Siena Poll finds Pa. up for grabs in prez race
New Poll by Siena College has Pa presidential race closing - 43 percent for Obama, 40 percent for Romney, with 12 percent undecided.
Siena Poll finds Pa. up for grabs in prez race
Thomas Fitzgerald, Inquirer Politics Writer
Pennsylvania's 20 electoral votes seem up for grabs in a new Siena Research Institute Poll that shows a tight race, with President Obama leading Republican Mitt Romney 43 percent to 40 percent.
The Siena College survey finds 12 percnet of the state's voters undecided. It shows Romeny winning in the Philadelphia suburbs. "With a month and two more debates to go, Pennsylvania's direction on the road to the White House remains in doubt," said Don Levy, the poll director.
Obama is viewed favorably by 49 percent of the voters, to 44 percent who view the president unfavorably, while Romney's ratio is 40 percent favorable to 49 percent unfavorable, the poll finds.
Results are based on interviews with 545 likely voters between Oct. 1 and Oct. 5, and results are subject to a margin of error of plus or minus 4.2 percentage points.
Comments (71)
This comment has been deleted.— philadelphia.fish- Romney's 90 minute liefest would not be enough.
Let Romney pour in his Cayman Island dollar if he really wants to win PA.
Romney should ask China to put some money in as well as he will create more jobs there. He did that while he was one term governor of MA— Seed - Romney low favorability tells what people feel about this snake oil sales man.
Republicans even liked a random blackman more before they settled for this two faced lier. No one likes or trust this man.— Seed - @ Seed - Still spilling your hollow hate filled rhetoric I see.
Net is Obama was exposed by a real business person. It was easy for Obama to "dazzle" when compared to John McCain, but now that Obama is up against a real leader, he was exposed in front of the nation!!!
And that "random blackman" you refer to is Herman Cain (yes, he has a name) only build the largest pizza chain in the country. You have no class and clearly are a racist.
BTW, GE, one of the largest contributors to the Obama campaign, recently moved its entire X-Ray Operations to China...whatca' got to say about that?!?
Fraud.— Professor1982 - And Mittens has been exposed as a pathological liar who will do and say anything to get elected. 5 Trillion dollar tax breaks, 2 Trillion in new defense spending.....nah, Mittens never said that even though his website says so!
Republicans....dopes, no change!— The Fundamentals of the Economy are Fine - The fact is that Romney has duped some people with the scam that he is trying to pull off. Tax cuts for everyone. No cuts in Social Security and Medicare. Massive increase in military spending. People with pre-existing conditions covered and children can stay on their parent's plan as long as they want AND balance the budget. Americans are too smart to fall for such absolute gardbage. Romeny's lead will be brief. The economy is steadily improving and unemployment is under 8%. Every state where Republican govenors have followed Romney's balanced budget policy saw unemployment rise and tax revenue go down. For a supposed businessman, Romney sure is short on a detailed plan. He is all things to all people. Keep all of the goodies yet balance the budget. Romney-Ryan - complete frauds. — MikeP
- He's not done yet. 3 more embarrassing humiliating debates coming for Obama. Maybe Mitt will feel bad and allow Obama to take his teleprompter this time. — Mr. Underhill
- i'd like to see Pa. competitive, or obama forced to play defense here, but the reality is that Pa. is not relevant to romney's chances. as pointed out by nate silver in his "tipping point" analysis, if romney's winning Pa. he's already won enough EVs in Va., Colo., iowa, N.H., etc.
— hannibal barca - Romney did get a bump from the debates, but like all bumps during this election, it will most certainly disapate in the coming days. We're only now seeing the results of the debate, but the unemployment numbers will most certainly provide a bump for Obama.
- ROMNEY'S NEW WAR.
During his foreign policy speech yesterday (September 8), Romney made extravagants statements, some of which will blow a cavaneous hole in the deficit. He said that should he ever become President, he would build 50 warships every year--that means 200 in a four year Presidency and 400 in eight. Amazing statement indeed! Voters, journalists and lawmakers have a right to ask now: Is Romney interested at all in reducing the deficit? What new wars will Romney start that would involve not just the cost of these ships but much more cost to American lives and treasury? What indeed would all these cost, including cost to America's reputation abroad? What impact on domestic programs, including education, social security, etec.? This man who has never enlisted in any war--no member of his family has-- is going to take us down the path of reckless militarism as George W. did--even worse. AMERICANS, THINK! iT IS NOT about slick debate and speeches. Look at policies and how it would affect you individually and the nation. THINK!
— Dr. Sam8 - @ Dr. Sam8 - There's a counter arguement to that philosophy. Is Obama's "hands off" foreign policy going to cost the US 10x as much down the road???
Clinton's "hands off" policy led to 9/11 and ultimatley 2 wars b/c he refused to do anything about the growing threat of Al Quada and other terrorists groups.
Some suspect this lax foreign policy was a setup to implement the most aggregious violations to the Constitution in Homeland Security and Patriot Act.
$1 of prevention is worth $10 of consequence.— Professor1982 - So, you believe that President Obama has practiced a "hands off" foreign policy? I guess all of those drone strikes against Al-Quada were really a video game. We have already paid a high price of being involved in two separate conflicts - one unwarrented and unlawful - the other a result of taking the Arabs and their culture as a whole for granted.
It also appears that your memory - like your common sense - has failed you. The Department of Homeland Security and the Patriot Act, were both created that the war-monger Bush.— lalaw9833 - Clinton was not responsible for 911. That one is on George bush and the RepubliCons who never really believed that Osama bin laden was a threat. they believed that concerns about Al Qaeda was just an excuse to deflect attention from the Monica scandal. If Bush would have listened to Richard Clark as the Clinton administration did, 9/11 might well have been prevented.
- Bush and Chenney allowed hijacked planes to fly over our skies for hours without any action.
There can't be any greater incompetence than that.
Remember 9/11 happened 9 month after Bush was president. Bush's job loss continued for months into Obama presidency and he has been asked to take responsibility for that.
GOP incompetence is always someone else's fault.— Seed - seed...only a total idiot would believe that. I lost 3 friends in 9/11. I find your comments totally repulsive. You are a complete loser!
Popular Posts
About this blog
Inquirer staff writer Thomas Fitzgerald blogs about national politics.
You can reach Tom Fitzgerald at 215-854-2718 or tfitzgerald@phillynews.com.
Reach Thomas at tfitzgerald@phillynews.com.
Thomas Fitzgerald
Inquirer Politics Writer
You can reach Tom Fitzgerald at 215-854-2718 or tfitzgerald@phillynews.com.
Reach Thomas at tfitzgerald@phillynews.com.
Classifieds:
Site Services:
Partners: