A new poll released by the New York Times seems to be very dreadful news for the Romney campaign.

For weeks, Republicans in Ohio have been watching with worry that the state’s vital 18 electoral votes were trending away from Mitt Romney. The anxiety has been similar in Florida, where Republicans are concerned that President Obama is gaining the upper hand in the fight for the state’s 29 electoral votes.

Those fears are affirmed in the findings of the latest Quinnipiac University/New York Times/CBS News polls of likely voters in both states, which show that Mr. Obama has widened his lead over Mr. Romney and is outperforming him on nearly every major campaign issue, even though about half said they were disappointed in Mr. Obama’s presidency.

Upon further review, the poll is just another example of how the media is intentionally manipulating numbers in an attempt to keep Romney voters discouraged, and by extension, from showing up to the polls.

Jamie Wearing Fools explains just how the Times ended up with their numbers, and why the reality is that those swing states appear more as a dead heat right now, than a landslide victory for the President.

So Obama allegedly is up 10 in Ohio, 9 in Florida and 12 in Pennsylvania? Sure.
So Obama is up 9 in Florida with a D+9 sample, up 10 in Ohio with a D+9 sample and up 12 in Pennsylvania with a D+11 sample. I notice in all the orgasmic news reports this morning none of them mention the ridiculous skew to the polls. But all you will hear all day is how big a lead Obama has.

Here’s the real kicker though.  The Assistant Director of Quinnipiac Polling, when asked about the sampling data used in a previous similarly skewed poll stated that even he didn’t think the numbers matched up with the likely voter turnout come November.

From Da Tech Guy:

By an odd coincidence the last time this poll came out Hugh Hewett questioned Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac Polls and asked him about this (emphasis mine):

Hugh Hewett: But I don’t know how that goes to the issue, Peter, so help me. I’m not being argumentative, I really want to know. Why would guys run a poll with nine percent more Democrats than Republicans when that percentage advantage, I mean, if you’re trying to tell people how the state is going to go, I don’t think this is particularly helpful, because you’ve oversampled Democrats, right?

Peter Brown: But we didn’t set out to oversample Democrats. We did our normal, random digit dial way of calling people. And there were, these are likely voters. They had to pass a screen. Because it’s a presidential year, it’s not a particularly heavy screen.

HH: And so if, in fact, you had gotten a hundred Democrats out of a hundred respondents that answered, would you think that poll was reliable?

PB: Probably not at 100 out of 100.

HH: Okay, so if it was 75 out of 100…

PB: Well, I mean…

HH: I mean, when does it become unreliable? You know you’ve just put your foot on the slope, so I’m going to push you down it. When does it become unreliable?

PB: Like the Supreme Court and pornography, you know it when you see it.

HH: Well, a lot of us look at a nine point advantage in Florida, and we say we know that to be the polling equivalent of pornography. Why am I wrong?

PB: Because what we found when we made the actual calls is this kind of party ID.

HH: Do you expect Democrats, this is a different question, do you, Peter Brown, expect Democrats to have a nine point registration advantage when the polls close on November 6th in Florida?

PB: Well, first, you don’t mean registration.

HH: I mean, yeah, turnout.

PB: Do I think…I think it is probably unlikely.

This is the man conducting the polls saying essentially that he doesn’t think the oversampling of Democrats used in the poll will be representative of the turnout in November.

There’s still plenty of work for Romney to do to win these swing states, but Republicans need not nearly be as concerned as the media would like them to be.