You can go see the results of the IBD/TIPP poll here. In a nutshell, the have it thus:
(That doesn't add up, so I guess the balance is Other.)
In this study, Romney is leading Independents 47% to 36%, with 13% undecided. The split along party lines is almost exact mirror images: 89% along the party line, 6 or 7% across the line, and the rest undecided. So, if you assume a close to even split between Dems and Reps, the margin Romney enjoys among Indies should give him
But note that this survey has 37% Dem respondents, 30% GOP, 32% Independents. That's a 7-point spread in the advantage of Obama that most analysts say will not hole up on election day. For instance, Gallop's Party Affiliation Poll, most recently taken a few weeks ago, has only 32% Dem, 28% GOP, and 38% Independent. That's only D+4 versus GOP, and a much bigger chunk of Independents.
Now I'm no mathematician, so if anyone can correct my math, I would appreciate it. But according to my calculations, if the IBD poll results by party affiliation were weighted according to the Gallop survey, the results would be:
So, it's quite possible that the IBD poll means that Romney is up by about 2, and not down by 2!
Now the science of polling is a little more complex than using Gallop's surveys to weigh IBD's polls, but from what I've been reading a D+4 might even be generous to the Democrats this year. And I have to believe that there will be a shift of Dems away from Obama. I cannot believe he is doing that well among Democrats and that it is only Indies that are shifting Romney's way.
This has nothing to do with bioethics, I guess. Except, we all form ourselves by our chosen actions. We reveal ourselves to be such a person, and we reinforce that we are. In a way, all of our actions alter us in some way. And that is a bioethical concern. And... IBD reveals themselves, too.
Yet of course there is no direct bioethical import to this poll. I'm just sayin' that statistics can be manipulated.