Does Obama really lead by double digits in Florida and Ohio?

So say the newest Quinnipiac/New York Times/CBS polls, which put Obama up 9% in Florida and 10% in Ohio.

Now... not to get all The Polls Are Biased on you, but these surveys really assume a remarkably big Democratic turnout advantage -- like, way bigger even than in 2008.

FLORIDA: Obama 53% Romney 44%

This sample is 36% Democratic, 33% Independent, and 27% Republican.

In 2008, actual turnout numbers in Florida were 37% Democratic, 34% Republican, and 29% Independent.

In other words, this survey suggests Republican turnout will be 7% lower this year than it was in 2008. Does anyone believe that?

Based on organization alone, that seems unlikely.

Romney is far more organized than McCain was in the state, Obama is less popular than in 2008, and the GOP more enthusiastic. That doesn't seem like a formula for turnout that's 7% lower.

OHIO: Obama 53% Romney 43%

This sample is 35% Democratic, 35% Independent, and 26% Republican.

In 2008, it was 39% Democratic, 31% Republican, and 30% Independent.

While this sample seems more reasonable than Florida's, it still assumes 5% lower Republican turnout than 2008. Again, GOP enthusiasm was a lot lower in 2008 than it is now, whatever Romney's flaws as a candidate, he has the luxury of running against a less popular version of Obama than McCain did, and Romney is a more organized opponent.

Having said all that, yes, Romney is -- without a doubt -- losing in Ohio and, as of now, probably nipped in Florida.

So the direction of these polls is useful, even if the degree of that direction makes them clear outliers (Obama is up 3.1% in the Florida RCP average and 5.2% in the Ohio RCP average).

But it's always important to put these results in context, and unfortunately, that's rarely done. Voters tend to like to join winners, and so reporting context on polls like these matters.