2010 Correction Election Has Started

[Polk]

Down from it's peak, but still miles ahead of the Republicans.
Pollster.com: National Party Identification (ALL ADULTS)

Notice that Rassmussen polls are about a +10 in republican self identification compared to the rest of the polls.

Actually not true if doing a more apples-to-apples polling comparison. "All Adults" vs "Registered and/or Likely Voters". Rasmussen is in line with other polls when similar polling comparisons are done. And the trend is clear - Democrats are in decline, Republicans are gaining in numbers, and the Independents remain the crucial deciding factor.

Thanks for the input though!


Pollster.com: National Party Identification (REGISTERED & LIKELY VOTERS ONLY)

A trend which, if continued, would have the GOP passing the Democrats some time around the middle of the decade.

 

[Sinatra]

Rasmussen was the most accurate poll before the 2008 election
Rasmussen, the Only Poll that Matters « The Washington Independent

So there is no reason to doubt Rasmussen's accuracy until they miss. There is no way that voters can be happy with the way dems/Obama are running the country.

True. Rasmussen is very highly regarded except curently by the far left who are in full on denial over America's growing dissatisfaction with the leftist big government agenda. He is perhaps the most credible and timely mainstream pollster out there, often ahead of the polling curve so to speak, with the rest playing catch-up...

 

[Polk]

Actually not true if doing a more apples-to-apples polling comparison. "All Adults" vs "Registered and/or Likely Voters". Rasmussen is in line with other polls when similar polling comparisons are done. And the trend is clear - Democrats are in decline, Republicans are gaining in numbers, and the Independents remain the crucial deciding factor.

Thanks for the input though!


Pollster.com: National Party Identification (REGISTERED & LIKELY VOTERS ONLY)

There aren't any Rassmussen polls in your link ...

And Sinatra ... the dems have the White House, large majorities in both houses, and have been in a politcal fight all year. Of course their numbers will be going down ... after last years election that's pretty much the only direction they could take. The Republicans will pick up 20 something seats MAYBE in the low 30's in the House and a handful of seats in the Senate which is pretty much par for the course in mid term elections when one party has such a large majority.

A correction election does not necessitate taking back Congress.

At present, we are estimating an approximate net gain for Republicans of between 34 -38 seats in the House - and there WILL be a strong move to remove Pelosi from her Speaker position that will have considerable support from a number of Democrats (and quiet but critical support from within the White House) The House Democrats will shift to a more moderate collective position.

In the Senate we predict a net pick up for Republican of 2-3, ensuring we break the current fillibuster-proof Democrat controlled Senate. And like many of the House Democrats, the Senate Dems will also shift to a far more moderate stance than the current leadership is directing.


From there, it's on to 2012...

Why would there be a move to replace Pelosi as Speaker? It's pretty clear to the interested parties that she's doing a great job managing her caucus. It's Reid that's the problem for Democrats (and he's probably going to lose his seat anyway).

And if you had to ask for my election predictions as of today, I think you'll bullish on the GOP House prospects (I'm projecting more in the 25-30 range), but bearish on the Senate (I'd say 4-6). Also, the Democrats don't have a filibuster-proof majority. On most major votes, Lieberman sides with the Republicans.

 

[Polk]

There aren't any Rassmussen polls in your link ...

And Sinatra ... the dems have the White House, large majorities in both houses, and have been in a politcal fight all year. Of course their numbers will be going down ... after last years election that's pretty much the only direction they could take. The Republicans will pick up 20 something seats MAYBE in the low 30's in the House and a handful of seats in the Senate which is pretty much par for the course in mid term elections when one party has such a large majority.

A correction election does not necessitate taking back Congress.

At present, we are estimating an approximate net gain for Republicans of between 34 -38 seats in the House - and there WILL be a strong move to remove Pelosi from her Speaker position that will have considerable support from a number of Democrats (and quiet but critical support from within the White House) The House Democrats will shift to a more moderate collective position.

In the Senate we predict a net pick up for Republican of 2-3, ensuring we break the current fillibuster-proof Democrat controlled Senate. And like many of the House Democrats, the Senate Dems will also shift to a far more moderate stance than the current leadership is directing.


From there, it's on to 2012...

Ok ... so you and I pretty much agree on what is going to happen in November. Great.

Now how about providing a link that actually shows Rassmussen polls to prove the point you were originally trying to make to me ....

For some reason, Pollster includes Rasmussen in their all voters figure, even though I'm pretty sure the poll they use is only looking at likely/registered.

 

[Polk]

Rasmussen was the most accurate poll before the 2008 election
Rasmussen, the Only Poll that Matters « The Washington Independent

So there is no reason to doubt Rasmussen's accuracy until they miss. There is no way that voters can be happy with the way dems/Obama are running the country.

Rasmussen was not the most accurate poll in the last election. I see you guys keep claiming that, but when asked to source it, you keep referring to this paper put out from a professor at Fordham. The problem is, he used incorrect numbers in his calculations.

 

[Polk]

Rasmussen was the most accurate poll before the 2008 election
Rasmussen, the Only Poll that Matters « The Washington Independent

So there is no reason to doubt Rasmussen's accuracy until they miss. There is no way that voters can be happy with the way dems/Obama are running the country.

True. Rasmussen is very highly regarded except curently by the far left who are in full on denial over America's growing dissatisfaction with the leftist big government agenda. He is perhaps the most credible and timely mainstream pollster out there, often ahead of the polling curve so to speak, with the rest playing catch-up...

That you consider Rasmussen "highly regarded" even though he's a partisan pollster is telling.

 

[Sinatra]

Rasmussen was the most accurate poll before the 2008 election
Rasmussen, the Only Poll that Matters « The Washington Independent

So there is no reason to doubt Rasmussen's accuracy until they miss. There is no way that voters can be happy with the way dems/Obama are running the country.

True. Rasmussen is very highly regarded except curently by the far left who are in full on denial over America's growing dissatisfaction with the leftist big government agenda. He is perhaps the most credible and timely mainstream pollster out there, often ahead of the polling curve so to speak, with the rest playing catch-up...

That you consider Rasmussen "highly regarded" even though he's a partisan pollster is telling.

That you would attempt to discredit him is more telling...

 

[Article 15]

Down from it's peak, but still miles ahead of the Republicans.
Pollster.com: National Party Identification (ALL ADULTS)

Notice that Rassmussen polls are about a +10 in republican self identification compared to the rest of the polls.

Just a point of interest, I saw where Rassmussen was asked about his polls, his answer was quite interesting.

He was correct in 2006, 2008 and only polls registered voters and gets real trends, he had the Dems pulling ahead in 2005 before anyone.

Dems loved him then, because it favored them.

Now the trends show the dems losing and he's an 'outler' and other stuff.

Face it, teh dems are as big a bunch of Fuckups as the GoP and way over played their hand last year.

They are going to get destroyed in the election, it will be 2006 in reverse.

Back in the '05 I wasn't paying close attention to politics at all so I'll take your word for it that the Dems loved Rassmussen back then.

The Dems last year showed me just how inept they are and that they don't have the party unity necessary to combat the GOP. You say they overplayed their hand and I disagree. The big battle was over healthcare and they caved on it. Other than that what exactly did they accomplish? Nada. Despite having such a large majority it's been essentially a do nothing Congress.

But I agree that it will be like 2006 and they will lose somewhere around 30 seats in the House but still keep the Senate.

 

[slackjawed]

Personally I don't put much faith in polls, except elections if you consider those to be polls. I did watch an interview with the Rassmussun guy last night and he said something very telling, two things really.
1) He said that they poll "likely vorters", and explained that historically the young voters 'stay home' during mid-term elections. He said himself this "skewed' the poll, because he maintains that it was mostly young voters that voted for obama and therefore they were left out of this poll.
IMHO, I am not convinced that this is the case. I think that there is so much dissatisfaction among people in general right now that I think the young voters will show up and vote. I could be wrong. I just don't think the historical models are all that reliable right now.
2) The second thing he said that jumped out at me was that rassmussun benefits even when their polls are accused of being biased or wrong. he maintained that just keeping the name rassmussun out there was a benefit to his company. Controversy, good or bad is good for him was his basic point.

I suspect that all the polling firms have both the same attitude about 'keeping their name out there' .
I also think that all the polls are biased to one degree or another, for whatever reason. The terms "likely voter", "registered voter" and "adults" are commonly used to describe what group is sampled by theh polling company. I, for one, was actually surprised to hear the guy in charge of rassmussun state that "likely voters" is a description that changes from one election to the next. Somehow it just seems to build a certain amount of bias into the poll.
I can see where polls can be useful, and have found them interesting in the past.
I still think the only poll that really matters is an election.

 

[Polk]

True. Rasmussen is very highly regarded except curently by the far left who are in full on denial over America's growing dissatisfaction with the leftist big government agenda. He is perhaps the most credible and timely mainstream pollster out there, often ahead of the polling curve so to speak, with the rest playing catch-up...

That you consider Rasmussen "highly regarded" even though he's a partisan pollster is telling.

That you would attempt to discredit him is more telling...

Would you trust a poll put out by someone who did contract work for Democratic candidates?

 

[Modbert]

Would you trust a poll put out by someone who did contract work for Democratic candidates?

Scott use to write articles for World Net Daily. That pretty much sums it up.

 

[Polk]

1) He said that they poll "likely vorters", and explained that historically the young voters 'stay home' during mid-term elections. He said himself this "skewed' the poll, because he maintains that it was mostly young voters that voted for obama and therefore they were left out of this poll.

IMHO, I am not convinced that this is the case. I think that there is so much dissatisfaction among people in general right now that I think the young voters will show up and vote. I could be wrong. I just don't think the historical models are all that reliable right now.

He's not wrong to make those assumptions. The electorate in midterms is generally older and whiter than in presidential years.

 

[Modbert]

He's not wrong to make those assumptions. The electorate in midterms is generally older and whiter than in presidential years.

And historically, younger people who tend to vote Democrat do not come out in large numbers. Older and whiter people do however.

 

[Polk]

Would you trust a poll put out by someone who did contract work for Democratic candidates?

Scott use to write articles for World Net Daily. That pretty much sums it up.

Wasn't aware of that, but yeah, that only makes the point even clearer.

 

[Polk]

He's not wrong to make those assumptions. The electorate in midterms is generally older and whiter than in presidential years.

And historically, younger people who tend to vote Democrat do not come out in large numbers. Older and whiter people do however.

I think being white is an absolute state, not a relative one.

Also, I find it very interesting people talk about this surge of youth voters that turned out for Obama. It makes for a cute story, but it didn't really happen. Look at the breakdowns from 2008 and compare them to 2004. The under-30 crowd made up the same percentage of the electorate in both races.

 

[Article 15]

Would you trust a poll put out by someone who did contract work for Democratic candidates?

Scott use to write articles for World Net Daily. That pretty much sums it up.

For real?

 

[Polk]

Would you trust a poll put out by someone who did contract work for Democratic candidates?

Scott use to write articles for World Net Daily. That pretty much sums it up.

For real?

WorldNetDaily – A Free Press for a Free People

 

[Modbert]

Wasn't aware of that, but yeah, that only makes the point even clearer.

It was back during the 2000 elections when he was a clear advocate for Conservative thinking. Now that his polling company has grown bigger, he's obviously taken a step back to not seem biased.

WorldNetDaily: Countdown to Election Day

So, the next time somebody tells you this race is too close to call, feel free to laugh!

Oh no, the 2000 election wasn't close at all.

 

[Article 15]

Scott use to write articles for World Net Daily. That pretty much sums it up.

For real?

WorldNetDaily – A Free Press for a Free People

lol ...

I wonder if the righties would accept polling data from a dude who used to write for the HuffPo or the DailyKOS?

 

[Modbert]

For real?

As Polk has just posted, sure is.

There also remains the fact that our buddy Scott got paid $95,500 by the RNC in 2003-2004 and $45,500 by the Bush Campaign.

And of course this:

DLC: Beyond Repair

The goal of the DLC is to make the Democratic Party more Moderate instead of Liberal.