According to the swing state polls Obama is set to win a second term

[theDoctorisIn]

I really REALLY believe you haven't read any of them. Not even your own. But oh well. Somebody has to vote for Obama.

I HAVE read them. I don't understand how you can continue to say that they backup your argument. YOUR link didn't even do that.

Direct from the Quinnipiac page: "It is important to understand that all of the major polls – Gallup, Pew, Quinnipiac, CBS, ABC, and NBC- do not weight their data by party. Those polls, as does Quinnipiac, weight their data for things such as gender and age to match the Census data because these things don’t change."

They don't weight them by party alone. Or shouldn't. But in rebuttal that they don't weight them by party at all.....including Quinnipac....:

Election Polling 101 « Survey Says

From YOUR link:

It is important to understand that all of the major polls – Gallup, Pew, Quinnipiac, CBS, ABC, and NBC- do not weight their data by party. Those polls, as does Quinnipiac, weight their data for things such as gender and age to match the Census data because these things don’t change.

You keep attacking other people's "reading comprehension", yet you keep posting links that directly contradict your argument.

 

[AceRothstein]

Are you dense? THIS LINE IS DIRECTLY FROM THE ARTICLE: "It is important to understand that all of the major polls – Gallup, Pew, Quinnipiac, CBS, ABC, and NBC- do not weight their data by party. Those polls, as does Quinnipiac, weight their data for things such as gender and age to match the Census data because these things don’t change."

Post an example of one of those polls weighted even or for republicans and show everyone.

Jesus fucking Christ, they don't weight by party. Well Rasmussen does but he doesn't release that information. Actually I believe he does but I think you have to pay for it.

 

[Foxfyre]

It says right in my link THEY DO NO WEIGHT THEIR DATA BY PARTY. It says nothing once again about weighting by party.

If you can read that article and continue to assert that polls, including Quinnipac, are not weighted by political party then may I please suggest a good remedial reading course? What does it say in the very first paragraph? Never mind. You want to believe what you want to believe. There is simply no way in hell to do a political poll that involves all the demographics without including political party in the mix. But carry on. Again somebody has to vote for Obama. Might as well be you.

Are you dense? THIS LINE IS DIRECTLY FROM THE ARTICLE: "It is important to understand that all of the major polls – Gallup, Pew, Quinnipiac, CBS, ABC, and NBC- do not weight their data by party. Those polls, as does Quinnipiac, weight their data for things such as gender and age to match the Census data because these things don’t change."

And I'm the one that believes what I want to believe? You're either playing dumb or you have a reading comprehension problem.

And the very same article talks very specifically about party identification. Do you honestly believe a poll with 100 Democrats responding and 50 Republicans responding in which the results would show support for Obama being twice that for Romney would be a valid poll? How do you suppose they come up with the values for the poll then? They have to use some other method to 'weight' the poll to reflect their best guess at what the actual democraphics are. So, also including other factors, they evaluate current response based on past behavior---are these just anybody being polled or likely voters? Are these representative of enough different demographics to draw any kind of informed conclusion?

The same article said something about age not changing? Really? Are you the same age you were four years ago? Gender doesn't change but interests in issues do. There are so many variables in weighting a poll that no two are going to be exactly alike. However, there is no way to conduct a political poll without weighting the political affiliations or identifications.

 

[AceRothstein]

If you can read that article and continue to assert that polls, including Quinnipac, are not weighted by political party then may I please suggest a good remedial reading course? What does it say in the very first paragraph? Never mind. You want to believe what you want to believe. There is simply no way in hell to do a political poll that involves all the demographics without including political party in the mix. But carry on. Again somebody has to vote for Obama. Might as well be you.

Are you dense? THIS LINE IS DIRECTLY FROM THE ARTICLE: "It is important to understand that all of the major polls – Gallup, Pew, Quinnipiac, CBS, ABC, and NBC- do not weight their data by party. Those polls, as does Quinnipiac, weight their data for things such as gender and age to match the Census data because these things don’t change."

And I'm the one that believes what I want to believe? You're either playing dumb or you have a reading comprehension problem.

And the very same article talks very specifically about party identification. Do you honestly believe a poll with 100 Democrats responding and 50 Republicans responding in which the results would show support for Obama being twice that for Romney would be a valid poll? How do you suppose they come up with the values for the poll then? They have to use some other method to 'weight' the poll to reflect their best guess at what the actual democraphics are. So, also including other factors, they evaluate current response based on past behavior---are these just anybody being polled or likely voters? Are these representative of enough different demographics to draw any kind of informed conclusion?

The same article said something about age not changing? Really? Are you the same age you were four years ago? Gender doesn't change but interests in issues do. There are so many variables in weighting a poll that no two are going to be exactly alike. However, there is no way to conduct a political poll without weighting the political affiliations or identifications.

So all of the pollsters that claim to not weight by political affiliation are lying in your opinion?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I HAVE read them. I don't understand how you can continue to say that they backup your argument. YOUR link didn't even do that.

Direct from the Quinnipiac page: "It is important to understand that all of the major polls – Gallup, Pew, Quinnipiac, CBS, ABC, and NBC- do not weight their data by party. Those polls, as does Quinnipiac, weight their data for things such as gender and age to match the Census data because these things don’t change."

They don't weight them by party alone. Or shouldn't. But in rebuttal that they don't weight them by party at all.....including Quinnipac....:

Election Polling 101 « Survey Says

From YOUR link:

It is important to understand that all of the major polls – Gallup, Pew, Quinnipiac, CBS, ABC, and NBC- do not weight their data by party. Those polls, as does Quinnipiac, weight their data for things such as gender and age to match the Census data because these things don’t change.

You keep attacking other people's "reading comprehension", yet you keep posting links that directly contradict your argument.

The bolded pretty much sums up most rightists on USMB.

And again, from the real world:

It appears that President Obama is likely to go into Election Day with a very modest lead in the average of national polls.

[T]here is enough data to conclude that Mr. Obama probably has a slight edge from national surveys, which until recently had pointed toward a tie — or perhaps a modest advantage for Mr. Romney in the immediate aftermath of the Denver debate.

We’ve observed the race shifting toward him over the past two to three weeks in polls of swing states, where overwhelming majorities of polls have had Mr. Obama ahead over the past few days.

Based on the simulations that we ran on early Sunday evening, for example, Mr. Obama would have an 85 percent chance of winning the Electoral College if the popular vote were exactly tied nationally. This is where Mr. Obama’s Electoral College advantages, particularly in Nevada, Ohio and Wisconsin, would be of their maximum benefit. Given a tied national popular vote, we would expect Mr. Obama to underperform his polls slightly in these states — but since he leads by a minimum of about three points in the polling average in each one, he could underperform those numbers and still win them.

Mr. Obama would be almost certain to win the Electoral College if he won the popular vote by a percentage point or so.

State and National Polls Come Into Better Alignment - NYTimes.com

 

[Foxfyre]

Are you dense? THIS LINE IS DIRECTLY FROM THE ARTICLE: "It is important to understand that all of the major polls – Gallup, Pew, Quinnipiac, CBS, ABC, and NBC- do not weight their data by party. Those polls, as does Quinnipiac, weight their data for things such as gender and age to match the Census data because these things don’t change."

And I'm the one that believes what I want to believe? You're either playing dumb or you have a reading comprehension problem.

And the very same article talks very specifically about party identification. Do you honestly believe a poll with 100 Democrats responding and 50 Republicans responding in which the results would show support for Obama being twice that for Romney would be a valid poll? How do you suppose they come up with the values for the poll then? They have to use some other method to 'weight' the poll to reflect their best guess at what the actual democraphics are. So, also including other factors, they evaluate current response based on past behavior---are these just anybody being polled or likely voters? Are these representative of enough different demographics to draw any kind of informed conclusion?

The same article said something about age not changing? Really? Are you the same age you were four years ago? Gender doesn't change but interests in issues do. There are so many variables in weighting a poll that no two are going to be exactly alike. However, there is no way to conduct a political poll without weighting the political affiliations or identifications.

So all of the pollsters that claim to not weight by political affiliation are lying in your opinion?

None of them have claimed not to. You have one guy saying they do not weight by party affiliation which may or may not be true. But we also have explained at some length, here and in those articles, that party identification and party affliliation are not necessarily the same thing. And in any case it is really splitting hairs when they weight according to behavior--those voting Democrat or Republican for instance--in previous elections. So you can make it an issue of semantics. Or you can make it an issue of reality. A political poll that does not consider party identification is worthless.

 

[JoeB131]

That's why RCP is so awesome. They use a mean of the polls to show trends and give a decent average. Sure, outliers affect means more than medians...but RCP is as unbiased as you can get.

Well, no, it really isn't.

It's a right wing site, and they fudge the numbers a much as they can get away with.

Today was a greate example. Gallup finally posted a poll with Romney with only a 1% advantage as opposed to the BS 5% advantage they've given him for the last few weeks.

So RCP dropped the National Journal Poll and a couple others favorable to Obama.

Obama is still ahead .7 nationally...

 

[mudwhistle]

Regardless......when Obama's best poll has to weight the sampling 11% in favor of Democrats and the best you can get is a tie.......Obama is losing.

 

[candycorn]

Are you prepared for the possibility? It seems hard to believe that the polls could be that far off this close to the election.

Hope for the best and prepare for the worst?

Obama is cruising. Been telling you that dumbass.

 

[thanatos144]

Guess we will find out today.

 

[Mustang]

Regardless......when Obama's best poll has to weight the sampling 11% in favor of Democrats and the best you can get is a tie.......Obama is losing.

There are more registered Democrats than registered Republicans.

 

[Uncensored2008]

There are more registered Democrats than registered Republicans.

There always have been.

democrats are just as likely to stay home and smoke dope, as they are to vote.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Hey there. I was reading a discussion just like this on a new website. It's called Habidy, and discussions like this are held on a large scale. I've been using it like crazy, so I suggest you take a look and see what it's about. It's still in its beginning stages so you will need this code–10MEGX–to get in.

Too bad you didn't read the TOS here, you wouldn't have gotten banned so fast.

Standard Disclaimer: I posted this prior to the spammer being banned, so did NOT violate the rules!

 

[Cheddarmelon]

Regardless......when Obama's best poll has to weight the sampling 11% in favor of Democrats and the best you can get is a tie.......Obama is losing.

He Just won.

how's that 11%?