Execellent article on polling

[Dick Tuck]

 

[The Rabbi]

The thing to remember about the skewed polling? WISCONSIN BABY...WISCONSIN! The media tried to hand it to the democrat there as well...

RCP had Walker up over Barrett the entire election.


Whoosh!

You realize your link doesnt prove what you write, right?
Dem Poll Shows Walker and Barrett Tied in Recall | Mother Jones

Poll: Walker, Barrett tied in recall race - Mackenzie Weinger - POLITICO.com

Daily Kos: Marquette Poll: Tom Barrett and Scott Walker Tied in WI Governor Recall Race


DOOSSHH!

 

[Dr.Traveler]

The thing to remember about the skewed polling? WISCONSIN BABY...WISCONSIN! The media tried to hand it to the democrat there as well...

RCP had Walker up over Barrett the entire election.


Whoosh!

Yeah, I don't recall one credible pollster or pundit actually claiming Walker would lose. I wanted Walker to lose, and I was the first to acknowledge he'd almost certainly win.

In 2008 they were talking about the Bradley Effect and telling Democrats "BE READY TO LOSE SUCKERS!". Didn't manifest in 2008 and the polls won't be wrong this year either.

 

[Oddball]

The thing to remember about the skewed polling? WISCONSIN BABY...WISCONSIN! The media tried to hand it to the democrat there as well...

RCP had Walker up over Barrett the entire election.


Whoosh!

Yeah, I don't recall one credible pollster or pundit actually claiming Walker would lose. I wanted Walker to lose, and I was the first to acknowledge he'd almost certainly win.

In 2008 they were talking about the Bradley Effect and telling Democrats "BE READY TO LOSE SUCKERS!". Didn't manifest in 2008 and the polls won't be wrong this year either.

Perhaps so...But there also was a record democrat turnout in '08, that is highly unlikely to repeat itself....It's also patently obvious that democrats are being oversampled, to the point that the oversamples are the basically the spread in the polls.

Yet, even with the pollsters' thumbs on the scales, they can't get the numbers for Boiking over 50% in most instances.....That isn't good news, no matter how you try to spin it.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Perhaps so...But there also was a record democrat turnout in '08, that is highly unlikely to repeat itself....It's also patently obvious that democrats are being oversampled, to the point that the oversamples are the basically the spread in the polls.

I don't think it will take record turnout to put the percentage of Democratic voters over the percentage of Republican by a large margin.

Many folks to change their party identification from years to years. That isn't a new idea, heck, there used to be "Reagan Democrats". This year the GOP has actively taken stances to alienate nearly every voting block out there. Mitt allowed himself to be defined by Obama and has ended up looking clueless and out of touch. Worse, he actively alienates his own base.

I wouldn't be surprised if you have depressed GOP turnout in 2012. After all, if Mitt is your standard bearer and you're a principled Conservative, are you really going to turn out and vote for Liberal Governor from Massachusetts? And after the booing Mitt and Ryan have gotten at various venues, a lot of the standard GOP voting blocks are probably starting to self identify as Democrats.

I don't think the race is over by any stretch, but Romney has some fence mending to do and some ground to cover if he's going to have a shot at winning. Do you really expect to carry Florida when you're getting booed at the AARP? Do you expect to carry states dependent on the Auto industry when your stated position is "Let Detroit go bankrupt"?

 

[Oddball]

Trust me...Libertarians like me aren't going to vote for Boiking.

Tea Party types may well stay home, but they won't just flip to voting for democrats because they're the only "viable" candidates on the ballot.

And the AARP is a HUGE left wing lobbying/pressure group...I expect anyone who doesn't have a (D) by their name to get booed by them.

 

[TNHarley]

Pre-elction polls are BS. I remember reading about an election, (maybe Carter?) That the loser was up 9 points and the opposing won by a landslide. You can make the polls outcome in your favor. Pretty sure that is why obama is up. Well at least on CNN/ABC/YAHOO/NBC LOL!

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Trust me...Libertarians like me aren't going to vote for Boiking.

But will you vote for Mitt? I've got to say, if ever there was an election I expect a third party candidate to break 10% in some states, it's this one. When your choice is a Liberal from Massachusetts and a Liberal from Illinois.... well... that third party option is looking mighty attractive even for me.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Pre-elction polls are BS. I remember reading about an election, (maybe Carter?) That the loser was up 9 points and the opposing won by a landslide. You can make the polls outcome in your favor. Pretty sure that is why obama is up. Well at least on CNN/ABC/YAHOO/NBC LOL!

The closer you get, the better a predictor they turn out to be. That's why, despite the fact that the polls are showing Mitt's in for a beating in the Electoral College, I won't count him out yet. There's still some time left. I have seen people come back even at this point.

But time is running out.

 

[Oddball]

Trust me...Libertarians like me aren't going to vote for Boiking.

But will you vote for Mitt? I've got to say, if ever there was an election I expect a third party candidate to break 10% in some states, it's this one. When your choice is a Liberal from Massachusetts and a Liberal from Illinois.... well... that third party option is looking mighty attractive even for me.

Oh, hell no...I haven't voted for a single republican since '94....But that's just me.

I also understand that the vast majority of voters have bought into the (R) or (D) Hegelian dialectic model for voting, to the point that any outside candidate getting 10% is absurd, especially given the media blackout of those candidates.

But none of that has anything to do with the current polls being purposefully oversamped with democrat voters.

 

[Article 15]

The thing to remember about the skewed polling? WISCONSIN BABY...WISCONSIN! The media tried to hand it to the democrat there as well...

RCP had Walker up over Barrett the entire election.


Whoosh!

You realize your link doesnt prove what you write, right?

I asserted that RCP had Walker up the entire campaign and the link to RCP that I provided backs that claim up.

Does it hurt to be this stupid?

 

[hazlnut]

 

[NYcarbineer]

[The thing to remember about the skewed polling? WISCONSIN BABY...WISCONSIN! The media tried to hand it to the democrat there as well...

That's become one of those quietly popular lies on the right:

Walker won by 6, the final RCP average was 6.

Barrett never won a poll in the RCP averages after February; the recall was in June.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - Wisconsin Governor Recall Election - Walker vs. Barrett

Please don't lie about this ever again. Show some character and integrity; separate yourself from the conservative pack.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Finally, what do the Independent voter numbers show? Even in these corrupt polls where Dems are being egregiously oversampled, Romney has a DOUBLE DIGIT lead amongst Independents.

Nuff’ said.

What Obama and his allies are doing now: “The Democrats want to convince [these anti-Obama voters] falsely that Romney will lose to discourage them from voting. So they lobby the pollsters to weight their surveys to emulate the 2008 Democrat-heavy models. They are lobbying them now to affect early voting. IVR [Interactive Voice Response] polls are heavily weighted. You can weight to whatever result you want. Some polls have included sizable segments of voters who say they are ‘not enthusiastic’ to vote or non-voters to dilute Republicans. Major pollsters have samples with Republican affiliation in the 20 to 30 percent range, at such low levels not seen since the 1960s in states like Virginia, Florida, North Carolina and which then place Obama ahead. The intended effect is to suppress Republican turnout through media polling bias. We’ll see a lot more of this.

Read More

The latest Foxnews poll showing Obama up by 5, polled 41% self-identified Democrats vs 38% Republican.

Obama won Independents in that poll by 4 points.

Even the crazy unskewedpolls guy gave it to Obama by 2 after he jiggered the numbers.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - General Election: Romney vs. Obama

 

[clevergirl]

The thing to remember about the skewed polling? WISCONSIN BABY...WISCONSIN! The media tried to hand it to the democrat there as well...

RCP had Walker up over Barrett the entire election.


Whoosh!

You realize your link doesnt prove what you write, right?
Dem Poll Shows Walker and Barrett Tied in Recall | Mother Jones

Poll: Walker, Barrett tied in recall race - Mackenzie Weinger - POLITICO.com

Daily Kos: Marquette Poll: Tom Barrett and Scott Walker Tied in WI Governor Recall Race


DOOSSHH!

Like most liberals reinventing the talking points as if the internet can't be uncovered to reveal their horseshit- he just attempts to ignore the facts. The facts are that the media polls are being heavenly weighted in favor of Obama...that is what exit polls for Walker did as well and again, was propagated by a biased media...and we all saw how that worked for them.

 

[NYcarbineer]

RCP had Walker up over Barrett the entire election.


Whoosh!

You realize your link doesnt prove what you write, right?
Dem Poll Shows Walker and Barrett Tied in Recall | Mother Jones

Poll: Walker, Barrett tied in recall race - Mackenzie Weinger - POLITICO.com

Daily Kos: Marquette Poll: Tom Barrett and Scott Walker Tied in WI Governor Recall Race


DOOSSHH!

Like most liberals reinventing the talking points as if the internet can't be uncovered to reveal their horseshit- he just attempts to ignore the facts. The facts are that the media polls are being heavenly weighted in favor of Obama...that is what exit polls for Walker did as well and again, was propagated by a biased media...and we all saw how that worked for them.

You lied. Period. Or you had no idea what you were talking about. I'd place the likelihood of either as about the same.

 

[The Rabbi]

RCP had Walker up over Barrett the entire election.


Whoosh!

You realize your link doesnt prove what you write, right?

I asserted that RCP had Walker up the entire campaign and the link to RCP that I provided backs that claim up.

Does it hurt to be this stupid?

And I've shown your point is irrelevant. The media and polls clearly showed a close race where it didnt exist.

 

[Jackson]

Winner - Rassmussen A-
2008 Intrade Vs. Actual Election Results

Winner - Rasmussen, Pew
The List: Which presidential polls were most accurate? | Texas on the Potomac | a Chron.com blog

Winner - Rassmussen A
Flashback: Rasmussen Most Accurate Pollster in 2008

Winner - Rassmussen, Pew
http://www.fordham.edu/images/acade...ccuracy in the 2008 presidential election.pdf

In reference to the 2008 presidential election, a Talking Points Memo article said, "Rasmussen's final polls had Obama ahead 52%-46%, which was nearly identical to Obama's final margin of 53%-46%, and made him one of the most accurate pollsters out there
Rasmussen Reports - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


In 2010, Rasmussen Reports was the first to show Republican Scott Brown had a chance to defeat Martha Coakley in the Massachusetts Senate race. Just after Brown's upset win, Ben Smith at Politico reported, "The overwhelming conventional wisdom in both parties until a Rasmussen poll showed the race in single digits in early January was that Martha Coakley was a lock. (It's hard to recall a single poll changing the mood of a race quite that dramatically.)"[45]

A study by Boston University and the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism about how the Massachusetts Senate race was covered in the media concluded, "...Rasmussen Report’s poll that showed the overwhelming Republican underdog, Scott Brown, climbing to within single digits (nine points) of Martha Coakley. That poll, perhaps more than anything else, signaled that a possible upset was brewing and galvanized both the media and political worlds.
Rasmussen Reports - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[The Rabbi]

But Rasmussen polls to the right. That's what the libturds here always tell us.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Winner - Rassmussen A-
2008 Intrade Vs. Actual Election Results

Winner - Rasmussen, Pew
The List: Which presidential polls were most accurate? | Texas on the Potomac | a Chron.com blog

Winner - Rassmussen A
Flashback: Rasmussen Most Accurate Pollster in 2008

Winner - Rassmussen, Pew
http://www.fordham.edu/images/acade...ccuracy in the 2008 presidential election.pdf

In reference to the 2008 presidential election, a Talking Points Memo article said, "Rasmussen's final polls had Obama ahead 52%-46%, which was nearly identical to Obama's final margin of 53%-46%, and made him one of the most accurate pollsters out there
Rasmussen Reports - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


In 2010, Rasmussen Reports was the first to show Republican Scott Brown had a chance to defeat Martha Coakley in the Massachusetts Senate race. Just after Brown's upset win, Ben Smith at Politico reported, "The overwhelming conventional wisdom in both parties until a Rasmussen poll showed the race in single digits in early January was that Martha Coakley was a lock. (It's hard to recall a single poll changing the mood of a race quite that dramatically.)"[45]

A study by Boston University and the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism about how the Massachusetts Senate race was covered in the media concluded, "...Rasmussen Report’s poll that showed the overwhelming Republican underdog, Scott Brown, climbing to within single digits (nine points) of Martha Coakley. That poll, perhaps more than anything else, signaled that a possible upset was brewing and galvanized both the media and political worlds.
Rasmussen Reports - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Rasmussen was not the most accurate pollster in 2008. You are full of shit.