How Many Undecided Voters are Left?

[nodoginnafight]

Not many.

Those expressing no preference in today's (Thursday) RCP poll averages weighed against the total number of registered voters leaves about 1,375,157 undecided likely voters in Florida, Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, Colorado, Nevada, Iowa, and New Hampshire combined.

I think we have entered the "it's all about the turnout" phase.

Who gets the edge?

Romney's base seem VERY motivated (whether that is pro-Romney or anti-Obama motivation doesn't really matter at this point does it?). Are some his recent statements taking any edge off that motivation?

Obama's convention is fresher and maybe he's still bouncing from that? Will that enthusiasm last six more weeks?

What's your take?

 

[Oddball]

If you're starting out with RCP you're dealing with phony numbers from the get-go.

 

[elvis]

A lot can change in a month, but I don't think it will.

 

[nodoginnafight]

If you're starting out with RCP you're dealing with phony numbers from the get-go.

They've been very accurate in the past. Their averaging tends to even out the outliers. How come you have problems with that?

 

[CausingPAIN]

I have not decided and always wait till last possible minute, you never know what may come up.

 

[nodoginnafight]

A lot can change in a month, but I don't think it will.

You are absolutely right on target there with the "A lot can change in a month" statement. I'm not sure about the "doubting it will" part though. Reagan turned it around by thrashing Carter in the debates. But yeah, I haven't seen anythying that indicates Romney can debate like Reagan nor that Obama will wilt at a debate like Carter did.

But the economy does SEEM fragile at this point and one good jolt .... who knows?

 

[Oddball]

If you're starting out with RCP you're dealing with phony numbers from the get-go.

They've been very accurate in the past. Their averaging tends to even out the outliers. How come you have problems with that?

No, they haven't been accurate.

Right now, they're averaging polls that are heavily oversampling democrats and that include people who may or may not show up at the polls.

Like them or not, Rasmussen is the only outfit that screens for likely voters, rather than merely registered voters or adults who may not vote at all, and has the track record of being the most accurate.

 

[beretta304]

Not many is correct. Now it's about how many will turn out. The one who gets the biggest turnout...wins.

 

[Black_Label]

If you're starting out with RCP you're dealing with phony numbers from the get-go.

They've been very accurate in the past. Their averaging tends to even out the outliers. How come you have problems with that?

No, they haven't been accurate.

Right now, they're averaging polls that are heavily oversampling democrats and that include people who may or may not show up at the polls.

Like them or not, Rasmussen is the only outfit that screens for likely voters, rather than merely registered voters or adults who may not vote at all, and has the track record of being the most accurate.

RCP is the fairest and most accurate pollster around. They were the most accurate in 2008 and others.

Right wingers such as yourself worship Rasmussen because it gives you that hard right bias you want to hear.

Also that's complete bullshit that rasmussen is the only pollster that screens likely voters. Every recent poll conducted besides gallup use likely voters

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html

 

[Oddball]

RCP is shit, because they average shit polls...Period.

GIGO.

 

[nodoginnafight]

If you're starting out with RCP you're dealing with phony numbers from the get-go.

They've been very accurate in the past. Their averaging tends to even out the outliers. How come you have problems with that?

No, they haven't been accurate.

Right now, they're averaging polls that are heavily oversampling democrats and that include people who may or may not show up at the polls.

Like them or not, Rasmussen is the only outfit that screens for likely voters, rather than merely registered voters or adults who may not vote at all, and has the track record of being the most accurate.

In 2008 and again in 2010 the RCP poll averages were a lot closer to the actual results than Rassmussen alone was. And at least 10 other individual polls listed in the RCP averages outperformed Rassmussen in 2008 and 2010. And btw, Rassmussen is not the only outfit that uses a "likely voter" poll. Just look athe RCP list of polls and note how many have the tell-tale LV designation.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Not many is correct. Now it's about how many will turn out. The one who gets the biggest turnout...wins.

I think you are right.

I also think a good indicator as to whether or not the candidates think we are right will show up soon enough by what we hear them saying on the stump. Are their speeches and remarks targeted to "excite the base" or "sway the undecided?"


btw - Rassmussen is "so reliable" that they overestimated the Republican candidate's support in the Hawaii senate race by 40 points.

In other 2088 and 2010 state polls - they overestimated repunican support by 4 points across the board. Maybe they've fixed their methodology for this go 'round. We will see.

 

[Oddball]

They've been very accurate in the past. Their averaging tends to even out the outliers. How come you have problems with that?

No, they haven't been accurate.

Right now, they're averaging polls that are heavily oversampling democrats and that include people who may or may not show up at the polls.

Like them or not, Rasmussen is the only outfit that screens for likely voters, rather than merely registered voters or adults who may not vote at all, and has the track record of being the most accurate.

In 2008 and again in 2010 the RCP poll averages were a lot closer to the actual results than Rassmussen alone was. And at least 10 other individual polls listed in the RCP averages outperformed Rassmussen in 2008 and 2010. And btw, Rassmussen is not the only outfit that uses a "likely voter" poll. Just look athe RCP list of polls and note how many have the tell-tale LV designation.

I've looked numerous times...RCP's roll of pollsters is heavily weighted to adults and registered voters, not likely voters.

On top of that, the majority of pollsters are, for one reason or another, oversampling democrats, to the point that the oversamples are equal to or greater than the spread between the candidates...Ergo any discussion based upon such flawed data ranks a couple of clicks below navel contemplation, IM not-at-all HO.

Like I said earlier, GIGO.

 

[nodoginnafight]

No, they haven't been accurate.

Right now, they're averaging polls that are heavily oversampling democrats and that include people who may or may not show up at the polls.

Like them or not, Rasmussen is the only outfit that screens for likely voters, rather than merely registered voters or adults who may not vote at all, and has the track record of being the most accurate.

In 2008 and again in 2010 the RCP poll averages were a lot closer to the actual results than Rassmussen alone was. And at least 10 other individual polls listed in the RCP averages outperformed Rassmussen in 2008 and 2010. And btw, Rassmussen is not the only outfit that uses a "likely voter" poll. Just look athe RCP list of polls and note how many have the tell-tale LV designation.

I've looked numerous times...RCP's roll of pollsters is heavily weighted to adults and registered voters, not likely voters.

On top of that, the majority of pollsters are, for one reason or another, oversampling democrats, to the point that the oversamples are equal to or greater than the spread between the candidates...Ergo any discussion based upon such flawed data ranks a couple of clicks below navel contemplation, IM not-at-all HO.

Like I said earlier, GIGO.

So how come the polls (likely voter polls - regardless of what you seem to think) and the RCP averages have been consistently so much more accurate than Rassmussen - maybe they are "over-sampling" Democrats in the ballot boxes too????

9/8 - 9/25 -- 49.9 47.0 +2.9
Gallup 9/23 - 9/25 1500 A 51 43 +8
Rasmussen Reports 9/23 - 9/25 1500 LV 48 51 -3
Bloomberg 9/21 - 9/24 1007 A 49 46 +3
Politico/GWU/Battleground 9/16 - 9/20 1000 LV 50 48 +2
Associated Press/GfK 9/13 - 9/17 807 LV 52 47 +5
Reason-Rupe/PSRAI 9/13 - 9/17 787 LV 51 46 +5
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl 9/12 - 9/16 900 RV 50 48 +2
FOX News 9/9 - 9/11 1056 LV 50 47 +3
CBS News/NY Times 9/8 - 9/12 1162 LV 49 46 +3
Democracy Corps (D) 9/8 - 9/12 1000 LV


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/polls/

How many "LV" polls you see there?
__________________

 

[Oddball]

How many of those are oversampling democrats?

 

[nodoginnafight]

How many of those are oversampling democrats?

according the accuracy recorded in 2008 and 2010 - not many.
Rassmussen is the one that has failed so badly in predicting the actual vote totals. Have they fixed their problems? We will see.

 

[Oddball]

Uh-huh...Sure.

The blatant oversampling of democrats in most polls is a matter of fact, that has been discussed at length and linked to numerous times in recent weeks...Why is a matter of conjecture but the fact remains.

Therefore any averaging of skewed polls is going to give skewed results....Period.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Uh-huh...Sure.

The blatant oversampling of democrats in most polls is a matter of fact, that has been discussed at length and linked to numerous times in recent weeks...Why is a matter of conjecture but the fact remains.

Therefore any averaging of skewed polls is going to give skewed results....Period.

So how come these "skewed" polls performed so much better than Rassmussen in 2008 and 2010?

 

[nodoginnafight]

Hmmm .... where'd he go? Can't keep substituting bravado for the actual results, huh?

 

[Black_Label]

Hmmm .... where'd he go? Can't keep substituting bravado for the actual results, huh?

He's just another right wing troll that can't handle the fact that Willard is getting his ass kicked, so in typical right wing fashion is trying to spin, twist, and turn the tinfoil powers to max in a desperate attempt to somehow show Willard as winning.