NBC/WSJ poll: Heading into conventions, Obama has four-point lead

[Liability]

So they do a random sample, but the folks at the WSJ who helped fund it request that they exclude a certain number of Republican responses?

Hang up when someone says they are a Republican?

One thing at a time, bub.

First, it is time to drop the "IF." They once again managed to conduct a random telephone poll of REGISTERED voters that DID over-sample for Dims:

QF4a Generally speaking, do you think of yourself as (ROTATE a Democrat, a Republican, an independent, or
something else? (IF "DEMOCRAT" OR "REPUBLICAN," ASK Would you call yourself a strong
(Democrat/Republican) or not a very strong (Democrat/Republican)? (IF "NOT SURE," CODE AS "NOT
VERY STRONG DEMOCRAT/REPUBLICAN.") (IF "INDEPENDENT," ASK Do you think of yourself as
closer to the Republican Party, closer to the Democratic Party, or do you think of yourself as strictly
independent? (IF "NOT SURE," CODE AS "STRICTLY INDEPENDENT.")+
Strong Democrat ............................................... 24
Not very strong Democrat ................................. 10
Independent/lean Democrat .............................. 11
Strictly Independent .......................................... 13
Independent/lean Republican ............................ 12
Not very strong Republican ............................... 9
Strong Republican ............................................. 18
Other (VOL) ....................................................... 3
Not sure ........................................................... 1
+ Results shown reflect responses among registered voters.

-- http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/S...y_Stories_Teases/August_NBC-WSJ_Int_Sched.pdf

SECONDLY, it is possible to take the over-sampling into account when analyzing the results. Was such an effort attempted?

Again, Liability: Please read my question carefully. It's an honest question:

How do you know they over-sampled Democrats?

In order to know this, you would need to know the true, accurate weighting of Dems and Reps in the US. There's only one way to achieve that - a census.

Since no one is going to fund a census, we use sampling. For instance, we could sample a couple thousand random people and get a breakdown to use - we could do that and achieve an MOE of 3% or so, with 95% of samples expected to fall within that MOE

Stop. You sound silly.

There are these things we call VOTER REGISTRATIONS.

For almost any given population, it is fucking easy to know the relative percentage of voters who are registered as Dims, Republicans, Liberals, Conservatives, Socialists, Communist Worker Party sheep, Independent, etc.

 

[8537]

You don't seem to understand standard poll weighting.

Why do you post so much on polls if you haven't a clue?

Tell me Sniperfire, how would you arrive at the proper breakdown in order to establish the weighting?

I would do it the industry-standard way they are doing it.

The industry standard?

You mean a random sample poll of 1070 Americans?

 

[SniperFire]

I don't play out of context games... You're boring now...

An oversampled poll of registered voters only shows Barry up by 4.... (trending downward, too)

Yikes...

Yesterday, the liberal PPP polling did a quick poll on Akins v. McCaskill to show them tied.


Problem is, they oversampled Republicans 39% to 30% to try and convince Akins to stay in the race.


They never, ever oversample Republicans.


LOL

 

[8537]

One thing at a time, bub.

First, it is time to drop the "IF." They once again managed to conduct a random telephone poll of REGISTERED voters that DID over-sample for Dims:

-- http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/S...y_Stories_Teases/August_NBC-WSJ_Int_Sched.pdf

SECONDLY, it is possible to take the over-sampling into account when analyzing the results. Was such an effort attempted?

Again, Liability: Please read my question carefully. It's an honest question:

How do you know they over-sampled Democrats?

In order to know this, you would need to know the true, accurate weighting of Dems and Reps in the US. There's only one way to achieve that - a census.

Since no one is going to fund a census, we use sampling. For instance, we could sample a couple thousand random people and get a breakdown to use - we could do that and achieve an MOE of 3% or so, with 95% of samples expected to fall within that MOE

Stop. You sound silly.

There are these things we call VOTER REGISTRATIONS.

For almost any given population, it is fucking easy to know the relative percentage of voters who are registered as Dims, Republicans, Liberals, Conservatives, Socialists, Communist Worker Party sheep, Independent, etc.

No, it's not. Voter registrations from 2010 don't tell you the makeup of the electorate in 2012 - and in many states party affiliation is not part of voter registration.

 

[SniperFire]

Tell me Sniperfire, how would you arrive at the proper breakdown in order to establish the weighting?

I would do it the industry-standard way they are doing it.

The industry standard?

You mean a random sample poll of 1070 Americans?

Again. You know nothing of the standard weighting of sample methodology for Presidential elections.


Why do you post so much on polling if you are such an ignorant ass?

 

[8537]

I would do it the industry-standard way they are doing it.

The industry standard?

You mean a random sample poll of 1070 Americans?

Again. You know nothing of the standard weighting of sample methodology for Presidential elections.


Why do you post so much on polling if you are such an ignorant ass?

Quit being a moron. Tell us, Sniperfire, how would YOU arrive at the actual weighting?

 

[Liability]

Again, Liability: Please read my question carefully. It's an honest question:

How do you know they over-sampled Democrats?

In order to know this, you would need to know the true, accurate weighting of Dems and Reps in the US. There's only one way to achieve that - a census.

Since no one is going to fund a census, we use sampling. For instance, we could sample a couple thousand random people and get a breakdown to use - we could do that and achieve an MOE of 3% or so, with 95% of samples expected to fall within that MOE

Stop. You sound silly.

There are these things we call VOTER REGISTRATIONS.

For almost any given population, it is fucking easy to know the relative percentage of voters who are registered as Dims, Republicans, Liberals, Conservatives, Socialists, Communist Worker Party sheep, Independent, etc.

No, it's not. Voter registrations from 2010 don't tell you the makeup of the electorate in 2012 - and in many states party affiliation is not part of voter registration.

Unless there has been a sea change (or a population shift) in the interceding two years, the numbers from 2010 offer a fair guideline.

And, one can also find out the approximate percentages by engaging in some polling ON THAT VERY TOPIC.

 

[Dr.House]

I don't play out of context games... You're boring now...

An oversampled poll of registered voters only shows Barry up by 4.....

Lol.

I'd run from the discussion if I was so spectacularly wrong as well. Nice work.

Who's running...??

You're just blathering on about meaningless shit...

the poll conducted over sampled democratics... Doing so favors the group being over sampled... It was already explained to you that using RV is not an accurate sampling as not all RVs vote... If you want to shore up your confidence on this poll, trending downward from +6 to +4, then don't let us stop you....

You can claim interweb victory if you want, but we can laugh at your dumbass too...

 

[8537]

it...

the poll conducted over sampled democratics...

I know you're afraid to attempt to answer this question, but once again: How did you arrive at that conclusion?

What would an accurate sample look like?

 

[8537]

And, one can also find out the approximate percentages by engaging in some polling ON THAT VERY TOPIC.

That's a great idea!

This poll does exactly that. How do you think they arrived at the breakdown they present?

I'm off for a bit...TBC.

 

[SniperFire]

I don't play out of context games... You're boring now...

An oversampled poll of registered voters only shows Barry up by 4.....

Lol.

I'd run from the discussion if I was so spectacularly wrong as well. Nice work.

Who's running...??

You're just blathering on about meaningless shit...

the poll conducted over sampled democratics... Doing so favors the group being over sampled... It was already explained to you that using RV is not an accurate sampling as not all RVs vote... If you want to shore up your confidence on this poll, trending downward from +6 to +4, then don't let us stop you....

You can claim interweb victory if you want, but we can laugh at your dumbass too...

And while from a pure methodology perspective there is nothing particularly 'corrupt' by these polling agencies oversampling Democrats by up to 10% to achieve comparisons to the 2008 turnout, everyone knows this nets laughable skewed results.

 

[Liability]

And, one can also find out the approximate percentages by engaging in some polling ON THAT VERY TOPIC.

That's a great idea!

This poll does exactly that.

No. It sure doesn't.

It ASKS the small sample, and they report.

But it did not even ATTEMPT to ascertain if those percentages were consistent with the party identification of the entire community.

 

[Dr.House]

Who's running...??

You're just blathering on about meaningless shit...

the poll conducted over sampled democratics... Doing so favors the group being over sampled... It was already explained to you that using RV is not an accurate sampling as not all RVs vote... If you want to shore up your confidence on this poll, trending downward from +6 to +4, then don't let us stop you....

You can claim interweb victory if you want, but we can laugh at your dumbass too...

I know you're afraid to attempt to answer this question, but once again: How did you arrive at that conclusion?

What would an accurate sample look like?

More democratics = over sampled... Just because more people are registered democratics doesn't mean they will vote...

Already answered...

You're a moron....

 

[candycorn]

I think it shows Romney as not being very likeable, Obama with work to do on getting above 50%, and not much bounce from Ryan.

Also, people's minds are basically made up but maybe can be swayed a little by the debates.

Obama also has an electoral advantage and that hasn't changed or has grown.

The ship has sailed on Mitt Romney becoming more likeable.

He's been running for President for 10 years and the conventions will do little to introduce him outside of showing off his captivating family, wonderufl community involvement, awesome philanthropy and lovley wife; all of which politicos know about already. No help there

Obama will win the election by a wide margin unless he fumbles the ball drastically. Ain't gonna happen. Start preparing for 2016.

 

[Dr.House]

Lol.

I'd run from the discussion if I was so spectacularly wrong as well. Nice work.

Who's running...??

You're just blathering on about meaningless shit...

the poll conducted over sampled democratics... Doing so favors the group being over sampled... It was already explained to you that using RV is not an accurate sampling as not all RVs vote... If you want to shore up your confidence on this poll, trending downward from +6 to +4, then don't let us stop you....

You can claim interweb victory if you want, but we can laugh at your dumbass too...

And while from a pure methodology perspective there is nothing particularly 'corrupt' by these polling agencies oversampling Democrats by up to 10% to achieve comparisons to the 2008 turnout, everyone knows this nets laughable skewed results.

It's funny as hell... They also ignore other trends...

But they need some sort of hope, what little it may be...

 

[Liability]

I think it shows Romney as not being very likeable, Obama with work to do on getting above 50%, and not much bounce from Ryan.

Also, people's minds are basically made up but maybe can be swayed a little by the debates.

Obama also has an electoral advantage and that hasn't changed or has grown.

The ship has sailed on Mitt Romney becoming more likeable.

He's been running for President for 10 years and the conventions will do little to introduce him outside of showing off his captivating family, wonderufl community involvement, awesome philanthropy and lovley wife; all of which politicos know about already. No help there

Obama will win the election by a wide margin unless he fumbles the ball drastically. Ain't gonna happen. Start preparing for 2016.

His re-election efforts are a foregone conclusion:

abject failure.

He is headed for an embarrassing defeat; for him and for his Party.

Good.

 

[usmcstinger]

After Mitt Romney selected his vice presidential running mate, and just days before the political conventions kick off next week, President Barack Obama maintains his advantage in the race for the White House, according to the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.

A Democratic ticket featuring Obama and Vice President Joe Biden gets support from 48 percent of registered voters, and a Republican ticket of Romney and new running mate Paul Ryan gets 44 percent.

These numbers are only slightly changed from July, when Obama led Romney by six points in the survey, 49 percent to 43 percent, suggesting a minimal bounce for Romney (if at all) after this month’s Ryan pick.

“The election has moved from a referendum to a choice,” says Democratic pollster Peter D. Hart, who conducted this survey with Republican pollster Bill McInturff. “Mitt Romney is starting to accumulate a number of negatives on the personal front and issues front.”

Looking ahead to next week’s Republican convention, which begins on Monday in Tampa, Fla., Hart adds: “Mitt Romney has a lot of repair work to do with his image.”

NBC/WSJ poll: Heading into conventions, Obama has four-point lead - First Read

GALLUP DAILY Poll April 18-20'2012
Obama Approval 45% Obama Disapproval 48%
Presidential Election Romney 47% Obama 45%

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows Mitt Romney attracting support from 46% of voters nationwide, while President Obama earns the vote from 44%. Five percent (5%) prefer some other candidate, and five percent (5%) are undecided.


Much depends on the sample that was used.

 

[candycorn]

I think it shows Romney as not being very likeable, Obama with work to do on getting above 50%, and not much bounce from Ryan.

Also, people's minds are basically made up but maybe can be swayed a little by the debates.

Obama also has an electoral advantage and that hasn't changed or has grown.

The ship has sailed on Mitt Romney becoming more likeable.

He's been running for President for 10 years and the conventions will do little to introduce him outside of showing off his captivating family, wonderufl community involvement, awesome philanthropy and lovley wife; all of which politicos know about already. No help there

Obama will win the election by a wide margin unless he fumbles the ball drastically. Ain't gonna happen. Start preparing for 2016.

His re-election efforts are a foregone conclusion:

abject failure.

He is headed for an embarrassing defeat; for him and for his Party.

Good.

So is it only the Political forum you're going to leave or the entire site--after Obama wins.

 

[Rinata]

Polls don't mean anything......

If you polled this site you would find Romney beating Obama by 75%.....

If you polled Huffo you would find Obama beating Romney by 75%....

Show us!!! If polls don't mean anything, why are you so familiar with what they say??

 

[Rinata]

What a bunch of sour pusses!!!!! Better buck up, righties. Your problems haven't even started yet.