Rasmussen Is a Neo-Con Tool

[Navy1960]

What good would it serve Rassmussen to skew his polls? Wouldn't it be a matter of a very short time before his numbers would be known by all to be unreliable?

Well, there's the thing... the way Rasmussen asks it's questions, it's less that it's "unreliable" per se and more that the questions beg certain responses that are skewed to the right. Then right wing pundits and bloggers and partisans use those skewed results.

We do know that the results have issues... that doesn't matter to the people who find the numbers to their advantage.

Hello jillian, well we all know that polls are subjective regardless of the polling company taking the poll. So you have to take what they say with a grain of salt, but from a pure business standpoint for a poll company to skew it's results to one side or the other, especially given the divide in this nation would make them wrong at least 40 plus percent of the time, and I don't really see that as being a good thing if your in the business of polling. I do agree though that almost anyone regardless of your political leanings can take a poll and run with results and make them into whatever they wish them to be. Actually it is sort of amusing from time to time to see what I call the " YES BUTS" you know when someone says well 51 percent of the people say this, well "YES BUT" , lol anyway so much for polls. In the case of Rasmussen himself other than MSNBC not using his polls , I can find very little to indicate that he would skew his polls on purpose and as I said for a polling compant to do that would seem to me to be defeating the purpose and bad for business.

 

[jillian]

Hello jillian, well we all know that polls are subjective regardless of the polling company taking the poll. So you have to take what they say with a grain of salt, but from a pure business standpoint for a poll company to skew it's results to one side or the other, especially given the divide in this nation would make them wrong at least 40 plus percent of the time, and I don't really see that as being a good thing if your in the business of polling. I do agree though that almost anyone regardless of your political leanings can take a poll and run with results and make them into whatever they wish them to be. Actually it is sort of amusing from time to time to see what I call the " YES BUTS" you know when someone says well 51 percent of the people say this, well "YES BUT" , lol anyway so much for polls. In the case of Rasmussen himself other than MSNBC not using his polls , I can find very little to indicate that he would skew his polls on purpose and as I said for a polling compant to do that would seem to me to be defeating the purpose and bad for business.

Hi Navy...

this was actually the best write up I found. perhaps it explains things better than I did.

Putting aside for the moment an analysis of how his questions are worded, Scott Rasmussen says that one reason some of his polls are trending Republican is that he is surveying likely voters, and the dynamic at work now is that conservatives are more energized than Democrats (which other polls have borne out). Other polls survey registered voters, a smaller percentage of whom are likely to vote, or just "adults."

Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight.com, a highly regarded analyst of polling, also has his problems with the wording of Rasmussen's questions, but says the operation's polling of political horse races "has tended to be quite accurate in the past."

When Rasmussen comes out with a different result from other pollsters, one that favors Republicans, Silver argues that it doesn't represent bias but "a different model of what the 2010 election is going to look like, one which will feature a more conservative electorate . . . and ultimately, these differences of opinion will be tested -- based on what happens next November."

Silver says that Rasmussen is just one of many pollsters and has this advice for consumers of polling and for those who write about it: "If you're running a news organization and you tend to cite Rasmussen's polls disproportionately, it probably means that you are biased -- it does not necessarily mean that Rasmussen is biased."

Rasmussen's Polling Stirs Bias Debate -- Politics Daily

anyway, i've been lollygagging and really need to head for home now.

laterz.,

 

[Maple]

Designed to skew things in favor of Republicans and all things Neo-Con.

Why can't you neo-cons see/accept that?

FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right: Is Rasmussen Reports Biased?
Rasmussen's Polling Stirs Bias Debate -- Politics Daily
How Rasmussen's right-wing bias has made it a laughing stock among major pollsters - LiveDaily Community
National Ledger - Scott Rasmussen Accused of Bias - Rasmussen Reports Polls Scrutiny

Now, what you do need to be aware of is that Rasmussen's opinion is one among many. They might turn out to be right -- but so might all of the other pollsters who have a different opinion about the electorate. If you're running a news organization and you tend to cite Rasmussen's polls disproportionately, it probably means that you are biased -- it does not necessarily mean that Rasmussen is biased.

* * *

But there are other respects in which I'm much less sympathetic to Rasmussen's case. In particular, this has to do with their choices of question wording and subject matter. The Politico question, for instance, points toward an August question in which Rasmussen asked "It’s always better to cut taxes than to increase government spending because taxpayers, not bureaucrats, are the best judges of how to spend their money.” That is not a question designed to elicit the most accurate reflection of public opinion.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNVcE1UI0OE[/ame]

Notice how Rasmussen uses very vague phrases like "likely voters" which should be read as "voters likely to vote for/favor republicans" and "pretty similar" as in "their numbers are pretty similar to ours" where "pretty similar" is not a defined range and varies substantially.

Notice also how Bill O'Reilly gently spoonfeeds Scottie all the necessary talking points.

Classic!

Thye just don't poll 6 year olds that can't vote yet, that's what's got you soooooooo upset.

 

[jillian]

What good would it serve Rassmussen to skew his polls? Wouldn't it be a matter of a very short time before his numbers would be known by all to be unreliable?

Well, there's the thing... the way Rasmussen asks it's questions, it's less that it's "unreliable" per se and more that the questions beg certain responses that are skewed to the right. Then right wing pundits and bloggers and partisans use those skewed results.

We do know that the results have issues... that doesn't matter to the people who find the numbers to their advantage.

don't use your legal words to snub rasmussen....they are like any other poll group

per se

really.....they are per se jillian? maybe you want them malum prohibitum

i'm sorry you aren't smart enough to follow along. *shrug*

i kind of feel bad for you though... you have this weird need to troll my posts and continue to make yourself look silly.

 

[Vast LWC]

Thanks for the reply, but when I find Rasmussen to be off by a significant margin, as I eventually will if what you are saying is true, I will no longer have his site set as a favorite.

It's in his self-interest to be accurate.

But this only proves that you are not one of the blind radicals that follow the word of the talking heads no matter how incorrect their predictions may be. To which I say kudos.

And, to be clear, it's not just the right-wing. MSNBC is a prime example of an outlet for lefties.

If you look at the first link in ATL's OP, it gives an excellent description of possible biases or lack thereof, and it also states that Rasmussen had not been skewing the results very much until this year.

I believe that Rasmussen has just discovered how profitable putting a bias on his polling can really be.

 

[Maple]

What good would it serve Rassmussen to skew his polls? Wouldn't it be a matter of a very short time before his numbers would be known by all to be unreliable?

The answer to that is simple.

There is a certain segment of society that only listen to news and opinion that agrees with their own point of view.

Radical viewers, readers or listeners generally believe that their views represent the majority, and that the media is somehow involved in a cover-up to hide the will of this "majority". They prefer to pay attention to media sources that agree with this viewpoint.

That's why MSNBC and FoxNews do better in ratings than other News outlets, and why Conservative talk radio is so popular among right-wingers.

Polling is no exception. There are a whole bunch of polls out there, Rasmussen would get lost among them, and have no notoriety, if he had the same numbers as everyone else.

By introducing right-wing bias to his methodology, Rasmussen has secured a relatively large permanent niche audience that will be loyal to him, just like FoxNews has a relatively large permanent niche audience that are loyal to them.

Interestingly I think that even if Rasmussen is proved to be completely and utterly wrong, his faithful readers will still blindly follow his numbers.

People watch MSNBC??? Is that why Fox news stomps all over them in their ratings??? The only people I know who watch MSNBC are the libs on this board all ten of em.

 

[manu1959]

totaly in the bag.............

rasmussen predicts landslide for obama - Google Search

 

[Screaming Eagle]

Who gives a shit about what non-voters think? Rasmussen's is the only poll that matters, the others poll insignificant people.

 

[Cal]

Assmussen is a conservative tool.

 

[Sinatra]

totaly in the bag.............

rasmussen predicts landslide for obama - Google Search

You just threw this thread into the "FAIL" pile!!

 

[skookerasbil]

LMAO.......the only people utterring this are the 21%er k00ks............nobody else!!!

In October 2008, every single k00k on here fell all over themselves trying to post up the Rasmussen polls on Obama taking a big lead over McCain!!!

Now??

Rasmussen is a fraud because Obama is sinking in every poll like a stone in wter!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

oh.......and ps............more awesome news for the k00ks..................

Generic Congressional Ballot
Generic Ballot: Republicans 44%, Democrats 35%
Tuesday, January 05, 2010 Email to a Friend ShareThisAdvertisement
Republican candidates start the year by opening a nine-point lead over Democrats, the GOP's biggest in several years, in the latest edition of the Generic Congressional Ballot.

The new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that 44% would vote for their district’s Republican congressional candidate while 35% would opt for his or her Democratic opponent.






Ooooooooooooooooooops!!!!!!!!

 

[NYcarbineer]

LMAO.......the only people utterring this are the 21%er k00ks............nobody else!!!

In October 2008, every single k00k on here fell all over themselves trying to post up the Rasmussen polls on Obama taking a big lead over McCain!!!

!

That would be a better lie if it wasn't so easy to look up and disprove. Rasmussen was middle of the pack throughout October.

You do know that there's a record of the facts on most things, don't you, Corky?

RealClearPolitics - Election 2008 - General Election: McCain vs. Obama

 

[NYcarbineer]

Who gives a shit about what non-voters think? Rasmussen's is the only poll that matters, the others poll insignificant people.

Digging.

 

[NYcarbineer]

What good would it serve Rassmussen to skew his polls? Wouldn't it be a matter of a very short time before his numbers would be known by all to be unreliable?

Approval numbers don't have a real result to be compared to, so unlike a final election poll, you can't prove them wrong.

Why would Rasmussen skew his polls? Simple. Money. Skewing to the right makes him a darling of the wingnut crowd, which is a lucrative market.

 

[code1211]

What good would it serve Rassmussen to skew his polls? Wouldn't it be a matter of a very short time before his numbers would be known by all to be unreliable?

The answer to that is simple.

There is a certain segment of society that only listen to news and opinion that agrees with their own point of view.

Radical viewers, readers or listeners generally believe that their views represent the majority, and that the media is somehow involved in a cover-up to hide the will of this "majority". They prefer to pay attention to media sources that agree with this viewpoint.

That's why MSNBC and FoxNews do better in ratings than other News outlets, and why Conservative talk radio is so popular among right-wingers.

Polling is no exception. There are a whole bunch of polls out there, Rasmussen would get lost among them, and have no notoriety, if he had the same numbers as everyone else.

By introducing right-wing bias to his methodology, Rasmussen has secured a relatively large permanent niche audience that will be loyal to him, just like FoxNews has a relatively large permanent niche audience that are loyal to them.

Interestingly I think that even if Rasmussen is proved to be completely and utterly wrong, his faithful readers will still blindly follow his numbers.

And yet he just about nailed the election results, was the first poller to note that Obama was overtaking Clinton and showed consistantly in polls leading up to the election that McCain woulf be trounced.

Were all of these also the result of right wing bias?

 

[code1211]

LMAO.......the only people utterring this are the 21%er k00ks............nobody else!!!

In October 2008, every single k00k on here fell all over themselves trying to post up the Rasmussen polls on Obama taking a big lead over McCain!!!

!

That would be a better lie if it wasn't so easy to look up and disprove. Rasmussen was middle of the pack throughout October.

You do know that there's a record of the facts on most things, don't you, Corky?

RealClearPolitics - Election 2008 - General Election: McCain vs. Obama

Rasmussen had the margin at +6 Obama with a 2 point margin of error. Actual was +7 Obama. That's within the margin of error and a dead ringer.

Is your point that this poll was right at the time of the election and wrong the rest of the time before and since?

 

[Zona]

For all the derision directed toward pre-election polling, the final poll estimates were not
far off from the actual nationwide voteshares for the two candidates. On average, preelection
polls from 23 public polling organizations projected a Democratic advantage of
7.52 percentage points on Election Day, which is only about 1.37 percentage points away
from the current estimate of a 6.15-point Obama margin in the national popular vote.
Following the procedures proposed by Martin, Traugott and Kennedy (see Public Opinion
Quarterly, Fall 2006, pp. 342-369) to assess poll accuracy, I analyze poll estimates from
these 23 polling organizations. Four of these polls appear to have overestimated McCain
support (indicated with a * below), while most polls (17) overestimated Obama strength.
Pre-election projections for two organizations’ final polls—Rasmussen and Pew—were
perfectly in agreement with the actual election result (**).
The following list ranks the 23 organizations by the accuracy of their final, national preelection
polls (as reported on pollster.com).
1. Rasmussen (11/1-3)**
1. Pew (10/29-11/1)**
2. YouGov/Polimetrix (10/18-11/1)
3. Harris Interactive (10/20-27)
4. GWU (Lake/Tarrance) (11/2-3)*
5. Diageo/Hotline (10/31-11/2)*

http://www.fordham.edu/images/acade...ccuracy in the 2008 presidential election.pdf

Doesn't sound too much like a polling company bent on trying to skew the facts.

Meanwhile, Fox is still saying mcCain is leading and will win the presidency. Go McCain, go sarah, go fox. Please.

 

[Mike458877]

Designed to skew things in favor of Republicans and all things Neo-Con.

Why can't you neo-cons see/accept that?

FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right: Is Rasmussen Reports Biased?
Rasmussen's Polling Stirs Bias Debate -- Politics Daily
How Rasmussen's right-wing bias has made it a laughing stock among major pollsters - LiveDaily Community
National Ledger - Scott Rasmussen Accused of Bias - Rasmussen Reports Polls Scrutiny

Now, what you do need to be aware of is that Rasmussen's opinion is one among many. They might turn out to be right -- but so might all of the other pollsters who have a different opinion about the electorate. If you're running a news organization and you tend to cite Rasmussen's polls disproportionately, it probably means that you are biased -- it does not necessarily mean that Rasmussen is biased.

* * *

But there are other respects in which I'm much less sympathetic to Rasmussen's case. In particular, this has to do with their choices of question wording and subject matter. The Politico question, for instance, points toward an August question in which Rasmussen asked "It’s always better to cut taxes than to increase government spending because taxpayers, not bureaucrats, are the best judges of how to spend their money.” That is not a question designed to elicit the most accurate reflection of public opinion.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNVcE1UI0OE[/ame]

Notice how Rasmussen uses very vague phrases like "likely voters" which should be read as "voters likely to vote for/favor republicans" and "pretty similar" as in "their numbers are pretty similar to ours" where "pretty similar" is not a defined range and varies substantially.

Notice also how Bill O'Reilly gently spoonfeeds Scottie all the necessary talking points.

Classic!

Your clearly experiencing emotional trauma due to the self destruction of the liberal movement in Washington.

Try this, next time you need to throw a fit, stick your head up that Elephants ass and scream!

Mike

 

[NYcarbineer]

What good would it serve Rassmussen to skew his polls? Wouldn't it be a matter of a very short time before his numbers would be known by all to be unreliable?

The answer to that is simple.

There is a certain segment of society that only listen to news and opinion that agrees with their own point of view.

Radical viewers, readers or listeners generally believe that their views represent the majority, and that the media is somehow involved in a cover-up to hide the will of this "majority". They prefer to pay attention to media sources that agree with this viewpoint.

That's why MSNBC and FoxNews do better in ratings than other News outlets, and why Conservative talk radio is so popular among right-wingers.

Polling is no exception. There are a whole bunch of polls out there, Rasmussen would get lost among them, and have no notoriety, if he had the same numbers as everyone else.

By introducing right-wing bias to his methodology, Rasmussen has secured a relatively large permanent niche audience that will be loyal to him, just like FoxNews has a relatively large permanent niche audience that are loyal to them.

Interestingly I think that even if Rasmussen is proved to be completely and utterly wrong, his faithful readers will still blindly follow his numbers.

And yet he just about nailed the election results, was the first poller to note that Obama was overtaking Clinton and showed consistantly in polls leading up to the election that McCain woulf be trounced.

Were all of these also the result of right wing bias?

We're talking about two different polls. Election polls can be proven wrong. Rasmussen uses the same method as everyone else on election polls. Approval polls can't be proven right or wrong. Rasmussen skews them to pander to the rightwingers, and as this thread and every other thread on political forums proves, he's very good at it.