LOL @ Public Policy Polling

[TheGreatGatsby]

Well one problem is that you are comparing Rasmussen's national record with PPP's state by state polling record. PPP didn't do national polling in 2008 while both did state polling. State polling is what you need to look at for accuracy as that is how the election is going to be decided.

PPP is far off the majority of polls right now and I don't trust them more than more proven entities like Gallup and Rasmussen. Again, PPP is being paid by off by the Dem machined to artificially create Obama momentum with their hack polls. That is why Obama is up in every poll and even tied in states like NC when Gravis has Romney plus 8 and Rassmussen has it plus 6.

Also, PPP really isn't the one off from the other polls right now any more than Ras is. You should really go through them state by state and you'd see your claim is utterly false.

For example, Ohio - PPP shows O+4, aligning with Time & CNN. Ras shows R+2, nobody else shows R up.

Time and CNN slant left too. All's your saying is that PPP is cheating even more than they are.

I know NC. Obama is not competing there. It'll be plus 4 minimum for Romney.

 

[AceRothstein]

PPP is far off the majority of polls right now and I don't trust them more than more proven entities like Gallup and Rasmussen. Again, PPP is being paid by off by the Dem machined to artificially create Obama momentum with their hack polls. That is why Obama is up in every poll and even tied in states like NC when Gravis has Romney plus 8 and Rassmussen has it plus 6.

Also, PPP really isn't the one off from the other polls right now any more than Ras is. You should really go through them state by state and you'd see your claim is utterly false.

For example, Ohio - PPP shows O+4, aligning with Time & CNN. Ras shows R+2, nobody else shows R up.

Time and CNN slant left too. All's your saying is that PPP is cheating even more than they are.

I know NC. Obama is not competing there. It'll be plus 4 minimum for Romney.

Please show me one poll in Ohio that agrees with the Ras poll. I'll wait.

Also, another poll released a little while ago showing NC tied. http://www.elon.edu/docs/e-web/elonpoll/102912_PollExecutiveSummaryAndData.pdf

 

[candycorn]

ahh, the conservatives are back to blaming the pollsters I see.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Also, PPP really isn't the one off from the other polls right now any more than Ras is. You should really go through them state by state and you'd see your claim is utterly false.

For example, Ohio - PPP shows O+4, aligning with Time & CNN. Ras shows R+2, nobody else shows R up.

Time and CNN slant left too. All's your saying is that PPP is cheating even more than they are.

I know NC. Obama is not competing there. It'll be plus 4 minimum for Romney.

Please show me one poll in Ohio that agrees with the Ras poll. I'll wait.

Also, another poll released a little while ago showing NC tied. http://www.elon.edu/docs/e-web/elonpoll/102912_PollExecutiveSummaryAndData.pdf

You will wait b/c I'm not gonna fetch polls for you. You're trying to argue that Ras. is off and they've been the most accurate pollsters in the last two presidential election. Meanwhile, polling orgs are taking their cues from the media and trying to cheat.

 

[AceRothstein]

Time and CNN slant left too. All's your saying is that PPP is cheating even more than they are.

I know NC. Obama is not competing there. It'll be plus 4 minimum for Romney.

Please show me one poll in Ohio that agrees with the Ras poll. I'll wait.

Also, another poll released a little while ago showing NC tied. http://www.elon.edu/docs/e-web/elonpoll/102912_PollExecutiveSummaryAndData.pdf

You will wait b/c I'm not gonna fetch polls for you. You're trying to argue that Ras. is off and they've been the most accurate pollsters in the last two presidential election. Meanwhile, polling orgs are taking their cues from the media and trying to cheat.

You won't do anything because you are getting slapped around in your own thread.

Let me know when we start awarding the winner of the election to whoever gets the most votes and then I'd give more credence to Ras and their national poll. Facts are that their state polling sucks. BTW - Ras has Romney's national lead at 2 today, down 2 from Saturday.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Please show me one poll in Ohio that agrees with the Ras poll. I'll wait.

Also, another poll released a little while ago showing NC tied. http://www.elon.edu/docs/e-web/elonpoll/102912_PollExecutiveSummaryAndData.pdf

You will wait b/c I'm not gonna fetch polls for you. You're trying to argue that Ras. is off and they've been the most accurate pollsters in the last two presidential election. Meanwhile, polling orgs are taking their cues from the media and trying to cheat.

You won't do anything because you are getting slapped around in your own thread.

Let me know when we start awarding the winner of the election to whoever gets the most votes and then I'd give more credence to Ras and their national poll. Facts are that their state polling sucks. BTW - Ras has Romney's national lead at 2 today, down 2 from Saturday.

Slapped around? Rasmussen has been the most accurate pollster in the last two presidential elections. It's rocket science worm. You tried to give me some garble about state polls for PPP in 08 vs Rasmussen. But again, it was easier not to cheat when their guy was gonna win anyhow. Meanwhile, Rasmussen has been spot on no matter what party was in the lead.

Again, PPP is a Democratic rigging organization. They are nothing more than a wing of Daily KOS.

Do you really think that Obama will win Wisconsin by 6 and tie NC like PPP says? You know that's BS. And if you don't; well you're gonna.

 

[AceRothstein]

You will wait b/c I'm not gonna fetch polls for you. You're trying to argue that Ras. is off and they've been the most accurate pollsters in the last two presidential election. Meanwhile, polling orgs are taking their cues from the media and trying to cheat.

You won't do anything because you are getting slapped around in your own thread.

Let me know when we start awarding the winner of the election to whoever gets the most votes and then I'd give more credence to Ras and their national poll. Facts are that their state polling sucks. BTW - Ras has Romney's national lead at 2 today, down 2 from Saturday.

Slapped around? Rasmussen has been the most accurate pollster in the last two presidential elections. It's rocket science worm. You tried to give me some garble about state polls for PPP in 08 vs Rasmussen. But again, it was easier not to cheat when their guy was gonna win anyhow. Meanwhile, Rasmussen has been spot on no matter what party was in the lead.

Again, PPP is a Democratic rigging organization. They are nothing more than a wing of Daily KOS.

Do you really think that Obama will win Wisconsin by 6 and tie NC like PPP says? You know that's BS. And if you don't; well you're gonna.

You make a claim that PPP is skewing the averages then do nothing to back it up. The reason for that? Because your claim is false.

Again, Rasmussen is great at their national polling but we don't elect our presidents that way, boy genius. Rasmussen's state polling sucked in 2008, it sucked in 2010 and it is going to suck again this year.

I could see Obama winning WI by 6. I don't think NC is going to go Obama but I don't think Romney will win by more than 2 or 3 points.

 

[oldfart]

I kept noticing that some PPP poll was especially skewing the Real Clear Nonsense averages for Obama. So I decided to check them out. They're an outfit named Public Policy Polling.

These are refered to as "house effects" in polling parlance. Some of them stem from differences in methodology and some may represent bias. Back in June, Nate Silver computed the average house effect for a number of major pollsters with the following results:

Pew Research---------------------------------------D+3.2
Public Policy Polling (PPP)--------------------------D+3.1
Ipsos-------------------------------------------------D+2.9
SurveyUSA-------------------------------------------D+2.4
Marist (NBC/WSJ)-----------------------------------D+1.9
YouGov-----------------------------------------------D+0.8
CNN (Opinion Research)----------------------------D+0.4
Rasmussen Reports---------------------------------R+1.3
Washington Post (ABC)-----------------------------R+1.4
Fox News (Roberts & Shaw)-----------------------R+1.5
Quinnipiac--------------------------------------------R+1.7
Gallup-------------------------------------------------R+2.5

Note that these results are normalized (i.e. the house effect of all polls is chosen as zero).

He has a good discussion of each pollster and the ratings at //http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/22/calculating-house-effects-of-polling-firms/

 

[AceRothstein]

I kept noticing that some PPP poll was especially skewing the Real Clear Nonsense averages for Obama. So I decided to check them out. They're an outfit named Public Policy Polling.

These are refered to as "house effects" in polling parlance. Some of them stem from differences in methodology and some may represent bias. Back in June, Nate Silver computed the average house effect for a number of major pollsters with the following results:

Pew Research---------------------------------------D+3.2
Public Policy Polling (PPP)--------------------------D+3.1
Ipsos-------------------------------------------------D+2.9
SurveyUSA-------------------------------------------D+2.4
Marist (NBC/WSJ)-----------------------------------D+1.9
YouGov-----------------------------------------------D+0.8
CNN (Opinion Research)----------------------------D+0.4
Rasmussen Reports---------------------------------R+1.3
Washington Post (ABC)-----------------------------R+1.4
Fox News (Roberts & Shaw)-----------------------R+1.5
Quinnipiac--------------------------------------------R+1.7
Gallup-------------------------------------------------R+2.5

Note that these results are normalized (i.e. the house effect of all polls is chosen as zero).

He has a good discussion of each pollster and the ratings at //http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/22/calculating-house-effects-of-polling-firms/

The only issue with this is that it is over 4 months old now.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

You won't do anything because you are getting slapped around in your own thread.

Let me know when we start awarding the winner of the election to whoever gets the most votes and then I'd give more credence to Ras and their national poll. Facts are that their state polling sucks. BTW - Ras has Romney's national lead at 2 today, down 2 from Saturday.

Slapped around? Rasmussen has been the most accurate pollster in the last two presidential elections. It's rocket science worm. You tried to give me some garble about state polls for PPP in 08 vs Rasmussen. But again, it was easier not to cheat when their guy was gonna win anyhow. Meanwhile, Rasmussen has been spot on no matter what party was in the lead.

Again, PPP is a Democratic rigging organization. They are nothing more than a wing of Daily KOS.

Do you really think that Obama will win Wisconsin by 6 and tie NC like PPP says? You know that's BS. And if you don't; well you're gonna.

You make a claim that PPP is skewing the averages then do nothing to back it up. The reason for that? Because your claim is false.

Again, Rasmussen is great at their national polling but we don't elect our presidents that way, boy genius. Rasmussen's state polling sucked in 2008, it sucked in 2010 and it is going to suck again this year.

I could see Obama winning WI by 6. I don't think NC is going to go Obama but I don't think Romney will win by more than 2 or 3 points.

My claim is that Rasmussen is accurate and trusted and that if PPP is that far from them (and many other polls) then they're f'd up. And their association with Daily Kos certainly hints at that.

And speaking of the 'every other poll' mentality; other polls are showing Wiscy within a point or two; but PPP is somehow way out there.

 

[AceRothstein]

Slapped around? Rasmussen has been the most accurate pollster in the last two presidential elections. It's rocket science worm. You tried to give me some garble about state polls for PPP in 08 vs Rasmussen. But again, it was easier not to cheat when their guy was gonna win anyhow. Meanwhile, Rasmussen has been spot on no matter what party was in the lead.

Again, PPP is a Democratic rigging organization. They are nothing more than a wing of Daily KOS.

Do you really think that Obama will win Wisconsin by 6 and tie NC like PPP says? You know that's BS. And if you don't; well you're gonna.

You make a claim that PPP is skewing the averages then do nothing to back it up. The reason for that? Because your claim is false.

Again, Rasmussen is great at their national polling but we don't elect our presidents that way, boy genius. Rasmussen's state polling sucked in 2008, it sucked in 2010 and it is going to suck again this year.

I could see Obama winning WI by 6. I don't think NC is going to go Obama but I don't think Romney will win by more than 2 or 3 points.

My claim is that Rasmussen is accurate and trusted and that if PPP is that far from them (and many other polls) then they're f'd up. And their association with Daily Kos certainly hints at that.

Again, you are making that claim so the burden is on you to show proof of this. Go through the state by state swing state polling on RCP and show us that what you are saying is true. You are going to refuse to do so because there is nothing in RCP that backs up what you are saying.

Also, you seem to have an issue separating national and state polling. I'll openly admit that Ras has done well with their national polling. Their state polling sucks and PPP did a much better job in '08. And enough with your claim that they can cheat more when their guy is winning. They weren't cheating in '08, they were more accurate than Ras in their sate polling. It isn't cheating when you do a better job, dum dum.

 

[AceRothstein]

Slapped around? Rasmussen has been the most accurate pollster in the last two presidential elections. It's rocket science worm. You tried to give me some garble about state polls for PPP in 08 vs Rasmussen. But again, it was easier not to cheat when their guy was gonna win anyhow. Meanwhile, Rasmussen has been spot on no matter what party was in the lead.

Again, PPP is a Democratic rigging organization. They are nothing more than a wing of Daily KOS.

Do you really think that Obama will win Wisconsin by 6 and tie NC like PPP says? You know that's BS. And if you don't; well you're gonna.

You make a claim that PPP is skewing the averages then do nothing to back it up. The reason for that? Because your claim is false.

Again, Rasmussen is great at their national polling but we don't elect our presidents that way, boy genius. Rasmussen's state polling sucked in 2008, it sucked in 2010 and it is going to suck again this year.

I could see Obama winning WI by 6. I don't think NC is going to go Obama but I don't think Romney will win by more than 2 or 3 points.

My claim is that Rasmussen is accurate and trusted and that if PPP is that far from them (and many other polls) then they're f'd up. And their association with Daily Kos certainly hints at that.

And speaking of the 'every other poll' mentality; other polls are showing Wiscy within a point or two; but PPP is somehow way out there.

Did you miss the NBC/WSJ poll showing O+6? And don't give me the NBC bullshit skewing it to the left. Last I checked, WSJ leaned right. You will also see that RCP isn't even using the PPP poll showing O+5, so it isn't doing anything to their average for WI.

There are also 2 polls of WI showing Obama up that RCP isn't using for some reason. Grove - O+5, Angus Reid - O+5

 

[Misty]

So polls are meaningless? Complete lies? Wow the libs seem to be leaping out of their panties with excitement over the polls.

No, looking at the average of the polls will give you a much clearer picture as there will always be outliers.

If the polls are skewed the averages are skewed as well. It is still inaccurate.

It's all become a cartoon to make news.

 

[AceRothstein]

So polls are meaningless? Complete lies? Wow the libs seem to be leaping out of their panties with excitement over the polls.

No, looking at the average of the polls will give you a much clearer picture as there will always be outliers.

If the polls are skewed the averages are skewed as well. It is still inaccurate.

It's all become a cartoon to make news.

Except when the polling averages are accurate more often than they are not.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

So polls are meaningless? Complete lies? Wow the libs seem to be leaping out of their panties with excitement over the polls.

No, looking at the average of the polls will give you a much clearer picture as there will always be outliers.

Averages are pointless if the outliers are included.

 

[Numeros]

They could equivocate while ignoring that Rasmussen has been the most accurate poll in the last two presidential elections.

They were not the most accurate in 2008 nationally and their state polling left a lot to be desired. For example with Ohio, their last poll showed a tie while Obama won the state by 4.

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)*
5. ARG (10/25-27)*
6. CNN (10/30-11/1)
6. Ipsos/McClatchy (10/30-11/1)
7. DailyKos.com (D)/Research 2000 (11/1-3)
8. AP/Yahoo/KN (10/17-27)
9. Democracy Corps (D) (10/30-11/2)
10. FOX (11/1-2)
11. Economist/YouGov (10/25-27)
12. IBD/TIPP (11/1-3)
13. NBC/WSJ (11/1-2)
14. ABC/Post (10/30-11/2)
15. Marist College (11/3)
16. CBS (10/31-11/2)
17. Gallup (10/31-11/2)
18. Reuters/ C-SPAN/ Zogby (10/31-11/3)
19. CBS/Times (10/25-29)
20. Newsweek (10/22-23)

If you're going to cite Fordham, at least cite their final analysis and not the infamously invalid "Initial Report."

Being new here, I'm not allowed to post links, but their final analysis is titled "Preelection Poll Accuracy in the 2008 General Elections. Look it up.

Democracy Corps (D) 51/44 +7
Fox News 50/43 +7
CNN/ORC 53/46 +7
Ipsos/McClatchy 53/46 +7
American Research Group 53/45 +8
IBD/TIPP 52/44 +8
Harris Interactive 52/44 +8
YouGov/Polimetrix 51/45 +6
Pew 52/46 +6
Rasmussen 52/46 +6
NBC/WSJ 51/43 +8
GWU (Lake Tarrence) 49/44 +5
ABC/WaPo 53/44 +9
Diageo/Hotline 50/45 +5
Daily Kos/Research 2000 51/46 +5
Marist 52/43 +9
CBS 51/42 +9
Gallup 55/44 +11
Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby 54/43 +11
CBS/NYT 52/41 +11

 

[Toro]

According to 538, in the 2010 elections, Rasmussen biased Republicans on average by 4 percent.

On Tuesday, polls conducted by the firm Rasmussen Reports — which released more than 100 surveys in the final three weeks of the campaign, including some commissioned under a subsidiary on behalf of Fox News — badly missed the margin in many states, and also exhibited a considerable bias toward Republican candidates.

Other polling firms, like SurveyUSA and Quinnipiac University, produced more reliable results in Senate and gubernatorial races. A firm that conducts surveys by Internet, YouGov, also performed relatively well.

What follows is a preliminary analysis of polls released to the public in the final 21 days of the campaign. Our process here is quite simple: we’ve taken all such polls in our database, and assessed how accurate they were, on average, in predicting the margin separating the two leading candidates in each race. For instance, a poll that had the Democrat winning by 2 percentage points in a race where the Republican actually won by 4 would have an error of 6 points.

We’ve also assessed whether a company’s polls consistently missed in either a Democratic or Republican direction — that is, whether they were biased. The hypothetical poll I just described would have had a 6 point Democratic bias, for instance. ...

The 105 polls released in Senate and gubernatorial races by Rasmussen Reports and its subsidiary, Pulse Opinion Research, missed the final margin between the candidates by 5.8 points, a considerably higher figure than that achieved by most other pollsters. Some 13 of its polls missed by 10 or more points, including one in the Hawaii Senate race that missed the final margin between the candidates by 40 points, the largest error ever recorded in a general election in FiveThirtyEight’s database, which includes all polls conducted since 1998.

Moreover, Rasmussen’s polls were quite biased, overestimating the standing of the Republican candidate by almost 4 points on average. In just 12 cases, Rasmussen’s polls overestimated the margin for the Democrat by 3 or more points. But it did so for the Republican candidate in 55 cases — that is, in more than half of the polls that it issued. ...

Rasmussen’s polls have come under heavy criticism throughout this election cycle, including from FiveThirtyEight. We have critiqued the firm for its cavalier attitude toward polling convention. Rasmussen, for instance, generally conducts all of its interviews during a single, 4-hour window; speaks with the first person it reaches on the phone rather than using a random selection process; does not call cellphones; does not call back respondents whom it misses initially; and uses a computer script rather than live interviewers to conduct its surveys. These are cost-saving measures which contribute to very low response rates and may lead to biased samples.

Rasmussen also weights their surveys based on preordained assumptions about the party identification of voters in each state, a relatively unusual practice that many polling firms consider dubious since party identification (unlike characteristics like age and gender) is often quite fluid.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytime...rate-quinnipiac-surveyusa-performed-strongly/

Maybe Rasmussen has changed its methodologies since 2010.

 

[Misty]

In a few more days all these posts will be BS.

 

[NYcarbineer]

They could equivocate while ignoring that Rasmussen has been the most accurate poll in the last two presidential elections.

They were not the most accurate in 2008 nationally and their state polling left a lot to be desired. For example with Ohio, their last poll showed a tie while Obama won the state by 4.

Do you just talk out of your ass for the fun of it? Rasmussen had 08 52-46 for Obama; nearly identical to the 53-46 outcome and that as PC points out, was the most accurate national poll of 08.

How could Rasmussen have been the most accurate pollster in 2008, calling it for Obama by 6 points,

when Obama won by 7.3 points,

and 3 pollsters had him winning by 7, and a couple had him winning by 8??

 

[NYcarbineer]

So polls are meaningless? Complete lies? Wow the libs seem to be leaping out of their panties with excitement over the polls.

No, looking at the average of the polls will give you a much clearer picture as there will always be outliers.

Averages are pointless if the outliers are included.

Who decides who the outliers are?