1. #241
    Stood in the Fire McSpriest's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    In a Hole
    Posts
    459
    Quote Originally Posted by Grummgug View Post
    Traditionally, polling data shows a democrat bias in most major polls. One example were all the early calls of Florida for Al Gore. Most recently, The Real Clear Politics average in the final days of the 2008 campaign offered the same:

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...obama-225.html

    The most accurate polls were from FOX News and Rasmussen. Each had Obama winning by 7%, very close to his 7.3% margin of victory. By comparison, Gallup and Reuters/C-Span/Zogby had Obama winning by 11. CBS and ABC had Obama winning by 9.

    Currently, Rasmussen has Obama +3 on Gingrich, while most of those others have it at double digits. Rasmussen has Santorum +1 over Obama, while most other polls have it Obama in double digits. When it comes to Romney, most all of them have it Obama +6.
    it depends and varies for each election to the next with poll is closest. its trying to sample a (by comparison) small group of people and project that to figure what it would be overall. aside from the fact that its hard to get an accurate enough sample size, its also hard to predict this far out. many things can change between now and November. plus it always is thrown off when multiple people are on one side and one person is on the other. We'll see a little closer in the race

  2. #242
    Santorum isn't "anti-women", but other than that, yeah, he seems to be against the tide on most social issues.

    I think it's all a sign of how much people are stressing fiscal issues this time around. Santorum's fiscal plan is one of the stronger ones amoung the Republican Candidates, and Romney's, ironically, is the single weakest (it's almost a "keep everything the same and then wait and see" proposal -- something politically very "safe" -- vs any sort of dramatic action to get the spending under control, which is what Republicans, and an ever-increasing number of independents are looking for).

    It could also be the evangelicals, Catholics and other religious groups that are turning to the candidate that's most like them. Obama's recent actions with the health care law that are seen as being against the Catholic Church have hurt him with that crowd, and many of them are independents that may have voted for Obama last time, but were turning away from him anyway (again, due to the fiscal concerns).

    I could see Santorum winning if he could manage to woo Floridians to vote for him. Romney is still a much safer (and in my personal opinion, a saner) choice on social issues - but I do wonder just how much the drive for fiscal reform is going to dominate the election when more people are paying attention to it. It's something to think about.

  3. #243
    I feel like Dems need another round in office, before we see another GOP up there.
    Is it me or does it feel like the repubs are not even trying?
    "If you want to control people, if you want to feed them a pack of lies and dominate them, keep them ignorant. For me, literacy means freedom." - LaVar Burton.

  4. #244
    Quote Originally Posted by Chonogo View Post
    Seriously, Santorum is better than Obama? Seriously?

    Pro-war, pro-life, anti-gay, anti-women. As a free thinking American, I don't get it. I really, really, don't.


    We don't need a brainwashed person running this country.

  5. #245
    Quote Originally Posted by Grummgug View Post
    Traditionally, polling data shows a democrat bias in most major polls. One example were all the early calls of Florida for Al Gore. Most recently, The Real Clear Politics average in the final days of the 2008 campaign offered the same:

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...obama-225.html

    The most accurate polls were from FOX News and Rasmussen. Each had Obama winning by 7%, very close to his 7.3% margin of victory. By comparison, Gallup and Reuters/C-Span/Zogby had Obama winning by 11. CBS and ABC had Obama winning by 9.

    Currently, Rasmussen has Obama +3 on Gingrich, while most of those others have it at double digits. Rasmussen has Santorum +1 over Obama, while most other polls have it Obama in double digits. When it comes to Romney, most all of them have it Obama +6.
    A single polling event is not enough to draw your conclusion from.

    ---------- Post added 2012-02-10 at 11:30 PM ----------

    Especially since Rasmussen gets pretty constant claims of conservative bias and was one of the least accurate polling groups in 2010.

    After Election night that year, Silver concluded that Rasmussen's polls were the least accurate of the major pollsters in 2010, having an average error of 5.8 points and a pro-Republican bias of 3.9 points according to Silver's model.[23] He singled out as an example the Hawaii Senate Race, in which Rasmussen showed the incumbent 13 points ahead, although in actuality Inouye won by 53[24] – a difference of 40 points, or "the largest error ever recorded in a general election in FiveThirtyEight’s database, which includes all polls conducted since 1998".[23]

  6. #246
    Quote Originally Posted by Amontoya86 View Post
    http://img685.imageshack.us/img685/4890/87882392.jpg

    We don't need a brainwashed person running this country.
    I love how Santorum runs around like he has a snowball's chance in hell of winning the nomination. If by some freak of politics he manages to win the Republican nomination, he's fucking doomed against Obama. Dude needs to sit down and bow out.

  7. #247
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    Especially since Rasmussen gets pretty constant claims of conservative bias and was one of the least accurate polling groups in 2010.
    So you rebuke his point about Rasmussen's accuracy in the 2008 presidential election by pointing out that Rasmussen was wrong on a 2010 senate race in Hawaii?

    You want another presidential election? In 2004 Bush got 50.7% of the vote and Kerry got 48.3%. The final Rasmussen poll had Bush at 50.2% and Kerry at 48.5%
    Last edited by Merkava; 2012-02-11 at 02:46 AM.

  8. #248
    Void Lord Felya's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    the other
    Posts
    58,334
    Quote Originally Posted by Merkava View Post
    So you rebuke his point about Rasmussen's accuracy in the 2008 presidential election by pointing out that Rasmussen was wrong on a 2010 senate race in Hawaii?

    You want another presidential election? In 2004 Bush got 50.7% of the vote and Kerry got 48.3%. The final Rasmussen poll had Bush at 50.2% and Kerry at 48.5%
    How long before elections were those poles? Were these presidential projections during the primaries?

    ---------- Post added 2012-02-11 at 03:55 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Grummgug View Post
    Traditionally, polling data shows a democrat bias in most major polls. One example were all the early calls of Florida for Al Gore.
    The poles were right, the result was bias. The poles were correct that Gore won:
    http://www.electionstudies.org/florida2000/

  9. #249
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya420 View Post
    How long before elections were those poles?
    Quote Originally Posted by Merkava View Post
    final Rasmussen poll
    I don't know. Final poll, within a couple days of the election I'm guessing.
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya420 View Post
    Were these presidential projections during the primaries?
    Quote Originally Posted by Merkava View Post
    Bush at 50.2% and Kerry at 48.5%
    Bush didn't run against Kerry in a primary.
    Last edited by Merkava; 2012-02-11 at 05:43 AM.

  10. #250
    Come on Merkava, I know you can read better than that. And your data lacks dates.

    ---------- Post added 2012-02-11 at 11:44 PM ----------

    I don't know. Final poll, within a couple days of the election I'm guessing.
    One of the more common problems with Rasmussen actually is they do their "final polling" much farther back from the actual date than many other groups.

  11. #251
    Void Lord Felya's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    the other
    Posts
    58,334
    Quote Originally Posted by Merkava View Post
    I don't know. Final poll, within a couple days of the election I'm guessing.
    Do you think accuracy within a few days is as impressive as accuracy nearly a year in advance of the date?

    Quote Originally Posted by Merkava View Post
    Bush didn't run against Kerry in a primary.
    What were Rasmussen polls like regarding Howard Dean v Bush, before his outburst during the primaries, nearly a year before the elections as opposed to after? The primaries that featured Dean v Kerry... Because, currently we are still in the primary... which I assure you, I am aware does not feature Obama...

  12. #252
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    Come on Merkava, I know you can read better than that. And your data lacks dates.
    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/bush_vs_kerry_hth.html

    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    One of the more common problems with Rasmussen actually is they do their "final polling" much farther back from the actual date than many other groups.
    See above and http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...obama-225.html. Now perhaps you can show me some data that shows that Rasmussen does their final polling for presidential races "much farther back from the actual date than many other groups"

    ---------- Post added 2012-02-11 at 07:01 PM ----------

    [/COLOR]
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya420 View Post
    Do you think accuracy within a few days is as impressive as accuracy nearly a year in advance of the date?
    .
    I don't know. Take it up with Wells. He seems to think that Rasmussens does his final polling early. I would say that would be more impressive. I've given links to show they all do it around the same time.

    ---------- Post added 2012-02-11 at 07:04 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Felya420 View Post
    What were Rasmussen polls like regarding Howard Dean v Bush, before his outburst during the primaries, nearly a year before the elections as opposed to after? The primaries that featured Dean v Kerry... Because, currently we are still in the primary... which I assure you, I am aware does not feature Obama...
    IDK, you can look it up. I gave data for Bush vs Kerry, and you asked me if those presidential projections were for during the primaries. Obviously they weren't. Yes I know were still in a primary, but the issue was Rasmussen's performance in a presidential general election.
    Last edited by Merkava; 2012-02-12 at 01:20 AM.

  13. #253
    I don't know. Take it up with Wells. He seems to think that Rasmussens does his final polling early. I would say that would be more impressive.
    No. A pollster's job is to accurately predict the mood of the public at a given time. If they happen to hit the same mark a month earlier that ends up being the final election count that doesn't mean they're doing their job better, it just means they're getting lucky.

    Shit even Nate Silver counts against them for that.

    And you're still missing the point. He took a single election event where Rasmussen was more accurate and determined that everything that got results to the left of that was displaying a liberal bias. Even if his premise wasn't faulty (and it is) its not proof of his conclusion.

  14. #254
    Void Lord Felya's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    the other
    Posts
    58,334
    Quote Originally Posted by Merkava View Post
    I don't know. Take it up with Wells. He seems to think that Rasmussens does his final polling early. I would say that would be more impressive. I've given links to show they all do it around the same time.
    Why should I take it up with anyone, but you? You were the one who backed up the accuracy of a poll during a primary, with one in a presidential election... days before the actual vote... I think it's an invalid comparison... The fact that you don't know when it's from should really speak for it self. You seriously don't understand why it would be more impressive to predict an even a year ahead of time vs a couple of days? You don't see how the two are drastically different, when we don't even now who will be running against Obama?

    Quote Originally Posted by Merkava View Post
    IDK, you can look it up. I gave data for Bush vs Kerry, and you asked me if those presidential projections were for during the primaries. Obviously they weren't. Yes I know were still in a primary, but the issue was Rasmussen's performance in a presidential general election.
    You were responding to someone who was questioning current primary candidates vs the president. How is giving data for Bush vs Kerry a few days before the actual election, an example of accuracy during a primary poll, where a candidate is not even declared?

    I do not understand your point of bringing up polling numbers from days before the actual elections, as a reflection of accuracy of their polling during a primary that is nearly a year away from these elections.

  15. #255
    You seriously don't understand why it would be more impressive to predict an even a year ahead of time vs a couple of days?
    The job of a poll isn't to predict the future, unless they're specifically asking about a future event, they're about measuring exactly what public opinion is at a specific point in time. That's why you see a lot of polling questions with stuff like "if the election were held tomorrow..." and such. You then use a series of polls to predict the future. Good polling is like digging core samples when you're looking for coal. You go along an area digging holes and use the data you get to predict trends.

    As such there isn't much value in polls that try to predict events too far out. Whether those polls end up being accurate or not is irrelevant and to hold up the results as proof of their merit is just a selection fallacy, since you're only using single polls at a time.

    If we are going to debate the quality of their polling though this is a pretty big deal: http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes...rmed-strongly/

    Rasmussen's polling was the farthest off the across the board in the last major election. I mean they had 13 polls off by more than 10%, and one off by 40%

    On top of that their methodology leaves a lot to be desired.
    Last edited by Wells; 2012-02-12 at 02:09 AM.

  16. #256
    eliminate international drug programs
    substantially reduce foreign travel
    eliminate international organizations and commissions

    Thats Ron Paul, pretty much going isolating mode. blech.

  17. #257
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya420 View Post
    Why should I take it up with anyone, but you? You were the one who backed up the accuracy of a poll during a primary, with one in a presidential election... days before the actual vote... I think it's an invalid comparison...
    Show me where I backed up the accuracy of a poll during a primary with one in a presidential election. Please.

    Wells response to you shows you why I said to take it up with him.You guys have differing opinions on it. And I seem to have predicted it successfully since he took it up with you in the very next post.
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    The job of a poll isn't to predict the future...
    Quote Originally Posted by Felya420 View Post
    The fact that you don't know when it's from should really speak for it self. .
    Quote Originally Posted by Merkava View Post
    I don't know. Final poll, within a couple days of the election I'm guessing.
    I said that and then provided a link which is here http://www.realclearpolitics.com/bush_vs_kerry_hth.html
    So I answered your question and then provided proof. Please take the time to read what I say before responding.

    Quote Originally Posted by Felya420 View Post
    How is giving data for Bush vs Kerry a few days before the actual election, an example of accuracy during a primary poll, where a candidate is not even declared?
    I wasn't defending the accuracy of a primary poll. I was answering Wells when he said this...
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    A single polling event is not enough to draw your conclusion from.
    Thanks for participating but please take the time to read the thread a little before responding. I put the effort into quoting what I'm responding to, the least you can do is read it.

    ---------- Post added 2012-02-12 at 12:57 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    No. A pollster's job is to accurately predict the mood of the public at a given time. If they happen to hit the same mark a month earlier that ends up being the final election count that doesn't mean they're doing their job better, it just means they're getting lucky.
    Sure, you're right on that one. Maybe I should have made myself clearer. I was talking about Rasmussen's performance in the presidential general election polling. You said a single event isn't enough to draw a conclusion from. I linked a second one. And gave the dates. I'm not defending criticisms of Rasmussen's conservative bias, I think more often than not that's probably true. But Rasmussen Reports has only been around since 2003. I'm not saying he's right, or his methodologies aren't questionable, just that he was pretty good on the last two presidential elections. I don't know how close he was to every other pollster 8 months out this time in 2008 and in 2004.

    I brought up the point that Rasmussen's final poll on Bush Kerry 2004 was very accurate and you said this in return...
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    One of the more common problems with Rasmussen actually is they do their "final polling" much farther back from the actual date than many other groups.
    and I posted this link http://www.realclearpolitics.com/bush_vs_kerry_hth.html. Do you care to address that?
    Last edited by Merkava; 2012-02-12 at 07:00 AM.

  18. #258
    Again, you're missing the point I was responding to, where someone used Rasmussen to determine "center" and declared everyone else to the left.

  19. #259
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    Again, you're missing the point I was responding to, where someone used Rasmussen to determine "center" and declared everyone else to the left.
    Point taken.

    I brought up the point that Rasmussen's final poll on Bush Kerry 2004 was very accurate and you said this in return...
    Quote Originally Posted by Wells View Post
    One of the more common problems with Rasmussen actually is they do their "final polling" much farther back from the actual date than many other groups.
    and I posted this link http://www.realclearpolitics.com/bush_vs_kerry_hth.html. Do you care to address that?

  20. #260
    I brought up the point that Rasmussen's final poll on Bush Kerry 2004 was very accurate and you said this in return...
    Rasmussen was a much better organization in the past. In 2004 and to a lesser extent 2006/08 their polling was fine. Not the best out there, but ok. In 2010 they managed to somehow be one of the worst.

    Polling organizations are a little like a car. It doesn't matter how well it ran in the past, if it runs like shit now its shit.

    That being said, happening to get the "correct" data doesn't mean their methodology is any less shitty. I mean last I checked they weren't even calling cell phones and conducted all calls for a poll within the same 4 hour window.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •