• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Romney, Obama, Rasmussen

And in the Truth is Stranger than fiction category, Rasmussen mentioned in his Friday column that Missouri is only +3 for Romney. All I can think is that a whole lot of "independents" were thinking that the party would pressure Akin into dropping out and they'd have someone to support. Now that it's clear that it's rape-boy or no one, they've come down on McCaskill's side.
 
MattusMaximus said:
Hey, just for the lulz, what say we start referencing the new right-wing spinmeisters at http://unskewedpolls.com in addition to the more reputable... errr, dirty lying liberal... pollsters and markets?

Please?! :D
Click to expand...

If they'd get a new site designer I might be able to look at it. The eyeball ache there drives me to distraction.

And I love their no-skew data gathering. They have a link to what I presume is what they think of as a valid poll. I'm sure they publish their results and do a lot of verification (not!). I see a non-protected "anonymous" internet poll and I can't resist. Did you know that I'm a conservative Republican Fox News watching Hispanic American who thinks that Obama won the debate? Oh, and I wanted to skew the data so I'm also from Idaho and a registered voter. I hope they tell Karl Rove that there's been a significant statistical shift in the Latino Conservatives in Idaho and they start buying air time to run Spanish-language Romney plugs.

(I picked Idaho because of its low population. Not that I'm suggesting anyone else play with them - that would be bad... bad. But a few more conservative Latinos shifting to Obama couldn't hurt, ya know!)
 
Last edited:
RandFan said:
RCP shows Obama losing 1.5 points. Romney's bounce became real.
Click to expand...

You have to watch out for RCP averages in the early a.m. in the USA. If you click the poll, it shows Obama with a 3.2 but their front page shows him at only 1.8

This could mean they have another poll coming out in the next few hours with stronger Mitt figures or it could mean that they haven't knocked off the older polls. That number will go waaaay down for Obama when they chop off the 9/26-30 polls because they're too old. One of those is Obama +7. That represents an entire point in the lead/trail poll because they're generally averaging seven polls in the selection.
 
SkepticalDrew said:
Where does it say that? I'm not seeing it.

edit: the only major polls that I've seen since the debate are from Rasmussen and We Ask America. They should a good bounce for Romney in the swing states. Still waiting on other polls to see for sure though. (both tend to lean conservative)
Click to expand...
When I went to bed last night Obama was up +3.1. This morning he was up +1.6. That's a difference of 1.5 (hence lost 1.5).

He's at +1.8 now so I might have misread the earlier stat. BTW: Those numbers are the RCP average.
 
Last edited:
SkepticalDrew said:
48.6 to 46.8 right for Obama right?

edit: real clear politics, aptly named!
Click to expand...

But check the Poll page.... http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html

I still think they're slow in updating something.


ETA: They did just update the General Election page - it now matches the Home Page. And that brings me to my Conspiracy Theory. They dropped out the poll with the largest number for Obama (NPR at Obama +7), but it had the same validity dates as the the last poll on that page (NBC/WSJ). I still say they're cooking the numbers to make the race look closer to enhance views.
 
Last edited:
Ah I see it now!

The change seems to be based on Rasmussen, as that's the only major national poll since the debate.
 
SkepticalDrew said:
Ah I see it now!

The change seems to be based on Rasmussen, as that's the only major national poll since the debate.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but again to my "cooking the numbers" accusation, they added one poll - Rasmussen at Obama +2, but knocked off two (Obama +3 and Obama +7). Why didn't the knock of one? By knocking off 10 and putting up 2, they get a lower total and are dividing by a lower number of polls (5). It's a handy way to manipulate the average while appearing to be working honestly. (You can expand the General Election poll to see the previous ones they knocked off the current average.)

Plus, their header for the General Election page still reads "Polls from 9/26 to 10/5". It should say "Some polls from 9/26" because they knocked off two that opened on 9/26.

I've been keeping an eye on their little games. First it was just suspicions but I'm pretty sure they're playing with the numbers a tad. I don't think they have an agenda other than upping their page views, though.
 
I guess I'll just say it - I don't trust Rasmussen.

Not saying Romney won't get a bounce, not saying he won't get a significant bounce either. But 49%-47% in favor of Romney? The problems with Rasmussen being biased toward republicans and the house effect have been analyzed and debated ad nauseum so I won't do that here. But I am going to wait until next week when other polls start coming in.

Foolmewunz said:
Yeah, but again to my "cooking the numbers" accusation, they added one poll - Rasmussen at Obama +2, but knocked off two (Obama +3 and Obama +7). Why didn't the knock of one? By knocking off 10 and putting up 2, they get a lower total and are dividing by a lower number of polls (5). It's a handy way to manipulate the average while appearing to be working honestly. (You can expand the General Election poll to see the previous ones they knocked off the current average.)

Plus, their header for the General Election page still reads "Polls from 9/26 to 10/5". It should say "Some polls from 9/26" because they knocked off two that opened on 9/26.

I've been keeping an eye on their little games. First it was just suspicions but I'm pretty sure they're playing with the numbers a tad. I don't think they have an agenda other than upping their page views, though.
Click to expand...

Yeah I'm not so certain of their internal reasoning on that one.
 
Last edited:
SkepticalDrew said:
I guess I'll just say it - I don't trust Rasmussen.
Click to expand...
...but only when they give the results you don't like. When they're in line with the rest or show the other guy up, well then there's no problem. LOL.

Rasmussen was at the top of the list in the 08 election in terms of accuracy for pollsters.
 
Foolmewunz said:
Yeah, but again to my "cooking the numbers" accusation, they added one poll - Rasmussen at Obama +2, but knocked off two (Obama +3 and Obama +7). Why didn't the knock of one? By knocking off 10 and putting up 2, they get a lower total and are dividing by a lower number of polls (5). It's a handy way to manipulate the average while appearing to be working honestly. (You can expand the General Election poll to see the previous ones they knocked off the current average.)

Plus, their header for the General Election page still reads "Polls from 9/26 to 10/5". It should say "Some polls from 9/26" because they knocked off two that opened on 9/26.

I've been keeping an eye on their little games. First it was just suspicions but I'm pretty sure they're playing with the numbers a tad. I don't think they have an agenda other than upping their page views, though.
Click to expand...
The founders of RCP are christian conservatives, and 51% of RCP is owned by Forbes, so the notion of them having an agenda isn't far-fetched.
 
Neally said:
Rasmussen was at the top of the list in the 08 election in terms of accuracy for pollsters.
Click to expand...

That one has already been debunked in this thread. They were only the most accurate the day before the election. Their long term accuracy is among the worst.
 
remirol said:
Some assessment of Rasmussen from a third party:

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/27/sept-26-could-2012-be-like-2008/
Click to expand...

Neally said:
Rasmussen was at the top of the list in the 08 election in terms of accuracy for pollsters.
Click to expand...

This assertion has been destroyed in numerous places, but because lying liars have to lie when they don't have facts, I'll just demolish it one more time. Plus it only takes like 5 minutes to do so. But just to remind you again...

2008 result: Obama +7.3
Rasmussen: Obama +6, a -1.3 point differential

The following polls were MORE accurate than Rasmussen in 2008:

RCP Average (+7.6 (+0.3))
FOX News (+7 (-0.3))
Ipsos/McClatchy (+7 (-0.3))
CNN/Opinion Research (+7 (-0.3))
IBD/Tipp (+8 (+0.7))
NBC News/Wall Street Journal (+8 (+0.7))

The following poll was EQUALLY as accurate as Rasmussen:

Pew Research (+6 (-1.3))

This puts Rasmussen in a tie for 7th most accurate. Not at all a compelling case for "accuracy", especially when you take into account their methodology flaws that persist and the horrendous 2010 performance of Rasmussen.
In addition, of the 16 "final" polls listed, Rasmussen was skewed further right than all but 2 -- both halves of the Battleground poll and Diageo. So it should be no surprise to anyone that Rasmussen effectively marks the "far right" extreme in any given set of polls.

Sourcey McSource Source

You're welcome. :D
 
remirol said:
This assertion has been destroyed in numerous places, but because lying liars have to lie when they don't have facts, I'll just demolish it one more time. Plus it only takes like 5 minutes to do so. But just to remind you again...
Click to expand...

The pollsters were graded on both the accuracy of their final poll (popular vote) and the consistency of their polling during the month of October 2008.
Rasmussen was at the top of the list. http://electoralmap.net/2012/2008_election.php

You're welcome.

varwoche said:
The founders of RCP are christian conservatives, and 51% of RCP is owned by Forbes, so the notion of them having an agenda isn't far-fetched.
Click to expand...
LOL, Now RCP is conspiring to give bad results, except of course when BO is surging ahead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom