Romney, Obama, Rasmussen

Neally said:
Yet your beloved Nate Silver thought it was the best in 08:
Click to expand...

Well, no, that's not what he said at all, but you can keep clinging to whatever shreds of dismal, embarrassed hope you may have left. :cool:

Really, how do exactly do determine that they need to "shape up?"
Click to expand...

They were way right of the pack in '10 and were one of the worst performers as a result, indicating one or more flaws in their approach. The flaws with their methodology are already well known, and given that they are way right of the pack again this year, it is patently obvious that they have not corrected those flaws; see earlier links. :cool:

In case you don't know, polls don't predict future outcomes, despite what JoeTheJuggler and Upchurch seem to think.
Click to expand...

Of course they do. The current polls predict that if people's minds don't change, and change significantly, and a _lot_ of people's minds don't change, that Obama will be re-elected in November with very little effort -- though with a lot of tooth-gnashing and crying from the Republicans who really, _really_ want to believe that Nate and RCP are wrong. Such as yourself. :cool:

Of course, you could also just go with the RCP averages and accept the data if you want to be consistent. But I guess reality doesn't mesh with what some here need to believe. So the minute it starts to trend in the wrong direction, there's some nefarious reason behind it, like the right-wingers were claiming when BO had a 4 point edge. Hypocrisy much?
Click to expand...

No nefarious reasons at all -- Rasmussen is always to the right of the pack whether they report +Romney or +Obama. I cackle with laughter whenever Rasmussen is forced to show +Obama because that just shows how strong Obama's position really is, _despite_ Rasmussen's lean. :cool:
 
varwoche said:
You view things in such a binary manner that speculation is lost on you. (It's not just you. It's a shame the extent that JAQ has tainted jaq.)

For the record, I do not claim that RCP fudged. My operating assumption is they did not.
Click to expand...

Just to be clear, I do claim they fudge, but I don't claim it's to promote their political agenda (their selection of dubious blogs as Top News may be another question). I believe they have a vested interest in a tight race. More interest means more hits at the site which means more revenue.

I think it's quite possible that they also see a big break, like after the debates, and want to be reflecting the new mood, so perhaps for that reason cut off some pre-debate polls. But for whatever reason, they cooked the selection of poll ranges Friday and Saturday.
 
remirol said:
Well, no, that's not what he said at all, but you can keep clinging to whatever shreds of dismal, embarrassed hope you may have left. :cool:
Click to expand...
Well yes, that's exactly what he wrote. Google the quote if you want, or I'll spoon feed you the cite if you want.

Of course they do. The current polls predict that if people's minds don't change, and change significantly, and a _lot_ of people's minds don't change, that Obama will be re-elected in November with very little effort
Click to expand...
LOL. Clearly you don't understand even the concept of polling. Polls say nothing about people changing their minds. They give a snapshot of opinion at a single point of time, or several days if the poll was conducted over several days. Peoples opinions can and do change, obviously as we've seen.

No nefarious reasons at all -- Rasmussen is always to the right of the pack whether they report +Romney or +Obama.
Click to expand...
Now your just making up stuff to try to salvage your position. Ramussen has often shown BO with a larger lead than Gallup. Hell, it's even been mentioned in this thread. Oops, there goes that lie. And the speculation about RCP being some sort of biased toward the right IS nefarious speculation. The other polls are now picking up on the bump that Romney got from the debate. Oops, there go goes another lie.

varwoche said:
For the record, I do not claim that RCP fudged. My operating assumption is they did not.
Click to expand...
Well glad to see that you are walking back on your previous post supporting the speculation, with "the notion of them having an agenda isn't far-fetched" comment.
 
Neally said:
Yet your beloved Nate Silver thought it was the best in 08:

In summation, none of these tracking polls are perfect, although Rasmussen -- with its large sample size and high pollster rating -- would probably be the one I'd want with me on a desert island.
Click to expand...

Neally said:
Well yes, that's exactly what he wrote.
Click to expand...

Well, no; see requote above. Wilfully misunderstanding the difference between declaring a poll concretely 'best' and what Silver said, however, is about all you have to cling to. :cool:

Of course, Nate changed his mind in '10 when Rasmussen performed horribly, with a hard right-wing skew. Or you could read what Nate says about them this year (both of these have been linked elsewhere in this thread already, you've just ignored them in your desperate need to believe). :cool:

LOL. Clearly you don't understand even the concept of polling. Polls say nothing about people changing their minds. They give a snapshot of opinion at a single point of time, or several days if the poll was conducted over several days. Peoples opinions can and do change, obviously as we've seen.
Click to expand...

Clearly you don't understand the concept of drawing conclusions from data... :rolleyes: The conclusion to be drawn from the polls currently is that Obama will be re-elected quite handily, unless a miracle occurs. Romney's already had one miracle with the debate and even _that_ wasn't enough to salvage his position. :cool:

Now your just making up stuff to try to salvage your position. Ramussen has often shown BO with a larger lead than Gallup. Hell, it's even been mentioned in this thread. Oops, there goes that lie. And the speculation about RCP being some sort of biased toward the right IS nefarious speculation. The other polls are now picking up on the bump that Romney got from the debate. Oops, there go goes another lie.
Click to expand...

And yet, the trend for Rasmussen is still hard right of the actual average, as RCP data shows. Linked elsewhere in the thread, as always. :cool:

Is it so hard to admit that you were wrong? :cool: Now, if you don't have any new _actual facts_ to bring to this debate, I'll just be moving on, settling back in my chair, and watching Obama get re-elected in November and all the Rasmussen fanbois frothing as their hopes and dreams are dashed.

Tea Party tears do taste the best.
 
Here's one that appears to be visibly skewed towards Obama, for reference. (I'd still trust Nate's model most since it has been the most accurate over the past 4 years, but hey, just showing that there's some wacky stuff out there each way :) )
 
remirol said:
Of course, Nate changed his mind in '10 when Rasmussen performed horribly, with a hard right-wing skew.
Click to expand...
Yes, Nate waffles on whether Rasmussen is good or bad, but the quote I cited was for 08, you know that year that you claimed Ramusssen was only average. Do try to keep your focus.


Clearly you don't understand the concept of drawing conclusions from data... :rolleyes: The conclusion to be drawn from the polls currently is that Obama will be re-elected quite handily, unless a miracle occurs.
Click to expand...
LOL. Still trying to salvage your obvious FAIL in understanding the concept of polling. The fact that you or others incorrectly think that polls are some sort of forecast of some future event, doesn't make it so.
Is it so hard to admit that you were wrong?
Click to expand...
So says the guy that hasn't a clue on the concept of polling and what it means. Who thinks polls are like a weather forecast and says they are because, well, because that's how he uses them.
 
Neally said:
Yes, Nate waffles on whether Rasmussen is good or bad, but the quote I cited was for 08, you know that year that you claimed Ramusssen was only average.
Click to expand...

And then I showed the hard data that proved it was only average. :cool:

The fact that you or others incorrectly think that polls are some sort of forecast of some future event, doesn't make it so.
Click to expand...

Already been explained to you above. They are a snapshot of current opinion, which can then be used as a forecast of what will happen if opinion doesn't change. In short: Obama gon' be re-elected. :cool:

Plenty of time for you to get in over at InTrade :D
 
BenBurch said:
Where does RCP get that Gallup is tied, then?
Click to expand...
From a CNN article today?
The Gallup poll indicates that Obama held a 50%-45% advantage over Romney from September 30-October 2, the three days leading up to last Wednesday's presidential debate in Denver, Colorado. According to the survey, Romney and Obama were deadlocked at 47% each in the three days after the debate, from October 4-6.
Click to expand...

Obama supporters writing off the debate are woefully mistaken for doing so.
 
Last edited:
Here' more from Gallup.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/157709/obama-approval-vote-support-reach-better.aspx

PRINCETON, NJ -- President Barack Obama's job approval rating has been 50% or higher in each of the last four Gallup Daily tracking figures, including a 51% rating in the latest three-day rolling average, from Sept. 23-25. This nearly matches the level of approval for Obama that Gallup found at the end of the Democratic National Convention earlier this month. His approval then dipped into the 40s by mid-month before rebounding to 51% late last week.
Click to expand...

ETA: I see the dates on this one are old. Sorry.
 
Last edited:
Unabogie said:
Gallup has Obama up by 5.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/150743/Obama-Romney.aspx

Debate bounce is gone for the Butcher of Big Bird?
Click to expand...

Don't rely too heavily on any one poll. Otherwise, you're making the same mistake as those who continually quote Rasmussen.

To me, after looking at some aggregated polling, it looks as if the post-debate bump that Romney got is now starting to settle down. He's in a better position than he was one week ago, but given where he was that isn't a big improvement in the long run. In addition, probably partly because of Friday's jobs report, it looks as if in many most recent (read: Sunday) polls President Obama is recovering. Nate Silver breaks it down here and here.

What I find most interesting is looking at Nate Silver's Electoral College map; it states that if the election were held today, Romney would have about a 51% chance of taking Florida, but when you look at the forecast for Nov. 6th President Obama has about a 51% chance of winning Florida. However, it's still not looking good for Romney in places like Iowa, Ohio, or Colorado (especially in Ohio). And without Ohio, I see little to no chance of Romney winning the EC.

Meanwhile, over at the markets...

IEM
Obama 70.1%
Romney 30.4%

Intrade
Obama 64.9%
Romney 35.1%

These are practically identical WTA numbers to what they were the day before the debate.
 
Yay! Finally, applecorped has one to boast about.

But, wait, Pew probably cooked the numbers so you can't trust them. Right, applecorped?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom