Romney's Momentum Seems to Have Stopped GOP Likely to Retain Control of House Bonus Quote of the Day Mourdock Story Continues Ohio's Nightmare Scenario Latest Swing State Polls

[h=1]News from the Votemaster[/h][h=4] Rasmussen Has a Two-Point Republican Bias Compared to Other Pollsters [/h] Enough presidential polling data is now available to analyze Rasmussen's data. Here is the methodology. The database contains 119 Rasmussen state polls from Jan. 1, 2012 until yesterday.. For each poll, a check was made to see if at least one poll from a different nonpartisan pollster was in the data base within a week either way from the Rasmussen poll. For example, for Rasmussen's poll of North Carolina on Oct. 2, a check was made for any other polls of North Carolina whose midpoint was between Sept. 25 and Oct 9. In this case, polls from PPP, ARG, SurveyUSA, and High Point University were found. For 82 polls, comparison polls within a week were found. For the other 37 Rasmussen polls, no other nonpartisan pollster surveyed the state within a week of Rasmussen's poll, so those polls were not used in this analysis.
For each remaining poll, the Obama - Romney score was computed. The arithmetic mean of the other polls' scores was then subtracted from the Rasmussen Obama - Romney value. Ideally, the result should be zero, but statistically that is very unlikely. A positive result means Rasmussen is overestimating Obama's standing and a negative one means he is underestimating it. For example, for the North Carolina poll cited above Rasmussen said Obama was 4 points behind but the average of the other pollsters put Obama 0.2 behind, so Rasmussen gets a bias score of -3.8 here. Averaging all 82 polls, Rasmussen's mean bias is -1.91 points, that is, Rasmussen appears to be making Obama look almost 2 points worse than the other pollsters.
As a simple example, look at the top line in the table below. on Feb. 16 (before Romney even got the nomination), Rasmussen gave Obama a 22% edge in California, but another poll within a week said Obama was 20% ahead. In this case Rasmussen has a positive bias (for Obama). On the line below, Rasmussen's bias is -2%, that is, against Obama.
Note that this does not necessarily mean Rasmussen is wrong and the others are right. It could be that Rasmussen is right and the others are painting too rosy a picture for Obama. There is no way to know now. Below are the scores for the 82 polls. Here are the results in .csv file. If you want all the 82 polls and the surrounding ones that were averaged, here it is.

If you pay that much attention to polls or if you are influenced by polls, I feel sorry for you.

Really getting desperate now....2% "bias" among Repubs? Even if that's true, it's entirely possible actual turnout is going to match that. Not inconceivable at all.
Now, when Dems were 8-10pts in these polls it was junk, but of course no one was saying anything because they liked what the polls showed.

The question I have is...when romney was up huge in polls...it was wonderful and grand..

now that Obama is regaining his lead....polls suck?? HMMM

gut;1304171 wrote:Really getting desperate now....2% "bias" among Repubs? Even if that's true, it's entirely possible actual turnout is going to match that. Not inconceivable at all.
Now, when Dems were 8-10pts in these polls it was junk, but of course no one was saying anything because they liked what the polls showed.

Its been proven Rasmussen has a Repub bias

pmoney25;1304170 wrote:If you pay that much attention to polls or if you are influenced by polls, I feel sorry for you.

This.

Ty Webb;1304175 wrote:The question I have is...when romney was up huge in polls...it was wonderful and grand..

now that Obama is regaining his lead....polls suck?? HMMM

I think polls suck regardless of whichever of these two is leading.

Ty Webb;1304176 wrote:Its been proven Rasmussen has a Repub bias

Proven? LMAO, now that Obama is trailing and doing nothing to revese momentum - nothing - now Dems all of sudden care about sampling and polling methodology.

Remember the polls you were posting 6 months ago showing Romney had no chance, no chance. Less than 40%.

But Obama isn't hitting 50%, and that's big time trouble. The walls are closing in.

And, seriously, why waste your time spreading your propaganda here? No one on this board is dumb enough to fall for that crap - we're all on to the game.

The fact the polls swing back and forth so much just shows me that there are a lot of people out there who just don't have clue.

Ty Webb;1304157 wrote:http://www.nationalmemo.com/is-the-race-in-ohio-already-over/

Guess I'm staying home on Nov. 6th. Congrats on the win. :rolleyes:

pmoney25;1304204 wrote:The fact the polls swing back and forth so much just shows me that there are a lot of people out there who just don't have clue.

I don't think people are waffling or changing back and forth. I've always thought that +/3%, that the margin of error typically is, is huge. That is potentially a 6pt gap vs. the true number. And the estimate, itself, is subject to getting the turnout % correct.

The shear number of polls also raises questions about qualification and bias. Where do all these polls come from, and where is the money coming from? Rasmussen and Gallup have been doing this for years. And Gallup is an interesting one that frequently comes under attack for accuracy - yet Gallup is a professional polling service (not just elections) with decades of experience - so if they can't or won't get it right, what does it say about these other groups?

Reality has a Republican bias.

Hope this helps.

Ty Webb;1304164 wrote:

Romney's Momentum Seems to Have Stopped GOP Likely to Retain Control of House Bonus Quote of the Day Mourdock Story Continues Ohio's Nightmare Scenario Latest Swing State Polls

News from the Votemaster

Rasmussen Has a Two-Point Republican Bias Compared to Other Pollsters

Enough presidential polling data is now available to analyze Rasmussen's data. Here is the methodology. The database contains 119 Rasmussen state polls from Jan. 1, 2012 until yesterday.. For each poll, a check was made to see if at least one poll from a different nonpartisan pollster was in the data base within a week either way from the Rasmussen poll. For example, for Rasmussen's poll of North Carolina on Oct. 2, a check was made for any other polls of North Carolina whose midpoint was between Sept. 25 and Oct 9. In this case, polls from PPP, ARG, SurveyUSA, and High Point University were found. For 82 polls, comparison polls within a week were found. For the other 37 Rasmussen polls, no other nonpartisan pollster surveyed the state within a week of Rasmussen's poll, so those polls were not used in this analysis.
For each remaining poll, the Obama - Romney score was computed. The arithmetic mean of the other polls' scores was then subtracted from the Rasmussen Obama - Romney value. Ideally, the result should be zero, but statistically that is very unlikely. A positive result means Rasmussen is overestimating Obama's standing and a negative one means he is underestimating it. For example, for the North Carolina poll cited above Rasmussen said Obama was 4 points behind but the average of the other pollsters put Obama 0.2 behind, so Rasmussen gets a bias score of -3.8 here. Averaging all 82 polls, Rasmussen's mean bias is -1.91 points, that is, Rasmussen appears to be making Obama look almost 2 points worse than the other pollsters.
As a simple example, look at the top line in the table below. on Feb. 16 (before Romney even got the nomination), Rasmussen gave Obama a 22% edge in California, but another poll within a week said Obama was 20% ahead. In this case Rasmussen has a positive bias (for Obama). On the line below, Rasmussen's bias is -2%, that is, against Obama.
Note that this does not necessarily mean Rasmussen is wrong and the others are right. It could be that Rasmussen is right and the others are painting too rosy a picture for Obama. There is no way to know now. Below are the scores for the 82 polls. Here are the results in .csv file. If you want all the 82 polls and the surrounding ones that were averaged, here it is.

That's the most idiotic statistical analysis I've ever seen. This tool doesn't even know what the word "bias" means. "Rasmussen is different than the other polls. Hence, he's biased."

I can't believe you're bringing that weak sht in here. Sweet 8lb baby jesus.......:rolleyes:

Ty Webb;1304176 wrote:Its been proven Rasmussen has a Repub bias

Also proven that Rasmussen was the most accurate last Presidential election. They are the best at what they do, whether you want to admit it or not.

Oh why not throw this in the mix:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/24/poll-shows-five-point-edge-for-obama-in-ohio/?hpt=hp_t2

"Time's poll showed Obama and Romney both at 45% among respondents who said they would vote on Election Day, and Obama leading Romney 60%-30% among people who said they've cast early ballots"

So....Obama has a 5pt lead, but it's a dead heat among likely voters. And then this sample would appear to overstated vs. the % of early ballots that seems to skew a bit toward Obama (not sure what the real number is or if anyone knows better than estimating). Taken together, that points to Obama being in trouble.

Yeah, I can play the game too. Fortunately the speculation ends in 12 days.

gut;1304231 wrote:Oh why not throw this in the mix:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/24/poll-shows-five-point-edge-for-obama-in-ohio/?hpt=hp_t2

"Time's poll showed Obama and Romney both at 45% among respondents who said they would vote on Election Day, and Obama leading Romney 60%-30% among people who said they've cast early ballots"

So....Obama has a 5pt lead, but it's a dead heat among likely voters. And then this sample would appear to overstated vs. the % of early ballots that seems to skew a bit toward Obama (not sure what the real number is or if anyone knows better than estimating). Taken together, that points to Obama being in trouble.

Yeah, I can play the game too. Fortunately the speculation ends in 12 days.

Ok....let me get this straight...

President Obama being up 2-to-1 among those who have early voted..and being tied among those who will vote on Election Day equates to him being in trouble?

You do realize Romney will have to win Election Day voting by 6-7 points to offset the President's EV lead

Ty Webb;1304238 wrote:Ok....let me get this straight...

President Obama being up 2-to-1 among those who have early voted..and being tied among those who will vote on Election Day equates to him being in trouble?

You do realize Romney will have to win Election Day voting by 6-7 points to offset the President's EV lead

A) If they oversampled the early voters, as it appears they have, then their other sample likely suffers the same problem. Not to mention, there's at least an 8pt margin of error in there (i.e. 60-30 is only 90%, and it's probably closer to 97-98%). 8 pts is just coincidentally the 22% numbers CCRunner quoted a bit ago.

B) Tied among likely voters is a problem - independents and undecideds typically break to the challenger.

C) Your math is wrong (shocker). 8.2M voters registered statewide. 800k early voters...even if we take Obama's 60-30 lead, that's only 240k votes. That means Romney needs @3pts of the rest, easily within the margin of error, not to mention at least 5% of voters still up for grabs.

Like I said, Obama is in trouble. And, oh by the way, 51.4% of the vote in 2008 and early voting indicates a significant slip in a margin that was quite tight in 2008.

Ty Webb;1304157 wrote:http://www.nationalmemo.com/is-the-race-in-ohio-already-over/

Please post this everywhere letting Dems know they need not bother to go vote on election day :thumbup:

Ty Webb;1304238 wrote:Ok....let me get this straight...

President Obama being up 2-to-1 among those who have early voted..and being tied among those who will vote on Election Day equates to him being in trouble?

You do realize Romney will have to win Election Day voting by 6-7 points to offset the President's EV lead

Do you know if those include the military votes?

Con_Alma;1304255 wrote:Do you know if those include the military votes?

It really doesn't even matter. 2:1 is bigger than what Obama saw in 2008, and many indications that gap has substantially narrowed (in other words, this is another example of oversampling). Ty ignores this. The deterioration we're seeing in early vote totals and early/absentee requests has basically wiped out Obama's 2008 margin. Dead heat among remaining likely voters, which favors Romney when you consider how undecideds/independents break.

My question wasn't related to the potential election impact nor how tellingit may be with reards to last year but rather the opinion of military voters.

So goes Stark County so goes the Nation

The bros are not as excited as in 2008 ????

http://www.cantonrep.com/news/x470411135/Lower-black-turnout-could-mean-loss-for-Obama

Belly35;1304291 wrote:So goes Stark County so goes the Nation

The bros are not as excited as in 2008 ????

http://www.cantonrep.com/news/x470411135/Lower-black-turnout-could-mean-loss-for-Obama

"St. John said the Obama campaign needs to hold rallies like in 2008 and bring in celebrities like Magic Johnson to inspire black supporters."

What a joke.

like_that;1304294 wrote:"St. John said the Obama campaign needs to hold rallies like in 2008 and bring in celebrities like Magic Johnson to inspire black supporters."

What a joke.

I'd be all for them bringing in Lebron James :thumbup:

gut;1304295 wrote:I'd be all for them bringing in Lebron James :thumbup:

Let see the bro athlete are rich and the half bro want to take mo from them .... wtf mofo that crazy thinking .. Hey! Obama I built what I'm earning kiss my wealth Black arsss