Posted on 10/21/2012 11:54:26 AM PDT by Signalman
Click the link to see the accuracy of the Gallup poll from 1936 to present. With a few exceptions, it's been quite accurate, usually not off more than a few points either way. And those that are off more than 3 pts on the plus side have usually gone to the Dem.
(Excerpt) Read more at gallup.com ...
their polster keeps using 2008 modeling for their sample split....good luck with that
Zogby is an Arab. After 9-11, Zogby became far more antagonistic to conservatives, far more prone to use polls to create opinion, instead of reflect it. However, polling was still his business, and he always seemed to give in to reality as the election neared. His final polls remained fairly accurate, as I recall. His ego demanded accuracy as to final results, when it was too late to push poll any more.
So, if he were still in the game, I would expect him to be showing polls that give momentum to Romney and a lead, as Gallup is doing. I haven't seen any Zogby polls, which is why I asked whether he is still out there. That's when you decided to be a jump in with a rude, uninformed comment.
Lighten up brother.
Zogby has never been as reliable or accurate as Rasmussen. Haven’t you ever heard of “Zogby sauce”?
In 2008 Zogby was 18th in accuracy out of 20 polls.
Interesting comments about Zogby. Certainly didn’t know about the Muslim connection or would never have responded. Last on-line poll they sent me included questions on BO versus Romney on various issues. I gave BO all zeros and Romney at least an 8 our of 10. Will just add them to my blocked list.
If you throw out 1936, yes...otherwise no.
Overestimate R by 0.33 pts...throw out 1936, it’s -0.03.
Underestimate D by 0.24 pts...throw out 1936, it’s +0.12
(an overestimate).
Overestimate liberal (Henry Wallace-McCarthy-Nader) by 0.21, or 1.3 if you consider they competed in only 3 elections.
Overestimate Dixiecrat-American (Thurmond-George Wallace)
by 0.05, or 0.5 if you consider they competed in only 2.
Underestimate Neutral (Anderson-Perot) by -0.26, or -1.67 if you consider they competed in only 3....almost entirely due to 1992.
Underestimate others by -0.09, or -0.24 for the 7 elections they appeared on the radar.
nothing you say contradicts anything I said. Does that mean you’ve been hitting the bong? Zogby was, however, the most accurate for quite a few election cycles, until after 9-11, after which he became progressively more pro-Arab and therefore, pro-Democrat and therefore less enamored with the truth. His brother became a radical spokesman for some terrorist front. And, it’s “special sauce”, not Zogby sauce.
You’re looking at a long outdated Fordham list. It was compiled just hours after the 2008 election, before the final numbers were available, and used an ESTIMATE of Obama’s win that was off by more than a percentage point.
The final Fordham report of pollster accuracy, based on the CORRECT election outcome, still has Zogby near the bottom of the list, but Rasmussen is no longer top of the heap. He was beat out by eight other pollsters.
He was 10th out of 16 in 2004. I don’t know how far back you want to go.
BTW I was kidding you, no need to get snotty, especially when you’re wrong.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1274530/posts
I wasn’t being snotty. And what was I wrong about? You posted a url for the incorrect 2008 Fordham report and I provided the correct one. I wasn’t talking about 2004.
Sorry, no you were not. The post I directed at you was intenteded for Defiant.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.