Posted on 09/07/2004 8:53:06 AM PDT by Heff
(1) The margin of error suggests that "actual" number lies somewhere within that range, and
(2) These are quoted at a 95% confidence level, which means that you can count on 1 in 20 samplings to be outside the predicted margin.
To make a long story short, Rasmussen got a skewed data set that will roll out of his 3-day running average tomorrow.
You just do this to get reaction, don't you? This very minute, you're sitting in front of your computer with a big sub and a mountain dew, searching for the poll threads so you can rake in the outraged responses, arentcha? Admit it, it's ok, we know already. :)
Oh good, a TROLL! Question, kinda off topic, but since you are a Troll, can you answer why some days Kerry's hair is dark and other days (like today) it is nearly totally gray?Does he change it depending on what he is wearing, the type of crowd, he just can't decide what looks best with his complexion, depends on what state he is in, depends on which advisor he talked to this morning, or all of the above?
>>There's a reason no one else quotes him.
Rasmussen blew the 2000 election for whatever reason. He claims that his polling company made adjustments to its methodology. I am willing to forgot the 2000 results for that reason.
However, I don't trust his polls because the only time he agrees with the other polls is when the others show the race close. Does his poll ever show anyone with a lead beyond the MOE? I have a hard time believing that the electorate has been that evenly divided for that long. Although the election might wind up close (but I don't think so), the candidates are going to have periodic surges in popularity. His polls never seem to reflect any current events that historically would have affected the election's horse-race numbers.
In addition, as several people have pointed out, there seems to be inconsistencies between his national polls and his state polls.
I'm afraid that Scott Rasmussen might have to readjust his methodology again after the 2004 election.
You point out a fundamental flaw in the automated methodology.
That is an EXCELLENT point about who answers the telephone. The man in the house will usually be the last one to answer.
Also, isn't it a lot easier to play around with an automated poll...just start pressing numbers for whoever? Especially if you are a teenager.
I thought Rasmussen might be on to something about automated phone polls...not a bad idea..but you lose a lot of screening that operators perform for other polling companies. Then Rasmussen plays around with it and "weights" it to reflect what he thinks will happen this election cycle. Is he not demonstrating we absolutely don't need a poll if he already is guessing how people will vote in the election based on his own beliefs and not on numbers shown in the polling??
Says likely voters on the site. It also says results are from the previous day. Anyone that had a life was too busy over the weekend to take a poll. Wait until the end of the week for more accurate results.
Two things. The biased news media have hammered on the theme that Kerry has interpreted Dubya's name in a way that superficial voters understand and Bush has mentioned Kerry by name in his campaign this weekend. The 3% who are influenced by the biased news reports of the day have responded by thinking of Kerry.
Since Aug 25, 2004
COURAGE
Since Oct 7, 1998
Hey newbie, respect your elders. And take your head out of sand. If you think this election is going to be a cake walk, you can say President Kerry. This is going one tough fight.
Now go, go to your crib, it's pass your nap time.
I actually think Rasmussen is doing us a favor. We need to campaign as if we are tied. We need to emphasize to all our voters how important it is they get out and vote. Then on election day they can say, "Where in the hell did Bush win this thing so big and we didn't even see it coming."
That is how we should do it.
I think there is something defective at a structural level in which Rasmussens polls are engineered.
I've been searching for a side-by-side analysis of the polls and their historic accuracy, but to no avail.
I mean "our next president..." My mind is quicker than my 2 fingers I use to type.
Gallup has very good information on pre-election polling and actual results...for their polls.
If you read the article on his site, he explains the discrepancy. Saturday's sample was wildly pro-Kerry, and Rasmussen himself says it's an outlier. He says that the data from the other days indicates that Bush has a four or five point lead. We should see Bush move back into a lead tomorrow when the Saturday data rolls off.
Bush will take WI and FL and NM. He LIKELY will take PA and IA, and MIGHT take MI and NJ. But your posts are ridiculous. Get some meds.
And they are oversampling Republicans. When corrected for normal turnout, Bush's lead is anywhere from 3 to 6 points.
There you go again troll boy.
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.