(Rasmussen) Partisan Trends: Republicans 35.4%, Democrats 34.0%, Unaffiliateds 30.5% (< 1% MOE)

RasmussenReports ^ | 2 Jul 12 | Rasmussen Reports

[xzins]

Monday, July 02, 2012

The number of Democrats and Republicans in the United States held relatively steady in June,

snip

During June, 35.4% of Americans considered themselves Republicans, down slightly from 35.7% in May.

Rasmussen Reports tracks this information based on telephone interviews with approximately 15,000 adults per month since November 2002. The margin of error for the full sample is less than one percentage point, with a 95% level of confidence.

[xzins]

So when we see polls giving 5-7 point advantages to Democrats, then we should be highly skeptical

[nhwingut]

More proof that Romney is up by about 4-5 points in national and battleground polls - as most sample Dems +4-9.

[devolve]

—

In Rise of the Black Serial Killer: Blacks represent 88.24% of the number of serial killers apprehended since 2010, yet only account for 12.6% of the populace.....

In Rise of the Black Serial Killer:

Documenting a Startling Trend, Justin Cottrell expels the myth that serial killers in America are predominately white. On the contrary after sifting through a myriad of newspaper records and books, he*s compiled a list of murderers that is equal too or greater than the number of white serial killers from 1860 to present. Few if any have ever heard any of their names or stories, until now.

Based on his findings white serial killers have been underrepresented throughout American history when compared to the percentage of the population they represent by a factor of 1.79 on average.

On the other hand, black serial killers have been overrepresented 2.68 to 7 times their portion of the population, with a 150 year average of 4.18.

Another startling trend he uncovered is black serial killers have never represented less than 26.83% of the number of serial killers in a given decade, despite their overall percentage of the population never exceeding 13.1%.

This trend has steadily increased to the point that in our current decade they represent 88.24% of the number of serial killers apprehended since 2010, yet only account for 12.6% of the populace.

Aside from trends, this book offers reasons most people assume “black serial killers don*t exist” from the media prohibition on the subject, to general misunderstandings. Coupled with this is a look into the various factors that breed serial killers, with a look into why black serial killers are on the rise, while white serial killers are on the decline.

To prove his research is valid, the full list of 836 black serial killer is provided, along with a brief description of their crimes. In addition to this the biographies of 35 of these killers are given, with detailed information about their crimes, including the names of their victims.

-

Washington DC
Chicago Illinois
Detroit Michigan
New Orleans Louisiana
Gary Indiana
St. Louis Missouri
Atlanta Georgia
Los Angeles California
Seattle Washington
Jacksonville Florida
Phoenix Arizona
Houston Texas

- Add the city/cities that you avoid -

-

[nathanbedford]

The good news is the other polls besides Rasmussen are misleading because they do not accurately reflect slight (1.5%) plurality in party affiliation favoring the Republicans. Bad news is that the Rasmussen poll presumably does account for this more accurate breakdown of party affiliation and therefore where Rasmussen has Romney and other Republicans behind, the poll is probably accurate.

Of course, these numbers do not purport to concern themselves with turnout and enthusiasm.

Finally, there seems to be an anomaly. Obviously with independents amounting to 30.5% they will decide the election no matter what the relative turnout amounts to. By all accounts, independents have been favoring Romney and Republicans over Democrats by substantial margins yet this dichotomy does not seem to be represented in the very close percentages for Romney and for Obama in the Rasmussen daily tracking polls.

Furthermore, Obama is not faring well in important issue polling numbers such as, the condition of the economy and right direction-wrong direction questions yet one would have expected these issues to have adversely affected Obama's numbers.

My belief is that the independents are hanging fire until they are compelled by other events or the calendar to make clear their preference. At that time I believe they will break heavily against Obama barring an October surprise or major gaffes by Romney if they can conclude from watching the debates and Romney's everyday performance that he is "presidential." Yet this supposition must be confronted by the fact that Rasmussen consistently shows only about 4% of the electorate "undecided" in his daily tracking polls.

I would welcome comments.

[IllumiNaughtyByNature]

About this time in 2010 the numbers were roughly 40-40 ish. I see a trend towards Unaffiliated but that is a wide net. You have REP who are aligning with the Tea Party and RAT who are avoiding the label. This is the one that interests me the most, as i think the Reagan democrats want a "safer label" so they can (psychologically speaking)give themselves permission to not vote for Obie. The GOP who lean unaffiliated will not cross over.

M2C

[cdcdawg]

This illustrates why the polls showing an even race are bovine excrement. If Obama is badly behind among independents, losing some of his support among women, behind in fundraising, and has even lost some ground with blacks and Hispanics, there is NO possible way this is even. They are using 2008 data to do these polls, then fudging even more to get it to even. It ain’t 2008 no more.

[InterceptPoint]

Finally, there seems to be an anomaly.

I have noticed the same thing.

Raz is, I think we can all agree, the most accurate of the pollsters. If he is using a 35D/35R mix with 30% I and Romney winning the I's then we should be seeing much better GOP polling numbers. Maybe he isn't using that mix.

'Tis a mystery to me.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[LS]

This story (http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-campaign-spends-more-26-million-polling-june_648846.html) says Zero ran a deficit last month in his campaign and spent $2.6 m on polling.

Yeah, that really has the look of a winning campaign, doesn't it?

[LS]

See the article I posted below your comment. Obama campaign in the hole for last month and spent $2.6m on POLLING. And we’re to believe he’s ahead?????

[LS]

Interesting, but what does it have to do with the topic, and do you have a source other than just a name for this researcher?

[skinndogNN]

It’s the 30% unaffliated that bothers me the most. Know what you believe and believe it. This group is either too ignorant to care, or so arrogant they think they are ABOVE both parties, both of these type of people drive me crazy.

[Jumper]

I think the trend of which you speak is that republicans say they are unaffiliated so as not to be labeled racist with a black president; democrats on the other hand are becoming unaffiliated just because of their preception that this black president is racist and therefore do not want to be associated with the dem party (other factors such as immigration, the economy, etc., may also factor against dem party membership as the party leaves those individuals). Independents just like to waffle and not have to have a choice in most cases; for 30 percent of the voting public to not have an opinion is bunk - they just don’t have spines due to soft living;)

[RedMDer]

Click.

Set it right. Donate to Free Republic.

[rdb3]

I'd like to see a link as well. Wouldn't surprise me, though.

[xzins]

Rasmussen’s database is so huge at this point that it’s hard to argue with his party affiliation breakdown.

The bad news is that Rasmussen still has Obama leading Romney by 2 points....a virtual tie.

When looking at other pollsters the other day, I noticed they like to add a bit of special sauce to the numbers. They’ll add census data or historic data of various forms to their polling data on party affiliation. Rasmussen, on the other hand, has put all his eggs in the polling basket.

Rasmussen actually makes sense. Party ID is not a static thing. It changes, and sometimes it changes rapidly. His polling is the best way to capture that.

What you told the census in 2010 could mean nothing now. How you voted in 2008 could mean nothing now.

My sense is that independents are not the same as undecideds. I became an independent 4 years ago and am still. It means that I don’t want the words “republican” or “democrat” associated with me at all. The republicans left me when they became a new spend and borrow party.

Therefore, there are conservative independents, liberal independents, and moderate independents.

[xzins]

See #17

[nathanbedford]

My sense is that independents are not the same as undecideds.

I agree with the entirety of your posts including the highlighted portion above. But that still does not explain the apparent anomaly.

[arrogantsob]

If there is one thing to count on with Romney it is that he will wipe the floor in a debate with The Disaster. Not only is he much smarter (which would not take much) but he is unflappable. The other Republicans hit him with anything including the kitchen sink and he just stood there an smiled as though they had said he was perfect.

Hence, your scenario is very positive for the GOP.