Posted on 09/27/2012 5:24:18 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Jay Cost today in The Weekly Standard should provide more than a little encouragement to conservatives who've prematurely taken to drink because of Romney's current alleged poll deficits. Cost's central point - and he is among the most prescient of poll observers -- is that most major polling organizations are oversampling Democrats, based on an assumption that the 2012 electorate will demographically match 2008's, when blacks, Hispanics and under thirty's constituted record percentages.
In discussing Ohio, for example, Cost points out that if this year's electoral demographics turn out to be a compromise between those of 2008 and 2004 -- a reasonable assumption, he thinks -- then this year's Ohio electorate would contain only a one to two point Democrat edge, which in turn would produce a razor thin outcome that would be determined by independents. But in its current poll of Ohio showing an alleged eight point Obama lead (52-44), the Washington Post sample is based on a seven point Democratic voter turnout advantage.
Whatever one thinks of the polls in general, it is a fact that in 2008, Rasmussen's call at the end was the most accurate. Today Rasmussen's polling organization has it 46-46 (actually, 48 Romney/46 Obama, with leaners), and the following are Rasmussen's most recently published numbers for six battleground states:
Ohio: Obama +1 (at 47%)
Florida: Obama + 1 (at 48%)
Virginia: Obama + 1 (at 49%)
Colorado: Romney +2 (Obama trailing at 45%)
Iowa: Romney + 3 (Obama trailing at 44%)
New Hampshire: Romney + 3 (Obama trailing at 45%)
For conservatives these are far from wrist-slitting numbers, and they come from the polling organization that has proven itself least partisan, most methodologically sensible and, in general, most reliable. More encouraging than the razor-thin deficits in Ohio, Florida and Virginia, and the slightly better
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Mostly manipulative BULLSHIT !!
I agree BS. I think Romney will win Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina.
I think Obama will win Iowa, Colorado and Florida.
This election will be close. Next time we need to pick a conservative!
We’re going to (I hope) start a thread on absentee trends in OH. Others can join in on their states. Quite simply, what we are seeing SO FAR-—and I caution, anything “can” happen-—is that the Rs are performing at 2012 levels and the Ds are performing at 2008 levels. If this holds, it won’t be all that close in OH-—and it won’t be an Obama win.
Where are all the Rep pundits screwing about these poll scams .
It’s time to ban polling for the last 2 months of an
Election like they all over the world to
Prevent this organized psych ops operations by the Obama media !
The fact that ABC , CNN ,NBC etc.. All trumpeted this off the wall
Fraud poll from QU tells us that Axelrod
Is running all these news rooms now and coordinated the no stop
Astroturfing using phony polls !
It’d the tell the lie long enough strategy which does work sadly .
Also Rassmussen said in 2010 the Pubbies would win a max of 40 seats....so lets not make him the oracle of electoral politics. He is just less wrong than the rest. Romney is winnnig VA, Florida and Ohio as it stands right now, don’t kid yourself.
I have a hunch Colorado is about to go back to RED..... look like in boxing you must take out the champ to win... it ain’t handed to you. Romney is easily within reach of knocking this guy out... in fact it is so close the media HAS O skew its polling to represent an unlikely turnout....
No wonder we are wimps
Boxers 47% Breifs 48%
Coke 48% Pepsi 47%
Toilet seat up 48% toilet seat down 47%
Fl will be like 2010 which Axelrod had banned from being used by state controlled media .
The fact Jo one will use 2010 tells me that
It kills Obama thus its must be banned
Fl new purged voter rolls and laws preventing letting the early voting going on non stop will stop the Muslim.
Acorn has been shut down in Fl .
I was called at least 10 times this month to vote early by the GOP vs 2008 when I got zero calls .
Exactly
The GOP needs to show they are pissed not
Resigned to the big lie !
The problem
Is all these GOP experts don’t want to out these Obama front groups be sure the want to get hired by them as pundits !
Idiots like Ed Gillispie are example one
Exactly
The GOP needs to show they are pissed not
Resigned to the big lie !
The problem
Is all these GOP experts don’t want to out these Obama front groups be sure the want to get hired by them as pundits !
Idiots like Ed Gillispie are example one
“In discussing Ohio, for example, Cost points out that if this year’s electoral demographics turn out to be a compromise between those of 2008 and 2004 — a reasonable assumption, he thinks — then this year’s Ohio electorate would contain only a one to two point Democrat edge, which in turn would produce a razor thin outcome that would be determined by independents.”
WHY would turnout for republicans in 2012 be LESS than what it was in 2010?
For this to be true, then a significant amount of republicans who were mad as hell in 2010 are going to pass on a chance to fire Zero and sit out 2012 because they aren’t thrilled with Romney. Really?? Any of you believe that??
They are underestimating republican turnout in 2012 just like they did in 2010. The Wisconsin Recall election proved their 2008 turnout models are crap. They are going to get a bigger surprise in November.
We just have to make sure that the people who see these polls on tv are made aware of the 2008 sampling bias. I watched my local news channel last night that is an abc affiliate and it made me SICK. They announced that crap poll that showed Zero ahead in Ohio and you could tell in their voice they were so happy, and of course the oversampling of Dims was not mentioned, and anyone listening would think that it was over in Ohio. They are trying to shape opinion with voters who don’t use the internet (mostly the elderly). They are trying to make these people think it is over and going to the polls to vote for Romney won’t make a difference. Never before has the lame-stream been so obviously and shamelessly in the tank for the Leftie candidate.
Why don’t they use the 2010 Mid-Term demographics? That’ll be closer to truth! Rasmussen had Romney UP by 2 when you include “leaners”. I, somewhat, trust Rasmussen’s polls.
I agree with this article in its entirety. And the closeness of Ras is the thread that I cling to.
What is frightening, though, is that I am not convinced that the middle/uninformed six percent (ie, those that decide elections) are not capable of withstanding the barrage of polling that shows obama with a commanding lead.
I suppose there is another thread to cling to which is that there is no scientific study (or poll...) which truly quantifies the effect of a longterm lopsidedness in polling in terms of either motivation for those who want to be on the winning team (ie the bandwagon effect) or those who think the winning team has it already one (ie, the overconfidence effect).
Hopefully the overconfidence will be as strong as the bandwagon and there will in the end be no net in either way for the Pravda Polls.
God help us. The stakes in an election should not be so high. That itself is part of our problem. But that is the situation we are in, and this election is a biggie to say the least.
Romney has Florida in the bag.
This election wont be close.
Because mid-terms never have the same sort of demographics as presidential-year elections. The less politically attentive (read lots of Obama voters under the present circumstances) stay home during the mid-terms and turn out during presidential elections. Generations of living in a democracy and before that a republic -- the 17th amendment was the thing that changed that -- don't make a dent in the enthusiasm for a monarch, and all the better if you get to help pick the monarch. (Hence the stupidity of the electorate in blaming or crediting the President for things which are in the Constitutional purview of Congress.) Nor do party identification numbers typically reflect who turns out on election day.
My inclination is to think that at this point taking any MSM poll result which is trying simulate 2008 turnout (there are ones which are even worse and have larger oversamplings of D's) and averaging it with the unskewedpolls.com reweighting of the same poll (which assumes that turnout will mirror the Rasmussen August 2012 party ID poll) will yield a fairly good model. Closer to the election when the MSM decides to save their credibility that would give too rosy a picture since they won't be skewing the polls as much.
I thought it’s more toilet seats up 49%. What about undecided?
That’s my opinion as well. My evidence is anecdotal, other than my formal education in political science and public administration.
A pollster called me last month, mid-morning. I work for myself and was getting ready to go downtown. He wanted my age, did I vote, who did plan to vote for.
As soon as I told him I did NOT plan on voting for Obama I could tell he had no further interest in my input. In fact I was still giving him an earful when he hung up me.
`Scientific’, objective, replicative—my eye! They are `fishing’ for what they want and if they don’t get it, they move on.
Polling and sample surveys go back the Roosevelt-Landon election (I was an old grouch even then) where pollsters decided Alf had it in the bag when the fact was that people with telephones were prosperous and had no use for Roosevelt. Carter was supposed to beat Reagan. Same-same. Polls are inductive and about as reliable as the main stream media. Phooie on all of them! If you give them any credence, then you’re being suckered.
November 6th, the poll that matters, Romney is going to clean Obama’s clock, wax his skiis, butter his necktie and then drop-kick him and Chewbacca out the WH back door, `nuff said.
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.