Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rasmussen Daily: TUE: 10/30: R:49 O:47 Obama -12%
Rasmussen Reports ^ | 10/30/2012 | Rasmussen Reports

Posted on 10/30/2012 6:32:50 AM PDT by SoftwareEngineer

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-109 next last
To: Palmetto Patriot
No one that will vote for Romney will tell a pollster that they expect for obama to be reelected... so this is more evidence that Rasmussen's polling is skewed towards obama... they all are.

LLS

51 posted on 10/30/2012 7:20:22 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer (OUR GOVERNMENT AND PRESS ARE NO LONGER TRUSTWORTHY OR DESERVING OF RESPECT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeInPA

Great image of the power of the very famous 47 % .

These 47 % are commonly known as ‘those that are in the wagon and not pulling the wagon.’


52 posted on 10/30/2012 7:20:49 AM PDT by Graewoulf ((Traitor John Roberts' Obama"care" violates Sherman Anti-Trust Law, AND the U.S. Constitution.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Proudcongal
Women should not have gotten the vote, country went down hill after that, we got Wilson, FDR, Clinton and Obama. A preponderance of Concern Trolls seem to be women this year.
53 posted on 10/30/2012 7:20:49 AM PDT by pburgh01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: SamAdams76

That is the difference between a ground game and media-polls.

One is for real and the other is for fun.


54 posted on 10/30/2012 7:22:44 AM PDT by VanDeKoik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Proudcongal

Hardly when you’re being negative, I’d say its an accurate description!

There are a number of people who’ll vote for O anyway - my point is don’t be concerned with what other people are thinking.

People who think positive and want change will get it. Pray for America!


55 posted on 10/30/2012 7:23:16 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved FrieGrnd Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop
O is still at 47%. We have six days to go.

Problem is, they have six days to gin up more fraud. Plus the phony attention he is paying to the storm.

56 posted on 10/30/2012 7:24:37 AM PDT by unixfox (Abolish Slavery, Repeal The 16th Amendment!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: paul544
those soft undecided types see that and think “Maybe he is a good President after all...”

... And then they wake up and have to fill up their gas tank, buy food, and file their weekly unemployment claim. Nice try.
57 posted on 10/30/2012 7:25:16 AM PDT by nhwingut (If you are concerned, you are not paying attention (or you are a troll). It will be a landslide.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: TexasFreeper2009
I would hate to be in engaged in a battle... with some of these people supposedly having my back.

LLS

58 posted on 10/30/2012 7:26:32 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer (OUR GOVERNMENT AND PRESS ARE NO LONGER TRUSTWORTHY OR DESERVING OF RESPECT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: paul544

I guess we didn’t get the memo. We’re supposed to put our heads in the sand like we did in 08.


59 posted on 10/30/2012 7:29:00 AM PDT by Proudcongal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: pgkdan

Did anyone look in on The New Weather Channel last night? It used to be called Fox News.

Watching Greta was pretty revealing. She’s trying to paint a picture of mass death and destruction but all the guests she spoke with were people in Atlantic City and Ocean City who stayed put and came through unharmed because they wanted to protect their property and most importantly, have access to their homes in the aftermath of the storm.


Living in Fla we deal with this all the time.

Storms are hyped to no end, they take on a life of their own , bigger than
any major sporting event, and covered as such in minutia

Was interesting to see a reporter in Point pleasant NJ talking about how
dangerous it was, and then we see two people walk right up to the beach
in a background shot.

He never knew they were there, when he closed with “ the streets are deserted”


60 posted on 10/30/2012 7:29:52 AM PDT by patriotspride
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Huskrrrr

Can’t think of a better example of biased media. In Katrina the dem governor in La. screwed her state and pinned it on Bush. So the media got people to hate Bush.

Now the storm just happened, Obama hasn’t done a damn thing and certainly nothing out of the ordinary. And Obama is already getting credit? For what? Nature?


61 posted on 10/30/2012 7:31:25 AM PDT by Williams (No Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: pgkdan

LOL... You seem much more familiar with the blissful dream world of Valium.


62 posted on 10/30/2012 7:33:24 AM PDT by paul544
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

You need to chill out and stop attacking people who have an opinion other than your own. Besides, it’s a violation of FR rules. Calm down.


63 posted on 10/30/2012 7:38:17 AM PDT by Proudcongal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: TexasFreeper2009

Are you trying to be an asshole? This overhyped thunderstorm, as you call it, covers an area over 900 miles wide and has left 3 million people without power. It has caused 100’s of millions of dollars worth of damage.
Shut your yap if you don’t have anything intelligent to contribute.


64 posted on 10/30/2012 7:41:37 AM PDT by LeonardFMason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: paul544

Just checked out some of your posting history. Looks to me like you’re a troll. All you do is go on threads predicting an obama win and monaing doom and gloom. Why don’t you find some place else to play? We don’t need your constant negativity here. We’re too busy winning this election to put up with your nonsense.


65 posted on 10/30/2012 7:44:26 AM PDT by pgkdan (A vote for anyone but Romney is a vote for obama. GO MITT!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: pgkdan

Go take another hit of your happy sauce. There’s nothing to see here. Romney’s going to win MA and CA.


66 posted on 10/30/2012 7:46:32 AM PDT by paul544
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Proudcongal
I guess we didn’t get the memo. We’re supposed to put our heads in the sand like we did in 08.

Oh. So those of us who see an incumbent at 46-47%, across the board in every poll, who see Romney with a 5% lead in Gallup, the gold standard, who refuse to panic over a MSM-manufactured storm - we are the ones "putting our heads in the sand like in 08."

If Obama were up 51-46 in Gallup, and Romney were the incumbent and at 46-47 in every poll, then your snark would have merit. But the facts say otherwise.
67 posted on 10/30/2012 7:46:32 AM PDT by nhwingut (If you are concerned, you are not paying attention (or you are a troll). It will be a landslide.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Proudcongal

I’m calm.... I have no investment in the outcome of this election.

I called this election after the second debate.

None of us know what’s going to happen next week. The final verdict on this President’s fate will be rendered by our fellow Americans.


68 posted on 10/30/2012 7:48:14 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved FrieGrnd Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: paul544

Answer me this. Name one incumbent who was polling at 47% with a week to go and went on to win.

There is not one. But I’ll await your reply.


69 posted on 10/30/2012 7:50:06 AM PDT by nhwingut (If you are concerned, you are not paying attention (or you are a troll). It will be a landslide.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: SamAdams76
I live in the Northeast and while we had a good blow yesterday here in northern MA, things are already getting back to normal. A bunch of branches and leaves everywhere but it's autumn - this is the time of year we have to rake our yards anyhow. We have some power outages but we get this in any big storm. By the weekend, this storm is going to be a distant memory anyhow.

Here in Red Hampshire; I usually lose power when a squirrel farts...much to my shock and surprise; I didn't lose power at all. The sun has been in and out; temps are in the sixties. It is drying out pretty fast...

70 posted on 10/30/2012 7:52:25 AM PDT by who knows what evil? (G-d saved more animals than people on the ark...www.siameserescue.org.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Perdogg

“Good news, the good 0bama day rolled off.”

I don’t follow. Until a day ago it has been 50-47 for Romney. Now it is 49-47 for two days. What exactly rolled off?


71 posted on 10/30/2012 8:00:12 AM PDT by Norman Bates
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: paul544
I said it before. This storm likely saved Obama’s presidency.

Another unfulfilled election promise. He told people the sea levels were going to retreat once he was elected. So if he had done what he promised NYC subway system would have been safe. Blame it on Mame Obama.

;-)

72 posted on 10/30/2012 8:01:39 AM PDT by ScaniaBoy (Part of the Right Wing Research & Attack Machine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: nhwingut

Thos pau544 poater I’ve never seen a positive post regarding tge elcetion. As faras a few of the other people popping up in this thread I’ve never seen them in the Ras thread before and its curious. They post like WE are the ones two ppints behind. If people are so “concerned” they should go work for the GOTV effort. Volunteer to work handing out material or whatever. Its just a shame we get contant shit from all media imcludong from entertainers and we ha e to get the negative stuff here too in a poll thread that is pretty good news six days from the election.


73 posted on 10/30/2012 8:01:42 AM PDT by snarkytart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: nhwingut
1992... But we won't let facts get in the way.

From the just released NPR poll. Note the REPUBLICAN pollster involved.
But Democratic pollster Stanley Greenberg and Republican pollster Whit Ayres found that Obama leads by 4 points in the 12 battleground states that appear ready to pick the winner for the rest of the country next Tuesday. And they suggest that Romney's post-debate surge has "stalled."

74 posted on 10/30/2012 8:02:47 AM PDT by paul544
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: pburgh01

How do you know a poster is a woman or a man? Please share your method of discernment with the rest of us.


75 posted on 10/30/2012 8:09:38 AM PDT by randita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: paul544

There are more ways than one to skew a poll. NPR had +4%D sample, ie oversampling Democrats, but not as much as some other polls. But the poll also oversampled women:

54% women/46% men. That will skew the results.

Can anyone tell me if there ever has been such a skewed gender participation in any national election since women got the right to vote? I would be v..e..r..y surprised if that were the case.


76 posted on 10/30/2012 8:17:35 AM PDT by ScaniaBoy (Part of the Right Wing Research & Attack Machine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: SoftwareEngineer

Obama is a cold fish who is incapable of exuding genuine compassion for anyone. If he’s thinking to himself “let me act really Presidential and milk this for all it’s worth”, people will be able to read him like a book.

And what makes everyone think that Romney and Ryan won’t be arriving at the scene to survey the damage and offer assistance to hurricane victims? Romney actually has a personal history of helping people, and doing so out of genuine caring. R&R also both look better in flak jackets!


77 posted on 10/30/2012 8:25:08 AM PDT by The Fop (Excuse me while I clean the saliva out of my racist dog whistle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ScaniaBoy

Maybe, but I just don’t buy the idea that all these pollsters are destroying their reputation by reporting something that doesn’t exist. In 2008 was the same story. All the polls were wrong... until they were right. I believe there are a lot of pollsters who have their reputations at stake and are reporting reality, whether we like it or not.


78 posted on 10/30/2012 8:26:46 AM PDT by paul544
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: gswilder
"But everyone here who is discounting the impact of this on the election is not grasping the significance."

It's a nothingburger. 4 years ago, Ike came home twice as strong in the Heartland, is still no. 2 all-time, killed 86 people, turned out the lights in the Mississippi & Ohio Valleys for weeks, and received a fraction of this insipid blathering coverage.

Didn't stir any love for McCrisis...

79 posted on 10/30/2012 8:27:02 AM PDT by StAnDeliver (2008 + IN, NE1, NC, FL, VA, OH, CO, IA, NH = 285EV)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: paul544
1992... But we won't let facts get in the way.

Um, the question was: What incumbent was polling at 47% with a week to go and went on to win?

In 1992, the incumbent was G HW Bush, who lost. Try again.
80 posted on 10/30/2012 8:28:05 AM PDT by nhwingut (If you are concerned, you are not paying attention (or you are a troll). It will be a landslide.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: TexasFreeper2009

States may not be competitve, true. Bad thunderstorm ? False. Im guessing by your handle that you are not in the hurricne path. Lots of people lost a lot, including neighbors and friends who had trees ripped up and fall on their houses and cars, floods with cars underwater etc....

Try not to be so condescending, hmm?


81 posted on 10/30/2012 8:42:49 AM PDT by Personal Responsibility (In times of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act - Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: who knows what evil?

I live in PA. They were calling for us to get high winds and severe flooding...they cancelled school for 2 days...all we got was rain...I left my house, went to work, came home, and my house was still here...we had more power outages, and trees down this summer with thunder storms...this was nothing in my area...


82 posted on 10/30/2012 8:54:45 AM PDT by little-e ((Get the muslim out of my White House--then fumigate it))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: who knows what evil?
I'm surprised also that I didn't lose power (though some of my neighbors did). I almost always lose power in storms like this and I had my generator all ready to go. I guess the last few storms brought down so many trees and limbs already that only the strong ones are left. Darwin in action.

Anyway, the sun has broken out down here as well and it's headed towards 70 degrees!

83 posted on 10/30/2012 8:55:38 AM PDT by SamAdams76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: nhwingut; LS; tatown; SoftwareEngineer

Weekly PPP/Daily Kos (D) poll has a tie at 49%. Romney leads independents by 6%. Obama underwater w/ 46-50 approval. Sample is D+2.


84 posted on 10/30/2012 9:02:38 AM PDT by Perdogg (Vote like the US Constitution depends on it - it does!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: paul544

No, I don’t think most pollsters try to skew their polls, but the climate today (I don’t mean Sandy) makes it very difficult to conduct polls. With a response rate of something between 10 - 20% according to what some pollsters recounted it is very difficult to get a non-skewed sample - and how do you know that the minority who actually responds to polls is really representative of the whole sample? Well, you don’t.

Some pollsters correct (recalculate) their results according to what they know (or expect a correct sample would look like) others do not.

An example was the Battleground poll released yesterday. The basic result was that Obama had the lead with 49/48, however, the resulting election day result prediction was Romney by 52/47. How come?

When they looked at the different age categories there Romney was in the lead in everyone except the youngest one (18 - 25 I think). Obviously for Obama to be in the lead in the whole sample his lead in this group must have been huge. However, as we know, and as the pollsters know, this is also the group that has the least tendency to actually go to the polls. So, given the reply to some other questions, which would help them to quantify the voting behavior they applied correction factors that gave the above result.

Rasmussen’s Ohio report, also out yesterday, is another case of a similar kind. He reported that more than 30% of his sample had voted. That subset was very much in Obama’s favor. However, he could have compared with the actual number of early votes which indicates that less than 20% of the expected votes have been cast so far. Correcting his results for this skewness would have given Romney a lead of 52/45 instead of 50/48 but Rasmussen did not do that sort of correction.

So which polls to trust? Basically, you have to look at the sample data and compare with what you know. So what do we know?

Well, there have been two large investigations by two acknowledged polling institutes (Rasmussen and Gallup) showing Republicans in the lead by 1-3% (nation wide), so that is what you can expect on election day.

The racial, age, and gender distribution is also pretty well known, and pollsters ought to be able to handle that.

At the moment ca 18% of the expected turn-out has voted.

Polls that confirm to those figures in their samples are probably closest to the truth, but there is of course also the polling history of the different outfits to take into account - Gallup, Rasmussen, Battleground are usually in the top.

Given the recent results from those and some other polling institutes I am pretty confident that Romney and Ryan will win the popular vote with a significant margin, large enough so that will also ensure a win in the elctoral college.

However, polling is not an exact science (to say the least) and the only poll that really matters is the one on the election day.


85 posted on 10/30/2012 9:03:21 AM PDT by ScaniaBoy (Part of the Right Wing Research & Attack Machine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: patriotspride

exactly, we’ve had black outs all the time, trees down all the time and this summer had many bad storms.

Megyn Kelly having a fit saying these people need to get out, they are in danger, why are they standing there , why is he walking the dog, they need to get out , this is a massive storm and the worst we’ve seen hitting us.

Or other people reporting and then seeing lights on, a few branches down, parts of a road with water up to the tires of one car but the other side of the road quite alright.

I know most of this media live and work in the north east , mainly NY, NJ but I have not seen one reporter camped out in WV, , western PA and other places, I guess they think that NJ,NY is America and it is not.

For the record my MIL is up in MA , right on the coast and she said this was nothing compared to other bad thunder storms and tropical storms.

The media needs to get out of their two states in once and while.

Also what on earth is Christie on?

He;s needs to shut up and just get on with his job.


86 posted on 10/30/2012 9:04:56 AM PDT by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: paul544

Benghazi wasn’t really having an impact.

Romney will be back in the news later this week when people really make final decisions.

Look, I am a little concerned as well the storm may help him, but even if it does (which I still kind of doubt because I think people are so turned off it will not change minds), it’s not going to save Obama I believe.

We will see.

Christie is doing what he has to do, as well. He can’t come on and attack him without a true problem....that would be put on Romney by the media.


87 posted on 10/30/2012 9:19:29 AM PDT by rwfromkansas ("Carve your name on hearts, not marble." - C.H. Spurgeon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: SoftwareEngineer

Rasmussen: Romney 279, Obama 243

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/rasmussen-romney-279-obama-243_658100.html


88 posted on 10/30/2012 9:27:00 AM PDT by tsowellfan (KEEP WORKING like we are 10 POINTS DOWN!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

First post here guys, I’ve been browsing through the articles and posts for a few days now and I have to admit I really dig yalls optimism and breakdown of polling info, it’s infectious and certainly has me in a better state of mind than previously. What I’d really like to know though, if somebody can answer, is the whole cell phone factor you hear libs and MSM drone on and on about. Every time a poll comes out that is even slightly favorable to Romney libs immediately pounce by saying that it is inaccurate because the poll in question didn’t include people who use cell phones exclusively, apparently group that is more likely to support Obama. There any validity to this? If this has already been discussed and addressed ad nauseam I apologize in advance.


89 posted on 10/30/2012 9:30:04 AM PDT by Texman82
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: ScaniaBoy
Can anyone tell me if there ever has been such a skewed gender participation in any national election since women got the right to vote

yea.. in 2008. I don't recall the exact number, but the skew toward women was AT LEAST that much, or more...

Women in thus country are becoming more educated than men... and, they now VOTE more.

90 posted on 10/30/2012 10:08:23 AM PDT by SomeCallMeTim ( The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: ScaniaBoy
There are more ways than one to skew a poll. NPR had +4%D sample, ie oversampling Democrats, but not as much as some other polls. But the poll also oversampled women:

54% women/46% men. That will skew the results.

Correction: In 2008, the breakdown of actual voters was: 53.7% Women
46.3% Men

It's a surprisingly hard statistice to come up with. But, that's what I calculated, using actual voter numbers.

91 posted on 10/30/2012 10:28:26 AM PDT by SomeCallMeTim ( The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: TexasFreeper2009
this is the most over hyped weather event i’ve ever seen. Basically a bad thuderstorm

Unbelievable. What a heartless, ignorant statement.

92 posted on 10/30/2012 10:31:08 AM PDT by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SomeCallMeTim

I knew that women voted slightly more often than men, but a 54/46 difference! I’m really taken aback. What did it look like in 2010?

(It does explain why the result turned out like it did in 2008!!)


93 posted on 10/30/2012 10:33:42 AM PDT by ScaniaBoy (Part of the Right Wing Research & Attack Machine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: ScaniaBoy

Having a HARD time replying to you.. FR is SLOOOW here..

Can’t find the same data for 2010, since there was no national election. I doubt it was all that much different.

HERE is the poll that really encourages me though...

http://www.gallup.com/poll/158399/2012-electorate-looks-like-2008.aspx

Ignore the headline... check out the political leanings of the “Likely Voters”... it’s at the very bottom. It shows a BIG drop in Democrats (4%) and a corresponding HUGE increase in Republicans..(7%). That, is GOOD NEWS for Romney.

And, that Gallup poll is NOT like all the other polls that come out every day. It’s a once-per-election cycle poll Gallup does, with 9,000 people.. and a Margin of Error of only 1%.


94 posted on 10/30/2012 10:51:42 AM PDT by SomeCallMeTim ( The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Texman82
Every time a poll comes out that is even slightly favorable to Romney libs immediately pounce by saying that it is inaccurate because the poll in question didn’t include people who use cell phones exclusively, apparently group that is more likely to support Obama. There any validity to this?

WELCOME to Free Republic! I've been here awhile. :-) it's a GREAT place to learn things.

To answer your question: Yes, there is SOME validity to it. Any poll that doesn't sample cell phones, and makes no correction for it, will likely undercount Dems by a couple of %.

That's what I heard Scott Rasmussen say in a radio interview a few days ago. The reason is two-fold:

1)People who ONLY use a cell phone, tend to skew younger, and younger people skew towards Obama, and

2) Of the people who do actually have land lines, people in urban areas tend to NOT ANSWER the phone as often as people in rural areas. So, the samples skew rural, which skews toward Rep's.

Rasmussen said his team has studied this affect, and they correct for it in their results. He must be doing SOMETHING right... cause, he was the most accurate pollster in the 2008 and 2010.

The impact is real, but... it's not as important as a poll that over-samples Democrats by 4-10%.

95 posted on 10/30/2012 10:59:40 AM PDT by SomeCallMeTim ( The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Texman82
Every time a poll comes out that is even slightly favorable to Romney libs immediately pounce by saying that it is inaccurate because the poll in question didn’t include people who use cell phones exclusively, apparently group that is more likely to support Obama. There any validity to this?

WELCOME to Free Republic! I've been here awhile. :-) it's a GREAT place to learn things.

To answer your question: Yes, there is SOME validity to it. Any poll that doesn't sample cell phones, and makes no correction for it, will likely undercount Dems by a couple of %.

That's what I heard Scott Rasmussen say in a radio interview a few days ago. The reason is two-fold:

1)People who ONLY use a cell phone, tend to skew younger, and younger people skew towards Obama, and

2) Of the people who do actually have land lines, people in urban areas tend to NOT ANSWER the phone as often as people in rural areas. So, the samples skew rural, which skews toward Rep's.

Rasmussen said his team has studied this affect, and they correct for it in their results. He must be doing SOMETHING right... cause, he was the most accurate pollster in the 2008 and 2010.

The impact is real, but... it's not as important as a poll that over-samples Democrats by 4-10%.

96 posted on 10/30/2012 11:00:18 AM PDT by SomeCallMeTim ( The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Texman82
Every time a poll comes out that is even slightly favorable to Romney libs immediately pounce by saying that it is inaccurate because the poll in question didn’t include people who use cell phones exclusively, apparently group that is more likely to support Obama. There any validity to this?

WELCOME to Free Republic! I've been here awhile. :-) it's a GREAT place to learn things.

To answer your question: Yes, there is SOME validity to it. Any poll that doesn't sample cell phones, and makes no correction for it, will likely undercount Dems by a couple of %.

That's what I heard Scott Rasmussen say in a radio interview a few days ago. The reason is two-fold:

1)People who ONLY use a cell phone, tend to skew younger, and younger people skew towards Obama, and

2) Of the people who do actually have land lines, people in urban areas tend to NOT ANSWER the phone as often as people in rural areas. So, the samples skew rural, which skews toward Rep's.

Rasmussen said his team has studied this affect, and they correct for it in their results. He must be doing SOMETHING right... cause, he was the most accurate pollster in the 2008 and 2010.

The impact is real, but... it's not as important as a poll that over-samples Democrats by 4-10%.

97 posted on 10/30/2012 11:01:24 AM PDT by SomeCallMeTim ( The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: SomeCallMeTim

Yes, that’s the one + the Rasmussen party identification poll that are also making me very positive.

(BTW - I’m surfing from Sweden, and I don’t seem to have a major problem with FR. Sometimes I have renew the page twice to get it to load, but that’s really all. V. strange considering all the others who seem to have big problems.)

PS: You live and learn - apparently the gender break-down 2004 was 46/54 (!!!) What are the men doing???


98 posted on 10/30/2012 11:04:09 AM PDT by ScaniaBoy (Part of the Right Wing Research & Attack Machine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: ScaniaBoy
That's interesting.... I have been wondering for awhile whether the FR "problem" was some kind of coordinated internet attack to keep our turnout down??? I can BARELY get the site to load... takes 3-4 attempts... stops completely at times, for an hour or two.... :-(

It's a different topic but... for the past 20-25 years, there has been a concerted effort in or school systems to remove ALL competition, and build self-esteem. One (I assume) unintended consequence of this has been: Boys don't care as much about school, or learning.... and they are LAGGING behind, badly in education.

For 12 years, I have given a lecture each spring to Senior Chemical Engineering students at two local universities... When I first started, the classes were ~ 30% female. These days, they are easily 60% female. Many universities, overall, are skewing >65% female. Men are becoming dumber and poore. It's NOT a good trend.

Maybe... it's the impact of video games? I'm not sure. But, I KNOW it's a trend that needs to be corrected.

99 posted on 10/30/2012 11:14:52 AM PDT by SomeCallMeTim ( The best minds are not in government. If any were, business would hire them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: SoftwareEngineer

These polls show Romney is just barely winning http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html, and list WI, OH, PA,CO and FL as toss up states. Do you think we can win WI ? I don’t, and will Romney is winning in OH, isn’t that the place where Obama’s supporters are trying the hardest to commit voter fraud and bus in illegals who don’t speak English to vote for Obama ?


100 posted on 10/30/2012 1:07:24 PM PDT by emax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-109 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson