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

Skip to comments.

(Rasmussen) Summary of Party Affiliation (Sep 30: R-36.8; D-34.2; Other-29.0)
Rasmussen Reports ^ | current | Rasmussen Reports

Posted on 10/10/2012 8:12:40 AM PDT by xzins

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-61 next last

1 posted on 10/10/2012 8:12:48 AM PDT by xzins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: xzins

Well that makes it completely clear why he is now using a D+5 turnout model. /S


2 posted on 10/10/2012 8:19:19 AM PDT by tatown ( FUMD, FUAC, and FUGB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tatown

I was thinking the Sam thing! Why is he doing that? It’s odd.


3 posted on 10/10/2012 8:20:50 AM PDT by KansasGirl ("If you have a business, you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen."--B. Hussein Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl

What they need to do is figure out how many Democrats and how many Republicans there is in America and go from there. They can do the same thing with the states. It is not a good idea to use 2008 samples or 2010 samples either. 2008 was heavily Democrats and 2010 was heavily Republican and Democrats did not show up. Democrats are showing up in 2012 for sure but by what percentage is a mystery that the pollsters are going to have to figure it out and get it together.


4 posted on 10/10/2012 8:29:40 AM PDT by napscoordinator (GOP Candidate 2020 - "Bloomberg 2020 - We vote for whatever crap the GOP puts in front of us.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl

The answer is that he is a stinking pollster.


5 posted on 10/10/2012 8:29:45 AM PDT by tatown ( FUMD, FUAC, and FUGB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: tatown

Why do you think he is using a D+5 model?


6 posted on 10/10/2012 8:33:23 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True supporters of our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: xzins

He’ll say because the affiliation should be based on the last general election. He’s reluctant to deviate methodology.

In 2008 the election results pretty much matched the previous published polling. In as much, 2008 was a wild swing to Dem compared to 2004, I’m puzzled why polling matched results in 2008 if it was skewed Rep as it should have been. I’m still puzzled by this.


7 posted on 10/10/2012 8:33:37 AM PDT by cicero2k
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cicero2k

Do you have an example of Rasmussen using a democrat skewed poll?


8 posted on 10/10/2012 8:34:57 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True supporters of our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: tatown

R-D is the critical factor in handicapping the upcoming election—heavily influenced by Party enthusiasm. Ras has picked up on the fact that 2010 was a prelude to a bigger drubbing for the Dims in 2012. The only other major variable is Independents, which all polls show Romney winning by at least 10%. So if R-D = 0, the I’s win it for us—which is what I’ve always felt.

I’ve read that Fox uses the R-D of D+5 just to have a poll that is not too much at odds with the other MSM outlets—for now. I think that Ras is doing something similar, for similar reasons. As we get to the actual event, everything tightens. Few outlets will want to show Obama with the lead if he is walking into a Carter-2 blowout. So I think Ras/Fox/etc will lead the way in showing just how far off “All us pollsters have been.”


9 posted on 10/10/2012 8:36:17 AM PDT by DJtex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
It is not a good idea to use 2008 samples or 2010 samples either. 2008 was heavily Democrats and 2010 was heavily Republican and Democrats did not show up.

*************************************************

I think it will be close to the 2004 election when it was pretty much a even split. Of course, that's just my educated guess.

However, it seems all the pollsters are just guessing too.

10 posted on 10/10/2012 8:37:34 AM PDT by kara37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

The Democrats have been running a vigorous, if suspect, voter registration drive, registering pets as well as illegal aliens. In WA State, they made it possible to register to vote through Facebook. I forget what they were doing in Florida, but I do remember hearing that they were even registering people’s dogs. I got an email from Move-On, claiming that the Democrats had succeeded in getting back their lead over Republicans in registered voters.


11 posted on 10/10/2012 8:38:29 AM PDT by Eva (Obama and Hillary lied, Americans died.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: kara37

I think Rs are much more motivated this election than any since 1980...maybe even more than 1980.


12 posted on 10/10/2012 8:39:31 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: DJtex

I agree. Rasmussen is playing games with his turnout model to make the race look close. The reason for doing so can be debated but I think his reasoning is more selfish. He wants eyeballs and attention. The best way to do that is to keep the race ‘close’. When we get about a week or so out, Rasmussen’s numbers will suddenly ‘shift’.


13 posted on 10/10/2012 8:40:48 AM PDT by tatown ( FUMD, FUAC, and FUGB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Eva
A lead in registered voters in Florida does not mean they are going to show up tp vote. They can register all the pets they want, but we do have a voter ID law in this state.

I know that is not going to stop all the fraud, but it sure helps.

14 posted on 10/10/2012 8:41:52 AM PDT by kara37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Am I missing something? Everyone keeps talking about Ras usinga D+3 or D+5 sample but what I see for September is R+ 2.6.


15 posted on 10/10/2012 8:44:13 AM PDT by pgkdan (A vote for anyone but Romney is a vote for obama. GO MITT!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

I think we will see a +3 to +5 Republican turnout for the 2012 election. The question is how widespread the Democrat vote fraud will be and if it will be enough to overcome the Romney victory. Rat vote fraud will be widespread especially in FL, OH, NV, CO, WI, MO, PA, MI, MO and VA and will occur in every state— the unanswered question is to what extent they have the nerve to take it.


16 posted on 10/10/2012 8:44:13 AM PDT by KansasGirl ("If you have a business, you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen."--B. Hussein Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: tatown

Well that makes it completely clear why he is now using a D+5 turnout model. /S
++++++++++++++
Where did you hear that? I thought it was D+3.


17 posted on 10/10/2012 8:45:14 AM PDT by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

Btw, I believe this is the reason the Obama campaign has put massive pressure on pollsters to use ridiculous turnout models favoring Rats to an extent that will not happen in an hones election.


18 posted on 10/10/2012 8:45:55 AM PDT by KansasGirl ("If you have a business, you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen."--B. Hussein Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: KansasGirl

Any coincidence which helps the Left is not a coincidence.


19 posted on 10/10/2012 8:47:19 AM PDT by Personal Responsibility (The Left blaming Jim Lehrer for the debate is like blaming Lincoln's assassination on the play.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: xzins

The R+2.6 is no big surprise. Very healthy. The R+4.3 always looked like an outlier.


20 posted on 10/10/2012 8:47:59 AM PDT by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins

I’m late to the game, how do we know Ras is using a D+5 model?


21 posted on 10/10/2012 8:50:56 AM PDT by don'tbedenied
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: pgkdan

I have yet to have anyone show me a Rasmussen poll where he uses other than his own party affiliation model.

My guess is that he uses his own model.


22 posted on 10/10/2012 8:54:03 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True supporters of our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

Several freepers have reverse engineered Rasmussen’s model based on access to detailed, daily numbers. They came up with D+5.

Ras has been slowly increasing the “D” over the past few weeks, which explains how his approval number has slowly moved closer to (and above on some days) 50%.


23 posted on 10/10/2012 8:57:28 AM PDT by tatown ( FUMD, FUAC, and FUGB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: don'tbedenied

No one has shown an example of Ras using a D+5. My guess is he uses his own numbers until someone shows me otherwise.

He used his own numbers in 2008 and 2010. I don’t know why he’d do differently now. Especially, since his numbers were the most accurate.

He was also the most consistent in 2008. He had Obama up throughout by about 4-6 points. He turned out to be correct.


24 posted on 10/10/2012 8:57:51 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True supporters of our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: cicero2k

Let me work out some logic here.

Lets assume you’re correct and that “affiliation should be based on last general election” is the standard by which Rasmussen determines the sample of his polls. If that’s the case then:

2012 polling should be based on 2008 results -D+6 or D+7 (Obama won by about 53-46).

and

2008 polling should have been based on 2004 results - R+2 ( Bush won by 51-49)

So, that being said

Rasmussen was accurate in 2008 - his polling predicted a 52-46 turnout and that’s within tenths of a point to what it was.

According to that logic, he’s saying:
He polled in 2008 using an R+2 sample
He came up with Obama winning 53-47 (or 52-46)

I am not a Rasmussen subscriber so I cannot go back and check the 2008 internals but I find that outcome - using an R+2 sample returned Obama winning by 4-6 points - very difficult to believe.

There is chicanery going on here. He’s varying his methodology for some reason (unexplained, to my knowledge)


25 posted on 10/10/2012 9:00:08 AM PDT by Personal Responsibility (The Left blaming Jim Lehrer for the debate is like blaming Lincoln's assassination on the play.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: tatown

Freepers have reverse-engineered the numbers???

So this is not based on anything that Rasmussen has reported about his own numbers?

I’m much less inclined to trust results by those who don’t have the actual data set numbers and the formula used than I am to trust the guy who collected those numbers and ran them, AND who has a stellar reputation for consistent correctness.


26 posted on 10/10/2012 9:02:51 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True supporters of our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Here you go:

Rasmussen is using a D+5 model, and here’s the math.

In a prior thread, I reverse engineered the Ras breakdown percentages to 34.4%R / 39.3%D / 26.6% I (D+5 gap).

Since there’s some controversy on whether Ras is using 3D or 5D model, I thought I’d show the math. Here’s profit_guy’s internals (thanks, BTW!) as of Sunday:

Confirming these calculations are easy enough by picking a few party breakdown crosstabs and seeing if they match the answer. I picked the following three:

Total Approve (50%) = 0.14R 0.87D 0.42I
Wrong Direction (57%) = 0.89R 0.25D 0.62I
Romney Leaners (49%) = 0.89R 0.10D 0.54I

Here’s the math:

Total Appove = 0.14*0.344 + 0.87*0.393 + 0.42*0.266 = 0.5018 (50%)
Wrong Direction = 0.89*0.344 + 0.25*0.393 + 0.62*0.266 = 0.5693 (57%)
Romney Leaners = 0.89*0.344 + 0.10*0.393 + 0.54*0.266 = 0.4891 (49%)

So, I think my original calculations of Rasmussen using D+5 gap are correct after all. Furthermore, note that Rasmussen is predicting a D turnout equal to or slightly greater than 2008, where exit polls showed that 39% of the voters self-identified as Ds. Take what you will.

73 posted on Tuesday, October 09, 2012 2:39:51 AM by Cruising For Freedom (Don’t be the proof that MSM PsyOps works.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies | Report Abuse]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2941780/posts?page=73#73


27 posted on 10/10/2012 9:07:54 AM PDT by tatown ( FUMD, FUAC, and FUGB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: kara37

True, but the Obama administration has managed to get voter ID overturned in some states. I don’t know if they can actually cheat enough to win the election, but they can cheat enough to influence polls, that’s what I meant. The Obama administration is putting pressure on pollsters to keep the Democrat numbers inflated.


28 posted on 10/10/2012 9:11:46 AM PDT by Eva (Obama and Hillary lied, Americans died.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint; don'tbedenied; KansasGirl

FYI

Go to Post 27. Also, go to the link at the bottom of that post as it contains a raw data table.


29 posted on 10/10/2012 9:20:46 AM PDT by tatown ( FUMD, FUAC, and FUGB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Personal Responsibility
There is chicanery going on here. He’s varying his methodology for some reason (unexplained, to my knowledge)

It's nice to know I'm not alone.

However, I would think someone close to the industry lurks here and will step forward to explain.

30 posted on 10/10/2012 9:20:46 AM PDT by cicero2k
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Dear xzins,

Perhaps my memory is finally failing me, but I thought I'd read a short interview about a week ago or so with Mr. Rasmussen that 1) he thought the electorate would be about D+2 - D+4 on election day and that 2) he was increasing his own D numbers in his polls because, well, he kept coming up with lots more Dems in his nightly interviews than his model was predicting.

I've googled for a few minutes and been unable to find a reference. When I have time, I'll look some more.


sitetest

31 posted on 10/10/2012 9:27:51 AM PDT by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Personal Responsibility
“affiliation should be based on last general election”

Rasmussen does not use that standard. His basic standard is a running poll of 15,000 respondents.

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.http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/archive/mood_of_america_archive/partisan_trends/gop_edge_in_partisan_id_slips_to_2012_low

32 posted on 10/10/2012 9:36:35 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True supporters of our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: tatown

It’s ridiculous. There’s nothing to indicate that Democrats will turn out in larger numbers than Republicans.


33 posted on 10/10/2012 9:36:58 AM PDT by popdonnelly (The first priority is get Obama out of the White House.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sitetest

see #32


34 posted on 10/10/2012 9:37:40 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True supporters of our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: sitetest

You are correct:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2938175/posts


35 posted on 10/10/2012 9:41:13 AM PDT by tatown ( FUMD, FUAC, and FUGB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: xzins; All

Thanks. Been wondering when the new numbers would come out.

I am projecting at this point we will see a D+1 sample during the election (because despite this poll there still are technically more Dems than GOP who vote in prez races).....making me extremely confident that unless something big happens, Obama’s going down.

I believe even Ras’ D+3/5 model is wrong.


36 posted on 10/10/2012 9:44:32 AM PDT by rwfromkansas ("Carve your name on hearts, not marble." - C.H. Spurgeon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tatown

See #32.

We don’t have Rasmussen’s data set. Without the data set, one can’t say too much about how Rasmussen arrives at his results.

Rasmussen himself says he arrives at Party ID by a sample of 15,000 respondents. Why would we not believe him?


37 posted on 10/10/2012 9:50:13 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True supporters of our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas

Ras’s old model was R +3.4

His new model is R +2.6

According to Ras, that is. I’ve seen nothing convincing that proves otherwise than what Ras says on his website. Nor can I come up with a good reason for him to publicize these numbers on his website and then do something entirely different.


38 posted on 10/10/2012 9:54:08 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True supporters of our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: xzins; Cruising For Freedom

In September Rasmussen himself said D+2 to D+4 and we know from Cruising For Freedom’s calculations that he IS now using D+5. There is nothing more to debate about this subject. The math and Rasmussen’s own words tell the entire story.


39 posted on 10/10/2012 9:58:11 AM PDT by tatown ( FUMD, FUAC, and FUGB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: xzins

We can’t assume his party affiliation numbers are the numbers he uses to weight his sample by party.

He might, but I’ve heard ad nauseam here that he doesn’t.

Too many assumptions on all sides, I suspect.


40 posted on 10/10/2012 9:58:59 AM PDT by Kingosaurus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: xzins

How in the hell can Rasmussen be using R+2.6 when he has Romney winning Independents by a significant margin, yet has the race tied? Only 3 weeks ago Rasmussen himself said D+2 to D+4. Cruising For Freedom just calculated that he is now up to D+5.

There is no possibly way for Rasmussen to be oversampling R’s and have Romney winning I’s by a significant margin, yet have the race tied! To try and argue otherwise is simple idiocy.


41 posted on 10/10/2012 10:01:51 AM PDT by tatown ( FUMD, FUAC, and FUGB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Ok, I believe that.

That being the case, if his own party ID shows R+2, why are his polling models using D+5?

Still chicanery, just a different type.


42 posted on 10/10/2012 10:02:27 AM PDT by Personal Responsibility (The Left blaming Jim Lehrer for the debate is like blaming Lincoln's assassination on the play.i of)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: tatown

Look at the chart above. It’s Rasmussen’s OWN chart. It says R +3.4 in September. It does not say D+2.

So, there is something to debate. And the calculations have no reference points or explanations, so I’m inclined to go with the guy who actually has the data set that we don’t have.


43 posted on 10/10/2012 10:02:27 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True supporters of our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Personal Responsibility

What makes you think he’s using D+5?


44 posted on 10/10/2012 10:03:20 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True supporters of our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: xzins

“Look at the chart above. It’s Rasmussen’s OWN chart. It says R +3.4 in September. It does not say D+2.”

Again, you’re assuming his party affiliation numbers is how he weights his sample. This is an unwarranted assumption. If Ras publicly admitted using a D+2 when his Party affiliation numbers are different from that, it’s just a brute fact that you need to take into account.


45 posted on 10/10/2012 10:06:24 AM PDT by Kingosaurus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Dear xzins,

I don't see a discrepancy between the two sets of information.

One is a poll unrelated to the presidential race, determining party affiliation of the population.

The other is a presidential race poll in which party affiliation is also asked.

It's two different data sets. They may or may not even be related; to the degree they are related, their relationship is likely not simple.

It's the second data set that Mr. Rasmussen needs to tie in to the election, because on election day, no matter how many Republicans, Democrats and Independents there are in the United States, the only ones that will matter are the ones that show up and vote, and what these voters call themselves as they leave the polling place (which may or may not be an accurate reflection of the actual population of voters).

Thus, it appears to me that Mr. Rasmussen doesn't weight his presidential race poll by his on-going party affiliation poll results. Indeed, there's nothing at your link to suggest that he does.

I'm going to rely on the York article, as it's pretty explicit in having Mr. Rasmussen say that he's going D+2 - D+4. The information at your link is interesting, but there's nothing explicit there that Mr. Rasmussen is using that data.


sitetest

46 posted on 10/10/2012 10:09:28 AM PDT by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: tatown

Thanks. Maybe I’m not losing my mind yet, after all. ;-)


47 posted on 10/10/2012 10:14:43 AM PDT by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: xzins

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2942779/posts?page=27#27

It’s been posted a couple times on other threads. The math works.

Ras is saying Party ID = R+2 (ish)
Ras polling data = D+5

Chicanery.


48 posted on 10/10/2012 10:31:46 AM PDT by Personal Responsibility (The Left blaming Jim Lehrer for the debate is like blaming Lincoln's assassination on the play.i of)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Let’s see... based on this Rasmussen study, there are more Republicans than Democrats. And every poll out there is telling us that Republicans are more energized than Democrats and that not only is Romney pulling more Republicans than Obama is pulling Democrats, but that now Romney is pulling in a share of Dems, too. Moreover, Romney is leading among Independents by a huge margin. Not only that, but though there are not many undecideds left, history tells us that most undecideds break for the challenger. Every one of these factors favors Romney.

So... why exactly does the Rasmussen Daily Tracker keep telling us day after day that it is a tie or a slight Obama lead?????? And why do we keep telling ourselves that Rasmussen is the one poll that is trustworthy?


49 posted on 10/10/2012 10:35:38 AM PDT by AC86UT89
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins

He isn’t using his ‘chart’.

I’ll try one more time. Excuse me if I’m not clear, I’m only a lowly engineer.

1. Rasmussen has Romey winning independents

2. Rasmussen has Romney winning a higher percentage of D’s than Obama is winning R’s.

Show us how it is possible for him to be using more R’s in his turnout model yet have the race tied!

You can’t because he is using more D’s (D+5).


50 posted on 10/10/2012 10:36:13 AM PDT by tatown ( FUMD, FUAC, and FUGB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-61 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