Rasmussen Daily: FRI: 10/19: R:48% O:48% (R regains lead in Wed & Thur night polling)

Rasmussen Reports ^ | 10/19/2012 | Rasmussen Reports

[NKP_Vet]

Rass has no backbone when it comes to standing up to liberals. That’s why he NEVER shows Romney leading by much, and the majority of the time his nation poll is a tie or the Kenyan communist leading by one or two points. You can see Rass interviewed on TV and he always says the exact same thing “this race is extremely close”. He knows deep down that Romney is on the verge of a massive landslide but he will not admit it because he’s scared of what liberals would say about him. He needs to grow a spine.

[devolve]

.

- The so-called “undecideds” are either idiots or liars - or both

- The dork that asked Obama that question was a self-important egotist that kept saying he and his fellow workplace philosopher-kings had serious discussions about deep questions they had

Obama glad-hands this squishy jerk after the Town Meeting debate and does the Bill Clinton routine on him

Now back in Chris Matthew mode - he reverts to the juvenile “I can’t make a decision!” crapola -

Blue Pill - Red Pill

Blue Wire - Red Wire

He was - and is - and will always be a liberal -

He thinks his one dinky vote is of gigantic earth-shaking importance and that he is King Solomon reborn -

- Sorry - Obama voted to kill the baby long ago -

.

[Intolerant in NJ]

In the two nights of polling conducted since the debate, Romney has a slight advantage...so how come Romney was ahead yesterday by 2, 49-47, and even with that "advantage" it's now tied 48-48 - some mighty weird statistics.....

[InterceptPoint]

I think you have it about right.

[Personal Responsibility]

Whenever a number is mysteriously “off” for no reason and it benefits the liberals, it’s on purpose. If it were happenstance, it’d benefit our side once in a while (and it never, ever does)

For example, this number is so odd - so out of place - that it’s akin how a large state :: coughCaliforniacough :: forgetting to report it’s significant job losses makes the unemployment number look good for a Democrat President....

[Brown Deer]

The betting money is on 0bama (62-38):

http://www.predictwise.com/politics/2012presidentindividual

but three weeks ago it was 80-20, so moving in the right direction, a 36 point swing for Romney.

If you look at their electoral predictions, then it is much closer (281-257):

http://www.predictwise.com/maps/2012president

If Romney takes Ohio (or two smaller states), he wins.

[nathanbedford]

nhwingut :

Do I correctly understand that Rasmussen arrives at his party/independents break down based on polling?

If so, does he poll individual states or does he simply assume the same percentage of Democrats in every state?

Shifting to the state polls:

How can any of this make sense if Romney is enjoying such a big advantage among independents? It is generally understood that each candidate will get somewhere near 90% of his party affiliation and Romney is leading several points (6 to 9) with independents, it seems on the face of it that Romney should be leading by 3 to 6 points in every poll unless the inconceivable is happening, Republicans are defecting to Obama.

A more reasonable conclusion is that Romney is not in fact enjoying such favorable numbers among independents and therefore he is breaking even with independents or +3 in order to produce numbers which leave Romney and Obama running about even. This, of course, could vary from state to state and there is the question of the margin of error.

Could Gallup and Rasmussen actually be in alignment if the margins of error overlap? There is only a three point spread now between Gallop's 51% for Romney and Rasmussen's 48%. A three point margin of error would put Romney at 51 and drop Obama down 45, matching Gallup. Why all this fuss on the Internet produced by Reuters and Washington Post to the effect that Gallup is an outlier?

Have I misunderstood the meaning of margin of error?

Finally, a bit of error of perhaps three points to six points from 90% in the assumption made about the defection by Democrats could produce about 1 or 2 percentage points diminution in Obama's total score. Moreover, if Rasmussen's polling data allocating the breakdown of D/R/I is off by a couple of percentage points, about 90% of that number falls directly to the bottom line as an error. Similarly, if Gallup is "guesstimating" party breakdown, his numbers could be way off. If all of these "errors" are not compensating each other out, Gallup does not look like such an outlier and Romney and Gallup do not look like they are in such disagreement.

Are we not left with looking at the trend? Is it not reassuring to see that by any measure the trend is now our friend?

I would be grateful for your thoughts on any of these questions.

Nathan