PDA

View Full Version : Romney at 39% v Obama-- Rasmussen



Soflasnapper
02-24-2012, 10:48 AM
Here (http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entries/rasmussen-tracking-romney-drops-below-40-percent-against?ref=fpblg)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Rasmussen Tracking: Romney Drops Below 40 Percent Against Obama

Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney may have had the best performance on the debate stage in Arizona last night, but Thursday morning wasn't as great -- Romney dropped to 39 percent in Rasmussen's nightly tracking poll of a potential matchup between him and President Obama nationally. Obama got 49 percent, giving him a ten point lead. The Ras tracking numbers use 500 autodial interviews a night and average the results over three days.

As with any polling this cycle, the numbers have been extremely volatile. Romney was down only two points in the Rasmussen tracking data on Monday, and other polling has shown the race much closer.

Here's the TPM Poll Average of the matchup since the beignning of the year.</div></div> (see at link)

cushioncrawler
02-24-2012, 03:03 PM
BringBringBringBri---
Hello, God speaking.
Hello Sir, this iz a autodial computer survey for the elections, would U pleez participate.
Ok -- But how did u get My number -- and its Madam not Sir.
ThankU Sir -- In a prezidential election between Obama and Romney, if U would vote for Obama pleez say [Obama] after the beep -- if U would vote for Romney pleez say [Romney] after the beep.
BEEEEEEEEP.
Obama -- and its Madam not Sir.
ThankU for participating in this survey Sir -- enjoy Your day.

LWW
02-24-2012, 07:32 PM
Amazing how you now see RASMUSSEN as credible.

Soflasnapper
02-25-2012, 11:52 AM
Sure they are, when acting against their interest and normal skewing to the Republican side.

They are homers for the GOP. When such a homer admits such a finding, it is credible, just as if your local homer sports broadcasters begin to criticize the home team, it is especially credible.

Just as when pollsters thought to be Democratic Party homers show results unfavorable to Democrats. Such results FROM SUCH PEOPLE are automatically credible.

LWW
02-26-2012, 07:15 AM
So on your spoon fed mind they are credible when they tell you what you want to believe, and not credible when they don't?

Actually that is completely consistent with the doublethink you put on display daily.

LWW
02-26-2012, 07:26 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sure they are ...</div></div>

So you accept that this week:

- Dear leader fell like a stone in the polls.

- Romney and Santorum are both running within the margin of error against Obama.

- Obama is running as a very unpopular incumbent.

It is these rare moments of lucidity that you display which keeps up my faith that you may someday fully recover.
RASMUSSEN - CERTIFIED CREDIBLE. (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll)

Soflasnapper
02-26-2012, 11:48 AM
No, because of the rest of the sentence: when acting against their interest and normal skewing to the Republican side.

Besides, if they are reporting Romney within the margin of error against Obama, he could not be at 39-49% by their own tracking poll cited above, as a 10% difference is outside the MOE (of likely +/- 3%).

Which is it, in your view?

LWW
02-26-2012, 02:50 PM
Actually what you quoted was an outdated poll.

Soflasnapper
02-26-2012, 05:17 PM
It was taken Monday-Wednesday of last week. Today is the next Sunday from that time. Pretty current.

The numbers you have cited as within the MOE are the older ones (as the quote said, within 2% as of MONDAY's report (i.e., from a time frame before Monday).

LWW
02-27-2012, 03:00 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Mitt Romney leads the president in a hypothetical 2012 matchup. Romney earns 45% of the vote, while the president attracts support from 43%. Romney holds a nine-point advantage among unaffiliated voters.

For the first time ever, Texas Congressman Ron Paul also leads the president. In that matchup, 43% prefer Paul and 41% Obama. Ten percent (10%) would vote for some other option, a figure that includes 17% of Republicans.

If former Senator Rick Santorum is the Republican nominee, the president leads by two, 45% to 43%. With former House Speaker Newt Gingrich as his opponent, the president enjoys a 10-point lead, 49% to 39%. </div></div>
THAT DIDN'T TAKE LONG! (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll)

Soflasnapper
02-27-2012, 03:18 PM
Yep, the old truism: live by the overnight tracking polls, die by the overnight tracking polls, which are indeed volatile.

Although these are not overnight tracking poll results. Doesn't matter, polls are volatile, so the snapshot that any one represents does not provide much evidence, absent how it fits in with the mosaic formed by the averages of all polling.

How does Rasmussen Reports itself hedge these possibilities?

<span style='font-size: 14pt'> It remains to be seen, of course, <span style='font-size: 17pt'>if this is merely statistical noise or a lasting change</span> signaling that the presidentís recent bounce in the polls has come to an end. </span>

LWW
02-28-2012, 03:48 AM
TRANSLATED:

Sofanapper only views the results as credible when they fit his agenda.

Qtec
02-28-2012, 04:15 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">TRANSLATED:

Sofanapper only views the results as credible when they fit his agenda. </div></div>

LMAO.

Q

LWW
02-28-2012, 04:24 AM
He is pretty comical the way he does that ... but he isn't in the same league as you.

Soflasnapper
02-28-2012, 10:10 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">TRANSLATED:

Sofanapper only views the results as credible when they fit his agenda. </div></div>

Never heard of the concept of 'outlier poll'?

When all the polls say one thing, and one poll disagrees, that is an outlier poll. As I've shown recently, the Romney v Obama race has the last 8 out of 10 polls showing Obama ahead, one showed a tie result, and one showed Romney ahead.

The one showing Romney ahead is Rasmussen, although they also just before that had Obama at 10 ahead. Probably the 10 ahead was an outlier, AND the one showing Romney ahead is an outlier as well.

What causes polls to be outliers? Problems with the sample composition, typically. (Rasmussen has its own proprietary way of doing the composition that is different from the others.)

LWW
02-28-2012, 05:02 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">TRANSLATED:

Sofanapper only views the results as credible when they fit his agenda. </div></div>

Never heard of the concept of 'outlier poll'?

When all the polls say one thing, and one poll disagrees, that is an outlier poll. </div></div>

Good description ... and you picked one.

Much to your perpetual embarrassment, I made no such error.

January 27, 2012 USA TODAY (http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2012-02-23/swing-states-health-care-obama/53260222/1)

OCTOBER 11, 2011 QUINNIPIAC (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/10/05/romney_leads_obama_in_national_poll_111577.html)

June 7, 2011 ABC NEWS (http://www.wmur.com/r/28162022/detail.html)

Soflasnapper
02-29-2012, 10:30 AM
I am not embarrassed for you, or it would have to be perpetual.

You still don't understand what I'm talking about? (Hint: citing polling from 2011 doesn't get the job done whatsoever.)

The question is what the collective average of polling in current real time adds up to, not what Romney looked like a couple weeks after his announcement (your oldest link), and before he shot up his negatives so high by his relentless brutal ad war attacks. He has a huge upside down number on approve v disapprove, whereas Obama does not, improbably, after so much attack.

Very likely, one could have 'proven' Obama's loss to Hillary, using similarly timed polling results in his late '07, early '08 results.

The swing state results are indeed more telling, although barely outside the MOE, but then the same group's national polling around the same time frame shows the collapse of the differences of Obama and the GOP candidates, to around a 1% difference, well within the MOE. What's worse for these numbers as for Obama's chances is that it's based on the health care bill, where Romney is himself a very vulnerable and flawed messenger.

LWW
02-29-2012, 03:32 PM
How lame was that?

Quite.

You claim the poll was an "OUTLIER" I show that Obama has trailed Romney most of the way ... you bury your head ever deeper in the ground.

Soflasnapper
02-29-2012, 05:57 PM
To repeat, past tense doesn't get it, to show the poll trends going on NOW!

As I showed with the link, 8 out of 10 recent polls say the opposite of the one you cited. Making it an outlier, NOW.

Stretch
02-29-2012, 06:38 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">To repeat, past tense doesn't get it, to show the poll trends going on NOW!

As I showed with the link, 8 out of 10 recent polls say the opposite of the one you cited. Making it an outlier, NOW. </div></div>

Maybe if you pulled Lar's head out of the sand, pryed out the potatoes from his ears, then yelled through a mega-phone, he might hear you. But i dought it. He's at bliss with his subterranian alternate universe. (good effort though) St.

LWW
03-01-2012, 03:39 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">To repeat, past tense doesn't get it, to show the poll trends going on NOW!

As I showed with the link, 8 out of 10 recent polls say the opposite of the one you cited. Making it an outlier, NOW. </div></div>

You mean the link that now shows Romney ahead also?

Try to keep up.