PDA

View Full Version : Red State website chronicles Rasmussen's errors



Soflasnapper
11-07-2012, 11:45 AM
As previously posted concerning Rasmussen:

Rasmussen, in predicting a strongly Republican electorate, seems to have discredited himself. Similarly, some heads should roll at Gallup, which despite having an enormous sample size completely botched predicting the partisan makeup of the electorate.

Here are the particulars of Rasmussen's errors. RedState is conservative Erik Erikson's blog.

From a comment in the blog there:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

May I suggest #31- Reliance on polling firms that tell us what we want to hear as opposed to the truth. Really. We pay these motherf$(*%s a lot of money,and this is the performance they deliver. Effing amazing!:

"Nationally, Rasmussen polled at 49%-48%. The actual result was (so far) 50%-49% Obama, the reverse of Rasmussen's poll.

In Colorado, Rasmussen polled at 50%-47% for Romney. The actual result was 51%-47% for Obama, the reverse of Rasmussen's poll.

In Florida, Rasmussen polled at 50%-48% for Romney. The actual result was 50%-49% for Obama, the reverse of Rasmussen's poll.

In Iowa, Rasmussen polled at 49%-48% for Romney. The actual result was 52%-47% for Obama, the reverse of Rasmussen's poll, doubled.

In New Hampshire, Rasmussen polled at 50%-48% for Romney. The actual result was 52%-47% for Obama, the reverse of Rasmussen's poll.

In Ohio, Rasmussen polled at a 49%-49% tie. The actual result was 50%-48% for Obama, a two-point swing.

In Virginia, Rasmussen polled at 50%-48% for Romney. The actual result was 50%-48% for Obama, the reverse of Rasmussen's poll.

In Wisconsin, Rasmussen polled at a 49%-49% tie. The actual result was 52-47% for Obama, a six-point swing.

In other words, in all the races that mattered, Rasmussen got it egregiously wrong. They didn't call a single battleground state right except for North Carolina, and even there it appears that they overestimated the margin of Romney's win."
</div></div>

Here (from commenter Iowan) (http://www.redstate.com/mikehammond/2012/11/07/30-reasons-republicans-lost-the-election/)

Soflasnapper
11-07-2012, 11:50 AM
A few other commentators seem to have woken up to their getting bad information:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
GremlinJones theiowan an hour ago

I can accept that my news is not really "news" like news in Cronkite's day, but a conservative take on the news. But it's unacceptable that Rasmussen appears to have distinguished themselves from everyone else in their quest to shade the numbers to appease us, the base. I didn't even look at other polls, to tell the truth, trusting that their methodology was more sound because it jived with what I was hearing on Fox and with people I talked to. It pains me to say this, but next time I want a dose of hard truth, I'm looking to Nate Silver, even if I don't like the results.
13

Share

Avatar
commonsenseobserver theiowan 8 hours ago

Well, the Democrats managed to crank up the turnout machine.
3

Share

Avatar
theiowan commonsenseobserver 8 hours ago


Yes they did. And they said they would. And there was documentation that they had an effective one. AND we trusted Gallop (R+7 last week, yeah right) and Gravis and Ras. But we have been told that those outfits have what pollsters call "house effect" (baked in bias) in our favor. We blew it off because it felt good to believe the good news. And the echo chamber around here makes it difficult for ideas that conflict with the narrative to emerge. There are polling firms that have "house effects" in the other direction, such as PPP.

We ignored a bunch of other shit too. I'm done... but listening to Dick Morris and Dean Chamberlain kinda fucked us.

Just Sayin'
</div></div>

Gayle in MD
11-07-2012, 12:15 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I can accept that my news is not really "news" like news in Cronkite's day, but a conservative take on the news. But it's unacceptable that Rasmussen appears to have distinguished themselves from everyone else in their quest to shade the numbers to appease us, the base. I didn't even look at other polls, to tell the truth, trusting that their methodology was more sound because it jived with what I was hearing on Fox and with people I talked to. It pains me to say this, but next time I want a dose of hard truth, I'm looking to Nate Silver, even if I don't like the results.
13
</div></div>

At least the guy is vowing to change his ways, which is more than we could say for the righties on here, lol.

But, the poor guy still doesn't understand his illness.

He has been suffering from bubble-oney!

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Rasmucous has always been a joke.

Can't wait for SNL and Bill Maher this week.

I think it was Chuck Todd who said the Repigs were going to FREAK OUT if they lost. I'd say he had that one right! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

This is one sweet win, given all of the exposed RW bubble-oney!

The future of the Repiglican Party, depends upon their ability to cut the BS, and face the facts. Not something they are known for, that's for sure.

If they don't do it this time, they can fuggeddaboudit! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

They are trapped inside a Tea Party zealotry that isn't going to go away for another two years, thanks to their filthy Oil Billionaires, who financed the TPers and their own demise, LMAO!

This is just too sweet!

G.

Gayle in MD
11-07-2012, 09:50 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As previously posted concerning Rasmussen:

Rasmussen, in predicting a strongly Republican electorate, seems to have discredited himself. Similarly, some heads should roll at Gallup, which despite having an enormous sample size completely botched predicting the partisan makeup of the electorate.

Here are the particulars of Rasmussen's errors. RedState is conservative Erik Erikson's blog.

From a comment in the blog there:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

May I suggest #31- Reliance on polling firms that tell us what we want to hear as opposed to the truth. Really. We pay these motherf$(*%s a lot of money,and this is the performance they deliver. Effing amazing!:

"Nationally, Rasmussen polled at 49%-48%. The actual result was (so far) 50%-49% Obama, the reverse of Rasmussen's poll.

In Colorado, Rasmussen polled at 50%-47% for Romney. The actual result was 51%-47% for Obama, the reverse of Rasmussen's poll.

In Florida, Rasmussen polled at 50%-48% for Romney. The actual result was 50%-49% for Obama, the reverse of Rasmussen's poll.

In Iowa, Rasmussen polled at 49%-48% for Romney. The actual result was 52%-47% for Obama, the reverse of Rasmussen's poll, doubled.

In New Hampshire, Rasmussen polled at 50%-48% for Romney. The actual result was 52%-47% for Obama, the reverse of Rasmussen's poll.

In Ohio, Rasmussen polled at a 49%-49% tie. The actual result was 50%-48% for Obama, a two-point swing.

In Virginia, Rasmussen polled at 50%-48% for Romney. The actual result was 50%-48% for Obama, the reverse of Rasmussen's poll.

In Wisconsin, Rasmussen polled at a 49%-49% tie. The actual result was 52-47% for Obama, a six-point swing.

In other words, in all the races that mattered, Rasmussen got it egregiously wrong. They didn't call a single battleground state right except for North Carolina, and even there it appears that they overestimated the margin of Romney's win."
</div></div>

Here (from commenter Iowan) (http://www.redstate.com/mikehammond/2012/11/07/30-reasons-republicans-lost-the-election/) </div></div>

When you see a polling organization consistantly give the advantage to the candidate who is losing everywhere else over numerous months, and the guy loses, they certainly lose credibility, when the other guy wins, and wins big.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

Qtec
11-08-2012, 05:38 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I'm done... but listening to Dick Morris and Dean Chamberlain kinda fucked us.

Just Sayin' </div></div>

LMAO. If you listen to Dick Morris then you deserve what you get. All he does these days is go on Fox and tell them what they want to hear. He has lost all credibility.

Q...BTW


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wed Nov 07, 2012 at 10:15 AM PST
<span style='font-size: 14pt'>PPP poll for Daily Kos/SEIU was the most accurate of 2012 </span>

From Fordham University's Costas Panagopoulos, director of the university's Center for Electoral Politics and Democracy.

For all the ridicule directed towards pre-election polling, the final poll estimates were not far off from the actual nationwide vote shares for the two candidates," said Dr. Panagopoulos.

On average, pre-election polls from 28 public polling organizations projected a Democratic advantage of 1.07 percentage points on Election Day, which is only about 0.63 percentage points away from the current estimate of a 1.7-point Obama margin in the national popular vote. [...]

1. PPP (D)
1. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Daily Kos</span>/SEIU/PPP
3. YouGov
4. Ipsos/Reuters
5. Purple Strategies
6. NBC/WSJ
6. CBS/NYT
6. YouGov/Economist
9. UPI/CVOTER
10. IBD/TIPP
11. Angus-Reid
12. ABC/WP
13. Pew Research
13. Hartford Courant/UConn
15. CNN/ORC
15. Monmouth/SurveyUSA
15. Politico/GWU/Battleground
15. <span style="color: #990000">FOX News</span>
15. <span style="color: #990000">Washington Times</span>/JZ Analytics
15. <span style="color: #990000">Newsmax</span>/JZ Analytics
15. American Research Group
15. Gravis Marketing
23. Democracy Corps (D)
24. <span style="color: #990000">Rasmussen</span>
24. <span style="color: #990000">Gallup</span>
26. NPR
27. National Journal
28. AP/GfK


</div></div>
link (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/11/07/1158157/-Most-accurate-national-popular-vote-pollsters)


EVEN Fox rated higher than Rasmussen and Gallup!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Its pretty clear that they have become tools who serve the highest bidder.

Qtec
11-08-2012, 06:55 AM
<a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2012/11/07/scott_rasmussen_explains_why_his_polls_didn_t_fors ee_an_obama_win.html" target="_blank">Scott Rasmussen Explains Why His Polls Didn't Foresee an Obama Win

</a>

Q...or not really!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Gayle in MD
11-08-2012, 07:29 AM
LOL, we all know Repiglicans are clueless when it comes to Math!

Exit polls prove the Repigs are out of step with the country on every issue.

The majority of Americans approve of Gay rights.

Approve of birth control.

Approve of abortion.

Approve of Planned Parenthood.

Approve of raising taxes on the wealthy.

Approve of tighter pollution regulations across the board.

Approve of The Dream Act.

And they do not want the Repiglican policies on vouchers for health care, or their intention to destroy Social Security, so they can give more to the wealthy.

Most Americans are against the Repiglican's & The RW Supreme Court's threat to reverse Roe V.Wade.

Most are against the radical RW Supreme Court's decision on Citizens United, and do not want to allow corporations to buy our elections, in secret, behind the scenes.

Most Americans want to get the money out of our elections.

Most want the public option included in the ACA.

Most believe in global warming, and want more regulations to protect our Food and water.

Most want the obstruction of the Repiglican Party to end, and want them to compromise in order to get things done, instead of obstructing for political purposes.

Most want the crooks on Wall St., to go to jail! And ann end to the shadow economy.

Repigs are Knuckle Dragging Neanderthals, Robme and Lyin' Ryan, and most of their party contenders for office, are too radical for the public's taste, and their Tea Party idiots block any rational, sensible moderates from being elected.

They are on their way out, and their gallish refusal to acknowledge that they have no madate at all for their policies, is going to cost them in the mid terms.

G.