Latest Generic Polls: Ras +12%R; WSJ 6%R; Gallup 15%R; CNN 10R; Fox13R; Bloom 3R

[Vepres]

Also, the pollster.com average is at +5.4 fwiw.

[The Vorlon]

If you also take into account that Republicans almost always outperform the generic ballot...

How many points do you add to all of these ballot results to "adjust" for this phenomenon?

I can't find a link, but I remember Gallup's top pollster say that it was along the lines of +5-ish.

For what it is worth,

in the last 4 mid term elections the GOP has, on average, done about 6% better than the final Gallup Generic ballot result.*

The broad, virtually across the board GOP advantage in the "generic ballot" is pretty much unprecedented in polling history.

CNN has the GOP +7
Democracy Corps (D) has the GOP +7
ABC/Washington Post has the GOP +13

This is uncharted territory, there really are no models to project what this means in terms of seats.



Past performance is no guarantee of future returns, Your mileage may vary, see dealer for details.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Yes, it's important not to get superstitious about that kind of thing; as people who follow elections are wont to.

[J. J.]

1.  Mr. Phipps, et al., for God's sake control yourselves.   Everybody sane expected a bad year, but the Democratic double decimation talk is a bit much, at least for now.  Okay, you can panic, but get in off the ledge.  Obama could survive in two years; it is still too early to tell.

I'll concede that the House is probably going Republican, but maybe not by much.  

2.  The 'bots have it it back up to twelve, but it is still early.

[Mr.Phips]

1.  Mr. Phipps, et al., for God's sake control yourselves.   Everybody sane expected a bad year, but the Democratic double decimation talk is a bit much, at least for now.  Okay, you can panic, but get in off the ledge.  Obama could survive in two years; it is still too early to tell.

I'll concede that the House is probably going Republican, but maybe not by much.  

2.  The 'bots have it it back up to twelve, but it is still early.

Obama surviving would be horrible for Democrats.  The party would not survive another four years of Obama. 

It is like what would have happpened to Republicans had Gerald Ford been reelected in 1976.

[Torie]

For those interested, there is a long interview with Ras here. I found it reasonably interesting, but alas he was not asked why he does not poll right before primaries.

[Capitan Zapp Brannigan]

It's an interesting interview, got to say.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I guess the latest Gallup isn't very interesting since it's a tie instead of R+10.

[CARLHAYDEN]

I guess the latest Gallup isn't very interesting since it's a tie instead of R+10.

Jfern,

When The Vorlon posted the thread about Gallup showing a 10 point Republican lead, I concurred with him that the next poll would likely be far more favorable to Democrats, and that due to its methodology, Gallup is over short terms, far more erratic than many other survey research firms.

That being said, there are a couple of other reasons for discounting the Gallup poll you cite.

First, it is a Registered Voter poll in a mid-term election.  Since turnout is far lower in such elections, Registered Voter polls are even more unreliable  than in Presidential elections.

Second, if you read the entire Gallup release, you will note that they concede that intensity favors Republicans in their own poll.  That's a fance way of saying that if it were a Likely Voter poll, it would have given the Republicans an edge.

Third, there is some validity to the methodology (as well as problems) used by RealClearPolitics (and others) in blending several polls.  After all, there is a generally accepted statistical likelihood that one out of twenty polls will have a Margain of error greater than the one which the size of the sample would create.

So, in conclusion, lets see what the polls show, both from Gallup and other sources, for the next few days, before jumping to conclusions based on one poll.

[J. J.]

I guess the latest Gallup isn't very interesting since it's a tie instead of R+10.

Registered voters, not likely voters.  The "enthusiasm poll" give is R +25.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/142892/Parties-Tied-Generic-Ballot.aspx

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I guess the latest Gallup isn't very interesting since it's a tie instead of R+10.

Registered voters, not likely voters.  The "enthusiasm poll" give is R +25.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/142892/Parties-Tied-Generic-Ballot.aspx

Well, it would obviously be pretty epic if only people who are currently "enthused" showed up to vote, but that's not going to happen.

[Eraserhead]

I guess the latest Gallup isn't very interesting since it's a tie instead of R+10.

It's Gallup. They'll be tied again next week.

Yeah, not good though.

[Mr.Phips]

Its really amazing that Republicans have gotten such a generic ballot lead.  I remember 1978, where even in the midst of rampant inflation and Carter being more unpopular than Obama, Democrats still held a 15%+ generic ballot lead and most people blamed the inflation on businesses rather than Democrats.

Remember the days when Democrats could actually create a message and make it stick?

[memphis]

Its really amazing that Republicans have gotten such a generic ballot lead.  I remember 1978, where even in the midst of rampant inflation and Carter being more unpopular than Obama, Democrats still held a 15%+ generic ballot lead and most people blamed the inflation on businesses rather than Democrats.

Remember the days when Democrats could actually create a message and make it stick?

Inflation only matters if you have substabtial wealth. Unemployment is a much more severe problem for most people. Comparable elections with high unemployment would be 1974 and 1982.

[Mr.Phips]

Its really amazing that Republicans have gotten such a generic ballot lead.  I remember 1978, where even in the midst of rampant inflation and Carter being more unpopular than Obama, Democrats still held a 15%+ generic ballot lead and most people blamed the inflation on businesses rather than Democrats.

Remember the days when Democrats could actually create a message and make it stick?

Inflation only matters if you have substabtial wealth. Unemployment is a much more severe problem for most people. Comparable elections with high unemployment would be 1974 and 1982.

Unemployment in 1974 was actually lower than in 1978.  The big jump in unemployment in 1974 didnt come until November, after the elections already had been held. 

[J. J.]

I guess the latest Gallup isn't very interesting since it's a tie instead of R+10.

Registered voters, not likely voters.  The "enthusiasm poll" give is R +25.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/142892/Parties-Tied-Generic-Ballot.aspx

Well, it would obviously be pretty epic if only people who are currently "enthused" showed up to vote, but that's not going to happen.

It is probably a better indication of who will turn out.  That's why the RV number becomes less important each day.

[??????????]

You ever imagine what an elephant raping a donkey would look like? The elephant would probably crush the donkey under its weight, leaving only a mangled corpse and some guts on the elephants feet.

See sig.

[The Vorlon]

Gallup says the GOP is back to +5 on the Generic ballot, which is, more or less, the real number among RVs.

At least for the next twenty minutes or so, the polling all looks reasonably sane and consistent....

Likely Voters

ABC News/Wash Post:   Republicans +13
Democracy Corps (D):   Republicans +7
Rasmussen Reports:        Republicans +9

Average: - GOP + 9.7%

Registered Voters:

Quinnipiac: Republicans +5
CNN/Opinion Research:   Republicans +7
FOX News:   Republicans +9
Gallup:   Republicans +5

Average - GOP + 6.5%

Polls of similar populations more or less agree, and the gap of 3.2% between LVs and RVs is consistent with historical patterns.

Stay tuned for next weeks thrilling new episode.....

[CARLHAYDEN]

Gallup had some really strong swings in the previous few weeks.

Republicans up 10 points, then tied!?!

Their current 5 point lead for Republicans seems a little more reasonable.

[Umengus]

Gallup had some really strong swings in the previous few weeks.

Republicans up 10 points, then tied!?!

Their current 5 point lead for Republicans seems a little more reasonable.

Gallup is a mess... the worst pollster. On this forum, the word gallup should be forbidden.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Gallup had some really strong swings in the previous few weeks.

Republicans up 10 points, then tied!?!

Their current 5 point lead for Republicans seems a little more reasonable.

Gallup is a mess... the worst pollster. On this forum, the word gallup should be forbidden.

     They're not great or anything, but I wouldn't go that far. Remember how bad ARG was back in 2008, after all. Now that I think about it, whatever happened to ARG?

[The Vorlon]

Gallup had some really strong swings in the previous few weeks.

Republicans up 10 points, then tied!?!

Their current 5 point lead for Republicans seems a little more reasonable.

Gallup is a mess... the worst pollster. On this forum, the word gallup should be forbidden.

Gallup has a lot of very bright people working for them, and they have a great deal of integrity.

That being said, Gallup is trying to use 1970s methodology in 21st century situations - with predictable results.

The REAL reason Gallup is running a daily tracking poll is so they can build up a huge dataset and actually go in and truly "fix" they way they are doing things.

When a pollster truly and profoundly $ up they can react one of two ways - denial or increased determination.

In 2000 Rasmussen totally blew it (He has Bush winning by 10% in a 3000 person sample size) - Rasmussen went in and fixed things and has done quite well since then.

Let's hope Gallup can do the same.

[ag]

Its really amazing that Republicans have gotten such a generic ballot lead.  I remember 1978, where even in the midst of rampant inflation and Carter being more unpopular than Obama, Democrats still held a 15%+ generic ballot lead and most people blamed the inflation on businesses rather than Democrats.

Remember the days when Democrats could actually create a message and make it stick?

Inflation only matters if you have substabtial wealth. Unemployment is a much more severe problem for most people. Comparable elections with high unemployment would be 1974 and 1982.

You are dead wrong on this. Inflation hits hardest at the poor. The rich have access to financial instruments that shield them from the impact. It is the poor who do not. Inflation is, probably, the most regressive tax the government ever imposes in practice.

[Beet]

ag, doesn't inflation hit the middle class the hardest?

The poor aren't hit the hardest because they generally live paycheck to paycheck - they have little savings. And during inflation, wages usually rise just as fast as prices. So the net effect on the poor would be nil.

The wealthy, of course, have assets - homes, stocks, land - that all rise in value with inflation. That protects them.

The middle class though, have cash savings which can easily be wiped out by inflation if not invested. Isn't this what happened during hyperinflation in Germany (of course they're not the same thing, but still)?

Also,doesn't inflation hurt creditors at the expense of debtors? The reason being that debt is not indexed to inflation, so over time, it decreases the debt load, where deflation increases it. This is why poor farmers in the American midwest advocated inflationary (or at least anti-deflationary) policies in the late 19th century.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Gallup had some really strong swings in the previous few weeks.

Republicans up 10 points, then tied!?!

Their current 5 point lead for Republicans seems a little more reasonable.

Gallup is a mess... the worst pollster. On this forum, the word gallup should be forbidden.

I must disagree.

Polimetrix is probably THE most inaccurate, closely followed by Washington Post (they usually combine with ABC) and PSRA.