Ras: Partisan Trends: First GOP Lead Ever

[CatoMinor]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

link

[Zarn]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

link

Say wha??

[Lief 🗽]

After the 2010 results, I think we can safely take whatever Rasmussen says with a large grain of salt.

[Franzl]

After the 2010 results, I think we can safely take whatever Rasmussen says with a large grain of salt.

I suppose elections before 2010 don't count?

[Marokai Backbeat]

After the 2010 results, I think we can safely take whatever Rasmussen says with a large grain of salt.

I suppose elections before 2010 don't count?

How many times do people have to argue over Rasmussen before people stop taking it as some sort of gold standard in polling?

[Franzl]

After the 2010 results, I think we can safely take whatever Rasmussen says with a large grain of salt.

I suppose elections before 2010 don't count?

How many times do people have to argue over Rasmussen before people stop taking it as some sort of gold standard in polling?

I'm not claiming Rasmussen is the gold standard...,but it's just dumb to disregard them because of 2010. They've had many very good performances as well.

[bgwah]

After the 2010 results, I think we can safely take whatever Rasmussen says with a large grain of salt.

I suppose elections before 2010 don't count?

How many times do people have to argue over Rasmussen before people stop taking it as some sort of gold standard in polling?

I'm not claiming Rasmussen is the gold standard...,but it's just dumb to disregard them because of 2010. They've had many very good performances as well.

What year is it right now?

[Franzl]

And that means we should simply disregard what they say? Take it with a grain of salt, by all means, as with any poll...but it's still a useful piece of information.

[King]

Didn't Rasmussen suck in 2008, too?  He hasn't been good in a few years.

[Torie]

I am waiting for Ras to defend his act in 2010. So far, he has chosen to stonewall, and not respond to Nate Silver's analysis, which is pretty effective in calling Ras out. Ras, it is time to man up, and hold yourself accountable.

[memphis]

Didn't Rasmussen suck in 2008, too?  He hasn't been good in a few years.

IIRC they were the best on Obama's popular vote margin. Gallup had these goofy huge margins, just like the did in the generic ballot this year.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

That's what happens when the Democratic brand is destroyed by a Republican President who claims that he's a Democrat.

[DrScholl]

Yeah, whatever, Rasmussen.

[Sam Spade]

I am waiting for Ras to defend his act in 2010. So far, he has chosen to stonewall, and not respond to Nate Silver's analysis, which is pretty effective in calling Ras out. Ras, it is time to man up, and hold yourself accountable.

FWIW, there is a big difference between Rasmussen's national polls and his state polls.

His state polling work leaned consistently to Republicans and by a good bit.  I agree with Nate 100% here.

However, his national polling work (especially the monthly polling - which is actually what I pay the most attention to) showed a lot of striking internal consistencies with the exit polling for 2010.  I can say this because I looked at the internals provided after the elections before I dropped my usual short-lived subscription.  For an example you can see, note the Democratic/Republican/Independent ID of the last 3 months before the 2010 election - looks an awful lot like the exit poll. 

This is what makes his generic vote poll having so much of a Republican lean kinda weird, because the other internals fit with the exit polling.  Of course, the monthly polling on the generic ballot was also better and the internals fit better.  Maybe what I'm trying to say is that if you're going to watch Rasmussen for anything - it's the long-term stuff just because he gathers so much information.  Gallup is probably the same way.  Or maybe I'm just defending pollsters.

I ignore all the issue-garbage polls, so don't ask me questions there... 

[Smash255]

I am waiting for Ras to defend his act in 2010. So far, he has chosen to stonewall, and not respond to Nate Silver's analysis, which is pretty effective in calling Ras out. Ras, it is time to man up, and hold yourself accountable.

FWIW, there is a big difference between Rasmussen's national polls and his state polls.

His state polling work leaned consistently to Republicans and by a good bit.  I agree with Nate 100% here.

However, his national polling work (especially the monthly polling - which is actually what I pay the most attention to) showed a lot of striking internal consistencies with the exit polling for 2010.  I can say this because I looked at the internals provided after the elections before I dropped my usual short-lived subscription.  For an example you can see, note the Democratic/Republican/Independent ID of the last 3 months before the 2010 election - looks an awful lot like the exit poll. 

This is what makes his generic vote poll having so much of a Republican lean kinda weird, because the other internals fit with the exit polling.  Of course, the monthly polling on the generic ballot was also better and the internals fit better.  Maybe what I'm trying to say is that if you're going to watch Rasmussen for anything - it's the long-term stuff just because he gathers so much information.  Gallup is probably the same way.  Or maybe I'm just defending pollsters.

I ignore all the issue-garbage polls, so don't ask me questions there... 

The likely voter model was obviously more GOP in 2010 and it was shown in the exit polls (some pollsters did seem to have that overblown a bit), but I could understand somewhat if this was a likely voter poll, but he mentions all adults.  Now that really just makes no sense in the whole scheme of things. 

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I am waiting for Ras to defend his act in 2010. So far, he has chosen to stonewall, and not respond to Nate Silver's analysis, which is pretty effective in calling Ras out. Ras, it is time to man up, and hold yourself accountable.

Nate Silver didn't exactly do too well in 2010 either...

[Landslide Lyndon]

I am waiting for Ras to defend his act in 2010. So far, he has chosen to stonewall, and not respond to Nate Silver's analysis, which is pretty effective in calling Ras out. Ras, it is time to man up, and hold yourself accountable.

Nate Silver didn't exactly do too well in 2010 either...

His model is based solely on polls and the enormous number of Rasmussen polls obviously contaminated his pool.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I am waiting for Ras to defend his act in 2010. So far, he has chosen to stonewall, and not respond to Nate Silver's analysis, which is pretty effective in calling Ras out. Ras, it is time to man up, and hold yourself accountable.

Nate Silver didn't exactly do too well in 2010 either...

His model is based solely on polls and the enormous number of Rasmussen polls obviously contaminated his pool.

Not really... Rasmussen wasn't weighted very high in NV, AK, or CO for Senate races.

In terms of gubernatorial races, Rasmussen was more accurate than Silver's prediction for MN.

[CatoMinor]

I am waiting for Ras to defend his act in 2010. So far, he has chosen to stonewall, and not respond to Nate Silver's analysis, which is pretty effective in calling Ras out. Ras, it is time to man up, and hold yourself accountable.

Nate Silver didn't exactly do too well in 2010 either...

His model is based solely on polls and the enormous number of Rasmussen polls obviously contaminated his pool.

That doesn't explain why Nate's house model was so off, he missed a ton of individual races. You cannot blame Ras on that.

[Sbane]

Nobody claimed Nate's house model was very good. This was his first time using it, no? Can't expect it to be perfect the first time.

As for Rasmussen, they still remain a good pollster that I trust, but don't have the blind belief in them that some Republicans had before the election. I also think that this year Rasmussen's enthusiasm towards the tea party might have biased some of his polls. It seemed like he expected greater turnout from Republican voters than actually occured.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I am waiting for Ras to defend his act in 2010. So far, he has chosen to stonewall, and not respond to Nate Silver's analysis, which is pretty effective in calling Ras out. Ras, it is time to man up, and hold yourself accountable.

Nate Silver didn't exactly do too well in 2010 either...

His model is based solely on polls and the enormous number of Rasmussen polls obviously contaminated his pool.

That doesn't explain why Nate's house model was so off, he missed a ton of individual races. You cannot blame Ras on that.

     In his defense, House races are hard to poll & even the most competitive ones typically only get a couple of polls, if even that. Making a good model to predict the outcome of House races is an exercise in masochism.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

The only states Rasmussen missed in the Senate were Alaska, Colorado, Nevada, and Washington.

So the only state that Silver got that Rasmussen didn't was Washington.

[LBJ Revivalist]

That's what happens when the Democratic brand is destroyed by a Republican President who claims that he's a Democrat.

Pretty much. Obama's been on a mission to destroy the Democratic Party since he got in office. He seems to be doing more to hurt the brand than any actual Republican could.

[Torie]

Sam, why would Ras's monthly national polling be better than his daily national polling or whatever. What makes up his monthly national polls?  How is it done differently than his shorter term national polls?  I was never aware of this distinction before.  In any event, the same issues of bias arise, lack of cell phone contact, etc.

[Brittain33]

ever = since February 2005, and according to Rasmussen's models.