MI: Public Policy Polling: Obama up double-digits
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 02:19:01 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2012 Elections
  2012 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls
  MI: Public Policy Polling: Obama up double-digits
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: MI: Public Policy Polling: Obama up double-digits  (Read 2440 times)
RI
realisticidealist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,714


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: July 25, 2012, 10:29:24 AM »

New Poll: Michigan President by Public Policy Polling on 2012-07-23

Summary: D: 53%, R: 39%, I: 0%, U: 8%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details

Logged
krazen1211
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,372


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: July 25, 2012, 10:30:08 AM »

Junk poll!
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,781
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: July 25, 2012, 10:32:19 AM »

Yipee
Logged
MorningInAmerica
polijunkie3057
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 779
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.55, S: 0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: July 25, 2012, 10:41:35 AM »

Leave it to PPP to give Obama his biggest lead of any pollster in Michigan for the last 6 months.
Logged
H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY
Alfred F. Jones
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,075
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: July 25, 2012, 10:47:48 AM »

I have to agree with Krazen on this one. No way Obama's up double here. High singles, maybe, but not double.
Logged
ajb
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 869
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: July 25, 2012, 10:51:27 AM »

Because somebody needs to say it:

Partisan breakdown in this poll: D 32 R 28 I 40

Partisan breakdown in MI in 2008, per the exit polls: D41 R 29 I 29

So by the reasoning of many on this board, this poll is likely to underestimate Obama's lead in Michigan.
Logged
MorningInAmerica
polijunkie3057
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 779
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.55, S: 0.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: July 25, 2012, 10:57:58 AM »



You have to go all the way back to February to find a poll that comes even close to PPPs results.
Logged
krazen1211
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,372


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: July 25, 2012, 10:59:56 AM »

Because somebody needs to say it:

Partisan breakdown in this poll: D 32 R 28 I 40

Partisan breakdown in MI in 2008, per the exit polls: D41 R 29 I 29

So by the reasoning of many on this board, this poll is likely to underestimate Obama's lead in Michigan.


Your replication of that reasoning is quite incorrect. When partisan breakdown is examined, it is typically done by using factual registration counts from the state, not some dubious other poll.
Logged
ajb
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 869
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: July 25, 2012, 11:15:06 AM »

So the people who were disputing the NBC/WSJ poll yesterday because it had a D+11 sample were wrong, because they weren't basing their concerns on factual registration counts (which, obviously, do not exist at the national level)?
Logged
Reds4
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 789


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: July 25, 2012, 11:33:30 AM »

Romney isn't ahead by a point like other polling is showing.. Obama likely isn't ahead by 14.. maybe Obama by 8 or so would be my guess.
Logged
DrScholl
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,929
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: July 25, 2012, 11:37:09 AM »

Michigan is Likely Democratic, end of story. Detractors can't even blame an unfavorable sample for this one, because has a lot less Democrats than the actual registration numbers of the state.
Logged
Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers
olawakandi
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 87,781
Jamaica
Political Matrix
E: -6.84, S: -0.17


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: July 25, 2012, 11:41:56 AM »

The rasmussen poll is right Obama +6.
Logged
krazen1211
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,372


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: July 25, 2012, 11:43:44 AM »

So the people who were disputing the NBC/WSJ poll yesterday because it had a D+11 sample were wrong, because they weren't basing their concerns on factual registration counts (which, obviously, do not exist at the national level)?

Not wrong, no. They were merely looking at the registration counts of the states that do have it, and what historical partisan identification nationwide has been for decades.
Logged
krazen1211
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,372


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: July 25, 2012, 11:45:50 AM »

Michigan is Likely Democratic, end of story. Detractors can't even blame an unfavorable sample for this one, because has a lot less Democrats than the actual registration numbers of the state.

That is amusing, given that Michigan has no partisan registration.

Facts are a tricky thing.
Logged
mondale84
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,307
United States


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -3.30

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: July 25, 2012, 11:53:30 AM »

Michigan is Likely Democratic, end of story. Detractors can't even blame an unfavorable sample for this one, because has a lot less Democrats than the actual registration numbers of the state.

That is amusing, given that Michigan has no partisan registration.

Facts are a tricky thing.

The fact is that in 2008 the party id (according to exits) was:
41% Dem
29% Rep
29% Indy

This sample shows:

32% Dem
28% Rep
40% Indy

If anything, this poll should underestimate Obama's lead which doesn't make any sense because he probably isn't up 14. Still, Obama is definitely UP and we know he's going to win the state, stop trolling and deluding yourself by only accounting for polls that the media fabricates to prop up the narrative of a close race.
Logged
ajb
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 869
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: July 25, 2012, 11:56:54 AM »

So the people who were disputing the NBC/WSJ poll yesterday because it had a D+11 sample were wrong, because they weren't basing their concerns on factual registration counts (which, obviously, do not exist at the national level)?

Not wrong, no. They were merely looking at the registration counts of the states that do have it, and what historical partisan identification nationwide has been for decades.
Where are they getting their numbers of historical partisan identification nationwide, if not from things like exit polls?
And how are they estimating partisan id in states like Michigan that don't have partisan registration? Because it's pretty difficult to get an accurate sum when some of the numbers are complete unknowns.
Logged
krazen1211
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,372


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: July 25, 2012, 12:06:17 PM »

So the people who were disputing the NBC/WSJ poll yesterday because it had a D+11 sample were wrong, because they weren't basing their concerns on factual registration counts (which, obviously, do not exist at the national level)?

Not wrong, no. They were merely looking at the registration counts of the states that do have it, and what historical partisan identification nationwide has been for decades.
Where are they getting their numbers of historical partisan identification nationwide, if not from things like exit polls?
And how are they estimating partisan id in states like Michigan that don't have partisan registration? Because it's pretty difficult to get an accurate sum when some of the numbers are complete unknowns.

I presume they use gallup surveys and other national surveys of the public that have historically been shown to be consistent and reliable, as opposed to, say, dubious exit polling that often times is proven wrong within minutes.



Whether you choose to believe PPP or 7 other pollsters is up to you. Certainly nobody can change your mind.
Logged
HagridOfTheDeep
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,717
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -4.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: July 25, 2012, 12:09:43 PM »

This polling firm has become laughable.
Logged
Snowstalker Mk. II
Snowstalker
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,414
Palestinian Territory, Occupied


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -4.35

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: July 25, 2012, 12:13:10 PM »

I'm not arguing that PPP is biased.
Logged
krazen1211
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,372


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: July 25, 2012, 12:29:11 PM »

Nate Silver on Michigan/PPP
(1) No the Michigan polls don't make any sense (2) Just average them, m'kay? (3) Would be nice to get a top-shelf pollster involved there.
Logged
DrScholl
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,929
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: July 25, 2012, 12:38:45 PM »
« Edited: July 25, 2012, 12:40:37 PM by DrScholl »

Michigan is Likely Democratic, end of story. Detractors can't even blame an unfavorable sample for this one, because has a lot less Democrats than the actual registration numbers of the state.

That is amusing, given that Michigan has no partisan registration.

Facts are a tricky thing.

That was an error, but the FACT still stands. The data I was looking at is based off the previous exit poll and my point still stands that the sample is less Democratic than it could have realistically been. The sample has less Democrats than the 2004 exit poll.

Michigan is Likely Democratic, end of debate.
Logged
mondale84
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,307
United States


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -3.30

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: July 25, 2012, 12:52:59 PM »

This polling firm has become laughable.

And your posts have always been laughable.
Logged
ajb
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 869
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: July 25, 2012, 01:03:10 PM »

So the people who were disputing the NBC/WSJ poll yesterday because it had a D+11 sample were wrong, because they weren't basing their concerns on factual registration counts (which, obviously, do not exist at the national level)?

Not wrong, no. They were merely looking at the registration counts of the states that do have it, and what historical partisan identification nationwide has been for decades.
Where are they getting their numbers of historical partisan identification nationwide, if not from things like exit polls?
And how are they estimating partisan id in states like Michigan that don't have partisan registration? Because it's pretty difficult to get an accurate sum when some of the numbers are complete unknowns.

I presume they use gallup surveys and other national surveys of the public that have historically been shown to be consistent and reliable, as opposed to, say, dubious exit polling that often times is proven wrong within minutes.



Whether you choose to believe PPP or 7 other pollsters is up to you. Certainly nobody can change your mind.

I'm just curious to know how Gallup's partisan ID numbers have been proven reliable, when there's nothing to confirm them against.
Logged
Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck
HockeyDude
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,376
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: July 25, 2012, 01:06:05 PM »
« Edited: July 25, 2012, 01:12:58 PM by AWallTEP81 »

Doesn't PPP have a decent track record?  As in, actual numbers?  Both sides have to stop spinning everything so hardcore but all the Republicans who constantly troll here (bar a few that have been here a long time and make sense) all sound like 14 year old members of their junior high school Republican Students Club.  

That said, Obama's not up 14.  Romney's not up 1.  I think Obama is probably winning by 7 or 8.  Remember, he crushed McCain here by 17, and that was not just an anomaly.  Northern suburbs trended hard towards Obama across the Midwest. 
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,842
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: July 25, 2012, 01:13:03 PM »

This may be high for now, but it is the likely result.

Rasmussen uses a "likely voter" screen which well fits an off-year or midterm election. Debbie Stabenow would be fighting for her political life if she faced a 2010-style electorate.  

Mitt Romney hasn't lived in Michigan since he was a young adult. He has had no public office while in Michigan.

Barack Obama is a good cultural match for Michigan, a state that usually looks available to Republicans who then waste effort and money on the state before the unions begin their GOTV drive. The state is acting much as it did in 2008.

The Mitchell poll is an outlier. Average PPP and Rasmussen and you get 10% -- which I am about to accept for now.

Doesn't PPP have a decent track record?  As in, actual numbers?  Both sides have to stop spinning everything so hardcore but all the Republicans who constantly troll here (bar a few that have been here a long time and make sense) all sound like 14 year old members of their junior high school Republican Students Club.   

Yes it does. It got the 2008 and 2010 electoral results very well.

Michigan -- fringe of contention for the GOP.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.046 seconds with 14 queries.