PPP poll of Likely Voters in NC: Romney 48%, Obama 48%

[MorningInAmerica]

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2012/09/nc-enters-convention-tied-up.html

It's not up on their website, but they've tweeted it

Obama - 48% (-1)
Romney - 48% (+2)

The number in parentheses represents the net change since PPP's last poll in early August, when Obama led Romney 49-46%. Pollster ratings show that PPP has been a bit of an outlier in NC (they're the only pollster in the last 2 months to show Obama with a lead in NC). Remember the chart below does NOT include the recent Elon poll showing Romney leading 47-43% in NC. http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2012-north-carolina-president-romney-vs-obama

Kind of goes back to that whole house effect thing Nate Silver talks about: http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/22/calculating-house-effects-of-polling-firms/



Edited to add the party ID of this likely voter sample: 47%D, 34%R, 19%I, or D+13 (!).

[MorningInAmerica]

I wasn't implying it meant they were wrong. People are allowed to draw whatever conclusion they would like from PPP's consistent deviation from the average of polls.

[MorningInAmerica]

I agree that this poll isn't that big of a deviation. Their last 2 NC polls were though.

Edited to say don't forget that the pollster chart in my original post of NC polls does NOT include the Elon University poll out today showing Romney with a 4 pt NC lead, 47-43%.

[MorningInAmerica]

There's this tweet from PPP polls:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[MorningInAmerica]

Wasn't Mitten's favorables already positive in NC?

In their last NC poll from August 5th, it was 42/50%, so -8 pts. Guessing it will be somewhere around. I'm guessing it will be around 46/47%.

[MorningInAmerica]

It's up on their site now.

Romney's favs are up:
Favorable: 47 (+5)
Unfavorable: 48% (-2)

Obama's job rating:
Approve: 48% (-)
Disapprove: 50% (+1)

Party ID of this LIKELY VOTER poll is D+13. It was D+11 in the record breaking Democratic year of 2008, and was R+1 in 2004.

[MorningInAmerica]

I wasn't implying it meant they were wrong. People are allowed to draw whatever conclusion they would like from PPP's consistent deviation from the average of polls.

Since when does "average of polls" equal to "correct"?

Again, where did I say that? If you put quotes around a word, then you should be able to show me where I said that, right? In fact, I'm saying the exact OPPOSITE OF that. Read the red bolded part carefully.

I wasn't implying it meant they were wrong. People are allowed to draw whatever conclusion they would like from PPP's consistent deviation from the average of polls.

[MorningInAmerica]

I wasn't implying it meant they were wrong. People are allowed to draw whatever conclusion they would like from PPP's consistent deviation from the average of polls.

Since when does "average of polls" equal to "correct"?

Again, where did I say that? If you put quotes around a word, then you should be able to show me where I said that, right? In fact, I'm saying the exact OPPOSITE OF that. Read the red bolded part carefully.

I wasn't implying it meant they were wrong. People are allowed to draw whatever conclusion they would like from PPP's consistent deviation from the average of polls.

Then don't use the deviation from the average of polls to say that PPP leans Dem.

Say what? You do know that that's what the standard deviation from the average of polls shows...that PPP leans Dem compared to other pollsters. So why can't I say that?