Rass Polls

[Free Bird]

Rass polls aren't the best, obviously, but is there any merit to them? Do they at least show GENERAL direction of a race without exact numbers, or are they just completely useless and out of nowhere?

[ElectionsGuy]

Ever since post-2012 they've been OK. They're not biased in one way as much as their all over the place. I'll go with option 2, as most of their polls are not garbage and most at least are close to other well-respected pollsters.

[IceSpear]

Ever since post-2012 they've been OK. They're not biased in one way as much as their all over the place. I'll go with option 2, as most of their polls are not garbage and most at least are close to other pollsters.

They don't seem particularly biased anymore (they frequently give both pro-Dem and pro-GOP outliers, whereas in 2010/2012 it was solely the latter), but whether they have become any more accurate remains to be seen.

[TDAS04]

Option 2.

[Person Man]

I'd imagine they get more accurate into October.

[Vega]

It shows the General Direction usually.

[badgate]

Option 2, same with PPP

[Panda Express]

I do think they're trying to redeem themselves after 2012 killed their reputation. Firing Scott Rasmussen was a good first step.

[IceSpear]

I do think they're trying to redeem themselves after 2012 killed their reputation. Firing Scott Rasmussen was a good first step.

lol, I almost forgot about that. Shouldn't they probably change their name then?

[Lambsbread]

Absolute complete trash.

[King]

They're always a cycle behind. They use a likely voter screen based on the previous election 2 years prior, which is idiotic. 2014 is not like 2012, 2012 was not like 2010, etc. The only time it worked was in 2004 to 2002.

[dmmidmi]

Option 2 gets closest to how I feel about their polls (mentally adjusting the results by three points in the direction of the Democrat).

This will always be hilarious, though: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2010/election_2010_senate_elections/hawaii/election_2010_hawaii_senate

[KCDem]

Junk.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

They routinely would take an (probably) accurate sample back in 2012 and "skew" it to reflect what they thought the makeup of the electorate would be.  This is hardly different than the spin on Fox News and an abysmal methodology. 

Utter trash and useless.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

We'll see... I am still highly skeptical of their methodology.

Ras still has a more significant house effect than most of the majors, bar Gal(o)lop.

[Smash255]

In the past it was option 3, with the firing of Scott and changing their methodology I think they are a bit closer to option 2, but still not sold on them.

[Lurker]

They were absurdly bad in both 2010 and 2012. The problem wasn't that they were that far-off (mostly they weren't), but that they were consistently biased in one direction.

Hopefully they've learnt something after two failures like that (not that they admitted either though).

[Oldiesfreak1854]

Option 2, although I quit trusting polls during the 2012 campaign, when they were literally all over the place.

[nolesfan2011]

Ever since post-2012 they've been OK. They're not biased in one way as much as their all over the place. I'll go with option 2, as most of their polls are not garbage and most at least are close to other well-respected pollsters.

I think their polls are fine, you just have to add between 1-4 points in favor of the Democrat in most every poll, and the numbers come out pretty much accurate, the do shade R but as long as you know that they aren't bad polls really

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

He gives a GOP House effect, and gives GOP a pump up in polls, like the controversal health care reform. But eventually his margin of error difference, may be syspect, but come back to polls.