CO: Rasmussen: McCain leads by 1%
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 19, 2024, 06:16:26 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2008 Elections
  2008 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls
  CO: Rasmussen: McCain leads by 1%
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3]
Author Topic: CO: Rasmussen: McCain leads by 1%  (Read 5256 times)
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #50 on: August 14, 2008, 07:30:14 PM »

Scott Rasmussen needed to "adjust" his polls a little bit so he could make his weekly appearance on the Sean Hannity Show.
Rasmussen got every Senate race in 2006, they got every Governors race right exceopt MN. They also did very well in 2004.

A slight lead in a swing state in August means little or nothing. The next poll probably could have Obama up.

It would seem the fundies have finally awaken from their slumber. I've noticed McCain bumper stickers and whatnot all around recently. It was inevitable that the race would tighten here although I was hoping Colorado would remain "lean ABM" for just a bit longer. Now it looks like a true tossup. It is important to note that McCain has been outspending ABM here, at least on TV ads. Perhaps it's time to stop pissing away money in places like North Carolina and Georgia and start focusing on the vital states?

That may very well be the case. Indeed we may see future polls coming out with Schafer closing the gap significantly in the Senate race. That outcome may then hinge on the Presidential winner in CO. 

Logged
Josh/Devilman88
josh4bush
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,079
Political Matrix
E: 3.61, S: -1.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #51 on: August 14, 2008, 07:35:05 PM »

NC Yankee where in NC do you live?
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,956


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -3.13

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #52 on: August 14, 2008, 07:52:49 PM »

Well, this is good news for McCain. This is the second of three recent polls to have him ahead in Colorado. This state will be extremely close this fall. I had it as a lean Obama state, but I am moving back in the tossup category.
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,956


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -3.13

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #53 on: August 14, 2008, 07:57:01 PM »

NC Yankee where in NC do you live?

Yes, welcome to the NC delegation. I'll be heading back on Saturday for school.
Logged
WalterMitty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,572


Political Matrix
E: 1.68, S: -2.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #54 on: August 14, 2008, 08:27:54 PM »

And people say Rasmusssen is lean republican.. don't believe these polls.

we should *never* believe any poll that shows obama behind!
Logged
Fmr. Pres. Duke
AHDuke99
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,956


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -3.13

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #55 on: August 14, 2008, 08:49:43 PM »

And people say Rasmusssen is lean republican.. don't believe these polls.

we should *never* believe any poll that shows obama behind!

The only accurate polls are the ones that show NC close.
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,172
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #56 on: August 15, 2008, 01:30:49 AM »

Explanation by Tom Jensen from PPP:

"Three days ago we said Barack Obama was up four in Colorado. Today Rasmussen says John McCain is up a point. I don't know who's right but I can tell you one reason for the difference in our polls.

Rasmussen's numbers are based on 500 interviews conducted Wednesday night.

We did 500 interviews last Tuesday night in Colorado, and based on those McCain was up by a point as well. But we also called everyone in the sample who we didn't reach Tuesday night again Wednesday morning, Wednesday afternoon, Wednesday night, and Thursday afternoon. We got almost another 500 respondents and they went for Obama by a good amount, pushing him to a four point lead.

As far as I can tell Rasmussen just makes calls until they get 500 respondents. When we buy a sample we attempt to reach every number in it at least four times over a period of several days and go with whatever number of respondents we get based on that. And we almost always find that the further into conducting the poll we go, the better Obama does. I don't know if it's that his supporters are harder to get on the line or what, but we're finding that trend in nearly every state we poll.

I'm not saying that one way or another is better- Rasmussen has an outstanding track record- just pointing out that differences in the way we conduct our polls may help explain some of the differences in the numbers we produce. It's not as simple as just saying Rasmussen is Republican and PPP is Democratic."

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2008/08/ppp-rasmussen-and-colorado.html
Logged
Eraserhead
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,368
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #57 on: August 15, 2008, 01:43:07 AM »

And people say Rasmusssen is lean republican.. don't believe these polls.

we should *never* believe any poll that shows obama behind!

The only accurate polls are the ones that show NC close.

Let the trolling begin.
Logged
Rowan
RowanBrandon
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,692


Political Matrix
E: 1.94, S: 4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #58 on: August 15, 2008, 05:58:58 AM »

Explanation by Tom Jensen from PPP:

"Three days ago we said Barack Obama was up four in Colorado. Today Rasmussen says John McCain is up a point. I don't know who's right but I can tell you one reason for the difference in our polls.

Rasmussen's numbers are based on 500 interviews conducted Wednesday night.

We did 500 interviews last Tuesday night in Colorado, and based on those McCain was up by a point as well. But we also called everyone in the sample who we didn't reach Tuesday night again Wednesday morning, Wednesday afternoon, Wednesday night, and Thursday afternoon. We got almost another 500 respondents and they went for Obama by a good amount, pushing him to a four point lead.

As far as I can tell Rasmussen just makes calls until they get 500 respondents. When we buy a sample we attempt to reach every number in it at least four times over a period of several days and go with whatever number of respondents we get based on that. And we almost always find that the further into conducting the poll we go, the better Obama does. I don't know if it's that his supporters are harder to get on the line or what, but we're finding that trend in nearly every state we poll.

I'm not saying that one way or another is better- Rasmussen has an outstanding track record- just pointing out that differences in the way we conduct our polls may help explain some of the differences in the numbers we produce. It's not as simple as just saying Rasmussen is Republican and PPP is Democratic."

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2008/08/ppp-rasmussen-and-colorado.html

Or is it that PPP goes and tries to find Obama votes so that his numbers appear better.
Logged
Umengus
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,469
Belgium


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #59 on: August 15, 2008, 07:02:28 AM »

Gee, it's really going to suck if Obama can win only the states that Kerry or Gore won.  It will appear that there is NO PATH TO VICTORY!!

Victory for McCain rewards Bush and sends an appalling message that goverance with all the finesse of an idiologically-driven cackhanded incompetent is something that should not go unpunished

Bottom-line. McCain's part in enabling Bush is not something worthy of promotion

America may be a center-right nation, in that conservatives outnumber liberals 3 to 2, but that shouldn't entitle Republican to govern poorly without fear of electoral consequences. It does, however, give them a higher floor in the Electoral College Sad

Dave

Mc cain is not Bush. Why should he paid for the Bush "mistakes" ? Presidential election is a choice about the future, not about the  past.
Logged
Umengus
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,469
Belgium


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #60 on: August 15, 2008, 07:05:21 AM »

Rasmussen is not a republican pollster or a organization who has a gop bias. It's just the best pollster, at least for presidential election.
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,772


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #61 on: August 15, 2008, 08:47:44 AM »

Explanation by Tom Jensen from PPP:

"Three days ago we said Barack Obama was up four in Colorado. Today Rasmussen says John McCain is up a point. I don't know who's right but I can tell you one reason for the difference in our polls.

Rasmussen's numbers are based on 500 interviews conducted Wednesday night.

We did 500 interviews last Tuesday night in Colorado, and based on those McCain was up by a point as well. But we also called everyone in the sample who we didn't reach Tuesday night again Wednesday morning, Wednesday afternoon, Wednesday night, and Thursday afternoon. We got almost another 500 respondents and they went for Obama by a good amount, pushing him to a four point lead.

As far as I can tell Rasmussen just makes calls until they get 500 respondents. When we buy a sample we attempt to reach every number in it at least four times over a period of several days and go with whatever number of respondents we get based on that. And we almost always find that the further into conducting the poll we go, the better Obama does. I don't know if it's that his supporters are harder to get on the line or what, but we're finding that trend in nearly every state we poll.

I'm not saying that one way or another is better- Rasmussen has an outstanding track record- just pointing out that differences in the way we conduct our polls may help explain some of the differences in the numbers we produce. It's not as simple as just saying Rasmussen is Republican and PPP is Democratic."

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2008/08/ppp-rasmussen-and-colorado.html

Or is it that PPP goes and tries to find Obama votes so that his numbers appear better.

It seems that is what he is saying, if he's saying they have a bigger sample and they think there are people who for some non-random reason are less likely to be receivable at night time, or just less likely to pick up the phone, but will be there during the day or will pick up if you attempt many times.
Logged
Democratic Hawk
LucysBeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,703
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: 2.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #62 on: August 15, 2008, 09:47:04 AM »

Gee, it's really going to suck if Obama can win only the states that Kerry or Gore won.  It will appear that there is NO PATH TO VICTORY!!

Victory for McCain rewards Bush and sends an appalling message that goverance with all the finesse of an idiologically-driven cackhanded incompetent is something that should not go unpunished

Bottom-line. McCain's part in enabling Bush is not something worthy of promotion

America may be a center-right nation, in that conservatives outnumber liberals 3 to 2, but that shouldn't entitle Republican to govern poorly without fear of electoral consequences. It does, however, give them a higher floor in the Electoral College Sad

Dave

Mc cain is not Bush. Why should he paid for the Bush "mistakes" ? Presidential election is a choice about the future, not about the  past.

I've already answered that Wink

Bottom-line. McCain's part in enabling Bush is not something worthy of promotion

This election should be about the future vs the past eight years of Republican governance. I support Obama for two reasons:

1. He's the candidate closest to my own Christian Smiley Democratic convictions on economic and quality of life issues

2. He's my candidate to restore American prestige abroad and reassert her moral authority

Back in January, when I bestowed Favored Republican status on John McCain, the very thought of me becoming one of his most strident critics on the Forum couldn't have been further from my mind. He only has himself to blame; and it is a consequence of his very own actions, which has compelled me to hold no candle for the John McCain of 2008

Dave
Logged
ChrisFromNJ
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,742


Political Matrix
E: -5.35, S: -8.61

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #63 on: August 15, 2008, 09:56:16 AM »

OMG OBAMA IS LOSING AN AUGUST POLL BY WITHIN THE MARGIN OF ERROR THE ELECTION IS OVER.
Logged
Sam Spade
SamSpade
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #64 on: August 15, 2008, 10:36:18 AM »

POLLSTER FIGHT!

(it's kinda like a cripple fight, but less amusing)

A general point:

The main problem with PPP that I have as an issue is that they have worked for Democrats in the past in North Carolina and were considered solely a Democratic firm before their first perusals into "independent" polling in 2006, which solely consisted of polling NC-11 and maybe something else I missed.

Therefore, we have no track record for them and no way to judge what their biases or non-biases are.

Considering the situation to be the opposite to Strategic Vision in 2004.  There we had a firm that was considered solely a Republican firm before their first perusals into "independent" polling. 

What did that election show us?  Their samples leaned too Republican, except in their home base area of Florida/Georgia.  But they were no less wrong to the Republican side than R2000 was to the Democratic side, which makes sense considering who runs R2000.

But should we consider them an "independent" pollster now?  Yes, unless the sample says otherwise.  Just merely keep in mind that their samples typically (but not always) lean too Republican with the exceptions as above (they were also ok there in 2006 as well).

As for Rasmussen, he may be a Republican, but there's no history that he's ever done any polling for any Republican ever.  The only polling he did for any politician were a couple of polls for Badnarik in 2004, amusingly.

Rasmussen obviously gets lambasted for his 2000 national result, as well he should.  But the interesting thing about that election was that the state polls he ran were pretty damn accurate.  And in 2004 and 2006, his state polls were pretty much on the money - I think only M-D performed better and it was close.

Now, I have issues with his method, especially in the summer.  One day polling in the summer is especially problematic for, oddly enough, the reasons that PPP mentions.  Theoretically, the method, though, should cause the same problems that most summer polling creates - jumping around and a Democratic lean.

One last thing - additional callbacks of people don't necessarily make the polls more accurate.  Look at what M-D does.
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #65 on: August 15, 2008, 11:11:41 AM »

So the map looks sort of like this at the moment?:



Obama 264
McCain  245
Tossup   29

Or more like this?:



McCain 265
Obama 264
Tossup 9
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #66 on: August 15, 2008, 11:23:00 AM »

Looks like it will either all come down to Colorado or Ohio.
Logged
Democratic Hawk
LucysBeau
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,703
United Kingdom


Political Matrix
E: -2.58, S: 2.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #67 on: August 15, 2008, 11:31:04 AM »

Looks like it will either all come down to Colorado or Ohio.

As of today, it would
Logged
emailking
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,842
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #68 on: August 15, 2008, 11:41:02 AM »

Explanation by Tom Jensen from PPP:

"Three days ago we said Barack Obama was up four in Colorado. Today Rasmussen says John McCain is up a point. I don't know who's right but I can tell you one reason for the difference in our polls.

Rasmussen's numbers are based on 500 interviews conducted Wednesday night.

We did 500 interviews last Tuesday night in Colorado, and based on those McCain was up by a point as well. But we also called everyone in the sample who we didn't reach Tuesday night again Wednesday morning, Wednesday afternoon, Wednesday night, and Thursday afternoon. We got almost another 500 respondents and they went for Obama by a good amount, pushing him to a four point lead.

As far as I can tell Rasmussen just makes calls until they get 500 respondents. When we buy a sample we attempt to reach every number in it at least four times over a period of several days and go with whatever number of respondents we get based on that. And we almost always find that the further into conducting the poll we go, the better Obama does. I don't know if it's that his supporters are harder to get on the line or what, but we're finding that trend in nearly every state we poll.

I'm not saying that one way or another is better- Rasmussen has an outstanding track record- just pointing out that differences in the way we conduct our polls may help explain some of the differences in the numbers we produce. It's not as simple as just saying Rasmussen is Republican and PPP is Democratic."

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2008/08/ppp-rasmussen-and-colorado.html

Or is it that PPP goes and tries to find Obama votes so that his numbers appear better.

It seems that is what he is saying, if he's saying they have a bigger sample and they think there are people who for some non-random reason are less likely to be receivable at night time, or just less likely to pick up the phone, but will be there during the day or will pick up if you attempt many times.

That's not at all what he's saying. Read it again. They did a sample size of about 1000 (pre-selected) and got 500 respondents on their first night of calling. This crew was for McCain by one point. They then continued to try and reach the other 500 in the pre-selected sample. When they did, they found Obama was up over McCain in the original, pre-selected sample of 1000. They did not go looking for "Obama" votes to make his numbers appear better. The question here is which sampling strategy better represents the population (and produces more turthful responses) of actual voters on November 4th.
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,772


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #69 on: August 15, 2008, 11:45:19 AM »
« Edited: August 15, 2008, 11:47:51 AM by Beet »

Explanation by Tom Jensen from PPP:

"Three days ago we said Barack Obama was up four in Colorado. Today Rasmussen says John McCain is up a point. I don't know who's right but I can tell you one reason for the difference in our polls.

Rasmussen's numbers are based on 500 interviews conducted Wednesday night.

We did 500 interviews last Tuesday night in Colorado, and based on those McCain was up by a point as well. But we also called everyone in the sample who we didn't reach Tuesday night again Wednesday morning, Wednesday afternoon, Wednesday night, and Thursday afternoon. We got almost another 500 respondents and they went for Obama by a good amount, pushing him to a four point lead.

As far as I can tell Rasmussen just makes calls until they get 500 respondents. When we buy a sample we attempt to reach every number in it at least four times over a period of several days and go with whatever number of respondents we get based on that. And we almost always find that the further into conducting the poll we go, the better Obama does. I don't know if it's that his supporters are harder to get on the line or what, but we're finding that trend in nearly every state we poll.

I'm not saying that one way or another is better- Rasmussen has an outstanding track record- just pointing out that differences in the way we conduct our polls may help explain some of the differences in the numbers we produce. It's not as simple as just saying Rasmussen is Republican and PPP is Democratic."

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2008/08/ppp-rasmussen-and-colorado.html

Or is it that PPP goes and tries to find Obama votes so that his numbers appear better.

It seems that is what he is saying, if he's saying they have a bigger sample and they think there are people who for some non-random reason are less likely to be receivable at night time, or just less likely to pick up the phone, but will be there during the day or will pick up if you attempt many times.

That's not at all what he's saying. Read it again. They did a sample size of about 1000 (pre-selected) and got 500 respondents on their first night of calling. This crew was for McCain by one point. They then continued to try and reach the other 500 in the pre-selected sample. When they did, they found Obama was up over McCain in the original, pre-selected sample of 1000. They did not go looking for "Obama" votes to make his numbers appear better. The question here is which sampling strategy better represents the population (and produces more turthful responses) of actual voters on November 4th.

I was responding to the bold text, not Rowan's comment. Sorry for the confusion.

And yes, the reason why the PPP strategy might better represent the population is that there are people who for some non-random reason are less likely to be receivable at night time, or just less likely to pick up the phone, but will be there during the day or will pick up if you attempt many times. I was not arguing that they went looking for Obama votes. It could simply be that the Obama supporters for some reason are less likely to pick up the phone at night. Getting a truthful answer is a different question. You could have a very good, representative sample but be getting bad answers from them. One thing the robocall method of interviewing is going to filter out (for the most part) is respondent bias based on social embarrassment or the demographic of the caller.
Logged
emailking
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,842
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #70 on: August 15, 2008, 01:08:46 PM »

Oh, ok. Sorry.
Logged
Flying Dog
Jtfdem
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,404
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #71 on: August 15, 2008, 01:30:45 PM »

How.... infuriating.
Logged
Small Business Owner of Any Repute
Mr. Moderate
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,431
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #72 on: August 15, 2008, 01:51:08 PM »

Bottom-line. McCain's part in enabling Bush is not something worthy of promotion

Interpretation: You are totally not cool with everything McCain did from 2001–2007.

Back in January, when I bestowed Favored Republican status on John McCain, the very thought of me becoming one of his most strident critics on the Forum couldn't have been further from my mind. He only has himself to blame; and it is a consequence of his very own actions, which has compelled me to hold no candle for the John McCain of 2008

Interpretation: You are totally cool with everything McCain did from 2001–2007, you just don't like the election posturing that any Republican candidate would, of course, have to do.

This sorta reminds me how every single Democrat from Illinois I knew was so happily behind Topinka for Governor around 2004, and then instantly switched to the painfully unpopular incumbent once the election campaign actually started.

Partisans never seem to be able to help themselves.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]  
« 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 0.064 seconds with 15 queries.