National Tracking Poll Thread

[J. J.]

I looked around and didnt find a number for today.

Nor I.

[big bad fab]

Can't someone make and update small graphs ?

[MorningInAmerica]

Still looking. Why in the WORLD would Ipsos stop the tracking poll on the day after the nominee's speech? Not saying they did stop it, but wondering why we got a new release yesterday at 4:30PM EST, and not today. There's bound to be a better explanation.

[Likely Voter]

The only thing I found was this
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/31/us-usa-campaign-poll-idUSBRE87U1CJ20120831

The no headline number but says Romney is ahead by one point.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Romney has improved his likability but still trails Obama in that and other metrics. He leads Obama in "would be an effective president"

[The Vorlon]

This poll actually has Mr. Romney up 44 / 42 among likely voters.

It's an internet based poll, so judge it as you will.

http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/ReutersIpsos083012.pdf

[Likely Voter]

it is on the Ipsos site now

Day 5


LV: Romney +1
Obama: 43 (+1)
Romney: 44 (-)  

RV: Obama +3
Obama: 43  (+1)
Romney: 40 (+1)


Monday:


LV: Obama +4
Obama: 46
Romney: 42

RV: Obama +6
Obama: 45
Romney: 39




article: http://www.ipsos-na.com/news-polls/pressrelease.aspx?id=5743

details: http://www.ipsos-na.com/download/pr.aspx?id=11913

attribute tracking charts: http://www.ipsos-na.com/download/pr.aspx?id=11914

[Tender Branson]

So, until now it looks like Romney got a 5-point bump @ Ipsos and basically no bump @ Rasmussen and Gallup. But we need to wait until Tuesday to get a clearer picture.

[J. J.]

Rasmussen: Romney +3
Obama     44 (u)
Romney     47 (+2)

It's probably the start (or peak) of a small bounce.  I expect it to be ephemeral.

[pepper11]

The Eastwood bump.

[Lief 🗽]

The height of Romney's convention bounce should be around now:

[Tender Branson]

Rasmussen made their sample quite Republican-leaning for August, showing a sudden jump in Republicans in the US to record levels:

August results: 37.6% GOP 33.3% DEM 29.2% IND / GOP+4.3

July results: 34.9% GOP 34.0% DEM 31.1% IND / GOP+0.9

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/partisan_trends

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/archive/mood_of_america_archive/partisan_trends/summary_of_party_affiliation

For their Daily Tracker, Rasmussen uses the average party ID for the past 3 months (currently GOP+2.2), which is among all ADULTS. Their tracker is of likely voters though, which is even more Republican.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

showing a sudden jump in Republicans in the US to record levels

That pretty much settles it: Rasmussen is completely delusional.

[Vosem]

showing a sudden jump in Republicans in the US to record levels

That pretty much settles it: Rasmussen is completely delusional.

Obviously there's no such thing as a convention bounce, and the significant advantages Republicans have this year don't exist.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

significant advantages Republicans have this year

Welcome to 2002, Vosem.

[MorningInAmerica]

So, until now it looks like Romney got a 5-point bump @ Ipsos and basically no bump @ Rasmussen and Gallup. But we need to wait until Tuesday to get a clearer picture.

That's just not accurate. On Monday, the day before the start of the convention, Obama led on 47-44%. Today, ROMNEY leads 47-44%. How is a net +6 pt swing NOT a bounce? How is Rasmussen NOT showing a bounce?

And for that very same matter, Ipsos is showing a net +5 point swing.

[Tender Branson]

So, until now it looks like Romney got a 5-point bump @ Ipsos and basically no bump @ Rasmussen and Gallup. But we need to wait until Tuesday to get a clearer picture.

That's just not accurate. On Monday, the day before the start of the convention, Obama led on 47-44%. Today, ROMNEY leads 47-44%. How is a net +6 pt swing NOT a bounce? How is Rasmussen NOT showing a bounce?

And for that very same matter, Ipsos is showing a net +5 point swing.

Read my post about how Rasmussen manipulated their August target sample to show a sudden "record Republican party ID", which in turn makes their target sample for their daily tracking poll more Republican too:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=140899.msg3407250#msg3407250

[Likely Voter]

Saturday:

Rasmussen: Romney +3  
Obama     44
Romney     47 (+2)

Gallup: Obama +1
Obama     47
Romney     46

1 week ago

Rasmussen: Obama +1  
Obama     46
Romney     45

Gallup: tied
Obama     46
Romney     46

[J. J.]

The height of Romney's convention bounce should be around now:

Mid week is more like it.  You still have samples from Wednesday afternnoon in the numbers.

[pbrower2a]

Good idea. Hopefully it won't disappear post-DNC.

President Obama is a spellbinding speaker in contrast to Romney. If people tune in at all to Obama -- then Romney is cooked like hamburger patties that fell onto the coals of the outdoor grill and have themselves become coals for all practical purposes.

The Romney bump is quite small -- probably reflecting that people did not tune in en masse to see what Republicans hope is the 45th President of the United States.  If people had been in such deep desire to change the President they would have been watching their only hope for such change.

[Lief 🗽]

Uh, guys, you know this is an internet poll right? I wouldn't pay it much attention...

[Eraserhead]

Gallup is still showing nothing. Too funny.

[King]

The height of Romney's convention bounce should be around now:

Mid week is more like it.  You still have samples from Wednesday afternnoon in the numbers.

This is a dangerous game you're playing J.J.  You could just accept a 1 point bounce for Romney at his weekend.  Saying this and you run the risk of the DNC going over well and Romney's midweek bounce being Obama +2.

[pepper11]

The height of Romney's convention bounce should be around now:

Mid week is more like it.  You still have samples from Wednesday afternnoon in the numbers.

This is a dangerous game you're playing J.J.  You could just accept a 1 point bounce for Romney at his weekend.  Saying this and you run the risk of the DNC going over well and Romney's midweek bounce being Obama +2.

Accept a 1 point bounce?

Gallup: -1
Ras: + 5
Ipsos: + 6

That would be a 3.3 point bounce.

[MorningInAmerica]

So, until now it looks like Romney got a 5-point bump @ Ipsos and basically no bump @ Rasmussen and Gallup. But we need to wait until Tuesday to get a clearer picture.

That's just not accurate. On Monday, the day before the start of the convention, Obama led on 47-44%. Today, ROMNEY leads 47-44%. How is a net +6 pt swing NOT a bounce? How is Rasmussen NOT showing a bounce?

And for that very same matter, Ipsos is showing a net +5 point swing.

Read my post about how Rasmussen manipulated their August target sample to show a sudden "record Republican party ID", which in turn makes their target sample for their daily tracking poll more Republican too:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=140899.msg3407250#msg3407250

Again, that "manipulating" statement is purely subjective, though stated by you as fact. Just because you don't like Rasmussen doesn't mean they're manipulating numbers. In fact, Nate Silver doesn't find them doing all that much "manipulating" at all. http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/22/calculating-house-effects-of-polling-firms/

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

So, until now it looks like Romney got a 5-point bump @ Ipsos and basically no bump @ Rasmussen and Gallup. But we need to wait until Tuesday to get a clearer picture.

That's just not accurate. On Monday, the day before the start of the convention, Obama led on 47-44%. Today, ROMNEY leads 47-44%. How is a net +6 pt swing NOT a bounce? How is Rasmussen NOT showing a bounce?

And for that very same matter, Ipsos is showing a net +5 point swing.

Read my post about how Rasmussen manipulated their August target sample to show a sudden "record Republican party ID", which in turn makes their target sample for their daily tracking poll more Republican too:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=140899.msg3407250#msg3407250

Again, that "manipulating" statement is purely subjective, though stated by you as fact. Just because you don't like Rasmussen doesn't mean they're manipulating numbers. In fact, Nate Silver doesn't find them doing all that much "manipulating" at all. http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/22/calculating-house-effects-of-polling-firms/

Actually, yes he does.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/rasmussen-polls-were-biased-and-inaccurate-quinnipiac-surveyusa-performed-strongly/