New Rasmussen Poll: Romney Leading in Iowa

[Politico]

For the fifth straight survey, the GOP field has a new frontrunner in Iowa.

On this first release video, Scott Rasmussen reveals Mitt Romney as the new frontrunner in the Iowa Caucus.

Source: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/iowa/iowa_romney_23_gingrich_20_paul_18

Looks like it might come down to Paul and Romney if Gingrich does not turn things around tonight...

[NHI]

Gingrich's boat is sinking. If Mitt can pull out a win here the nomination is his by NH.

[Torie]

Yes!  There is a God after all. I think I will go pray with BRTD now.  

[Niemeyerite]

That's because O'Donnell has endorsed him, probably hahahaha

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

>Rasmussen Poll

Really all you need to know. When at least one more credible pollster (or two semi-credible ones) also show Romney leading Iowa, you'll have me convinced.

[Torie]

>Rasmussen Poll

Really all you need to know. When at least one more credible pollster (or two semi-credible ones) also show Romney leading Iowa, you'll have me convinced.

Party pooper.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

What is Rasmussens status in the polling world? Because this sounds like something that Zogby would publish.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

What is Rasmussens status in the polling world? Because this sounds like something that Zogby would publish.

Fallen hero, basically.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Why is this thread still open?

[Jackson]

Ron Paul supporters are upset that no one other than their small section of the electorate supports their candidate.

[CaDan]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You are projecting. Rasmussen has an extremely good track record.

The fact that lefties here worship at the altar of Daily Kos/PPP doesn't make them right.

[Alcon]

Rasmussen has an extremely good track record.

Does he?  I thought he's had a fairly mediocre record for the last few cycles.

[Politico]

When I think of Rasmussen, I think of them nailing the general election in 2004 and showing the rise of John Kerry in the primaries before anybody else. But, admittedly, I have not followed them much as of late.

[Negusa Nagast 🚀]

When I think of Rasmussen, I think of them nailing the general election in 2004 and showing the rise of John Kerry in the primaries before anybody else. But, admittedly, I have not followed them much as of late.

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

They were horribly off in 2010. They were off in 2008 a bit as well.

[Oakvale]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You are projecting. Rasmussen has an extremely good track record.

Eh, no.  Rasmussen Polls Were Biased and Inaccurate.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm still eagerly awaiting you posting some evidence on your assertion that PPP's polling is biased in favour of Democrats, BTW.

[CaDan]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Wrong, they were THE MOST ACCURATE pollster in 2008.

http://blog.chron.com/txpotomac/2008/11/the-list-which-presidential-polls-were-most-accurate/

And the lying Weasel Silver has no credibility to judge anything. He's a sniveling little weasel, a pathetic propaganda artist, and lying piece of filth.

Contrary to what this pathetic little cretin says, Rasmussen did fairly well in 2010, not as good as they did in 2008, but still fairly well.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2010/election_night/election_2010_how_did_we_do

Moreover, PPP, the firm that people worship here, wasn't nearly the best pollster in 2010.

[CaDan]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I find it quite amusing that you think you have the right to demand ANYTHING of me.

LOL!

[Oakvale]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I find it quite amusing that you think you have the right to demand ANYTHING of me.

LOL!

Oh fuck off, if you're going to make baseless assertions and refuse to post any evidence there's no point in taking the swill you post seriously.

[Alcon]

I find it quite amusing that you think you have the right to demand ANYTHING of me.

LOL!

Is "eagerly awaiting" a demand of some sort...?

Also, I'm very intrigued by what evidence you have for this too...why not present it?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Wrong, they were THE MOST ACCURATE pollster in 2008.

http://blog.chron.com/txpotomac/2008/11/the-list-which-presidential-polls-were-most-accurate/

You do realize that using the last national poll (n=1) constitutes an incredibly poor analysis of a pollster's overall performance for a year in which they issue many more polls, local and national?  Surely, considering how much you're criticizing Nate Silver, you understand the statistical issues of using a sample of n=1?

And the lying Weasel Silver has no credibility to judge anything. He's a sniveling little weasel, a pathetic propaganda artist, and lying piece of filth.

Contrary to what this pathetic little cretin says,

Maybe you should spend more times on substantive criticism that inventing synonyms for "dude I don't like."

Rasmussen did fairly well in 2010, not as good as they did in 2008, but still fairly well.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2010/election_night/election_2010_how_did_we_do

Why are you accepting a totally different methodology for 2010 vs. 2008?  And you're trusting Rasmussen's own post hoc analysis of his performance...?

[Oakvale]

Also, as an aside, what did Nate Silver do to inspire such bile? It's not like he's some controversial partisan firebrand, he's a statistician.

[Lincoln Republican]

First, we take Iowa

Then we take DC

[Negusa Nagast 🚀]

Oh man. Because Silver disagrees with you and uses the real statistics he's "an evil librul spreadin propaganda."

Silver is objective and accurate in his projections, and is better than PPP and a hell of a lot better than Rasmussen (but then again, who isn't?)

[CaDan]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

BWWHWHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAH!

He's a pathetic sniveling piece of filth. An ignorant hack. A worthless piece of garbage.

He's also often wrong.

According to Weasel Silver, the redefinition of marriage was a done deal in Maine. He kept harping how the polls all showed the referendum was going to fail, and there was nothing anyone could do about it. Even on election night, he was crowing about how good it looked for the redefinition of marriage because of the numbers in Portland.

NOPE DIDN'T HAPPEN.

According to Weasel Silver, John Fleming was a goner to Paul Carmouche. Even on election night, he was blogging that it was all over and Carmouche was going to win.

NOPE DIDN'T HAPPEN.

[Landslide Lyndon]

He's a pathetic sniveling piece of filth. An ignorant hack. A worthless piece of garbage.

He's also often wrong.

OK, let's stop talking about yourself for a minute.

[M]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

BWWHWHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAH!

He's a pathetic sniveling piece of filth. An ignorant hack. A worthless piece of garbage.

He's also often wrong.

According to Weasel Silver, the redefinition of marriage was a done deal in Maine. He kept harping how the polls all showed the referendum was going to fail, and there was nothing anyone could do about it. Even on election night, he was crowing about how good it looked for the redefinition of marriage because of the numbers in Portland.

NOPE DIDN'T HAPPEN.

According to Weasel Silver, John Fleming was a goner to Paul Carmouche. Even on election night, he was blogging that it was all over and Carmouche was going to win.

NOPE DIDN'T HAPPEN.

Dude. Chill.