MI: Public Policy Polling: Obama up double-digits

[ajb]

Because somebody needs to say it:

Partisan breakdown in this poll: D 32 R 28 I 40

Partisan breakdown in MI in 2008, per the exit polls: D41 R 29 I 29

So by the reasoning of many on this board, this poll is likely to underestimate Obama's lead in Michigan.

[ajb]

So the people who were disputing the NBC/WSJ poll yesterday because it had a D+11 sample were wrong, because they weren't basing their concerns on factual registration counts (which, obviously, do not exist at the national level)?

[ajb]

So the people who were disputing the NBC/WSJ poll yesterday because it had a D+11 sample were wrong, because they weren't basing their concerns on factual registration counts (which, obviously, do not exist at the national level)?

Not wrong, no. They were merely looking at the registration counts of the states that do have it, and what historical partisan identification nationwide has been for decades.

Where are they getting their numbers of historical partisan identification nationwide, if not from things like exit polls?
And how are they estimating partisan id in states like Michigan that don't have partisan registration? Because it's pretty difficult to get an accurate sum when some of the numbers are complete unknowns.

[ajb]

So the people who were disputing the NBC/WSJ poll yesterday because it had a D+11 sample were wrong, because they weren't basing their concerns on factual registration counts (which, obviously, do not exist at the national level)?

Not wrong, no. They were merely looking at the registration counts of the states that do have it, and what historical partisan identification nationwide has been for decades.

Where are they getting their numbers of historical partisan identification nationwide, if not from things like exit polls?
And how are they estimating partisan id in states like Michigan that don't have partisan registration? Because it's pretty difficult to get an accurate sum when some of the numbers are complete unknowns.

I presume they use gallup surveys and other national surveys of the public that have historically been shown to be consistent and reliable, as opposed to, say, dubious exit polling that often times is proven wrong within minutes.



Whether you choose to believe PPP or 7 other pollsters is up to you. Certainly nobody can change your mind.

I'm just curious to know how Gallup's partisan ID numbers have been proven reliable, when there's nothing to confirm them against.

[ajb]

This may be high for now, but it is the likely result.

Rasmussen uses a "likely voter" screen which well fits an off-year or midterm election. Debbie Stabenow would be fighting for her political life if she faced a 2010-style electorate.  

Mitt Romney hasn't lived in Michigan since he was a young adult. He has had no public office while in Michigan.

Barack Obama is a good cultural match for Michigan, a state that usually looks available to Republicans who then waste effort and money on the state before the unions begin their GOTV drive. The state is acting much as it did in 2008.

The Mitchell poll is an outlier. Average PPP and Rasmussen and you get 10% -- which I am about to accept for now.

Doesn't PPP have a decent track record?  As in, actual numbers?  Both sides have to stop spinning everything so hardcore but all the Republicans who constantly troll here (bar a few that have been here a long time and make sense) all sound like 14 year old members of their junior high school Republican Students Club.   

Yes it does. It got the 2008 and 2010 electoral results very well.

Michigan -- fringe of contention for the GOP.

Better yet, average all the polls coming out of the state.

[ajb]

This polling firm has become laughable.

And your posts have always been laughable.

Well, keep chuckling and maybe click the ignore button, friend.

But you can't talk away the RCP poll entries. Look down the list. Every single PPP poll in Michigan has a number that is completely out-of-line when compared with other pollsters.

Do I think Romney is currently winning the state? Nope. But he sure ain't losing it by double-digits, either.

I'm curious: Do you legitimately believe that PPP is publishing more honest polls than Rasmussen at this point in time?

There's no particular reason to bring honesty into the discussion. Different pollsters make different assumptions about how to sample the public, and (partly, but not only, for that reason) they get different results.
For myself, I can live pretty happily with the idea that Obama is somewhere between one point behind Romney in Michigan, and fourteen points ahead of Romney. We'll never know the truth anyway, so why not just average them all and see what you end up with? Which, in this case, is an Obama lead of about 5-6 points in Michigan.