Gravis: Virginia tied

[evan83]

O 48
R 48

[Gass3268]

Not a good poll for Romney considering their bias

[Brittain33]

Not a good poll for Romney considering their bias

Gravis is all over the map. They showed Obama +4 in Iowa. They're not (R)asmussen.

[Lief 🗽]

Their last poll had Romney up by 5%.

[Maxwell]

Source may be bad, but the numbers sound about right.

[Lief 🗽]

Washington Post comes out with a Virginia poll later tonight.

[Ty440]

I have been telling you guys this is not the same Virginia Bush won in 2004, demographics has changed dramatically since then.

It's well into it's transformation of becoming a Mid-Atlantic state like it's sister state Maryland.

[Yank2133]

Bad poll for Romney.

A tie in Gravis is basically a 2-3 point lead for Obama due to their house effect.

[Eraserhead]

Don't worry, the hurricane will save Romney! The final Gravis Poll will have Romney up by 7%.

[Skill and Chance]

Yes and no.  Gravis has been on the Obama-side of things in FL, IA and CO recently.  Their NV poll was favorable to Romney, however.  There is growing evidence of minor Obama movement in the past week, though.

[ajb]

Bad poll for Romney.

A tie in Gravis is basically a 2-3 point lead for Obama due to their house effect.

I'd like to be able to say this, but I think they're more incompetent than R-leaning, though of course there's no reason they can't be both.

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

Washington Post comes out with a Virginia poll later tonight.

I have a feeling its not gonna be very favorable to obama. I expect it to be between Romney +3 to Obama +2. A far cry from when he lead by between 5-8 points in September during his Post-Convention/47% Highs.

[Yank2133]

Bad poll for Romney.

A tie in Gravis is basically a 2-3 point lead for Obama due to their house effect.

I'd like to be able to say this, but I think they're more incompetent than R-leaning, though of course there's no reason they can't be both.

Perhaps.

I am just going by Silver's assessment on Gravis.

[Likely Voter]

While I think most polls should factor into calculations, not Gravis. Just look at their website. They are a joke.

[Ty440]

Virginia's PVI has been swinging towards the dems since 2000, Kerry did better than Gore, Obama swung it almost  to R+0.

In a 49.5%-49.5% 1% other race I'm curious to see where Virginia  ends up.

[Eraserhead]

Washington Post comes out with a Virginia poll later tonight.

I have a feeling its not gonna be very favorable to obama. I expect it to be between Romney +3 to Obama +2. A far cry from when he lead by between 5-8 points in September during his Post-Convention/47% Highs.

Just a guess or have you heard something? I'd be very happy with Obama + anything personally.

[ajb]

Bad poll for Romney.

A tie in Gravis is basically a 2-3 point lead for Obama due to their house effect.

I'd like to be able to say this, but I think they're more incompetent than R-leaning, though of course there's no reason they can't be both.

Perhaps.

I am just going by Silver's assessment on Gravis.

Oh, I do think on average they lean R. But where Rasmussen leans R because of methodological choices he's made, and is thus pretty reliably a little bit to the right on almost every poll he does, Gravis just seems to be bad at their job. Their average poll is a little to the right of the polling average, but sometimes they're drastically to the right, like when they had Smith beating Casey by 19 points in PA-Sen, and sometimes they're just a little D-friendly compared to the average, as with that Iowa poll with Obama up 4 (a couple of points better than the polling average).
If the only information I had about a race was that Gravis showed it tied, I'd assume that Obama was ahead by a couple of points -- unless he was ahead by 20, or behind by 4.

[Skill and Chance]

If VA ends up being a <5,000 vote affair, it's important to note that Romney will be leading substantially on election night until the bitter end. Rural VA reports much faster than NOVA. 

[Umengus]

If VA ends up being a <5,000 vote affair, it's important to note that Romney will be leading substantially on election night until the bitter end. Rural VA reports much faster than NOVA. 

like in 2006. Nightmare.

[Warren 4 Secretary of Everything]

Washington Post comes out with a Virginia poll later tonight.

I have a feeling its not gonna be very favorable to obama. I expect it to be between Romney +3 to Obama +2. A far cry from when he lead by between 5-8 points in September during his Post-Convention/47% Highs.

Just a guess or have you heard something? I'd be very happy with Obama + anything personally.

Just a guess. But Virginia's been scaring me as of late. A month or so ago, Virginia was Obama's firewall, not Ohio. Now it seems Ohio is D+4 and Virginia is tracking the national average.

[Ljube]

Not a good poll for Romney considering their bias

They have no bias. They are just bad.

[philly09]

Adjust for GOP house effect, Obama leads by 50 or 51 which, if true, would line with the recent PPP and WaPo polls.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

So it's okay on this forum for Democrats of all stripes to "adjust for bias" here and "adjust for bias" there, but the second any Republican brings up the internal party IDs, we're troll idiots. Got it.

[Seriously?]

So it's okay on this forum for Democrats of all stripes to "adjust for bias" here and "adjust for bias" there, but the second any Republican brings up the internal party IDs, we're troll idiots. Got it.

You do know, it's going to be a D+8 election again. Even if the projection data from "flawed" Rasmussen and Gallup claim that you're more likely looking at an R+1 election.

BUT the story goes that a reputable pollster will adjust for everything but party ID because voters self-identify. You agree, or you are a troll.

Thus, there's only "house effect" to folks like Rasmussen and cheers from the other side of the aisle on a poll from the "reputable" Washington Post.

[Orion0]

You do know, it's going to be a D+8 election again.

No.

Won't be r+1, but I also think its very doubtful we'll see anything over d+4 or 5.

Look, clearly there's hang ups from both sides on the validity of polling, granted on the right it largely revolves around party id, and on the left its centered on cellphones and Spanish-language options, but you either have to accept the fact that polling has built in biases and should question and scrutinize them all, or you reject them all. None of this "well these 3 pollsters are great but the rest suck" nonsense.