Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 15, 2019, 03:04:46 am
News: 2019 Gubernatorial Predictions close today at noon

  Atlas Forum
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2014 Gubernatorial Election Polls
  2014 Senatorial Election Polls
  GA-Rasmussen: Perdue+5
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: GA-Rasmussen: Perdue+5  (Read 2110 times)
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 50,654
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: September 18, 2014, 10:14:38 am »

46-41 Perdue/Nunn

Link later.
Logged
Dave Leip
leip
Administrator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,361
United States


P P P
WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: September 18, 2014, 02:37:18 pm »

New Poll: Georgia Senator by Rasmussen on 2014-09-16

Summary: D: 41%, R: 46%, I: 4%, U: 9%

Poll Source URL: Full Poll Details
Logged
President Griffin
Adam Griffin
Atlas Politician
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 15,516
Greece


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: September 23, 2014, 02:37:58 am »

Weirdly enough, both of Rasmussen's most recent polls for Sen and Gov look accurate.
Logged
Del Tachi
Republican95
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6,363
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: September 23, 2014, 12:00:22 pm »

Weirdly enough, both of Rasmussen's most recent polls for Sen and Gov look accurate.

Eh, probably means that both GA-SEN and GA-GOV are at least Likely R by this point.  Sorry Buddy. 
Logged
Maxwell
mah519
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 28,532
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: September 23, 2014, 03:05:53 pm »

Excellent News!
Logged
The Other Castro
Castro2020
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 10,940
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: September 23, 2014, 05:10:38 pm »

Weirdly enough, both of Rasmussen's most recent polls for Sen and Gov look accurate.

Eh, probably means that both GA-SEN and GA-GOV are at least Likely R by this point.  Sorry Buddy. 

I'll give you Lean R for GA-SEN but Likely R for GA-GOV? Absolutely not
Logged
2,868,691
Harry
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 23,849
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: September 23, 2014, 05:19:00 pm »

She's within 5 now? #Comeback
Logged
Dixie Reborn
BeyondTruthAndIdeals
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 820
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: September 23, 2014, 05:24:50 pm »


Terri Lynn Land is within five in Michigan, but no one says that's a comeback.
Logged
GaussLaw
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,283
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: September 23, 2014, 08:20:04 pm »


Terri Lynn Land is within five in Michigan, but no one says that's a comeback.

Indeed.  A 2 point Ras lead for Peters is "Safe D" according to DrScholl.  I think Lean/Likely D is still fair, but Safe D is ridiculous when you have multiple polls within the MoE on that race.

Anyways, this is Lean/Likely R.  It's analogous to Michigan for the GOP.
Logged
Landslide Andy
IceSpear
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 31,731
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: September 23, 2014, 08:37:28 pm »


Terri Lynn Land is within five in Michigan, but no one says that's a comeback.

Indeed.  A 2 point Ras lead for Peters is "Safe D" according to DrScholl.  I think Lean/Likely D is still fair, but Safe D is ridiculous when you have multiple polls within the MoE on that race.

Anyways, this is Lean/Likely R.  It's analogous to Michigan for the GOP.

The fact that it's essential for Nunn to hit 50% while Land could squeak by with a plurality actually makes me think Michigan is slightly more likely to flip than Georgia. I don't see either happening, of course.
Logged
Impeachment Inquiry
DrScholl
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9,988
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: September 23, 2014, 09:43:06 pm »


Terri Lynn Land is within five in Michigan, but no one says that's a comeback.

Indeed.  A 2 point Ras lead for Peters is "Safe D" according to DrScholl.  I think Lean/Likely D is still fair, but Safe D is ridiculous when you have multiple polls within the MoE on that race.

Anyways, this is Lean/Likely R.  It's analogous to Michigan for the GOP.

Land is a horrible candidate and that really makes a big difference. Sure, you could claim that Land is really leading and Peters lead is only due to error, but that's not exactly how polling works. Fact of it is, Michigan was a climb to begin with, but with Land being a horrible candidate, it is quite Safe for Democrats.
Logged
GaussLaw
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,283
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: September 23, 2014, 09:53:04 pm »


Terri Lynn Land is within five in Michigan, but no one says that's a comeback.

Indeed.  A 2 point Ras lead for Peters is "Safe D" according to DrScholl.  I think Lean/Likely D is still fair, but Safe D is ridiculous when you have multiple polls within the MoE on that race.

Anyways, this is Lean/Likely R.  It's analogous to Michigan for the GOP.

Land is a horrible candidate and that really makes a big difference. Sure, you could claim that Land is really leading and Peters lead is only due to error, but that's not exactly how polling works. Fact of it is, Michigan was a climb to begin with, but with Land being a horrible candidate, it is quite Safe for Democrats.

Sigh......all I was saying is that Michigan is as safe for Democrats only as much as Georgia is safe for Republicans, which is lean/likely D/R, respectively.  Since when did I say that Peter would lose?
Logged
Impeachment Inquiry
DrScholl
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9,988
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: September 23, 2014, 09:55:12 pm »


Terri Lynn Land is within five in Michigan, but no one says that's a comeback.

Indeed.  A 2 point Ras lead for Peters is "Safe D" according to DrScholl.  I think Lean/Likely D is still fair, but Safe D is ridiculous when you have multiple polls within the MoE on that race.

Anyways, this is Lean/Likely R.  It's analogous to Michigan for the GOP.

Land is a horrible candidate and that really makes a big difference. Sure, you could claim that Land is really leading and Peters lead is only due to error, but that's not exactly how polling works. Fact of it is, Michigan was a climb to begin with, but with Land being a horrible candidate, it is quite Safe for Democrats.

Sigh......all I was saying is that Michigan is as safe for Democrats only as much as Georgia is safe for Republicans, which is lean/likely D/R, respectively.  Since when did I say that Peter would lose?

You mentioned the margin of error and all I was saying is that you can't really contribute error to Peters lead.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29,553


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: September 25, 2014, 04:54:26 am »


Terri Lynn Land is within five in Michigan, but no one says that's a comeback.

Indeed.  A 2 point Ras lead for Peters is "Safe D" according to DrScholl.  I think Lean/Likely D is still fair, but Safe D is ridiculous when you have multiple polls within the MoE on that race.

Anyways, this is Lean/Likely R.  It's analogous to Michigan for the GOP.

Land is a horrible candidate and that really makes a big difference. Sure, you could claim that Land is really leading and Peters lead is only due to error, but that's not exactly how polling works. Fact of it is, Michigan was a climb to begin with, but with Land being a horrible candidate, it is quite Safe for Democrats.

Sigh......all I was saying is that Michigan is as safe for Democrats only as much as Georgia is safe for Republicans, which is lean/likely D/R, respectively.  Since when did I say that Peter would lose?

You mentioned the margin of error and all I was saying is that you can't really contribute error to Peters lead.

Are you sure you know what a margin of error is in this context?
Logged
Impeachment Inquiry
DrScholl
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9,988
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: September 25, 2014, 09:16:59 am »
« Edited: September 25, 2014, 09:35:32 am by Invisible Obama »


Terri Lynn Land is within five in Michigan, but no one says that's a comeback.

Indeed.  A 2 point Ras lead for Peters is "Safe D" according to DrScholl.  I think Lean/Likely D is still fair, but Safe D is ridiculous when you have multiple polls within the MoE on that race.

Anyways, this is Lean/Likely R.  It's analogous to Michigan for the GOP.

Land is a horrible candidate and that really makes a big difference. Sure, you could claim that Land is really leading and Peters lead is only due to error, but that's not exactly how polling works. Fact of it is, Michigan was a climb to begin with, but with Land being a horrible candidate, it is quite Safe for Democrats.

Sigh......all I was saying is that Michigan is as safe for Democrats only as much as Georgia is safe for Republicans, which is lean/likely D/R, respectively.  Since when did I say that Peter would lose?

You mentioned the margin of error and all I was saying is that you can't really contribute error to Peters lead.

Are you sure you know what a margin of error is in this context?

I am well aware of what margin of error means, thank you very much. I simply don't think a race being "within the margin of error" means that it will necessarily go either way.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29,553


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: September 28, 2014, 05:39:22 pm »


Terri Lynn Land is within five in Michigan, but no one says that's a comeback.

Indeed.  A 2 point Ras lead for Peters is "Safe D" according to DrScholl.  I think Lean/Likely D is still fair, but Safe D is ridiculous when you have multiple polls within the MoE on that race.

Anyways, this is Lean/Likely R.  It's analogous to Michigan for the GOP.

Land is a horrible candidate and that really makes a big difference. Sure, you could claim that Land is really leading and Peters lead is only due to error, but that's not exactly how polling works. Fact of it is, Michigan was a climb to begin with, but with Land being a horrible candidate, it is quite Safe for Democrats.

Sigh......all I was saying is that Michigan is as safe for Democrats only as much as Georgia is safe for Republicans, which is lean/likely D/R, respectively.  Since when did I say that Peter would lose?

You mentioned the margin of error and all I was saying is that you can't really contribute error to Peters lead.

Are you sure you know what a margin of error is in this context?

I am well aware of what margin of error means, thank you very much. I simply don't think a race being "within the margin of error" means that it will necessarily go either way.

I'm still not convinced.
Logged
Impeachment Inquiry
DrScholl
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9,988
United States



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: September 28, 2014, 05:53:11 pm »


Terri Lynn Land is within five in Michigan, but no one says that's a comeback.

Indeed.  A 2 point Ras lead for Peters is "Safe D" according to DrScholl.  I think Lean/Likely D is still fair, but Safe D is ridiculous when you have multiple polls within the MoE on that race.

Anyways, this is Lean/Likely R.  It's analogous to Michigan for the GOP.

Land is a horrible candidate and that really makes a big difference. Sure, you could claim that Land is really leading and Peters lead is only due to error, but that's not exactly how polling works. Fact of it is, Michigan was a climb to begin with, but with Land being a horrible candidate, it is quite Safe for Democrats.

Sigh......all I was saying is that Michigan is as safe for Democrats only as much as Georgia is safe for Republicans, which is lean/likely D/R, respectively.  Since when did I say that Peter would lose?

You mentioned the margin of error and all I was saying is that you can't really contribute error to Peters lead.

Are you sure you know what a margin of error is in this context?

I am well aware of what margin of error means, thank you very much. I simply don't think a race being "within the margin of error" means that it will necessarily go either way.

I'm still not convinced.

Well, I certainly won't lose any sleep over whether or not you are convinced. I don't really care if you are, because it's not that serious to me.
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC