Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 24, 2019, 08:09:53 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  Election Archive
| |-+  Election Archive
| | |-+  All Archived Boards
| | | |-+  2014 Gubernatorial Election Polls
| | | | |-+  2014 Senatorial Election Polls
| | | | | |-+  KS-Rassy: Orman+12
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] Print
Poll
Question: Should this poll be entered to the FORUM poll database ? (please read thread)
Yes
No
Show Pie Chart

Author Topic: KS-Rassy: Orman+12  (Read 3223 times)
Secret Cavern Survivor
Antonio V
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 49,972
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #50 on: October 12, 2014, 10:45:47 am »

The poll had Obama's approval at 45%. They probably retracted it because it is clearly a bad sample.

Retracting polls because you don't like their results is just plain wrong. There is no excuse.

Facts didn't like the results either: there's no way Obama is at 45% approval in Kansas. He's lucky to have that rating in PA right now!

That's not how polling works.

Ah, I understand. But disputing other findings in polls is still enough reason to throw them out, right?

No, a poll should never been thrown out because of what its results show. It can be thrown out because it uses a crappy methodology or because it was done on behalf of a partisan cause, but disregarding a polls because its results "don't look right" is inherently stupid.

I think we are misunderstanding each other, my friend. I'm not saying the President's (inaccurate) approval rating per this poll is a reason to exclude it from the database but I do think it's further proof that the poll is junk. 

I'm not claiming the opposite. Actually, I doubt anyone on the forum actually thinks Orman is leading by 12. Still, just like we included those crappy polls that showed Brown ahead in NH, we should include this one.
Logged
SUSAN CRUSHBONE
a Person
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9,810
Antarctica


View Profile WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #51 on: October 12, 2014, 10:57:01 am »

if it was retracted it shouldn't be entered, yeah
Logged
Lief 🐋
Lief
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 40,644
Dominica


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #52 on: October 12, 2014, 10:58:21 am »

Considering that it hasn't been entered into RCP or Huffintgon Post Pollster, no.
Logged
RI
realisticidealist
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11,720
Vatican City State


Political Matrix
E: -0.39, S: 4.52

View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #53 on: October 12, 2014, 11:33:04 am »

This poll shouldn't be entered into the database, as Tmth said, it's just a really bad sample.

That's hardly stopped us before. If we excluded every poll with a "bad sample", we'd have half the polls in the database that we do now.

Considering that it hasn't been entered into RCP or Huffintgon Post Pollster, no.

We include lots of polls not included by them.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2014, 12:04:25 pm by realisticidealist »Logged
Invisible Obama
DrScholl
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 8,919
United States



View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #54 on: October 12, 2014, 11:37:57 am »

Are we really at the point where people want polls they don't like kept out of the database? The only thing that should be excluded is internals. Not every single poll is accurate, but they still get entered regardless.
Logged
IceSpear
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30,708
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.65, S: -5.70

P P

View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #55 on: October 12, 2014, 01:09:19 pm »

The poll is clearly an outlier, but that has never been a valid reason for excluding one from the database. Ras published it, so had somebody entered it quickly, would we be pulling it now just because Ras pulled it later? Probably not.
Logged
cinyc
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 11,624


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #56 on: October 12, 2014, 09:56:30 pm »

Are we really at the point where people want polls they don't like kept out of the database? The only thing that should be excluded is internals. Not every single poll is accurate, but they still get entered regardless.

Because the pollster recalled the poll.  This would be like the Gravis poll that was recalled and replaced. The pulled Gravis poll would have to be removed from the database and replaced with the new one as Gravis doesn't stand behind the original poll. There is no October Rassmussen Kansas poll to put into the database at this moment.  Rasmussen recalled it.
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 48,171
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -6.09

P P
View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #57 on: October 13, 2014, 10:58:16 am »

New Rasmussen KS poll out later today.

(Will Rassy pull a Gravis and show Roberts ahead, because they didn't like the original results ?)
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 48,171
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -6.09

P P
View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #58 on: October 13, 2014, 12:33:35 pm »

New Rasmussen KS poll out later today.

(Will Rassy pull a Gravis and show Roberts ahead, because they didn't like the original results ?)

Weird.

I got the daily Rasmussen email and it says that they release the new KS poll at 1pm Eastern.

It's already 1:30 pm and it's still not out.

Are the results not "right" again ?
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 48,171
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -7.10, S: -6.09

P P
View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #59 on: October 13, 2014, 12:39:28 pm »

Img


They released the Columbus Day thing already, so where's KS ... ?
Logged
IceSpear
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30,708
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.65, S: -5.70

P P

View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #60 on: October 13, 2014, 03:30:13 pm »

Maybe Scott Rasmussen sabotaged Rasmussen's polling data.
Logged
Watermelon sin Jamón
Zanas46
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 2,879
France


View Profile WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #61 on: October 14, 2014, 05:57:47 am »

Outlying polls to each side of the race is how you get an average of polls that show you where the race is going. The more polls you have, provided they are done with a valid methodology and not to serve a partisan purpose, the more sense an average of polls make and the more chance you have that your average can predict the outcome more or less correctly.

I'm with Antonio on this.
Logged
Recalcuate
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 444


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #62 on: October 14, 2014, 09:21:47 am »

Outlying polls to each side of the race is how you get an average of polls that show you where the race is going. The more polls you have, provided they are done with a valid methodology and not to serve a partisan purpose, the more sense an average of polls make and the more chance you have that your average can predict the outcome more or less correctly.

I'm with Antonio on this.

It's only an outlying poll if the poll was publicly released. Obviously, this one wasn't ready for prime time. They held short of a wider release and retracted it. It amazes me that people want to include bad information solely because it looks good for one candidate over another.

Bad information is bad information. It should not be included if you are intellectually honest. Something was wrong as a matter of science or Rasmussen would have released the poll to not just subscribers.
Logged
IceSpear
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30,708
United States


Political Matrix
E: -4.65, S: -5.70

P P

View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #63 on: October 14, 2014, 04:45:35 pm »

Outlying polls to each side of the race is how you get an average of polls that show you where the race is going. The more polls you have, provided they are done with a valid methodology and not to serve a partisan purpose, the more sense an average of polls make and the more chance you have that your average can predict the outcome more or less correctly.

I'm with Antonio on this.

It's only an outlying poll if the poll was publicly released. Obviously, this one wasn't ready for prime time. They held short of a wider release and retracted it. It amazes me that people want to include bad information solely because it looks good for one candidate over another.

Bad information is bad information. It should not be included if you are intellectually honest. Something was wrong as a matter of science or Rasmussen would have released the poll to not just subscribers.

There's plenty of good information that never gets released and bad information that does get released, so I'm not sure what your point is here. You have no proof that Ras didn't release it because it was "bad science", it's probable they just realized afterward that it was far off the consensus and didn't want to embarrass themselves by releasing an obvious outlier.
Logged
Recalcuate
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 444


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #64 on: October 14, 2014, 06:18:56 pm »

Outlying polls to each side of the race is how you get an average of polls that show you where the race is going. The more polls you have, provided they are done with a valid methodology and not to serve a partisan purpose, the more sense an average of polls make and the more chance you have that your average can predict the outcome more or less correctly.

I'm with Antonio on this.

It's only an outlying poll if the poll was publicly released. Obviously, this one wasn't ready for prime time. They held short of a wider release and retracted it. It amazes me that people want to include bad information solely because it looks good for one candidate over another.

Bad information is bad information. It should not be included if you are intellectually honest. Something was wrong as a matter of science or Rasmussen would have released the poll to not just subscribers.

There's plenty of good information that never gets released and bad information that does get released, so I'm not sure what your point is here. You have no proof that Ras didn't release it because it was "bad science", it's probable they just realized afterward that it was far off the consensus and didn't want to embarrass themselves by releasing an obvious outlier.

Give me a break. Everyone else has this race within a few percentage points either way. This particular poll which was never publicly released, has this race in a different universe. There's no logical explanation other than the poll was not released because it was a bad poll.
Logged
KCDem
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,932


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #65 on: October 14, 2014, 06:19:54 pm »

Outlying polls to each side of the race is how you get an average of polls that show you where the race is going. The more polls you have, provided they are done with a valid methodology and not to serve a partisan purpose, the more sense an average of polls make and the more chance you have that your average can predict the outcome more or less correctly.

I'm with Antonio on this.

It's only an outlying poll if the poll was publicly released. Obviously, this one wasn't ready for prime time. They held short of a wider release and retracted it. It amazes me that people want to include bad information solely because it looks good for one candidate over another.

Bad information is bad information. It should not be included if you are intellectually honest. Something was wrong as a matter of science or Rasmussen would have released the poll to not just subscribers.

There's plenty of good information that never gets released and bad information that does get released, so I'm not sure what your point is here. You have no proof that Ras didn't release it because it was "bad science", it's probable they just realized afterward that it was far off the consensus and didn't want to embarrass themselves by releasing an obvious outlier.

Give me a break. Everyone else has this race within a few percentage points either way. This particular poll which was never publicly released, has this race in a different universe. There's no logical explanation other than the poll was not released because it was a bad poll.

It wasn't released because Rasmussen's Republican subscriber base revolted.
Logged
Keyboard Jacobinism
Kalwejt
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 52,004


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #66 on: October 17, 2014, 03:42:45 am »

Rest In Pieces, Senator Roberts.
Logged
Recalcuate
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 444


View Profile Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #67 on: October 17, 2014, 08:53:33 am »

Outlying polls to each side of the race is how you get an average of polls that show you where the race is going. The more polls you have, provided they are done with a valid methodology and not to serve a partisan purpose, the more sense an average of polls make and the more chance you have that your average can predict the outcome more or less correctly.

I'm with Antonio on this.

It's only an outlying poll if the poll was publicly released. Obviously, this one wasn't ready for prime time. They held short of a wider release and retracted it. It amazes me that people want to include bad information solely because it looks good for one candidate over another.

Bad information is bad information. It should not be included if you are intellectually honest. Something was wrong as a matter of science or Rasmussen would have released the poll to not just subscribers.

There's plenty of good information that never gets released and bad information that does get released, so I'm not sure what your point is here. You have no proof that Ras didn't release it because it was "bad science", it's probable they just realized afterward that it was far off the consensus and didn't want to embarrass themselves by releasing an obvious outlier.

Give me a break. Everyone else has this race within a few percentage points either way. This particular poll which was never publicly released, has this race in a different universe. There's no logical explanation other than the poll was not released because it was a bad poll.

It wasn't released because Rasmussen's Republican subscriber base revolted.

They'd be revolting en masse this cycle then because, if anything, Rasmussen-less Rasmussen has been slightly more favorable to the Democrats than other pollsters this cycle.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

Terms of Service

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines