Poll Farce: Pew Oversamples Democrats

Max E. · Aug 4, 2012

Quote from futurecurrents:

So what could be happening is that people are reassessing what being Republican and Democrat really means. They see an out-of-touch rich guy who wants tax breaks for the wealthy, more defense spending, and cuts to social programs. They see a guy who's gamed the system for all it's worth with off-shore tax havens etc. They see a guy who bullied a gay person. They are finally starting to realize that this is the essence of Republicanism today, and they don't like it.
More...

LOL, I love how you play your occupy wallstreet talking points off as if they are the norm and you really have your finger on the pulse.....

You always question right wingers intelligence, yet you are either too stupid, or too biased to figure out the very poll you are posting about. Romney has a lead in this poll with independents by 2 points, and he is only losing by 10 points on a 19 point skew, which means that even a shit load of democrats like Romney more than obama. So if you were to ask the average guy on the street, who was not biased by his political beliefs odds are good that they would hate Obama more.....

The only people who seem to share your view are other far left democrats, and then the rest of your buddies down at MSNBC.

Max E. · Aug 4, 2012

Quote from AK Forty Seven:

You interpret polls the way you like,I'll interpret polls the way I like.Obama is winning the 2012 election
More...

I have never denied that Obama is winning

AK Forty Seven · Aug 4, 2012

Quote from futurecurrents:

I now see that Pew has written an article addressing this very issue...an excerpt.......

In every campaign cycle, pollwatchers pay close attention to the details of every election survey. And well they should. But focusing on the partisan balance of surveys is, in almost every circumstance, the wrong place to look.

In every presidential election since 1996, our final pre-election surveys have aligned with the actual vote outcome, because we measured rising Democratic or Republican fortunes in each year.

In short, because party identification is so tightly intertwined with candidate preferences, any effort to constrain or affix the partisan balance of a survey would certainly smooth out any peaks and valleys in our survey trends, but would also lead us to miss more fundamental changes in the electorate that may be occurring. In effect, standardizing, smoothing, or otherwise tinkering with the balance of party identification in a survey is tantamount to saying we know how well each candidate is doing before the survey is conducted.

So what could be happening is that people are reassessing what being Republican and Democrat really means. They see an out-of-touch rich guy who wants tax breaks for the wealthy, more defense spending, and cuts to social programs. They see a guy who's gamed the system for all it's worth with off-shore tax havens etc. They see a guy who bullied a gay person. They are finally starting to realize that this is the essence of Republicanism today, and they don't like it.
More...

+ 1

They could have just said check out our record and to Rasmussen fanboys compare Pews record to Rasmussen

Pew polls From the 2008 presidential election.Unlike Rasmussen they never had Mccain in the lead.5 out of their 10 polls were within 1 point of the election results and 2 were spot on(Obama won +7)

Max E. · Aug 4, 2012

Quote from AK Forty Seven:

,I'll interpret polls the way I like.Obama is winning the 2012 election
More...

btw chief, you may want to go and read all the polls you keep posting, every single poll you will ever see, you will notice that the question on who they would vote for SPECIFICALLY asks, and HIGHLITES "If the Election were held "TODAY" who would you vote for"

I have yet to see one saying "who are you going to vote for 6 months from now" because too many variables change.....

jficquette · Aug 4, 2012

It's to keep people donating money.

jem · Aug 4, 2012

What they wrote and what they did... not not jibe.

The pew sample --
D 33/ R 22/ I 38

Reminder the 2010 election was
D35 / R 35 / I 30

and the OP showed a D plus 19 sample.

Quote from futurecurrents:

I now see that Pew has written an article addressing this very issue...an excerpt.......

In every campaign cycle, pollwatchers pay close attention to the details of every election survey. And well they should. But focusing on the partisan balance of surveys is, in almost every circumstance, the wrong place to look.

In every presidential election since 1996, our final pre-election surveys have aligned with the actual vote outcome, because we measured rising Democratic or Republican fortunes in each year.

In short, because party identification is so tightly intertwined with candidate preferences, any effort to constrain or affix the partisan balance of a survey would certainly smooth out any peaks and valleys in our survey trends, but would also lead us to miss more fundamental changes in the electorate that may be occurring. In effect, standardizing, smoothing, or otherwise tinkering with the balance of party identification in a survey is tantamount to saying we know how well each candidate is doing before the survey is conducted.

http://www.people-press.org/2012/08/03/party-affiliation-and-election-polls/

So what could be happening is that people are reassessing what being Republican and Democrat really means. They see an out-of-touch rich guy who wants tax breaks for the wealthy, more defense spending, and cuts to social programs. They see a guy who's gamed the system for all it's worth with off-shore tax havens etc. They see a guy who bullied a gay person. They are finally starting to realize that this is the essence of Republicanism today, and they don't like it.
More...

Ricter · Aug 4, 2012

Quote from Max E. Pad:

btw chief, you may want to go and read all the polls you keep posting, every single poll you will ever see, you will notice that the question on who they would vote for SPECIFICALLY asks, and HIGHLITES "If the Election were held "TODAY" who would you vote for"

I have yet to see one saying "who are you going to vote for 6 months from now" because too many variables change.....
More...

Fair enough. Are jem's favorite polls any different in that sense?

jem · Aug 4, 2012

Quote from Ricter:

Fair enough. Are jem's favorite polls any different in that sense?
More...

no of course not... and a few times I have stated pollsters tell us none of this matters until after the conventions.

AK Forty Seven · Aug 4, 2012

Quote from Max E. Pad:

btw chief, you may want to go and read all the polls you keep posting, every single poll you will ever see, you will notice that the question on who they would vote for SPECIFICALLY asks, and HIGHLITES "If the Election were held "TODAY" who would you vote for"

I have yet to see one saying "who are you going to vote for 6 months from now" because too many variables change.....
More...

If there are no drastic events in most cases the candidate the person plans on voting for today is the same person they will vote for on election day which is why some polls (not rasmuessen )and intrade have good records of picking the winner 6 months before the election

AK Forty Seven · Aug 4, 2012

Quote from jem:

no of course not... and a few times I have stated pollsters tell us none of this matters until after the conventions.
More...

Pew,NBC/WSJ and Intrade would disagree.Unlike Rasmussen their polls consistently have the eventual winner ahead long before the convention

Just because Rasmussen shit polls dont have the eventual winner ahead before the conventions or later doesn't mean others polls dont have value before then