patrick.net

  new post
register or log in

#investing   #housing   #politics   #humor  
10,721 registered users, 2 users online now: APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE, curious2

Everyone now knows that Rasmussen was baised for Republicans......

By iwog (84/84 = 100% civil)   2012 Nov 8, 5:39am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   2 links   1,332 views   11 comments   watch (0)   share   quote  

....but just how bad were they? Following are the last polls before the election released by Rasmussen for each swing state.

Source: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map_no_toss_ups.html

Florida
Rasmussen: Romney +2
Final tally: Even
Verdict: within the margin of error (barely)

Ohio
Rasmussen: Tie
Final Tally: Obama +2
Verdict: within the margin of error (barely)

Colorado
Rasmussen: Romney +3
Final Tally: Obama +4.7
Verdict: Massive Fail

Virginia
Rasmussen: Romney +2
Final Tally: Obama +3
Verdict: Pathetic

North Carolina
Rasmussen: Romney +6
Final Tally: Romney +2
Verdict: screwing up by 4 is actually good by Rasmussen standards

Iowa
Rasmussen: Romney +1
Final Tally: Obama +5.6
Verdict: Unbelievably wrong

Wisconsin
Rasmussen: tie
Final Tally: Obama +6.7
Verdict: Ridiculously stupid

New Hamster
Rasmussen: Obama +2
Final Tally: Obama +5.8
Verdict: Fail

Nevada
Rasmussen: Obama +2
Finaly Tally: Obama +6.6
Verdict: Fail

One interesting thing that supports my hypothesis of intentional bias was the states they got right. Rasmussen was on target in Pennsylvania and Indiana. They also got it right or even favored Obama by a point or two in some deep red states like Montana. The problem is that none of these were ever considered seriously in play, which makes me think that Rasmussen knew what it was doing and where it had to fake data to try and influence the election.

#politics

Comments 1-11 of 11     Last »

1   iwog (84/84 = 100% civil)   2012 Nov 8, 9:32am  ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

You know Shrek, it's odd that Rasmussen agrees almost perfectly with your prediction yet you say you didn't use Rasmussen numbers in your analysis.

That's quite a coincidence.

2   Automan Empire   2012 Nov 8, 10:54am  ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

That's quite a coincidence.
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Zinnnggg!

Rasmussen was/is predictably biased to the right.

What I'm curious about is why Gallup went +5 beyond everyone else for Romney toward the end there?

Republicans, who 1-2 weeks becore dismissed Gallup as left-biased, suddenly took it as predigested wisdom and cause for gloating.

3   bdrasin   2012 Nov 8, 12:33pm  ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

Automan Empire says

That's quite a coincidence.

^^^^^^^^^^^^

Zinnnggg!

Rasmussen was/is predictably biased to the right.

What I'm curious about is why Gallup went +5 beyond everyone else for Romney toward the end there?

Republicans, who 1-2 weeks becore dismissed Gallup as left-biased, suddenly took it as predigested wisdom and cause for gloating.

Gallup has a pretty mixed track record from what I understand. Maybe they just really aren't that good, in spite of being a household name. Unlike Rasmussen they aren't always or predictably biased in favor of Republicans; their last poll in 2008 predicted an Obama win by 11(!) percent.

4   Fucking White Male (11/11 = 100% civil)   2012 Nov 8, 12:49pm  ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

IWOG is correct in his data, and may be correct in his analysis, even the conspiracy theory portion.

There is nothing to argue with here. Its clear that Rasmussen(and Gallup) used incorrect polling pools.

5   marcus (25/25 = 100% civil)   2012 Nov 8, 10:33pm  ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

Automan Empire says

What I'm curious about is why Gallup went +5 beyond everyone else for Romney toward the end there?

Bribes perhaps ?

Maybe the theory was that to really get the republican vote out in battleground states, they need to believe they can win ?

Or maybe they just have really bad models. It's gotta be complicated these days, accounting for young people who only have call phones, but also in say for example a state poll, how do they select the locations to get samples that will represent the entire state well ?

I think doing that requires either some significant guessing, or else a very complicated process that samples many different locations.

It's probably just us older people that see Gallop as a household name. Because they aren't very good any more.

6   iwog (84/84 = 100% civil)   2012 Nov 9, 2:12am  ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

Gallup was middle of the pack for most of the year, then took a violent turn towards Romney near the end. I think they have a mole who hijacked the sample at the last moment.

7   Bellingham Bill (5/5 = 100% civil)   2012 Nov 9, 3:05am  ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

iwog says

I think they have a mole who hijacked the sample at the last moment.

my thoughts too. . . . it's like the Republican Party has become the the new "Red Menace", infiltrating everything from the inside, LOL

8   Bellingham Bill (5/5 = 100% civil)   2012 Nov 9, 3:29am  ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

"I'll repeat the original question. Uh, are you now or have you ever been a member of the Republican party?"

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Brecht_HUAC_hearing

9   curious2 (16/16 = 100% civil)   2012 Nov 11, 3:56am  ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

FYI Nate Silver has a table ranking polling sources in terms of bias.

Among famous news outlets, the least biased were IBD, Google, and CNN, while Rasmussen and Gallup scored worst.

10   bdrasin   2012 Nov 11, 4:00am  ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

curious2 says

FYI Nate Silver has a table ranking polling sources in terms of bias:

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/10/which-polls-fared-best-and-worst-in-the-2012-presidential-race/#more-37396

Among famous news outlets, the least biased were IBD, Google, and CNN, while Rasmussen and Gallup scored worst.

Another surprising thing about the comparison was that almost all of the main polling organizations, including Ipos/Reuters,YouGove, and PPP (which the right wingers STILL think was a left-wing shill) were at least somewhat biased towards the Republicans.

11   APOCALYPSEFUCKisShostikovitch   2012 Nov 11, 1:11pm  ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote   top   bottom   home   share  

Fox News won;t consider a polling source unbiased until they can prove all the numbers are simply fabricated whole cloth to reflect monstrous Republican superiority.

Comments 1-11 of 11     Last »

Watch comments by email

home   top   users  
housing crash   thunderdome   sexy pix   site suggestions  
best comments   ad hominem comment jail   random post   patrick.net on twitter  
about   contact  
please recommend patrick.net to your boss