Rasmussen Reportsā?¢: The most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a presidential election.
Even though I'm voting McCain you would think Obama with all his support would be able to put the old man down. :hippy:
Printable View
Rasmussen Reportsā?¢: The most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a presidential election.
Even though I'm voting McCain you would think Obama with all his support would be able to put the old man down. :hippy:
polling techniques and methods are antique 2008! just my 2 cents, i really never trust any of these political polls. plus they can be designed in certain ways to give desired results... trust me! fair polling is a very hard thing to do and who knows who is behind which polling company! they are for profit!
But there's no way to tell if it's inaccurate in McCain's favor or Obama's.Quote:
Originally Posted by flyingimam
The polls are just a estimated reference and I use them for just that... nothing more; however even still you would think Obama would have a considerable lead.
The Iowa election markets have historically performed better than polls, and Obama's winning there 55-45 in the vote-share market and 60-40 in the winner-take-all market.
IEM -- 2008 Presidential Election Markets Quotes
Anyway, McCain kind of stole the show by nominating Sarah Palin. It's getting him a lot more attention, but I'm not sure how long it'll last.
u know where u can actually get real useful info?
:DVegas... people actually do wagers on these things and some put big money into it, they get their info from sources more useful than media & polls!
one thing that i say is that almost all polls for this election year will be off by great percentage due to the fact that on both sides of the competition too many young people are involved that have very little say in polls using landlines!
young people like me maybe lazy or uninterested in going and taking an optional survey online or on phone or whatever... but certainly alot of us will cast a vote this year... alot of us that wouldnt have done so in previous elections!
This is one of the few elections where the popular vote will actually make or break who wins the office. It will be interesting.Quote:
Originally Posted by flyingimam
McCain is a nutjob plain and simple and i cant see him winning unless the repukes rig the election.If McCain wins the election you can expect an angry old man to have his finger on the button and you can expect very dark times ahead.I will truly feel sorry for America if McCain is your next president......
Well, technically, realclearpolitics.com (which averages 10 or so of the country's top polls) has had them at a statistical dead heat for a while. You have to consider the +/- margin of error, which is generally three points...The Rasmussen poll most likely reflects just a post-convention bump that most candidates get. Obama is definitely included. As the Palin information regarding troopergate and other scandals comes out, the numbers will drop by more than most politicos can even imagine.
I'm surprised at how close it is in the polls.
I think some of the polling models for determining a representative sample of voters are probably more out of whack than usual this year. I think there will be turnout from groups of people who usually don't vote, and I don't think they are getting counted in the polls.
I also think things get a bit volatile in the polling right after the conventions because of all the excitement and the short-term bounce. It should settle down a bit and start to trend more predictably once the hype dies down and the candidates get back to issues. It's going to be interesting so see if the Palin hype lasts or fades.
I am defniitely surprised at how close it is, because I expected the Dems to have a stronger advantage considereing Bush's unpopularity. The Democrats have made the mistake in the past of thinking there was no way they could lose. I'm hoping they didn't do that again.
I expect that once we get some side-by-side comparisions in the debates, and people start thinking about issues like the economy, jobs, energy and healthcare, it will break one way or the other. I think Obama wins on the issues, so I expect him to re-open that gap.
Polls don't mean shit.
Every election year there are polls that say this or that and they always end up being way off.
But dragonrider, your post cracks me up. You see the polls in a dead heat and then you make the gist of, "well uh, this will fade fast, Obama will pick it up, there must be some sort of error, this will change, you'll see....". Can't you just accept the truth? Haha sorry hun, I had to pull your chain.
Typical Liberal haha. ;)
Ha ha! I'm just saying what I think will happen, but who knows? It may just be wishfull thinking on my part!Quote:
Originally Posted by rebgirl420
You are absolutely right though, about the polls not meaning shit. Thay are accurate up to a degree, but almost always off by way more than thier so-called "margin of error." I'm thinking back to the Democratic primary especially, when after every major event or primary election, the polls and pundits got it wrong. Then they would immediately launch into this insane analysis about "what it means" and a new round of polls showing why the NEW trend was right, and then it would go the other way again. I got the impression they were wrong more often than they were right.
The other thing to remember is how important it is how the individual states are leaning. The popular vote can be a virtual tie and still have the electoral college go in a landslide if one candidate gets a huge margin in one state, and the other gets small margins in lots of states.
Your correct.
I remember watching my first real political debates and polls (For Clinton on his second term when he was in trouble and then for Bush after, yes I'm young haha) and the polls had Gore winning by at least 10-15% in some.
Well, of course THAT was amiss. I think it's just for ratings. Really we would all have better results if we all stripped naked, covered ourselves in flour and let the wind guid us to who is going to win haha.
We'll never know until the end.
That lead dwindled down after the conventions though ;).. And historically at least since Reagans first run for president the democrats have always held a double digit lead up until October; which is why I've said in other threads that if Obama wants to win he needs to try to pull a double digit lead at the bare minimum.Quote:
Originally Posted by rebgirl420
Polls are not correct, and polls are flawed but if you use some common sense and use historical polling data verses the results of an election you can get a sort've clear picture of how things may turn out.
In the end though it's just an educated guess.
:hippy:
I prefer the "we all stripped naked, covered ourselves in flour and let the wind guid us to who is going to win" idea better,
But I guess logical deductions work too haha (Though not as fun).
I'm not sure I'd want to see some people naked :( Scary stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by rebgirl420
Yeah, politicians naked in flour....not always a good thing....:)
OMG NEWT GINGRICH!!! IS THAT YOU! HOT!Quote:
Originally Posted by rebgirl420
Nope, it's Teddy Kennedy!