Romney 48% Obama 45% according to Rasmussen poll on 9/18
NH moves from "lean Democrat" to "toss up"
-
Rasmussen is heavily biased toward conservative candidates. See here:
http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/75161/the-rasmussen-problem#
It's bad when TNR, of all sources, calls you biased towards conservatives!
-
^ Yeah, closest poll in 2008, but man he doesn't get it, we don't want close we want blue.
Rasmussen’s polls were quite biased, overestimating the standing of the Republican candidate by almost 4 points on average. In just 12 cases, Rasmussen’s polls overestimated the margin for the Democrat by 3 or more points. But it did so for the Republican candidate in 55 cases — that is, in more than half of the polls that it issued.
...
The discrepancies between Rasmussen Reports polls and those issued by other companies were apparent from virtually the first day that Barack Obama took office. Rasmussen showed Barack Obama’s disapproval rating at 36 percent, for instance, just a week after his inauguration, at a point when no other pollster had that figure higher than 20 percent.
...
-
Rasmussen's polling numbers were criticized heavily during the 2004 and 2008 presidential elections, being seen as biased toward Republicans... until after the elections, when it turned out they had been extremely close both times.
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_nature/2004/12/lets_go_to_the_audiotape.html
-
Nate Silver has said that Rasmussen doesn't perform well on senate/House but is mostly accurate on the presidential race.
"The discrepancies between Rasmussen Reports polls and those issued by other companies were apparent from virtually the first day that Barack Obama took office. Rasmussen showed Barack Obama’s disapproval rating at 36 percent, for instance, just a week after his inauguration, at a point when no other pollster had that figure higher than 20 percent."
-
Rasmussen's polling numbers were criticized heavily during the 2004 and 2008 presidential elections, being seen as biased toward Republicans... until after the elections, when it turned out they had been extremely close both times.
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_nature/2004/12/lets_go_to_the_audiotape.htmlHey, retard: My TNR article is from 2010, WELL AFTER THE f**kING ELECTION.
You're really willing to lie to yourself to lessen the blow of your candidate sucking so goddamn hard, aren't you?
-
Actually, CNN has NH as a toss-up as well. Along with NV, which Rasmussen considers "lean Democrat."
Poll Date Obama (D) Romney (R) Spread
Average 8/9 - 9/18 47.3 45.0 Obama +2.3
Rasmussen 9/18 - 9/18 45 48 Romney +3
ARG 9/15 - 9/17 48 47 Obama +1
WMUR/UNH 9/4 - 9/10 45 40 Obama +5
PPP (D) 8/9 - 8/12 51 45 Obama +6 -
^^Learn how to read, would you? The f**king article is about the Senate and gubernatorial races. f**ktard.
"The discrepancies between Rasmussen Reports polls and those issued by other companies were apparent from virtually the first day that Barack Obama took office. Rasmussen showed Barack Obama’s disapproval rating at 36 percent, for instance, just a week after his inauguration, at a point when no other pollster had that figure higher than 20 percent."
-
^^Learn how to read, would you? The f**king article is about the Senate and gubernatorial races. f**ktard.
"The discrepancies between Rasmussen Reports polls and those issued by other companies were apparent from virtually the first day that Barack Obama took office. Rasmussen showed Barack Obama�s disapproval rating at 36 percent, for instance, just a week after his inauguration, at a point when no other pollster had that figure higher than 20 percent."Rasmussen probably phrased their question in a way that made respondents more likely to express disapproval, in addition to their usual tendency to lean conservative relative to other polls. That doesn't address their accuracy in the past two elections, and besides, the spreads between Rasmussen and other polls are no where near as extreme as the one in your quote.
-
Actually, CNN has NH as a toss-up as well. Along with NV, which Rasmussen considers "lean Democrat."
Poll Date Obama (D) Romney (R) Spread
Average 8/9 - 9/18 47.3 45.0 Obama +2.3
Rasmussen 9/18 - 9/18 45 48 Romney +3
ARG 9/15 - 9/17 48 47 Obama +1
WMUR/UNH 9/4 - 9/10 45 40 Obama +5
PPP (D) 8/9 - 8/12 51 45 Obama+6Good work! Notice something? As you move in time from 8/9 to 9/18, the spreads go from Obama +6, Obama +5, Obama +1 to Romney +3. They call this a trend. What would be the point of taking polls if they never changed, right?
-
^^Learn how to read, would you? The f**king article is about the Senate and gubernatorial races. f**ktard.
"The discrepancies between Rasmussen Reports polls and those issued by other companies were apparent from virtually the first day that Barack Obama took office. Rasmussen showed Barack Obama�s disapproval rating at 36 percent, for instance, just a week after his inauguration, at a point when no other pollster had that figure higher than 20 percent."You f**king idiot, approval ratings is not the same thing as asking which candidate to vote for, as it depends highly on the frame (a point made already). Besides, you cannot test the accuracy of approval ratings, so nobody knows if Rasmussen is horribly off or entirely accurate. Whereas you can do that with presidential elections, and Rasmussen have done well in that regard. Nate Silver said as much in his posts - which is why he puts a high weight on Rasmussen polls.
And no, you did not need to post your s**t twice. I saw it the first time, and chose not to respond to it because it was even more ridiculous than the one I did respond to. But hey, you got your attention, f**king undergread, now go suck your sociotard professor's dick.
-
Nate Silver keeps score of which polls are accurate and which aren't and weights accordingly, and he currently gives Obama a 71% chance in New Hampshire. You can call that a toss-up or lean Democrat.
By the way, I don't see why a poll should have a house effect on gubernatorial and Senate races but not on presidential races. House effects arise because of sampling and population weights, and it's not like the people voting for each party in one kind of race is radically different from the other kind of race.