Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

POLL: PPP (D), InsiderAdvantage, Western New England College in TN, GA, and MA


PPP (D)
Georgia: Romney 32,McCain 21,Huckabee 24...
Obama 51, Clinton 41

InsiderAdvantage
Georgia: McCain 35, Romney 24, Huckabee 24...
Obama 52, Clinton 36

Tennessee: McCain 33, Huckabee 25, Romney 18...
Clinton 59, Obama 26

Western New England College
Massachusetts: Clinton 43, Obama 15

 

Comments
FlyOnTheWall:

And the 800-lbs gorilla of today's polls: Rasmussen tracking puts Hillary's lead at a Gallup-like seven points - and last night's sample, taken without Edwards, shows the two effectively tied. Gulp.

____________________

Rasmus:

This Massachusetts poll is unrealistic.
They asked too many women, and too less blacks and latinos. Rasmussen has them at 43-37, this seems more considerable.
The Tennessee Poll asked too many old people, they had just 11% under 30.

____________________

Brian:

I went to Western New England college before i transferred to Uconn. Give that poll no consideration since 30% of respondents refused to answer the poll questions. The race in Mass is in single digits.

____________________

FlyOnTheWall:

Rasmus,

Not only that, but it took its sample over the course of a full week (January 20-26), and so the data it generated is now 5-12 days old. It also undersampled young voters. I've seen some bad polls this year, but this one's gotta be the worst of the bunch.

____________________

andrew:

flyonthewaall, what you don't mention is that rasmussens 7 point difference does not significantly differ from their recent numbers.
So don't pretend that Clinton got a significant bump in Rasmussen's.

____________________

Bruce Moomaw:

Andrew has it seriously wrong -- Rasmussen's 3-day running average lead for Hillary, which for about the last week has been a stable 9 points, suddenly dropped to 7 points. This means that their results for last night alone must have shown her lead suddenly dropping to only about 3 points -- and this agrees very nicely with Gallup's latest report ( http://www.gallup.com/poll/104044/Gallup-Daily-Tracking-Election-2008.aspx ): "Barack Obama has now cut the gap with Hillary Clinton to 6 percentage points among Democrats nationally in the Gallup Poll Daily tracking three-day average, and interviewing conducted Tuesday night shows the gap between the two candidates is within a few points." It also agrees well with Rasmussen's newest polls of California, Massachusetts and Connecticut. Only one thing can be said for sure: it's going to be a VERY interesting night.

____________________

BDM:

Rasmussen like Gallup is showing a tightening of the race. Obama is slowly chipping away at Clinton's lead.

Her number's are static and Obama's number's are moving closer to Clinton.

I predict that tomorrow's number's will show further tightening.

____________________

FlyOnTheWall:

Andrew:

I'm not really sure what point you're trying to make. If you're suggesting that the Rasmussen tracking poll hasn't shown a significant trend over the past week, you're absolutely right. It's not a great poll, for reasons Mark has explained at length.

And that should give us reason for caution in looking at last night's sample. But what a sample it was! It was the first sample without Edwards. And for the first time, it showed Obama and Clinton in a statistical tie. No, I don't have the actual numbers - Rasmussen didn't release them.

But conveniently, for the past two days, the three-day sample averaged out to 41-32. Last night, it was 42-35. That suggests that last night's numbers were something like Clinton 44, Obama 41. Or, at any rate, in that ballpark. And it should grab everyone's attention.


____________________

DC Pol Sci:

And last night's numbers (admitted small sample) show them tied post-Edwards withdrawal.

Very interesting. And two big anti-Hillary stories breaking in this morning's news cycle. Obama has the momentum going into Super Tuesday unless he bombs the debate tonight.

____________________

Jesse:

The Western NE college poll only had 151 respondants for the primary question! My god, is there no minimum sample that pollsters can agree to use before publishing a result?

I also think that pollster.com should exercise some discretion here about whether or not to factor polls such as this into the averages. A week-old poll in Mass (pre-SC, pre-Kennedy's endorsement) with a 8%+ MOE and questionable demographics isn't really any more significant than, say, my friend in Mass's gut feeling.

____________________

Rasmus:

I don�t think that the full effect of Edwards effect is already in the polls.
Most of Edwards former voters need time to think about their new situation and whom they should give their vote instead of Edwards.

I think the effect will not be in the polls before the weekend.

What do you think, will the republican Maine caucus have any effect on the 5-February elections?

Sorry for my bad english, I am a critical german viewer :-)

Rasmus

@FlyOnTheWall: Alright, I didn�t look too long on the WENC Poll... THey undersampled ALL groups probably supporting Obama...

In Germany, there is a idiom:
"Traue keiner Statistik, die Du nicht selber gef�lscht hast", I could translate it with "Don�t trust a statistic that you didn�t manipulate for yourself"
Some of the pollsters, for example SurveyUSA seem to be Pro-Clinton, just my opinion...

____________________

Anonymous:

Why is Hillary so far ahead in Tennessee and so far behind in neighboring Georgia? Very strange...

____________________

sumsar:

"This Massachusetts poll is unrealistic.
They asked too many women, and too less blacks and latinos."

LOL! Yes, stop asking so many women and latinos. We don't like their answers!

You Obama nuts are too much.

____________________

Rasmus :

@sumsar:
Well, if you look at the poll statistics, you´ll find that they asked about 60%, but there are just 50% women in that state.
Also, there are 7% afro-americans, but just 5% are included in that poll.
The same with the latinos, the younger people and every group likely voting for Obama.
Also, 150 respondants in a poll are not really represantative...

It seems the Clinton pollster did not want to hear the answers of the minorities and the younger people liking Obamas "change" paroles...

PS: A very creative name,
sumsar :-)
Rasmus

____________________

Rasmus:

@sumsar:
Well, if you look at the poll statistics, you´ll find that they asked about 60%, but there are just 50% women in that state.
Also, there are 7% afro-americans, but just 5% are included in that poll.
The same with the latinos, the younger people and every group likely voting for Obama.
Also, 150 respondants in a poll are not really represantative...

It seems the Clinton pollster did not want to hear the answers of the minorities and the younger people liking Obamas "change" paroles...

PS: A very creative name,
sumsar :-)
Rasmus

____________________

vh:

Hey Rasmus ,
Latinos are a monority and they don't support Obama by 2 to 1.
Your pants are on fire.

____________________

Rasmus:

1. Don´t get insulting.
2. Yes, that´s a point, but the poll is just not represantative. Maybe the Latinos do not support Obama so much, but the Blacks do, the younger generation too and the men support him also more than the women do.
The number of Latinos in Massachusetts is negligible, but if you undersample the men and the black so much, you distort the answer on the gender-race question.

Again, sorry for my bad english, I am a foreigner.


PS: This is the 5th [Edit: 6th] time I try to post this comment. It just does not appear -.-

____________________



Post a comment




Please be patient while your comment posts - sometimes it takes a minute or two. To check your comment, please wait 60 seconds and click your browser's refresh button. Note that comments with three or more hyperlinks will be held for approval.

MAP - US, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY, PR