Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

US: Daily Tracking (9/21)

Topics: PHome

National Daily Tracking Surveys
End date: 9/21/08

Daily Kos (D) / Research 2000
1,100 LV, 3%; Live Telephone Interviews
Obama 49, McCain 43

Diageo / Hotline
915 RV, 3.2%: Live Telephone Interviews
Obama 47, McCain 42

Gallup
2,740 RV, 2%; Live Telephone Interviews
Obama 48, McCain 44

GWU Battleground / Tarrance (R) / Lake (D)
800 LV, 3.5%; Live Telephone Interviews
McCain 48, Obama 47

Rasmussen
3,000 LV, 2%; IVR
Obama 48, McCain 47

 

Comments
Justin:

::Change From Yesterday::
Rasmussen bumps weighted democratic advantage up by 0.4% this week.

DailyKos.com / Research 2000 (Weight: 35% Dem, 26% Rep, 30% Ind)
Obama 0, McCain +1

Diageo / Hotline (*Weight: 41% Dem, 36% Rep, 19% Ind)
Obama +2, McCain -2

Gallup (Weight: Unweighted)
Obama -1, McCain -1

Rasmussen (*Weight: 39.0% Dem, 33.5% Rep, 27.5% Ind>
Obama 0, McCain 0


Average Change
Obama +0.25, McCain -0.5

Average Swing
Obama 0.75


*This is yesterday's Hotline weighing, today's has not been released yet
*Last Week Rasmussen: 38.7% Dem, 33.6% Rep, 27.7% Ind

____________________

Justin:

This made me laugh.

http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2008/09/no_love_lost_mc.html

He is basically saying "The New York Times supports Obama, so let's just ignore the facts entirely shall we?"

____________________

Scott in PacNW:

Good day for Obama. Me likee.

____________________

AmericaFirst:

Still very close but slowly slipping away for McCain.

____________________

John:
____________________

Stillow:

Some of you keepsaying McCain is finished. Not so fast. Obama and the Dems are buried in this financial mess and have there fingerprints all over it. Obama having disgraced Fannie execs running his economic policy.....Obama and the Dems voting against the 2005 fix for this problem. If McCain grows a brain and starts explaining this stuff, the Dems are thru. Good article on Bloomberg about it.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aSKSoiNbnQY0

____________________

jamesia:

Multiple accounts have discredited Obama's Freddie/Fannie 'connection'.

"Senator John McCain’s campaign manager was paid more than $30,000 a month for five years as president of an advocacy group set up by the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to defend them against stricter regulations, current and former officials say."

____________________

Justin:

John, I'm not seeing the weights in that document. The only place I've ever seen them is on the Hotline blog, which has yet to post anything about the tracker today. Are you seeing something that I am not and if so could you be more specific as to where it is?

____________________

Justin:

Never mind, it is up now on the blog and is indeed the same as yesterday. Wish I could edit my post.

____________________

brambster:

@Justin

The only pollster from the list that weights by party ID is Rasmussen. The way you started to add this information in is misleading. The numbers that the other pollsters get are merely a reflection of what they are seeing after some demographic adjustments that ignore party ID.

It would probably be more beneficial to compare the percentages by age group, race, sex, etc. These are statements of fact, while party ID is influenced by the way the question is asked. For instance, if you were asked "are you a D" or "are you an R" your answer might be different than "to which party do you most closely identify with".

____________________

John:

Opps, sorry wrong link. Not that it matters now but here is the right link

http://www.diageohotlinepoll.com/documents/diageohotlinepoll/DiageoHotlineTracker09.22.08data.pdf

____________________

george:

@Justin:

Just a general thank-you for your daily tracking of the daily tracking polls. It's extremely useful to see in the midst of the blathery back and forth. (The simplest ideas are usually the best.) Please don't be bothered by the occasional slipup.

____________________

KipTin:

Multiple accounts have NOT discredited Obama's connections to FannieMae and FreddieMac. Facts are that Obama has received the bulk of the donations and both Raines (even though casually) and Johnson (credited adviser and VP search committee) are both connected to Obama.

Doesn't matter about Obama's campaign manager being paid as former lobbyist. What matters is that McCain co-sponsored bill(s) to reign in FannieMae and FreddieMac, and the Dems killed it because they did not want loans to be to restricted.

The truth hurts, don't it?

____________________

KipTin:

Oh, Raines and Johnson are recent former CEOs and who have their own legal problems.

____________________

mirrorball:

@Stillow: Know of any other sources for the 2005 bill outcome? I'm not asking because I necessarily doubt the Bloomberg commentary piece, but I'm trying to find some info on this. My recollection is that the House passed a bill in 2005, but some Dems (thought not a majority of them) voted against because they felt it had been watered down. I'm just wondering if the Senate bill was identical, or was something different.

____________________

Stillow:

Its a classic case of well-meaning liberal ideas gone to hell. The idea of givign loans to everyone, even those unqualified so they can own a home is great, but the practical deployment of the idea leads to disaster....

If McCain does not hammer this issue every day, then he deserves to lose....hopefully i nthe debates he brings this up and pounds it home. The people need to get the facts and away fro mthe Democrats spin.

____________________

NW Patrick:

KipTin. Sigh. LIAR. Obama's campaign contributions were from EMPLOYEES for Fannie and Freddy. McCain's? Lobbiests and CEO's. Gone one though.

____________________

Stillow:

@mirrorball

The WSJ had some good pieces on it too...but you'd have to look i nthere archives, I don't have an active link right now.

____________________

KipTin:

Back to the polls...

Now it makes more sense for the Diego and Gallup to be closer together since they are both REGISTERED voters.

GWU Battleground and Rasmussen are both LIKELY voters and are tracking with each other within sampling error.

Daily Kos is way out in "left field" with LIKELY voters.

____________________

Snowspinner:

Tell me about the Battleground poll.

____________________

Justin:

Oh, thanks, John. That's the first time I've seen that document. I see the link to it now at the top of the main page. Good to know.

Brambster, do you have a source for that information? The IDs seem way too steady to me to be coincidence.

No problem, George. It's all information I like to have in one place and doesn't take much time to actually post it.

____________________

KipTin:

Quit calling me a LIAR... Patrick NW. Learn some freakin' manners and also learn to read comprehensively.

I specifically said "connections" and I did not at any time indicate that corporations gave money to either candidate, because it is ILLEGAL.

FYI: Obama received the bulk of donations from those corporate employees, of which a large amount was bundled.

Bottom line Obama received significantly MORE campaign donations than McCain and never sponsored a bill to regulate FannieMae and Freddie Mac... whereas McCain did sponsor regulatory legislation.

____________________

Freds76:

Fortunately in this case, American people don't care much about fingerprint as they do about sound bytes. McCain screwed up by repeating the infamous line that "The fundamentals of the economy is strong" and that is what people will remember when they are voting in November.

He showed that he is out of touch as well as a flip flopper both at the same time.

McCain is doing to himself by this and the Palin selection. Palin pick will go down as the lousiest political stunt ever in the modern history and will become the laughing stock for people for years to come.

The sad part is that the power hungry, greedy anti-tax (anti-American) Republicans are supporting this fraud ticket with closed eyes even when they know the real truth!

I can't wait for November 5th victory celebration not only for dems but for all Americans!

Freds76

____________________

Stillow:

I can also tell you that if ex Frannie CEO's were working in the McCain campaign, it would be all over every news site....the fact is Obama is buried in this mess...has former Fannie CEO's working his campaign. Huge doublestandard here, but it is what it is.

____________________

KipTin:

Andrew Sullivan is madly in lust with Obama, and therefore now FORMER conservative, as well as British citizen (cannot vote for his man crush). Even his own co-workers at Atlantic Monthly have taken him to task.

____________________

@stillow

there is a problem with using that link to "prove" this situation is the dem's fault. it lies at the end of this "commentary":

(Kevin Hassett, director of economic-policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, is a Bloomberg News columnist. He is an adviser to Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona in the 2008 presidential election. The opinions expressed are his own.)

this is not a news article, its a hit piece by by a McCain supporter/advisor. this should hold no weight with anyone, its completely partisan.

____________________

Stillow:

@Freds76

You are wrong about the Palin pick...she is the only reasons states like WI, MI and PA are in play...and why McCain is polling so well in those states. Obama can win CO, NV, IA, NM, but if he loses WI, it won't matter. Palin appeals very strongly to traditional Americans and conservative Democrats.....the problem for Obama with the Palin pick is that WI, MI and PA are full of conservative Dems, also known as Reagan Dems. That's why those 3 states are so close in an anti-GOP year.

____________________

Eternal:

@ Stillow, Are you using the plural of Fannie CEO's on purpose? I ask because if you are I would advise that bold face lies in the face of facts is what got McCain in his current situation. Raines and Obama have both said he is not an advisor, has never been so I would caution repeating a proven lie.

Just my 2c.

____________________

KipTin:

Raines has stated that Obama has called him for ADVICE. By the way there is no "proof" that Obama denies this... ergo not a "proven lie."

Obama is parsing and nuancing agains in his lawyer-speak. Raines may not have been a formal "advisor" as Obama says, but it does not mean that Obama has not communicated with him for advice. Get it? Obama is pretty slippery with his words... again speaks like an attorney.

____________________

KipTin:

So Obama focuses on Raines as McCain "lying" about him, and makes sure not to address the problems with Jim Johnson. It is called deflecting. Another lawyer trick.

____________________

Obama speaks like an attorney & McCain speaks like a fading old man. Who do I want in the whitehouse? hmmm.

____________________

Freds76:

Those Dems will come to their senses by election day and will vote for Obama/Biden. People are teasing and entertaining themselves with Palin right now, we all know that no person with a bit of head on their shoulder will put the country in hands of Palin, that is inconceivable!
Americans love their country way more than that, you will see those close polls will widen as the election becomes more a reality than a TV show and soap opera than what we saw in the past few weeks. Trust me on this!

____________________

KipTin:

Yes, a big choice... Obama tells people what he thinks people want to hear, and McCain believes in what he says. Polls show Obama loses in being principled.

____________________

pion:

@Stillow: That Bloomberg "article" is a commentary. Can you learn the difference? Frank Hassett is a McCain campaign adviser who also worked on the Bush campaign. That "article" is garbage.

____________________

KipTin:

Wow... last I looked Obama was NOT running against Palin for president. The choice is Obama or McCain. When will Obamanation accept that FACT?

____________________

@kiptin

the polls show that Obama wins in "who shares your values"

i dont know where you pulled that principles crap from but that sounds like bull to me. mccain has been running lies 24/7. anyone who thinks he is more principled than Obama needs to wake up.

____________________

Stillow:

@Freds76

I personally think Palin is going to steal one of those three states. A former mayor and current governor.....is fine with me. If Obama is qualified then Palin is well qualified. It will be interesting nonetheless. But I beleive Palin attracts just enough Reagan Dems tosteal WI or PA....MI and MN are more remote chances.

____________________

pion:

Correction: I meant Kevin Hassett, not Frank Hassett.

____________________

KipTin:

How about some manners there "Knockout Ed" and quit your "crappy" "bull" rhetoric?
---------

The polls show that McCain is way ahead on that he "believes in what he says." The polls show that Obama is way ahead on "telling people what they want to hear."

The term "principles" was my assessment of those results. Principles would be sticking to something one truly believed in... such as Obama's promise to fight the FISA bill he eventually voted for.

BTW... values and principles are not the same thing. Values are more geared toward pro-choice vs. pro-life, etc. One does not have to agree with another's principled positions to admire that person for standing by his principles.

____________________

Stillow:

@pion

I didn
't say anything about the article other than here is a good article laying out why the Dems are largely at fault. It doesn't matter who wrote it if they wrote facts....five minutes of research will show you the Dems voted agaisnt legislation that McCain sponsored that would have clearly helped the current situation...but the Dems didn't want restrictions on loans because it would have prevented lower income less qualified buyers from obtaining loans.......you Dems are geniuses at deflecting....

____________________

Hope Reborn:

Battleground is a joke

____________________

KipTin:

Wow, again. Sam Donaldson. Most of Obamanation do not even know who he is.

____________________

KipTin:

Battleground is run by George Washington University which is not considered a joke. Enough of this blasting the polls just because you do not like that McCain is ahead.. even by 1 point.

____________________

barracudatossedmysalad:

HAHAHAHAAH!!


The people are finally seeing how republican policies like deregulation are killing the economy!!!


HAHAHAHAHA!!! ROTFLMAO @ repub trolls!!!

HAHAHAAH! Look at Obama beat the living hell out of you clowns in NC!! HAHAHAHAH!!

I love it! You dumb tards are TOAST!!!

____________________

nick-socal:

Um, this idea that Democrats are responsible for the financial mess we're in now is absolutely crazy. Congress does NOT regulate. Congress writes a law that requires or not requires regulation. It's up to the president's administration (employees) to enforce the regulation. And um, well Bush is a Republican not a Democrat. It was his administration that did absolutely nothing to regulate the industry. Hello!

____________________

barracudatossedmysalad:

the 800 sample is a JOKE!!

____________________

nick-socal:

barracuda, I'm an Obama supporter and hope to heck he wins in November so we can get rid of this ridiculous Republicanism we've had to deal with for the last eight years. But come on dude you sound like an idiot. Cockiness never won anything. Maybe you're really just a Republican troll trying to use reverse psychology and fire up the Republican base against people like "barracudatossedmysalad"?

____________________

brambster:

@Justin

This is one of the most common topics discussed by the professionals in their blog posts on this site.

You should search Pollster for Party ID Weighting and Party Identification and come up with a few articles.

Rasmussen is well known to weight by Party ID. The others are known to not do this. The practice if frowned upon in the industry. I can't speak to the GWB survey since I haven't read up about them, but such a practice should appear in their disclosure. If you don't find it, they don't do it.

Weighting for demographics is not the same as weighting for Party ID. Also, one pollster's way of identifying potential voters by party is not necessarily the same as another pollster, so you can't directly compare the two numbers. You can however do a direct comparison of 18-29 year olds, or the AA sample, or sex.

____________________

Eternal:

KipTin,

I'm sure you didn't mean for you response on Raines to come out this way but I swear it reminded me of the SNL McCain skit.

Think about it...and then decide if you want to support the comment that and I'm going to quote here... "

former Fannie CEO's working his campaign

That is what I was commenting on, not a phone call. So do you stand by the position that former Fannie CEO(s) are working on his campaign.


____________________

Stillow:

@nick-socal:


This is a problem going back to Clinton....who's administration oversaw the start of financial disasters, Enron, Worldcom, tech bubble, etc. The push to give home loans to unqualified buyers began under Clinton, Janet Reno even got involved in it. Then Bush took over and oversaw the housing bubble....niehter side in Congress did anything to address the issue until 2005 when McCain co-sponsored legislation which attempted to restrict the type of loans given out by Freddie and Fannie, the Dems voted it down.
So ya I blame the Dems for starting this mess in the 90's, Bush continued the mess in the 00's....

____________________

Stillow:

@Eternal

It was rhetorical phrasing....geeeez, you guys deflect like crazy people. Would it make you feel better if I said a former Fannie CEO working on his campaign? And ohter former Fannie CEO's giving advice on a "not o nthe record" basis...? You guys deflect and whine about the smallest things.

____________________

brambster:

@Eternal

Give it up. niTpiK Nickie is paid to say delusional things like this, and she will never back down. If she's cornered, she'll just throw up some other parroted spin in an effort to change the subject.

She's absolutely dishonest. She is a liar.

____________________

Eternal:

@ Stillow,

My only point was, there is plenty to argue about , plenty of associations, plenty of people without just making up stuff. Raines said he is not a member of team Obama, Obama says Raines is not member of team Obama, pick a different foil. Then we can argue what the facts mean rather than what the facts are.

____________________

thoughtful:

@stillow

Your girl turns off more than she turns on.

There is more likelihood that she will step down than your ticket winning any blue midwesten states.

In the mean time market DJ down 400pts Oil up to $120 per barrel. This is areal problen $ being sold short, capital taking flight in oil.

____________________

Justin:

brambster, I am aware of the difference between weighing for different demographics. Do you have any direct source that these polling firms do not weigh by party ID in these tracking polls? I don't buy the "If you don't find it, they don't do it" statement.

Either way, I see no reason why listing the current weights in my posts is at all misleading. These are indeed the party weights for each poll, regardless of whether or not they are specifically aimed for. Perhaps having "unweighted" up there for Gallup confuses things somewhat. If so I will remove that and just leave Gallup blank.

I'd still like some evidence that these polls are not intentionally weighted, as they seem to be very steady. Weighing for different demographics does not explain the fact that Kos/RS2000 has had the same for each party for ten days running now.

____________________

KS Rose:

Stillow said:

"Its a classic case of well-meaning liberal ideas gone to hell. The idea of givign loans to everyone, even those unqualified so they can own a home is great, but the practical deployment of the idea leads to disaster...."

Nice try bucko... unfortunately this is George Bush's plan. Here's the link to the following information http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/08/20040809-9.html

# The President believes that homeownership is the cornerstone of America's vibrant communities and benefits individual families by building stability and long-term financial security. In June 2002, President Bush issued America's Homeownership Challenge to the real estate and mortgage finance industries to encourage them to join the effort to close the gap that exists between the homeownership rates of minorities and non-minorities. The President also announced the goal of increasing the number of minority homeowners by at least 5.5 million families before the end of the decade. Under his leadership, the overall U.S. homeownership rate in the second quarter of 2004 was at an all time high of 69.2 percent. Minority homeownership set a new record of 51 percent in the second quarter, up 0.2 percentage point from the first quarter and up 2.1 percentage points from a year ago. President Bush's initiative to dismantle the barriers to homeownership includes:

* American Dream Downpayment Initiative, which provides down payment assistance to approximately 40,000 low-income families;
* Affordable Housing. The President has proposed the Single-Family Affordable Housing Tax Credit, which would increase the supply of affordable homes;
* Helping Families Help Themselves. The President has proposed increasing support for the Self-Help Homeownership Opportunities Program; and
* Simplifying Homebuying and Increasing Education. The President and HUD want to empower homebuyers by simplifying the home buying process so consumers can better understand and benefit from cost savings. The President also wants to expand financial education efforts so that families can understand what they need to do to become homeowners.


That George Bush.. what a liberal.. /snark

____________________

Stillow:

@thoughtful

I see Palin is still driving you guys crazy....she is putting states in play that would not be in play otherwise....I'll bet ya a Alaskan Igloo she picks up one of those 3 states, WI, MI or PA...and if Obama loses even one of those, he has to pick up FL or VA....and thats assuming he wins both CO and NV....
She's a great choice......I cannot wait to see the vp debate #'s.....

____________________

Stillow:

@KS Rose:

Again, this is the problem your side has, you avoid the balme on your side...I put plenty of blame on Bush for doing "nothing"....Go back to Clinton, he was he and Janet Reno putting pressure on Fannie to give out crap loans.....Charlie Rangel, Barney Frnak, Dodd, etc...all wanted more ownership of home sby poor people. This problem dates back to the Clinton years where it started, then went pop under Bush....so why you try to just assign blame to one side, most people can see it was both parties who let hte problem inflame itself and get out of control.

____________________

GeorgeHusseinBush:

I have four words for all the right wingers on here trying to blame the economy on Democrats: Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.

____________________

Stillow:

@thoughtful

Did you see Palin get over 60,000 at a rally yesterday?

____________________

GeorgeHusseinBush:

@ Stillow

Too bad that estimate was given out by the McCain campaign and was TWICE the actual attendance.

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics/story/696050.html

____________________

Stillow:

@GeorgeHusseinBush

Actually saw it reported on CNN.........

____________________

brambster:

@Justin

You prove that they do. How about that?

With the exception of Rasmussen and one CBS/NYTimes national poll, I have heard of no other mainstream pollster that does this.

I told you how to search this site, but it is very difficult to prove a negative in a case such as this. You need to prove a positive. If they do so, they will say so.

Rasmussen adopted this new idea in 2006, which also happens to have been the start of their poll bias for Republicans. In 2006, across all of the last polls for Senate and Governors races, Rasmussen had an average bias of +2.04 points in margin for the Republicans. Then just about a month ago, Charles Franklin worked out the House Effects for all of the pollsters this year based on the average, and found Rasmussen to have a 2.7 point Republican skew.

It's not necessarily that party ID weighting causes skew in one direction, it's that the party ID weighting becomes more predictive of the outcome than the responses to their polls since nearly 80% of respondents are 90% likely to vote for the party that they identify with. This is how Rasmussen gets away with 400 to 500 LV samples and has the lowest variability. The 4.5 MoE of those small samples is actually larger because the party ID has it's own MoE, and there is no accepted method of resolving that. Rasmussen seems to find more Republican identifiers than anyone else, and this skews their results consistently.

Other pollsters rely on the fact that a big sample with proper randomization and minimal adjustments for much more static demographics will produce a true picture on their own. This is even what Rasmussen did in 2004 when they were one of the most accurate pollsters...but not now.

Search this site for "party ID weighting" and you will find a wealth of knowledge on the subject.

____________________

Eternal:

@Stillow,

I'm confused, (even though the real number was 25k, still huge) does this mean that big crowds are good again.

It's so hard to figure with the changing rules..

____________________

pion:

@Stillow: Here are some facts for you to ponder with respect to the bill S.190

1) That bill was introduced by Chuck Hagel and co-sponsored by E. Dole and J. Sununu in January 2005.

2) Johnny come lately co-sponsored it in May 2006---it died with the new session of congress after the 2006 elections (bills can not be carried over from one session to the next)

3) The senate bill did not get traction partly because it competed with a house bill (which passed the house). The house bill provided monies to fund affordable housing initiatives while the senate version did not.

4) Chuck Hagel re-introduced the bill (now called S.1100) in April 2007. Co-sponsors were: E. Dole, J. Sununu and M. Martinez. McCain is not a co-sponsor on that bill. What happened? Did he change his mind?

5) Chuck Hagel, the Republican senator from Nebraska, did *not* endorse McCain and has made clear that he is sympathetic to Obama---he accompanied Obama on his recent trip to the Middle East and Europe and said he would accept a VP nomination from Obama before the Biden nod.

6) The current financial melt-down would not have occurred without the Gramm-Leach-Bliley act of 1999. Three sub-facts:

a) McCain voted for for the act in 1999.
b) Gramm is McCain's economic advisor.
c) McCain refers to himself as fundamentally
a deregulator

____________________

brambster:

@Stillow

Like they reported the 30,000 figure given to them when it was more like 8,000 also.

Compare the scene in Florida to the 75,000 seen in Portland during the primaries and the difference will become quite obvious.

No doubt Palin is a spectacle, but in a bad way. Obama is a spectacle in a good way.

____________________

Justin:

I can't prove that they do, nor do I need to. I'm not attempting to convince you of anything. You are welcome to your own opinion. I don't know for sure if they do or not, which is why I've asked you for a source. In my opinion, however, the evidence seems to point towards weighting parties.

Ten days in a row from Kos without any change whatsoever is too much for me to simply ignore. Hotline adjusted from a nine point or so advantage to a five point advantage over a two or three day period and has held perfectly steady since. Without further evidence I see no reason to go against what the numbers say.

Again, even if you are correct and these polls do not set party ID targets, I still see absolutely nothing misleading in listing the weight of the parties on any given day, which is what I do.

____________________

brambster:

@Justin

You list your daily summaries with highlights of the "weight" for party ID, but to call this "weight" is improper without proof that they are weighting that way.

Some pollsters will occasionally apply some form of party ID weight, similar to how the CBS/NYTimes poll just did, and most likely only when they find that this is significantly out of line.

I can't say certainly that the Research 2000 poll does not, nor the others except for Rasmussen. If you list it as "weight" though, you ought to have something to back that up with besides speculation.

Also consider the fact that Rasmussen primarily weights by party ID, whereas others would use it as a small adjustment without a solid target to reach. So even if another pollster did this, it would still be an apples to oranges comparison.

Party ID weighting has been one of the hottest topics on Pollster for the last three elections. Zogby pioneered this in 2000, but since then his results have been some of the worst of all. Rasmussen had a great year in 2004 without it, and then a terrible skew in 2006 and seemingly in 2008 (unless most other polls are off).

I do know for sure that PPP will very rarely use such weighting when things are out of line, and SurveyUSA does not use party ID weighting, but like most mainstream pollsters, they release their findings.

FYI, if you look at registrations, the country is 42 million Democrat, 31 million Republican, and this is a larger disparity than Rasmussen shows right now. Rasmussen asks "if you are a Republican, press 1, if you are a Democrat, press 2, if you are an Independent, press 3". I know because they called me for their tracking poll. I answered Independent because that is how I am registered, however if they asked me which party I most closely identified with, I would have surely chosen Democrat. Other pollsters ask this question in different ways. So you can't compare one pollster to another without them both using the same wording and choices.

You can however compare one pollster to another on factual demographic data like sex, age and race. You are ignoring that for this red herring of party ID. You are also ignoring the fact that some of these polls are using RV samples and others are using LV samples, and LV models typically favor Republicans, but some believe that in a high turnout election, an RV sample is most appropriate.

I do appreciate your notes on the movement, but I think the debate about weighting is speculation and shouldn't be included while ignoring other demographic data. I would really love to know how Rasmussen's heavy use of party ID weighting skews their demographic data in comparison to the others (and it is clearly skewed as their results are currently, and generally have been slanted, and sometimes extremely so).

____________________

metsmets:

@Stillow
I love you man! I'm seeing the Pallin effect too! "People without passports" have now got their champion. This is a radically new view of politics. You don't need to travel to any stinkin' country just to find out that it's not like the Good Ole USA! Some places they don't even speak English, for Heavens sake!

I think Pallin is the greatest thing in a long, long time, to come along.. for..
..the Democratic Party! We love her man!
Go to her rallies! We want her on the news! We can't gert enough Pallin minutes!

Oh, you were serious?

____________________

brambster:

@Justin

Here's a recent article by Mark Blumenthal that generally goes over the issue and the differences:

http://www.nationaljournal.com/njonline/print_friendly.php?ID=mp_20080918_5097

____________________

metsmets:

Oh Rassmussen, Oh Rasmussen,
You've got the wrong guy ahead agin
Oh Rassmussen, Oh Rasmussen,
You've got the wrong guy ahead agin
Your polls are daily joys with signs of hope for these Red State boys!
Oh Rassmussen, Oh Rasmussen,
You've got the wrong guy ahead agin
Oh Rassmussen, Oh Rasmussen,
You've got the wrong guy ahead agin

____________________

metsmets:

I see a red state and I want it voting Barack
No colors anymore I voted for Barack!
I see the Prez walk by dressed in his Paulson robes
I have to turn my head until this assh*le goes
I see a line of states that could vote for Barack
With Florida and all, we want them to come back.
I see Pallin turn their heads and quickly look away
Like a new born baby it was only cute for a day
I look inside myself and see my heart is for Barack
I see a red state and I want it voting Barack

Apologies to Mick and Keith

____________________

Paul:

RE: DailyKos which overall shows Obama up 6, adjusted for national 2004 exit poll:

Based on region: Obama up 8
Based on age: Obama up 5
Based on gender: Obama up 7
Based on race: Obama up 4

____________________

Justin:

Brambster,

I'm am completely aware of all of these things. However, whether or not these polls have targets for party identification, the parties do in fact represent a specific weight in each poll. The same can be said of any demographic (sex, age, location, ethnicity) regardless of whether or not they are specific targets. Each represents a certain weight in each poll, and I think showing this helps people decide if they are in agreement with the results.

Party ID is the only demographic representative of all the others. One's age does not correlate with one's ethnicity, nor does one's location correlate with one's sex. Party ID encompasses all of these things which is why I choose to represent it in a quick easy to follow post. Anyone wanting more specifics has as much access to them as I do.

You keep assuming that I'm not aware of the differences between results from differently worded questions, etc. I am aware. I do understand. I still do not think I am being in any way misleading and I think I give the representative information available in a small easy to follow post. If people do not agree they are free to scroll right past.

____________________

Justin:

Brambster, I should add that I'm not going to be checking this post again, so if you've anything further please save it for tomorrow's tracking poll. :)

____________________

cinnamonape:

Someone tell me how a 5 minute meeting between Obama and Raines somehow makes him an "advisor"? McCain better be very careful or there will will be all sorts of meetings with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac officials exposed.

Wait! Steve Schmidt, McCain's chief campaign strategist, was actually paid $50K a month as a lobbyist for further de-regulation of Fannie and Freddie...and Phil Gramm (McCain's principle Financial Advisor...because McCain has said "I don't understand economics) pushed through the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act...through the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (Vote 54 Republicans FOR/ 45 Democrats Against). THAT Law, supported by the "deregulator" John McCain was what opened the floodgates for this utter greed by the financial giants.

A five minute meeting in an open event vs. years of backroom dealings and strategy meetings with lobbyists for the industry. Takes your choice!

BTW when is Cindy McCain going to reveal her tax forms so we can see just where HER investments and business deals lie? After all - Johnny has been involved in making laws for years that clearly could have made Cindy Lou a LOT wealthier.

If you are going to raise the issue of Beau Biden then Cindy had better reveal HER TAX FORMS and investment links.

Wasn't that precisely the issue with Johnny Boys problems with Charles Keating...helping out a business buddy of his wife?

____________________

brambster:

@Justin

If you put "weight" next to a percentage of party identification, and that pollster doesn't weight at all by party ID, you are in fact being misleading. No if's, and's or but's about it.

If you change that "weight" to another term such as "findings", that would be accurate, however I believe it would be an improper focus on just one finding that rarely dictates how a pollster weights. I would be very curious to find if Rasmussen has to massively distory demographics in order to fit their model. I would be greatly interested in daily results on an individual basis. I would be greatly interested in knowing if a pollster does callbacks, and if so for how long. I would be greatly interested in knowing how a pollster identifies likely voters, and who gets thrown out.

Polls are so much more. You should focus more on the bigger picture and the trends rather than the difference between two individual polls anyway. That's what this site does. They don't even care if a pollster is partisan or biased in method, figuring that it will all work out in the trend.

____________________



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