General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumshrmjustin
(71,265 posts)virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)I was surprised when I looked at the 2012 final polls.....
I suspect that the current polls undercount Democratic support even more.
AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)He clearly outperformed the polls.....by almost 4 whole percent, it seems. And if we can get results that good in a "main" election year, then it stands to reason that we may have some surprisingly positive results this year, too, especially if early voting numbers are anything to go by.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)When the underlying turnout assumptions are wrong, you can see huge surprises.
kentuck
(111,104 posts)So, if the pollsters are wrong, they can always invent an excuse. By keeping the races within the margin of error, they can maintain their credibility, however it may turn out. If they are lucky, they will get more right than wrong. Otherwise, they are not telling us a whole lot that we don't already know. Don't bet on any of their picks.
spanone
(135,847 posts)virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)I could bet Republican, and if Democrats didn't win, I could at least console myself with the cash.
tazkcmo
(7,300 posts)They bet on everything, even on how many people are betting.
world wide wally
(21,747 posts)But it would be so satisfying just to see the talking heads on TV eat crow (among other things)
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)I loved watching Fox announce Obama winning the Presidency
mahina
(17,673 posts)Nothing like a civil rights historic event to bring people out of apathy.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)hopefully the racists are complacent.
Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)Silver, Wang et all are mostly giving the Republicans about 2-1 to take the Senate - likely, but not certain.
virtualobserver
(8,760 posts)if the pollsters get the percentages wrong by misreading the effectiveness of the ground game on either side, the result could be surprising. mid-terms are harder to predict.
TlalocW
(15,384 posts)Is that most people - well, Fox - saying that Romney was going to win is that they were looking at national polls. I remember the only pundit on Fox to bring up a poll that said Obama was going to win was Dennis Miller to Bill O'Reilly, and he said that he didn't believe it. National polls don't really mean much when it comes to the president - it's the state polls, and how many different routes to the magic number of electoral votes each candidate had. Obama had the advantage in both, and I think a lot of us here knew it as we were looking at those polls, and we're into these kinds of details. Corporate media can't - or won't - work that way because it involves more work, and once again, in the case of Fox, supplying their viewers with more information than their pea-brains can handle.
But now we're looking at state and even district polls. I'm still hopeful that they're skewed or wrong in some way - it seems to me that the media are going to push the whole republicans always do well in off-year elections meme come hell or high water, but from some of the things about early voter turn out seems to be playing well for us, and as happened in 2012, I think a lot of voters came out specifically because the GOP was trying to take their votes away, and I hope that happens again.
TlalocW