2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumNew General Election Poll: Trump 43%, Clinton 39%, 12% someone else, 5% undecided
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/white_house_watchStarting to get a little scared here. A Trump presidency would be a disaster akin to the Brexit.
RBInMaine
(13,570 posts)scscholar
(2,902 posts)I'm so confused by the new rules. I wish there was a page that explained them.
InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)Response to GeorgiaPeanuts (Original post)
rjsquirrel This message was self-deleted by its author.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Maru Kitteh
(28,340 posts)ismnotwasm
(41,989 posts)SoLeftIAmRight
(4,883 posts)on that you can be assured
MineralMan
(146,317 posts)Don't get scared. Get ready to work on GOTV. That's my suggestion.
Help Democrats to flip Georgia! That's what you can do to help. Please tell me you'll work on that.
JRLeft
(7,010 posts)GeorgiaPeanuts
(2,353 posts)...just like the Brexit Remain voters were.
JRLeft
(7,010 posts)brush
(53,785 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)GoCubsGo
(32,086 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)And perusing the site moments ago to check, they are STILL the only pollster allowed to be posted there without the possibility of being banned.
NurseJackie
(42,862 posts)Couldn't have said it better myself!
tallahasseedem
(6,716 posts)Nothing more needs to be said. Except that they're trying to drive a wedge in Democrats and depress our turnout.
JRLeft
(7,010 posts)woolldog
(8,791 posts)on the Quinipiac poll results (that had Clinton at only +2) to create a false narrative that Trump is surging. Unfortunately for Rassmussen, there are a bunch of other GE polls released today that flatly contradict Rassmussen's poll and are a lot more credible.
Rassmusen did the same thing in the 2012 election with Obama and Romney. When an outlier bad poll came out for Obama, Rassmussen would come out with its own poll that was bad for Obama. I posted then about this trend and how I thought Rass was massaging the numbers.
JRLeft
(7,010 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)They tried to create a false narrative of a McCain boost from the Palin announcement when multiple other polls showed him sinking even further because the world could tell immediately she was a fucking moron.
And on every liberal internet forum I browsed during '08 and '12, the concern trolls always touted Rasmussen.
uponit7771
(90,347 posts)Renew Deal
(81,861 posts)still_one
(92,217 posts)or the PPP poll? Clinton 48 Trump 44
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/
Doesn't fit your talking point perhaps, so you post the rasmussen poll.
Excuse me while I remain skeptical of your concern
BlueNoMatterWho
(880 posts)still_one
(92,217 posts)filtering, which doesn't tell the full story.
However, National Polls, while they may serve as a talking point, do not represent an accurate picture of the general election.
For one thing, states determine through the electoral college who will be the next president, and national polls don't fully describe the effect that more populous states have on the electoral college.
Right after a contentious primary, and before the Democratic Convention, I view most of the polls with skepticism. After the Democratic convention, that is where I believe most people will start to pay attention
SheenaR
(2,052 posts)that Rasmussen is very much a Republican leaning poll outlet and has been for a long time.
We post polls here frequently that have left leaning biases confirmed by Silver's analysis of the pollsters.
Attack the methodology? Fine.
Don't jump down the author's throat because you don't like them reporting facts.
I see this as a major outlier, but to attack someone for posting it is stupid.
Well said. I like to know the good the bad and the ugly when it comes to the polling. Not that I'll believe it all, but I want as much info as possible. And I hate the idea of people not posting info they have for fear of being criticized because the result is not to our liking.
rocktivity
(44,576 posts)rocktivity
Politicalboi
(15,189 posts)Unless of course she should heel. And she may move over if Bernie goes Green.
rocktivity
(44,576 posts)"ANYONE else" would have been a more honest and professional choice.
rocknation
Maru Kitteh
(28,340 posts)Sanders is voting for Hillary Clinton, so it would be weird for him to "go green" - since he's voting for the Democratic Nominee.
And Jill who?
Response to Politicalboi (Reply #33)
rjsquirrel This message was self-deleted by its author.
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)Fuck her.
apnu
(8,758 posts)They mean nothing today, tomorrow and on November 8th, 2016. State polls are important, its the states EV's that elect the President.
La Lioness Priyanka
(53,866 posts)Especially if you are in a swing state or a republican leaning state
Gothmog
(145,303 posts)You got to be kidding
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)Nate Sliver says: Donald Trump Has A 20 Percent Chance Of Becoming President
By Nate Silver
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/donald-trump-has-a-20-percent-chance-of-becoming-president/
GeorgiaPeanuts
(2,353 posts)BlueNoMatterWho
(880 posts)Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)Nate Silver has written many articles about Rasmussen's inaccuracy. 538 gives them a "C" grade and says they average +2 toward Republicans, but that doesn't account for stunts like this poll which includes a nonexistent "someone else" in candidate options.
BlueNoMatterWho
(880 posts)as well.
Godhumor
(6,437 posts)Rasmussen does both of these things as does the OANN/Gravis poll that also gets counted. They don't care about the partisanship of the pollster.
LexVegas
(6,067 posts)obamanut2012
(26,080 posts)LenaBaby61
(6,974 posts)Are or have turned into outlier polls.
I know Nate Silver gives Q polling a high grade, but they're the same folks who one month ago had Bernie losing 10 points off a 14 point lead over Trump in Ohio when Bernie was doing well in the primaries. Q poll also is "projecting" currently that the white vote WILL increase by 2% more this election cycle and that minority voting will go down by that same 2%. They also had a few other "weird" stats in that Q poll from a month ago IIRC saying that Trump was winning 33% of the Hispanic vote, and I find that HIGHLY unlikely. They're the same folks who gave us a Pres. Romney and Pres. McCain aren't they?
As we know, the news folks LOVE this 'horse race' narrative, which is why you had them touting two polls late out of California saying that Bernie had a chance at winning California or was only 1 point down there vs Clinton when the race was not that close (I live in CA., and no poll ever had Bernie ahead or that close here but those 2 'horse-race' polls late). The methodology of those 2 polls was "odd" to put it mildly, which is WHY the primary race. For goodness sake, PPP asked people in their latest poll from yesterday if they'd rather have an asteroid (or meteorite) hit the earth or vote for Hillary or Trump. What kind of ridiculous questioning is that? Polling is only as good as the methodology you're using and the questions you ask, which is why the Q poll, PPP and especially Rasmussen polls been "questioned" on MANY an occasion during these last few election cycles.
tonyt53
(5,737 posts)Lord Magus
(1,999 posts)A stunt like that is bad even by Rasmussen standards.
woolldog
(8,791 posts)Did they do the same in previous polls? Their previous poll had Clinton up 4 now she's down 4 in a week? That's absurd. Rassmussen is playing the public for fools.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)Don't get scared! Get organized and GOTV!
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Godhumor
(6,437 posts)Someone walks up to me and says there is one national poll that has the Republican ahead. Without knowing anything else, I'd say Rasmussen.
https://twitter.com/ForecasterEnten/status/748528979339055104
MyNameGoesHere
(7,638 posts)Peacetrain
(22,877 posts)lunamagica
(9,967 posts)of him.
But you don't post those. I think it's because they scare you. You are afraid she (gasp) could win
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)Squinch
(50,955 posts)David__77
(23,420 posts)I think the a large segment of the Republican Party does not want him. I also think that he's a viable candidate. Finally, I think that Trump would lose and not win if the election were held tomorrow.
WI_DEM
(33,497 posts)and give your faux "starting to get a little scared here."
Zen Democrat
(5,901 posts)Renew Deal
(81,861 posts)GeorgiaPeanuts
(2,353 posts)blue neen
(12,321 posts)especially since this poll scared you so much. I can't understand why anyone who wants to help Hillary's campaign would wait.
andym
(5,444 posts)So there is a good chance that the trend really has been in favor of Trump in the last week. That said there is plenty of time for things to improve.
LenaBaby61
(6,974 posts)Also is using the methodology that 2% more whites will vote this time around, and that minority voting will go down by that same 2%. They also 'believe' Trump has at least 33% of the Hispanic vote and I find that hard to believe.
Trump had one of the worst weeks ever, and his polling went up so much that it reversed (by double digits) a much better week that Hillary & Liz Warren had together?
uponit7771
(90,347 posts)... non white which is what the other polls measure.
yellowcanine
(35,699 posts)And the trend is toward HRC in the battleground states. Hard to see how DT turns that around with hardly any national campaign organization and little money for ads. And HRC has a strong national organization and is already dropping millions on ads into the battleground states.
Doctor Jack
(3,072 posts)When most pollsters were showing Clinton and Sanders ahead of Trump by 15+ points, Rasmussen had Trump ahead by 2 or 3 points. In 2012, Rasmussen had Romney leading for the entire election and right before the election, predicted that Romney would win in a landslide.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_michael_barone/going_out_on_a_limb_romney_beats_obama_handily
Now, I'm not sure if the handwringers among us remember, but Romney lost....by a lot.
DemonGoddess
(4,640 posts)with alerting this garbage, because it IS garbage. As it is, alerting is something I rarely do anyway. For something that skates the line for ToS, it's not worth the hassle.
But Rasmussen??? REALLY????
MFM008
(19,814 posts)now the media wouldn't want anyone going in there with blowout numbers would they?
So lets make it a race.
Outlier
ALL Rasmusson polls are outliers
They had Romney as president remember?
They need to stop polling repubes on land lines.
MADem
(135,425 posts)If Rasmussen is saying go right, you'd do well to go left!
ibeplato
(66 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)They consistently oversample Republicans in their polls.
I haven't even checked this time and I would bet good money they have done this again. I'll post later after I check.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)"As we have noted many times, there is a disagreement within the polling industry as to whether or not polling firms should weight or adjust their sample to reflect a specific mix of Democrats, Republicans, and unaffiliated voters"
----------------------------------------------
No there is no disagreement. The best way to make a poll accurate is to use stratified sampling to make sure your sample accurately reflects the demographics of the population in every way. Party identification, race, religion, gender, orientation, etc.
The only folk who disagree are Rasmussen because a completely accurate result is not their intent.
emulatorloo
(44,131 posts)They aren't credible.
grossproffit
(5,591 posts)I said the same thing during the primaries.
JI7
(89,251 posts)ram2008
(1,238 posts)That being said, national polls have it at about 4-5 point Clinton lead nationally. That is a bit scary, but we'll know more after the conventions.
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)exactly besting Donald Trump in one on one matchups. Why is anyone surprised that those results are still showing up?
There was another candidate who consistently bested Trump everywhere, but oddly enough he did not prevail in the primary. Just don't be shocked that things haven't changed all that much since the end of the primary season.
unblock
(52,251 posts)brexit was a stupid, self-inflicted wound, but people are making much more of it than it is.
they already have their own currency, and the trading relationships have to remain -- the uk is too dependent on the eu for trade.
it's a pointless administrative hassle for the government and businesses alike for them to effectively swap one big bureaucratic system for another, which, at the end of the day, will be remarkably similar out of necessity.
even immigration can't change much because businesses will howl too much. at a minimum, anyone already in the uk will be grandfathered in, and if anything immigration will increase so people can get in before the anticipated cutoff. moreover, the eu is already pressing for freedom of movement as a precondition for continued free access to the eu market.
they will waste a whole lot of time and effort to change very little.
trump, on the other hand, would be an unmitigated disaster of monumental proportions with tremendous lasting effects on our society, our government, our politics, our international relations, etc.
RandySF
(58,899 posts)silvershadow
(10,336 posts)I don't trust anything are this point. I am just going to let it all play out now. And support our good Democratic candidates up and down the ballot. I wish us all good luck.
obamanut2012
(26,080 posts)Missed you, bud!
GeorgiaPeanuts
(2,353 posts)I looked through "My Posts" and didn't see any such thing. But awesome baseless accusation about my motives.
Night Watchman
(743 posts)Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Thanks for the concern.
Also, Trump is not going to be president.