Skip to main content

[bumped — Barbara Morrill]

Daily Kos-SEIU polling banner

Public Policy Polling for Daily Kos & SEIU. 9/27-30. Likely voters. MoE ±2.8% (9/13-16 results):

So Republicans are convinced the polls are skewed:

Do you think pollsters are intentionally skewing their polls this year to help Barack Obama, or not?

Just 13 percent of Republicans eschew the ridiculous notion that there is a polling industry-wide conspiracy to undercount Republican support in the 2012 presidential election.

So are the 71 percent of Republicans who buy that conspiracy theory responding to last week's full-court efforts to explain away Romney's abysmal poll numbers, or is this another manifestation of the already existing GOP pathos and persecution complex at work?

If we asked, "Do you think the laws of physics are intentionally helping Barack Obama, or not?", chances are a majority of Republicans would answer "yes," since it's clear to them that the whole universe is arrayed against them. Reality, after all, has a well-known liberal bias.

However, the aggregate opinion polling does a great job of predicting final election results, so what happens when once again, the polling is proven generally right on Election Day? Conservatives have effectively built their very own reality distortion field to filter out unwelcome information. But at some point in this case, reality has to intrude. So if the polls are wrong, and the election results validate the polls, then what? Charges of voter fraud?

In other poll findings, Obama leads Romney 49-45, the same four-point margin as last week's 50-46 findings. But for fun, we split out the results into red, blue and purple states:

We used an expansive definition of "swing state", so that's: CO, FL, IN, IA, MI, MO, NH, NV, NC, NM, OH, PA, VA and WI. These states are 40 percent of the sample, so factor in a higher margin of error (about 4.67 percent).

Blue states: CA, CT, DE, DC, HI, IL, MA, ME, MD, MN, NJ, NY, OR, RI, VT and WA.

Red states: AL, AK, AZ, AR, GA, ID, KS, KY, LA, MS, MT, NE, ND, OK, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, WV and WY. The Blue and Red states are each 30 percent of the sample (MoE 5.39 percent).

That Obama leads in Blue states by 19 points isn't surprising. But Obama losing the Red states by just 11 is. It shows that even in hostile territory, Obama gets significantly broader support than the other guy. It also suggests that Democratic down-ballot candidates running in Red areas will have a somewhat easier time getting to 50 percent than Republicans running in Blue areas (think North Dakota and Arizona Senate races, versus Massachusetts and Connecticut).

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  This is the GOP's opening shot (10+ / 0-)
    However, the aggregate opinion polling does a great job of predicting final election results, so what happens when once again, the polling is proven generally right on Election Day?
    in their new 4 year battle to de-legitimize President Obama. Birtherism didn't work. Charges of Kenyan-Muslim-Socialism didn't work. There's no Lewinski-ism to use against Obama. Republicans can never ever admit defeat or that they are wrong. So clearly, the election must have been STOLEN.

    NC-4 (soon to be NC-6) Obama/Biden 2012

    by bear83 on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 05:16:18 AM PDT

    •  Serves them right (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Loose Fur, skod, ljb, jfromga, JBraden

      Repubs hate everyone unless you are rich and/or white, hateful, bitter, racist, homophobic, males who drag drag their women along with them.
      60% of women support Obama!  Hello?
      Women and enlightened men will vote for Obama in droves!  What could Romney say tomorrow night that could change that?  He can't change his sick party and that is the problem for Romney.
      With Romney, you get the bat shit crazy teabagging repubs too!  They will lead him around by the nose.  Ryan would tell him he has to sign a bill and Romney will just say where do I sign?  He will be just like W only a better talker.  He will govern in the CEO mode by just throwing out grand general ideas expection the crazy repubs in the House and Senate to come up with legislation.  We can't let that happen!

      •  As conservaton mormon, 1% supports War on Women (0+ / 0-)

        While some are no doubt more liberal, on women's right, most mormons seem to be like those I have known: 'submit to your man, STFU and spread your legs'.

        Oh, they pretty it up with happy talk, but at its core that seems to be that church's view of women.  Hardly surprising given they still say African-Americans have the 'Mark of Cain' b/c of skin color.  Yeah, being black makes you  a bunch of murdering sibling killing scum.  Any wonder where Moneybag's 47% thinking comes from?

  •  But, ARE THE POLLS ABOUT SKEWING SKEWED??!! (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bear83, IM, kos, jfromga, Thorby Baslim

    See??!!!

    Well???!

    Yes or no?

    ...

    ...
    ...
    ...

    See !!  ??

    "So, am I right or what?"

    by itzik shpitzik on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 05:18:43 AM PDT

  •  That 45% of independents who buy into this (9+ / 0-)

    ..conspiracy theory bullshit is annoying. Are we becoming a  nation of complete morans?

    Free Image Hosting at www.ImageShack.us

  •  That poll shows a majority of Independents think.. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TexasTom

    ...the polls are being skewed. That sucks.

  •  I find it noteworthy that the Repugs "buy into" (7+ / 0-)

    any damn position that is put forth on Fox Noise no matter how absurd it may be.

    I used to tell my students when asked how I voted - "I've never been rich enough to vote Republican".

    Now I would answer that "I could never put critical thinking aside long enough to vote Republican"!

    GOP - "Home of the Whopper!"

    by Templar on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 05:24:53 AM PDT

  •  I think the GOP is laying the groundwork to steal (0+ / 0-)

    The election. Results compared to polls are how we judge the validity of elections worldwide.

    •  So.. if Romney wins, the election was stolen? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TexasTom

      Definitely?

      The other possibility - i.e. that the polls are indeed using models skewed too far toward Dems - is impossible? Unthinkable?

      Just think about that for a sec.  If Romney were to win by vote fraud, they would have to flip 5 or 6 percentage points (at least) from the current polls.

      How exactly do you steal that many millions of votes?  Especially when the consensus around here is that vote fraud doesn't even exist?  Disenfranchise that many voters?  Most laws attempting to do so have been shot down.

      So.. how do you steal that many votes?

      •  4% lead or over (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        EcosseNJ

        will make it very hard for them to steal it.   Don't forget that right now half the country is voting already.  Campaigns really need to adjust to this time frame.  Their conventions were too late and Obama has been very smart to get out there early and often.

      •  Fair questions (0+ / 0-)

        It's not impossible, but pretty unlikely, that there's liberal bias in every single polling organization that nobody noticed until this election. A widespread methodology error is more plausible.

        How do you steal that many votes? By keeping Those People away from the polls, through "purges" of the voter rolls, underserving poor voting districts, and of course having ties with the voting machine companies. Those are some of the tactics that have avoided prosecution.

      •  they don't have to flip that many votes (0+ / 0-)

        These national polls aren't much help. They only need to flip votes in a few key states (Florida and Ohio anyone?).
        I agree that they are trying to lay the groundwork for stealing the election.
        A number of people around here have been saying that the only explanation for the utter failure of the Romney campaign is that they're not really trying. They know that they've already bought the elections that count.

    •  No not necessarily. This is all about turnout and (0+ / 0-)

      the screens used by polling firms to predict turnout.  If turnout is like 2008, then we win and the polls were right.

        If not, we might not win....but it doesn't mean it was stolen, just that the prediction of a 2008 turnout was incorrect and the poll screen used were incorrect.  

      •  I've been arguing .. (0+ / 0-)

        On another forum where it is stated that the difference in this election as opposed to 2008 is that white people will show up more this time versus 2008,a poster on that other forum stated that the white non-hispanic vote dropped relatively from 2004 to 2008 and this time around the demographic will look more like 2004. This demographic favors Romney.  I pointed out that yes the Asian vote went from 44.1% of all eligible voting age Asians voted in 2004, it went up to 47.6% in 2008. Now for Hispanics it went from 47.2% in 04 to 49.9% in 08, for Blacks it went from 60% in 04 to 64.7% in 08. The white-non hispanic went from 89.4% to 90% but the number of registered voters in that demographic went down a 100,000 from 04 to 08 despite an increase in population for the demographic of 3,000,000.

           I rebutted that he couldn't cherry pick since even if what he says about White non hispanic coming out more in 2012 versus 2008 ,almost assuredly 40% of that will probably vote Democratic furthermore if one read the Census Reports in age demographics the 75 and older crowd turned at 88.6% in 08 versus 86.8% in 04 or to the tune of 400,000 more voters in 2008 versus 2004,the 65 to 74 demographic went from 92.1% in 04 to 92.7% in 08 to the tune of 1,160,000 more votes in 08 versus 04 . One can also say the same as per the 55-64 age group  and  these three age groups favor Romney.

           These poll deniers want to use a certain years electorate  but as I feel like I've shown choosing a certain year might give you an a boost in a certain area BUT in reading through them you might find surprises that hurt.

        •  I made a mistake.. (0+ / 0-)

          In the  comparison of Hispanics,Blacks and Asians showing up I used the % of voting age adult citizens figures versus the % of registered voters I used for the three aforementioned age groups.. However the % of RV's actually voting for those 3 age groups did go up from 2004 to 2008 .

      •  likely voter models?? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        chrismorgan

        Look at last month's AP's poll showing Obama +10 in RV's but only +1 in LV however their likely voter model shows only 63% of registered voters  showing up to vote whereas in 1996 82.3% of RV's showed up,in 2000 85.5%, in 2004 88.5% and in 2008 89.6%. If history is any example people who are registering do show up for the most part.

        •  I think this is partly due to (0+ / 0-)

          increased computerization of voter roles, better scrutiny of voter registration forms (knocking out those with bad addresses, etc.) and just overall cleaning up of voter rolls.

          If you take people off when they move, just that would increase the percentage who vote, because if they're not there but not removed, they are counted as not voting.

          So if you had a precinct with 200 voters on the rolls, but 50 of those registrations had moved and not been purged off the rolls, you could have EVERY eligible voter in that precinct vote and STILL only have 75% of 'registered' voters vote.

          If the rolls get cleaned up (and computerizing them makes that much easier, since you can cross reference with death records and drivers licenses) it stands to reason that your voting percentage could increase substantially, even if the raw number of voters hadn't budged.

          •  I think you're making a strong assumption... (0+ / 0-)

            ...that AP knows who is actually registered.

            In that poll, 79% of respondents reported being registered.  In the 2008 Current Population Survey, 71% of voting age citizens reported being registered -- and even that was probably high. (The turnout numbers that bridav cites appear to be from the CPS.) So that probably accounts for part of the gap cited by bridav, but not all of it.

            Election protection: there's an app for that!
            Better Know Your Voting System with the Verifier!

            by HudsonValleyMark on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 01:44:42 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yep... (0+ / 0-)

               That's where I got it from . I posted it because a lot of people say turnout is going to be so down but if one looks at the historical record if people register they vote.

            •  Ok I went back and (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              HudsonValleyMark

              I looked back at the AP poll which showed 1512 adults being interviewed ,of which 1282 reported being registered in their current domicile . AP then narrowed the 1282 registered voter figure down to 807 interviewees which is 63%  of the totaled  RV field.

                I'm just saying history seems to show that a far higher % of registered voters show up at the polls then what this poll shows.

              •  sure; just to recap... (0+ / 0-)

                If you're trying to figure out whether AP's likely voter model is reasonable, per se -- or how unreasonable it is?! -- I think it may be better to look at likely voters as a percentage of adults, which is about 53%. According to Michael McDonald, turnout in 2008 was about 57% of the voting age population -- which I think is a better standard of comparison, for this purpose, than voting-eligible population. So, it's off, but not crazy off.

                The point of a likely voter model isn't to estimate turnout; it's just to reduce bias in the sample. I think we'd need a lot more information to evaluate the AP poll on that score.

                All that aside, official statistics indicate that in 2008, something like 73% of registered voters turned out -- depending on how one handles Election Day Registration states. The CPS figure is higher, partly due to overreporting, but also because surveys don't pick up on "deadwood" in the registration rolls. Regardless of the exact figure one uses and why, I agree that most registered voters do vote in presidential elections. (The ones who don't, generally don't remain registered very long -- although that can vary a lot.)

                Election protection: there's an app for that!
                Better Know Your Voting System with the Verifier!

                by HudsonValleyMark on Wed Oct 03, 2012 at 01:54:22 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

    •  Then what? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DSPS owl

      What do you suppose all the millions of Americans will do knowing this is just another stolen election?  Will they sit back and let them put the final nail in our country's coffin. That is exactly what would happen.  I can't stand the thought of them stealing it again.  It would not be pretty this time.

    •  Oh dear god (7+ / 0-)

      I swear, the fraudsters are as annoying as the birthers and poll conspiracy theorists.

  •  Honestly, (0+ / 0-)

    that's profoundly frightening.

    "after the Rapture, we get all their shit"

    the albany project.

    by lipris on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 05:30:27 AM PDT

  •  So, (0+ / 0-)

    Obama leads the swing states by 4 to produce the overall 4 point lead?

    (.4)(x)+(.3)(19)+(.3)(-11)=4

    I'mma let you finish, Barack, but the teabaggers have done about the most for international peace of all time.--The collective GOP 10/9/09

    by Superribbie on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 05:33:02 AM PDT

  •  It is more than denial of the polls (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    journeyman

    It is denial of reality itself as the tea party pushes to eliminate every social advance since the feudal ages speaking fondly of slavery and against minimum wage for one example.  Plus after Reagan, Bush and Bush the lesser to adhere to GOP economic policy is insanity.

    Never promote men who seek after a state-established religion; it is spiritual tyranny--the worst of despotism. It is turnpiking the way to heaven by human law, in order to establish ministerial gates to collect toll. John Leland

    by J Edward on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 05:56:00 AM PDT

  •  So why don't you (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    beth meacham, jfromga

    Ask that in the next poll!

    If we asked, "Do you think the laws of physics are intentionally helping Barack Obama, or not?", chances are a majority of Republicans would answer "yes"
    And then broadcast it around the world.
  •  Repubs are driving the "Obama has a lead story" (0+ / 0-)

    in order to lull Dems into complacency and make them think they don't have to vote, because Obama's sure to win.

    Then they accuse pollsters of anti-Repub bias, just to really milk every last possible advantage out of their shameless skullduggery.

    That's how Repubs roll.

    •  And who in their right mind (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      llywrch, askew

      would just sit back and not vote because Obama has it?  Presidential elections take on a life of their own. Folks want to be involve and vote.  It is exciting and anyone who thinks they don't need to vote is in a very low state of mind.

      •  No one would (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        llywrch, journeyman, askew

        that's who.

        The people who quit are the people who are losing. It's true in sports, and it's true in politics. That's why Republicans are freaking out about the polls -- they are worried their troops will sit out this losing election like we did in 2010.

        •  Turn off the game, we're winning. (0+ / 0-)

          I can't waste any more time watching this.  Yeah, I don't think I've ever heard that.

          Ceterum censeo Factionem Republicanam esse delendam.

          by journeyman on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 12:07:51 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I've known plenty of people (0+ / 0-)

            who have left a NASCAR race in the last 50 laps when somebody was up by a huge amount, only to hear as they're driving away that the leader just blew an engine and is out.

            So they miss the come from behind ending, and the best part of the race.

            Same with baseball games - we've left before, when it's damp and/or rainy, there's been a rain delay, it's late, and we're losing by 3. Only to find next morning that we got 5 runs in the 9th inning to win.

            Happens all the time.

            Of course, we would do the same if we were UP by a lot. It's when it's looks like the game is over anyway that people just tune out. When it looks like the one side has an overwhelming lead. It becomes way less interesting then.

            That's part of the reason the press wants it to be close. People will tune THEM out if it looks like it's a foregone conclusion.

            I think it's a good thing the press does that. Keeps people engaged.

      •  If the PTB have made it difficult to vote (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jfromga

        For example, you can't leave work to get to the polling place in time. Or you have to show more ID to register to vote than to buy a gun.

        BTW, I have no excuse not the vote. The state of Oregon will be mailing my ballot to me & my wife soon, & if I forget to vote & mail the ballot in time (which happens a lot), I'll just drive over to the county Elections office & drop it off the weekend before.

        Sheesh, why can't every state be this civilized in voting? (Despite all of my snark, I'd be happy to see even Mississippi & Alabama adopt vote-by-mail.) Do those opposed to making voting easy really envy how people live in Somalia, where there is no socialized medicine, no government, & no organized elections? And Republicans do win elections here in Oregon with vote-by-mail. (That's another issue, for another diary.)

      •  In the state of Maryland, where I live, two (0+ / 0-)

        genntlemen were convicted of criminal fraud for placing robo calls to likely Dem voters in the last gubernatorial election falsely telling people that the Dem candidate had already won and they didn't have to vote.

        Story got no national coverage.

    •  I'm sorry (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      EcosseNJ, askew

      but this is ridiculous.

      Not only does it lack logic, but it lacks reality.

      Republicans are driving the "race is tied" story. The numbers in this poll PROVE THAT by showing that they believe the polls are wrong about Obama's lead.

      And I'd love to see the voter who quits when they're ahead. Sure didn't happen in 2010 when the polls showed big GOP advantages, did it? And it didn't happen in 2006 and 2008 when the Democrats had the big advantages, did it?

  •  Follow the Money (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    journeyman, Dogs are fuzzy

    I keep thinking Republican operatives such as Rove and Morris, etc are MUCH more interested in keeping their own personal income obscenely high than anything else.

    That means - keep the donations rolling at all costs. If you have to lie about skewed polling, so be it. The higher the donations, the more they get to keep.

  •  Conservatives won't do anything more than whine (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    brabc1, DSPS owl, llywrch

    about how horribly cheated they've been, AGAIN!!!

    If Obama wins, I plan to remind them how lucky they are to live in a society that will take care of them no matter how petulant and stupid they act.

  •  The dangerous # is Independents who believe (0+ / 0-)

    That's obviously a sign the disinformation campaign about polls is reaching them, and that's not good.

    Remember that to commit election fraud, you have to have a screen of rationality behind it. If your magical electronic voting machines come out with numbers 10% off the poll numbers, then you have to have some sort of excuse, and this campaign to doubt the polls is intended to cast doubts on the science of polling for a reason.

    Some people are intolerant, and I CAN'T STAND people like that. -- Tom Lehrer

    by TheCrank on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 06:08:18 AM PDT

    •  The indie number is a little misleading (0+ / 0-)

      It's a national number, so it includes red states.  The blue and purple numbers are likely different.  Also, many people who called themselves indie earlier this year are now identifying as Democrats.  That shrinks the pool of indies and the remainder is likely to be more evenly split.  In addition, many tea partiers still do not identify as Republicans.  They still like the indie label.

      Alternative rock with something to say: http://www.myspace.com/globalshakedown

      by khyber900 on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 06:26:05 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Teabaggers (0+ / 0-)

      call themselves independents. It skews those numbers.

  •  I hope this is a rhetorical question. (0+ / 0-)
    So if the polls are wrong, and the election results validate the polls, then what? Charges of voter fraud?
    That's obviously the plan.

    I agree that it's not particularly courageous to solve a problem on the backs of people who are poor, or people who are powerless, or don't have lobbyists, or don't have clout.

    by teknofyl on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 07:03:00 AM PDT

  •  ABC/WAPO and Ras better than PPP in Swing States (0+ / 0-)

    Ras +5 Obama
    Wapo +11 Obama

    PPP is increasingly the conservative outlier.

  •  Ras - 50-45 +Obama in Swing States (0+ / 0-)
  •  Inventing a narrative (0+ / 0-)

    "what happens when once again, the polling is proven generally right on Election Day?"

    This is exactly where this narrative is heading: If the reported election results match the pro-Obama pro-Democratic polling (and, presumably, the exit polls), that's proof that all those inner-city black and brown people were in fact bussed around to multiple polling places and voted multiple times and whatever, so impeach Obama or sue to block him from getting sworn in or some such hue and cry.

  •  If you put Indiana in the swing states why (0+ / 0-)

    in the world didn't you include Arizona and Montana in there?

    "Do what you can with what you have where you are." - Teddy Roosevelt

    by Andrew C White on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 08:37:56 AM PDT

    •  Well, we actually won Indiana last time. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Andrew C White

      I think that makes a difference.

      Ceterum censeo Factionem Republicanam esse delendam.

      by journeyman on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 12:10:14 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  But we're more likely (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        journeyman

        to win Arizona this time and Montana was fairly close last time as well.

        I guess what I am getting at is that the grouping numbers will change based on what is contained in the groups. Seems to me there should be some firm polling percentage cut-off at either end in order to determine the groupings or the numbers just start getting fuzzy.

        "Do what you can with what you have where you are." - Teddy Roosevelt

        by Andrew C White on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 12:26:43 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  I take this more seriously (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    skod

    The claim that the polls are skewed to help Obama can still be used if the final polls match the election day result and Obama wins. The claim will morph into the polls led people to vote for Obama, and that's why he won. Conservatives (not just Republicans, but independents who won't admit being Republicans, and those bizarre remaining conservative Democrats) are still seeking to delegitimatize Obama and with so many people believing it, it will seem plausible.  I was thinking poll denial was good for a laugh until this PPP poll. Now I'm thinking there's a real problem. Maybe news junkies overestimate how much the general public knows about polls. They may have no clue what they are, and find claims of bias thereby plausible. Probably non-conservatives will be amenable to facts like how many pollsters there are or party self-identification being something pollsters find rather than use as a starting point, but not if they're never told how polls work. If unrefuted, it will become common knowledge, despite being wrong.

  •  Epistemic closure. (0+ / 0-)

    "To hunt a species to extinction is not logical."--Spock, in Star Trek IV.

    by Wildthumb on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 11:52:43 AM PDT

  •  They don't believe what they are saying (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    skod

    They are just laying the groundwork for a stolen election which requires discrediting of polls both before the election and exit polling.

  •  Polls are airplane seats on a Boeing 757 of /nt (0+ / 0-)

    yksitoista ulotteinen presidentin shakki. / tappaa kaikki natsit "Nous sommes un groupuscule" (-9.50; -7.03) 政治委员, 政委‽ Warning - some snark above ‽

    by annieli on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 11:53:24 AM PDT

  •  Get $50 if you're a VA Republican! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jfromga

    https://twitter.com/...

    The Virginia Voters Town Hall meeting in Springfield on Saturday morning, October 6th is bringing together a representative sample of Virginia voters to give their views on issues that are at the center of the election campaign. We expect national media representatives to be present to observe and report on the results. We are short on registered Republicans and so all Republicans who apply in the next few days will be accepted to participate.

    Once in a while you get shown the light, in the strangest of places if you look at it right. I'm riding for MS in September. Please donate here if you can.

    by darthstar on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 11:53:33 AM PDT

  •  even if they were skewed... (0+ / 0-)

    it doesn't matter.  people are going to vote as they are going to vote.  a skewed poll favoring a Democratic candidate doesn't make a Republican vote for a Democrat.

    I'm a blue drop in a red bucket.

    by blue drop on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 11:58:10 AM PDT

  •  The polls r just the set up for ACORN's big score (0+ / 0-)

    First the lamestream media (which is all powerful even though "real" Americans don't pay any attention to it) fakes the polls to convince everybody that the Kenyan Usurper winning, then ACORN swoops in (even though it doesn't exist anymore) and stuffs the ballot boxes with Mickey Mouse's votes -- overcoming the GOP's own heroic efforts to get out the cartoon character demographic.

    I know it sounds crazy, but don't worry: Rush will explain the whole thing to us after Nov. 6.

  •  100% of people who think polls are skewed... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mmacdDE

    ...think polls are skewed.  Therefore, I would expect that number to be higher than what it is.  It must be sample bias.  

    Here are the numbers I came up with just by asking a few people in the office:

    Q:  Do you think polls are skewed to help the president?

                YES                 NO

    YES       100%               0%

    NO         31%                69%

    So there you have it:  when you weigh the sample appropriately, you get 131% of people who believe that polls are unfairly skewed.  

    Your poll is clearly wrong, but that's exactly what I'd expect from someone who uses liberal-biased statistics, and not conservamath.  

  •  This is a pretty stupid question probably (0+ / 0-)

    But is there any way to break it down by state?

    I know it would probably be pretty worthless info since the sample size for individual states would be very small, but it would still be something that I would be interested in checking out.

  •  What surprised me (0+ / 0-)

    I really expected the Red states to be "redder" than the Blue states are blue. The fact that evidently the complete reverse is true ought to REALLY worry the Repub pros. Since the demographics are all tending toward the Democratic party (see eg Lindsay "We're not generating enough angry white guys" Graham), it would seem to mean that there will be fewer and fewer safe Repub states, while the Dems continue to hold their own states quite well, thank you. In other words, the likelihood of Repubs winning presidential elections will continue to decline with every passing year.

    If your internal map of reality doesn't match external conditions, bad things happen.--Cambias

    by pimutant on Tue Oct 02, 2012 at 12:35:58 PM PDT

  •  How hard is it? (0+ / 0-)

    While I would much rather be where we are than where Romney is, I am wondering if the polls show how hard the support is for Obama.

    Even though he is not a particularly good candidate, and even though he doesn't really have a good campaign theme, Romney seems to have a pretty hard floor around 45-46%.  It seems like he can't go lower, nationally, than that.

    So I am wondering if Obama has a solid floor above that line, say around 48%, such that it would take a major screw up for him to fall below that.

  •  The kneejerk anti-Obama response (0+ / 0-)

    I think this speaks to how ridiculous the Obama-hate is that drives GOPers. They naturally want to respond to whichever poll choice suggests that Obama, liberals, whoever they're ragging on, is bad or corrupt, so they say, Yes, the polls are skewed in Obama's favor.

    But really...how would lots of inflated polls help our side? People claiming that the polls are skewed seem to be suggesting that Romney is winning but the polls are being skewed toward Obama...why? As a hardcore Obama partisan, if Romney is winning, I damn sure want to know it, objectively and without bias, so I can respond accordingly, give more, make more calls, whatever.

    I don't buy the "logic" that inflating polls and hyping an Obama win somehow helps him win. These people are really grasping.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site