- Joined
- Jan 8, 2010
- Messages
- 72,141
- Reaction score
- 58,870
- Location
- NE Ohio
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
So now that Romney is doing better in polling, where did all the claims of poll rigging go?
So now that Romney is doing better in polling, where did all the claims of poll rigging go?
What poll rigging?
All the panty twisting and crying about the media being in a conspiracy to make Romney's polling look worse than actual popular sentiment. Were you not here the last three weeks?
To me, its a perfect example on how the opinion makers in the popular media truly lead the conservatives in this country like shephards.
All the panty twisting and crying about the media being in a conspiracy to make Romney's polling look worse than actual popular sentiment. Were you not here the last three weeks?
To me, its a perfect example on how the opinion makers in the popular media truly lead the conservatives in this country like shephards.
Conspiracy?
It's an established fact that certain polls were over sampling Democrats and under sampling Republican and independent voters.
Presidential elections are high-stakes affairs. So perhaps it is no surprise that when supporters of one candidate do not like the message they are hearing from the polls they tend to blame the messenger.
In 2004, Democratic Web sites were convinced that the polls were biased toward George W. Bush, asserting that they showed an implausible gain in the number of voters identifying as Republicans. But in fact, the polls were very near the actual result. Mr. Bush defeated John Kerry by 2.5 percentage points, close to (in fact just slightly better than) the 1- or 2-point lead that he had on average in the final polls. Exit polls that year found an equal number of voters describing themselves as Democrats and Republicans, also close to what the polls had predicted.
Since President Obama gained ground in the polls after the Democrats’ convention, it has been the Republicans’ turn to make the same accusations. Some have said that the polls are “oversampling” Democrats and producing results that are biased in Mr. Obama’s favor. One Web site, unskewedpolls.com, contends that even Fox News is part of the racket in what it says is a “trend of skewed polls that oversample Democratic voters to produce results favorable for the president.”
The criticisms are largely unsound, especially when couched in terms like “oversampling,” which implies that pollsters are deliberately rigging their samples.
But pollsters, at least if they are following the industry’s standard guidelines, do not choose how many Democrats, Republicans or independent voters to put into their samples — any more than they choose the number of voters for Mr. Obama or Mitt Romney. Instead, this is determined by the responses of the voters that they reach after calling random numbers from telephone directories or registered voter lists.
Pollsters will re-weight their numbers if the demographics of their sample diverge from Census Bureau data. For instance, it is typically more challenging to get younger voters on the phone, so most pollsters weight their samples by age to remedy this problem.
So now that Romney is doing better in polling, where did all the claims of poll rigging go?
Internal emails between senior officials at The Gallup Organization, obtained by The Daily Caller, show senior Obama campaign adviser David Axelrod attempting to subtly intimidate the respected polling firm when its numbers were unfavorable to the president.
After Gallup declined to change its polling methodology, Obama’s Department of Justice hit it with an unrelated lawsuit that appears damning on its face.
TheDC is withholding the identities of the Gallup officials to protect them from potential retaliation from Obama’s campaign and his administration.
Employees at the venerable Gallup polling firm suggested they felt threatened by Obama campaign adviser David Axelrod when he questioned the methodology of a mid-April poll showing Mitt Romney leading the president – according to internal emails published Thursday.
That poll showed Romney leading Obama 48-43 percent.
The exchange, according to emails published by The Daily Caller, started when Axelrod sent a tweet saying the tracking poll was “saddled with some methodological problems” and directing followers to a National Journal story in which a professor suggested outdated sampling.
According to the email chain titled “Axelrod vs. Gallup,” the White House in addition asked that a Gallup staffer “come over and explain our methodology,” which was apparently perceived as a subtle threat.
A Gallup official said in an email he thought Axelrod’s pressure “sounds a little like a Godfather situation.”
Yes, it's an established fact and that quote did nothing to take away from it.
Ok, but that means gallup had integrity in face of potential pressure, not that gallup is biased.
Ok, but that means gallup had integrity in face of potential pressure, not that gallup is biased.
Except ... Gallup then changed its methodology to return more favorable results to the Obama administration.
I just went over that with Maggie, her sources actually stood up for Gallup even though she didn't intend that. Can you do better?
Conspiracy?
It's an established fact that certain polls were over sampling Democrats and under sampling Republican and independent voters.
Except ... Gallup then changed its methodology to return more favorable results to the Obama administration.
It's a statistical fact that most polls usually overrate democratic support. 2008, for example.So now that Romney is doing better in polling, where did all the claims of poll rigging go?
Do you have any evidence of that? I haven't seen anything showing Gallup changing their methodology.
It's a statistical fact that most polls usually overrate democratic support. 2008, for example.
a) NY Times is a joke. :lol:You must have not looked at my citation from nate silver.
It's a statistical fact that most polls usually overrate democratic support. 2008, for example.
Oxymoron? rofla) dismissing a valid source and expert statistician
There are no facts in the article. It is nothing but rhetoric for hacks to eat up.b) I see you didn't bother to read it with an objective lense
ahahahahahaha no, just no.c) That is from 2008 and has nothing to do with this election.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?