When Even Unskewing Doesn’t Help

September 28, 2012

Comments

THE POLL IN QUESTION: A Fox News-sponsored survey released yesterday that shows President Obama up 5 points, 48 percent to Mitt Romney’s 43.

THE ‘UNSKEWED’ VERSION: Obama up 2 points, 46 percent to 44 percent. You read that right: The president is now in the lead even by Chambers’ math. While the margin is obviously less than the gap the Fox News poll showed, it’s nonetheless noteworthy because it’s a major departure from the past dozen of so of Chambers’ reworked polls that showed Romney well on his way to a historic victory.

16 responses to “When Even Unskewing Doesn’t Help”

Smooth Jazz

September 28, 2012 at 9:43 pm

“When Even Unskewing Doesn’t Help”

LOL, You seem to be overly obsessed with that unskew.com crank. Obviously, what he is posting isn’t the answer either. Neither is Romney losing OH by a gazzilion points. Here is something you can start a thread on, and make snarky posts about, rather than the obligatory “2012 Election is Over, Don’t bother voting” standard fare around here:

http://www.redstate.com/2012/09/27/tracking-ohios-absentee-ballot-requests/

http://theiowarepublican.com/2012/romney-leads-obama-in-latest-tir-poll/

And don’t give me this “It was reported by a Conservative blog” so it must be wrong crap. Are the posts right or not? Are Rop voters in OH registering for signifcantly more absentee ballots in 2012 versus 2008, while the Dems are way downfrom 2008? Is that really happening? You guys post NY Times, MSNBC, CBS, PPP/DailyKOS, Nate Silver, Talking Points Memo and other Liberal sources all the time as fact, so the question should be are those stories true, not that they were reported on blogs that you folks generally do not agree with.

If this is true, all your premature celebrations and snarky end zone dancing may be for naught.

Just wanted to rib you guys a little bit. Now the left wing wolves can attack. Over and out.
jukeboxgrad

September 28, 2012 at 10:12 pm

Instead of posting those same links over and over again in multiple threads, you should respond to what I said here.

Over and out.

Promises, promises.
Jim Henley

September 28, 2012 at 10:37 pm

Steven: You need to apply the method!
Ron Beasley

September 28, 2012 at 10:39 pm

@Jim Henley: Good one Jim!
An Interested Party

September 28, 2012 at 10:42 pm

LOL, You seem to be overly obsessed with that unskew.com crank.

No more than you are obsessed with just about every reputable, er, excuse me, “democrat-oversampled” poll…

Promises, promises.

Indeed…if only…
Console

September 29, 2012 at 12:46 am

@Smooth Jazz:

So we can maybe assume that there is more voter enthusiasm for the GOP in Ohio… But votes aren’t calculated by percentages. Absolute numbers still show more requests for democrats and polls still show Obama up.

Still a bit of a meaningless point though because Ohio is R+1 yet Obama took the state by plus 4. For Obama to win, he inherently has to get republicans to vote for him.

Meh, I don’t know why I even responded. I’ve seen this same thing play out in 2008. If you could think critically on your own, you wouldn’t need talking points from blogs in the first place.
jukeboxgrad

September 29, 2012 at 7:11 am

Obama took the state by plus 4

4.58, to be more exact (link). The current RCP average for OH is Obama +5.4, which is not that far away from the 2008 number.

There are a lot of auto jobs in OH, and Kasich’s union-busting was a major flop, and Mitt’s 47% tape pushes all those buttons. So we shouldn’t be too shocked if Obama manages to match his 2008 performance in this particular state.
PJ

September 29, 2012 at 12:44 pm

Obama is 6 points up in today’s Gallup average, that makes it four days in a row, which is a first.
Obama had been 6+ points up three days in a row twice before.

I’m guessing this proves, beyond a doubt, that Gallup is a leftist pollster that can’t be trusted.
Smooth Jazz

September 29, 2012 at 2:56 pm

“Obama is 6 points up in today’s Gallup average, that makes it four days in a row, which is a first. Obama had been 6+ points up three days in a row twice before.I’m guessing this proves, beyond a doubt, that Gallup is a leftist pollster that can’t be trusted.”

NO, Gallup is not a left wing pollsters. They call it as they see it, unlike the NY Times & NBC that has to rig their polls to push their agena. Gallup has been polling registered voters to this point; They switch to a Likely Voter screen next week. It will be interesting to see if their likely voter screen changes anything.

In the meantime, this trend in OH is very dangerous for Obama. OH Dem voters registration and absentee ballot requests and WA down in critical Dem counties. I wouldn’t call the election for Obama yet. I would wait for the voters first:

DEMOCRATIC VOTER REGISTRATION IN OH WAY DOWN FROM 2008:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/27/drop-in-ohio-voter-registration-especially-in-dem-strongholds-mirrors/

ABSENTEE BALLOTS IN OH BY DEMS WAY DOWN FROM 2008:
http://townhall.com/columnists/hughhewitt/2012/09/29/introducing_the_new_polling_firm_of_madoff_marist_quinnipiac_and_ponzi
Steven L. Taylor

September 29, 2012 at 3:03 pm

@Smooth Jazz:

NO, Gallup is not a left wing pollsters. They call it as they see it, unlike the NY Times & NBC that has to rig their polls to push their agena.

The problem for your position and why you are open to significant criticism on this subject, is that your assertions are not arguments. You call people hacks and leftist because they do not agree with you or because their numbers do not provide the answers that you want.

The fact that the polls are all converging in a similar trend is indicative of the fact that you have been wrong and have provided no evidence to contrary save for ranting.

Your recent attempts have been poor because they compare two different (if not three different metrics). Since you don’t like the results of one metric (polling) you turn to others (absentee ballots and registrations). These are not directly comparable.

My beef with the unskewed bit, and to your ongoing objections, is based in the fact that you (and others) are arguing from preference, not empirics. If the polls showed Obama in Romney’s place and Democrats were screaming that the polls must be skewed and if Kos was re-weighing the samples to fit his preferences, I would be just as critical of that.
Steven L. Taylor

September 29, 2012 at 3:09 pm

@Smooth Jazz:

NBC that has to rig their polls to push their agena

Also, as I noted in another thread, which you ignored: one of the main partners in the NBC/WSJ poll is Bill McInturff. Bill McInturff’s firm does Republican polling. He and his pollsters have every reason to put forth a quality product so that they can continue to acquire clients (note: REPUBLICAN clients).

McIntruff is a well known name in polling and is well respected. You can ask James Joyner about him if you like, as his late wife was an executive with the firm. I can assure you via knowledge of his work and reputation that McInturff is a legit pollster and I expect James can offer similar assurances based on both professional and personal knowledge.

You assertions have no foundation.
jukeboxgrad

September 29, 2012 at 3:23 pm

smooth:

Gallup is not a left wing pollsters. They call it as they see it, unlike the NY Times & NBC that has to rig their polls to push their agena

National polling:

Gallup shows Obama +6
Fox shows Obama +5
Rasmussen shows Obama +2

Ohio:

Fox shows Obama +7
Rasmussen shows Obama +1

Florida:

Fox shows Obama +5
Rasmussen shows Obama +2

Virginia:

Fox shows Obama +7
Rasmussen shows Obama +1

Total electoral votes: 60. All rigged, right?
Smooth Jazz

September 29, 2012 at 3:48 pm

“The fact that the polls are all converging in a similar trend is indicative of the fact that you have been wrong and have provided no evidence to contrary save for ranting.”

Please spare your your patronizing and hectoring. I have provided evidence here that runs counter to your thesis that Dems are going to vote in greater numbers versus 2008, which is the basis for many of the polls you keep suggesting tell the whole story. I have povided links that suggests Dems voting registration is WAY DOWN in key Dem areas in OH versus 2008 (a development that runs counter to the polls you have been relying out) and you claim I’ve provided “no evidence to the contrary”. If Dem registration is way down from 2008, I would say that is major “evidence” of something the Obama pollsters are not capturing.

Finally, I and many other Repubs do not trust Bill McInturff or the news Division of the Wall Street journal. McInturff wants NBC/MSNBC $ and sponsorship and I wouldn’t put it past him to fall in line with his Obama pay masters at NBC/MSNBC, an entity known for doctoring tapes to push the Liberal agenda. Besides, McInturff is the classic “Inside the Beltway Repb” that sucks up to Liberals so they can get invited to DC/NY cocktail parties and get their $.

You can turn a blind eye to the lower Dem registration all you want, but as I said on another thread: If your polls that you claim are accurate turn out to be a hoax on election day, with Dems voting WAY less than anticipated, and Romney wins, I’ll be back to call you out for your hectoring, lectoring and being gullible. Then I’ll move on and leave you guys in peace.
Jim Henley

September 29, 2012 at 4:01 pm

I dunno, man. I kinda think a guy like Bill McInturff could afford to throw his own cocktail parties.
Steven L. Taylor

September 29, 2012 at 4:07 pm

@Smooth Jazz:

Please spare your your patronizing and hectoring.

Asking someone to back up their positions is neither patronizing or hectoring.

I have provided evidence here that runs counter to your thesis that Dems are going to vote in greater numbers versus 2008,

I have made no claims about numbers in November, and I certainly have made no claims about 2008 v. 2012. Perhaps you are confused about with whom you are arguing? (And, by way of example, that was a tad patronizing).

I have povided links that suggests Dems voting registration is WAY DOWN in key Dem areas in OH versus 2008 (a development that runs counter to the polls you have been relying out) and you claim I’ve provided “no evidence to the contrary”.

The thing is: none of my posts have been about Ohio, and they certainly have not been about voter registration nor about absentee ballots. I am referring to the constant claims you make about the overall polling situation. You make claims and provide no evidence.

I and many other Repubs do not trust Bill McInturff or the news Division of the Wall Street journal. McInturff wants NBC/MSNBC $ and sponsorship and I wouldn’t put it past him to fall in line with his Obama pay masters at NBC/MSNBC, an entity known for doctoring tapes to push the Liberal agenda. Besides, McInturff is the classic “Inside the Beltway Repb” that sucks up to Liberals so they can get invited to DC/NY cocktail parties and get their $.

You are welcome to your opinion, but you are making my point: you don’t like the results because you don’t like the results and you have only preferences, not evidence.

Also: two points. 1. The cocktail party bit is quite cliche, and 2. where do you think pollsters get their $? They get it from politicians who pay them. These politicians want and need accuracy. How is McInturff going to get the business of REPUBLICANS by skewing polls to help Democrats? This make no sense and you provide no argument for your position.

f your polls that you claim are accurate turn out to be a hoax on election day, with Dems voting WAY less than anticipated, and Romney wins, I’ll be back to call you out for your hectoring, lectoring and being gullible. Then I’ll move on and leave you guys in peace.

As I have stated elsewhere: if the polling ends up to be as wrong as you say that it is, then I will be doing quite a bit of writing on that subject.
Steven L. Taylor

September 29, 2012 at 4:08 pm

@Jim Henley: No doubt. Several at once, if he would like, in fact.