The Vastly Underimproved Poll Thread

There's no way to spin this one.

I think this is what is rubbing some people the wrong way. We (as far as I can see) aren't interested in "spinning", we're merely interested in accuracy. If the news is bad, the news is bad.

I take the "spin" to be the people who insist the polls do not mean anything, Carter was ahead of Reagan in 1980 yada yada yada.

I agree with Furball. The news is very bad.

For the last month. Here is a compilation of polls, mostly for swing states (PA, OH, VA, NC, FL, MO, IA, CO, AZ, NV), but I've included afew others. If there is more than one poll, I have averaged them and the number is in parentheses. If I've left out a state, it's because I have not found one over the last month.

NV - Nero +8 (2), 51-43
IN - Romney +9, 49-40
OH - Nero +5(2), 45-40
MI - Nero +4, 47-43
FL - Nero +1 (3), 46-45
VA - tie (3), 45-45
NC - Nero +4 (3), 47-43
NM - Nero +14, 54-40
AZ - tie (2), 41-41
CO - Nero +13, 53-40
MO - Romney +3, 48-45
NH - Nero +7(3), 48-41

Romney has to win most of those states to win the election. If Nero wins Fl and Pa, he wins.

Man, I hope people start waking up.

It blows my mind that NV and CO are so strongly in the tank for Obama. What the hell happened there?

What all this means looking at the electoral map is that there isnt even a nucleus of states that would be capable of succeeding (with the possible exception of the middle deep south).

Americans want Marxism.

What we still have (and Romney, too) is time, plus some natural tightening.

[Nilla]

What we still have (and Romney, too) is time, plus some natural tightening.

Sure.

But what Obama stands for is no longer any secret. His record is there for all to see. We saw who he installed in positions of power and on the courts. He is a Marxist. He is polling surprisingly well in light of this fact. And although it is early, he is leading the key states by a wide margin.

Therefore, I am forced to conclude that Americans, at the very least, are not uncomfortable with the concept of a Marxist nation.

Last edited by Nilla on Wed May 02, 2012 3:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

2012 Electoral Map: Poll Version

The map on this page displays the electoral forecast based on 2012 state-level polling. Where no polling is available, the spreads are currently based on 2008 actual results. Where only one poll is available, we use that. This will occasionally yield some outlier results (e.g., SC as toss-up, IL only leaning Obama) that may quickly change once polling becomes more regular. Where multiple polls are available for a state, it is generally an average of the most recent poll from each pollster, although older polls may be dropped.

Thanks for the link dementon.

Therefore, I am forced to conclude that Americans, at the very least, are not uncomfortable with the concept of a Marxist nation.

That's because they have no concept of Marxism. All they know is that voting in a certain way results in free shit.

Therefore, I am forced to conclude that Americans, at the very least, are not uncomfortable with the concept of a Marxist nation.

That's because they have no concept of Marxism. All they know is that voting in a certain way results in free shit.

The American people have seen enough out of this administration to know exactly what it is. Obama hates America. He hates its founding fathers. He hates our history, he hates our Constitution. He hates free market capitalism. He hates individualism. He hates property rights. He may hate white people (his Attorney General certainly does).

The fact that >45% of the country is comfortable with that is greatly disturbing.

For the last month. Here is a compilation of polls, mostly for swing states (PA, OH, VA, NC, FL, MO, IA, CO, AZ, NV), but I've included afew others. If there is more than one poll, I have averaged them and the number is in parentheses. If I've left out a state, it's because I have not found one over the last month.

NV - Nero +8 (2), 51-43
IN - Romney +9, 49-40
OH - Nero +5(2), 45-40
MI - Nero +4, 47-43
FL - Nero +1 (3), 46-45
VA - tie (3), 45-45
NC - Nero +4 (3), 47-43
NM - Nero +14, 54-40
AZ - tie (2), 41-41
CO - Nero +13, 53-40
MO - Romney +3, 48-45
NH - Nero +7(3), 48-41

Romney has to win most of those states to win the election. If Nero wins Fl and Pa, he wins.

Man, I hope people start waking up.

It blows my mind that NV and CO are so strongly in the tank for Obama. What the hell happened there?

What all this means looking at the electoral map is that there isnt even a nucleus of states that would be capable of succeeding (with the possible exception of the middle deep south).

Americans want Marxism.

Obama's quite popular in many areas. Reports on the economy will become positive later in the year. Much of the Religious Right would prefer Obama's being president to voting for a Mormon. Looking good for Obama, not necessarily for the Democrats in the House.

Nevada has a large Mormon population. I can easily see them voting for Romney in the fall. Maybe it doesn't look that way now, but it could happen.

Something is amiss here. The horserace polls show it neck and neck sometimes with a slight Romne edge but the stste by state polls are all favorable to the failed president. I find it hard to believe that Romney is running up big numbers in the red states and sinking everywhere else.

Something is amiss here. The horserace polls show it neck and neck sometimes with a slight Romne edge but the stste by state polls are all favorable to the failed president. I find it hard to believe that Romney is running up big numbers in the red states and sinking everywhere else.

He isnt even running up big numbers in the red states.

Texas (!) is listed as weakly GOP.

Nevada has a large Mormon population. I can easily see them voting for Romney in the fall. Maybe it doesn't look that way now, but it could happen.

Obama is up by a staggering 8 points in Nevada. I don't think religion really enters into it. Nevadans must really like Socialism.

Something is amiss here. The horserace polls show it neck and neck sometimes with a slight Romne edge but the stste by state polls are all favorable to the failed president. I find it hard to believe that Romney is running up big numbers in the red states and sinking everywhere else.

He isnt even running up big numbers in the red states.

Texas (!) is listed as weakly GOP.

I understand that but the horserace, national popular vote, numbers have been practically neck and neck. So something is wrong with one of the sets, maybe both.

Something is amiss here. The horserace polls show it neck and neck sometimes with a slight Romne edge but the stste by state polls are all favorable to the failed president. I find it hard to believe that Romney is running up big numbers in the red states and sinking everywhere else.

He isnt even running up big numbers in the red states.

Texas (!) is listed as weakly GOP.

I understand that but the horserace, national popular vote, numbers have been practically neck and neck. So something is wrong with one of the sets, maybe both.

Possibly. I put no stock in the national popular vote since it is largely irrelevant. Furball has it right. You have to keep your eyes on the key "swing" states.

Here is a link similar to dementon's, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... e_map.html . Nero only has to find 43 in the battleground states, seems pretty easy.

A big uphill battle for Romney.

Most incumbents have leads this early on. GHWB was at 90-something % approval during the 1992 election cycle.

He lost.

The fact that Nero still has trouble staying above 50% is a Good Thing. It means he's vulnerable.

Nevada has a large Mormon population. I can easily see them voting for Romney in the fall. Maybe it doesn't look that way now, but it could happen.

Obama is up by a staggering 8 points in Nevada. I don't think religion really enters into it. Nevadans must really like Socialism.

I was thinking they must really like being out of work. For a state economy that relies so heavily on people having leisure money to bring into the state, yes, it boggles the mind.

I put no stock in the national popular vote since it is largely irrelevant.

That's a mistake. We cann't assume data is correct merely because we find it more relevant. If two methods are giving different results (state polls totalled give different results than national polls) we can't assume which one is more correct.

I put no stock in the national popular vote since it is largely irrelevant.

That's a mistake. We cann't assume data is correct merely because we find it more relevant. If two methods are giving different results (state polls totalled give different results than national polls) we can't assume which one is more correct.

I suppose the explanation lies in the fact that there are a decent number of people in the deep blue states that will crawl over broken glass to vote against Obama. But here one begins to see how worthless the national poll is. Romney voters exist in the blue states. BFD. So what? At the end of the day, there aren't nearly enough of us to matter.

So now, once again, I direct your attention to what does matter: the battleground states.

For the last month. Here is a compilation of polls, mostly for swing states (PA, OH, VA, NC, FL, MO, IA, CO, AZ, NV), but I've included afew others. If there is more than one poll, I have averaged them and the number is in parentheses. If I've left out a state, it's because I have not found one over the last month.

NV - Nero +8 (2), 51-43
IN - Romney +9, 49-40
OH - Nero +5(2), 45-40
MI - Nero +4, 47-43
FL - Nero +1 (3), 46-45
VA - tie (3), 45-45
NC - Nero +4 (3), 47-43
NM - Nero +14, 54-40
AZ - tie (2), 41-41
CO - Nero +13, 53-40
MO - Romney +3, 48-45
NH - Nero +7(3), 48-41

Romney has to win most of those states to win the election. If Nero wins Fl and Pa, he wins.

Man, I hope people start waking up.

It blows my mind that NV and CO are so strongly in the tank for Obama. What the hell happened there?

What all this means looking at the electoral map is that there isnt even a nucleus of states that would be capable of succeeding (with the possible exception of the middle deep south).

Americans want Marxism.

In CO, they probably did the bulk of the polling in Denver.

For the last month. Here is a compilation of polls, mostly for swing states (PA, OH, VA, NC, FL, MO, IA, CO, AZ, NV), but I've included afew others. If there is more than one poll, I have averaged them and the number is in parentheses. If I've left out a state, it's because I have not found one over the last month.

NV - Nero +8 (2), 51-43
IN - Romney +9, 49-40
OH - Nero +5(2), 45-40
MI - Nero +4, 47-43
FL - Nero +1 (3), 46-45
VA - tie (3), 45-45
NC - Nero +4 (3), 47-43
NM - Nero +14, 54-40
AZ - tie (2), 41-41
CO - Nero +13, 53-40
MO - Romney +3, 48-45
NH - Nero +7(3), 48-41

Romney has to win most of those states to win the election. If Nero wins Fl and Pa, he wins.

Man, I hope people start waking up.

It blows my mind that NV and CO are so strongly in the tank for Obama. What the hell happened there?

What all this means looking at the electoral map is that there isnt even a nucleus of states that would be capable of succeeding (with the possible exception of the middle deep south).

Americans want Marxism.

Isn't obvious why? Lots if people from California moved to those states and brought with them the political philosophies that, once enacted, made them leave. I bet a similar exodus from the Northeast explains Virginia, too.

The discrepancy between the state polls and the national polls can be easily explained. Consider:

1. For a state poll you have to find the right mix of Dems and Reps - easy for any polling group since that is what they make a living doing. You'd also like to get a mix between urban areas and rural areas - tougher, but doable

2. For a national poll, the logistics are much more formidable. A poll with 1600 (Registered Voters or Likely Voters), mixed appropriately weighted for state populations, different time zones, and state makeup of Dems and Reps would be a nightmare, so I think they just poll randomly across the country with the Dem-Rep weighting from the last few elections.

3. Voila - you get different readings nationally from readings at the state level.

Other than a reading of popularity, I don't know what use a national poll is for a presidential election. But all the polling organizations do them.

The discrepancy between the state polls and the national polls can be easily explained. Consider:

1. For a state poll you have to find the right mix of Dems and Reps - easy for any polling group since that is what they make a living doing. You'd also like to get a mix between urban areas and rural areas - tougher, but doable

2. For a national poll, the logistics are much more formidable. A poll with 1600 (Registered Voters or Likely Voters), mixed appropriately weighted for state populations, different time zones, and state makeup of Dems and Reps would be a nightmare, so I think they just poll randomly across the country with the Dem-Rep weighting from the last few elections.

3. Voila - you get different readings nationally from readings at the state level.

Other than a reading of popularity, I don't know what use a national poll is for a presidential election. But all the polling organizations do them.

one could do a nationwide representative sample, but it would have to be of NLSY size, and larger because of the removal of NLSY age restriction. Say, 20000.

More meat:

In Wisconsin, Nero +9 (Registered Voters), 51-42
In Montana, Romney +5 (Registered Voters), 48-43
In Ohio, Nero +2 (Registered Voters), 44-42
In Florida, Romney +1 (Registered Voters), 44-43
In Pennsylvania, Nero +8 (Registered Voters), 47-39
In Nevada, Nero +9 (Likely Voters), 52-44

The news out of PA and NV is not good, although there are quite a few "undecideds" in PA. The others are what you might expect (WI, although I hoped that WI might flip). Montana should be Rep. FL and OH are nail biters with high undecideds.

YMMV

More meat:

In Wisconsin, Nero +9 (Registered Voters), 51-42
In Montana, Romney +5 (Registered Voters), 48-43
In Ohio, Nero +2 (Registered Voters), 44-42
In Florida, Romney +1 (Registered Voters), 44-43
In Pennsylvania, Nero +8 (Registered Voters), 47-39
In Nevada, Nero +9 (Likely Voters), 52-44

The news out of PA and NV is not good, although there are quite a few "undecideds" in PA. The others are what you might expect (WI, although I hoped that WI might flip). Montana should be Rep. FL and OH are nail biters with high undecideds.

YMMV

Pennsylvania +8 for Obama.

We are royally screwed.