Spin much?
Perish the thought!!
Distort, obfuscate, dissemble, "spike," maybe, but "spin?" Never! /s
Posted on 06/07/2012 2:26:56 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
They are at it again. Following what can only be described as a butt-kicking win for Gov. Scott Walker in Wisconsin's recall election, many media pundits were trying to "split the baby" by acknowledging Walker's win, but pointing to exit polls that show President Obama with a seven-point lead against Mitt Romney in that state. There is just one problem with their story: It fails to acknowledge just how far off the exit poll was in the gubernatorial contest.
To add insult to injury, the elite media bashed Matt Drudge for supposedly posting information saying the exit polls showed Walker safely winning, declaring the polls to show the race as very tight. Turns out the exit polls they referred to were wrong. Perhaps we should just go to The Drudge Report to get the accurate information from now on.
I continue to contend that exit polls are darn close to useless. I prefer polling a base model and then taking key county or even precinct results as early numbers arrive in order to project a winner. It works better and actually can often be released with a better sense of accuracy than these horrible exit polls that the media are often afraid to release.
Considering the exit polls the media relied on showed a razor-thin difference between Walker and his Democratic opponent, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, the logic behind some huge lead for Obama, produced by the same exit polls, melts away. Walker defeated Barrett by seven-point margin.
Apply that same analysis to Obama's seven-point lead in the same exit polls and the race in Wisconsin is actually closer to being dead even. Wisconsin is hardly a bastion of Republican power or conservative might, yet it is even up for grabs. And this says much more about all of the polls and predictions we have seen to date.
In order for an exit poll to truly have any value, it must somehow take the various selected precincts from which information is gathered and attempt to place it in some "model" that reflects party identification, age, race and gender proportions normally seen or expected for a certain statewide race. My guess is that these polls likely skewed stronger towards younger voters and perhaps Democrats than was the actual turnout.
This would suggest that pollsters who are "weighting" their polls in other states, particularly the critically close swing states such as North Carolina, Florida and Ohio, might want to reexamine their allocation of young voters as well as consider increasing their proportion of "independent" voters that they use as they process the raw data they collect.
What might that mean in terms of these states? It might mean that Florida and North Carolina, traditionally Republican presidential states, are not as close as recent polls suggest, with Romney leading Obama. It would also make states like Missouri and Colorado, considered potential swing states that lean Obama, more than likely toss-ups that could easily go Republican in November.
And I am not a GOP rah-rah pollster (yes, my opinion is more rah-rah!). In fact, when polling for one of the nation's top sources of political news in 2008, my results showed Obama carrying both Florida and North Carolina. But a few things have changed in four years that cause me to believe that, if the election were held today, Romney would carry both states. First, we do not see the "on fire" energy for President Obama in 2012 among voters under 30 that existed for candidate Obama in 2008.
Second and more importantly, the percentage of those who view themselves as moderates or who say they are "independent" as to their party affiliation in a general election (regardless of how they might be registered for primary purposes) is not only high, but is leaning more Republican than in 2008. Many of these same "independent" voters desperately wanted change in 2008 and supplied Obama with the margin of victory in the major swing states.
We are still far from November, and as will remain my contention, the result of the presidential debates will likely determine who wins the contest for the presidency. But my Wisconsin-based interpretation of the national electoral mood is based on something more tangible than a guess about the strength of unions or weariness over recalls. My evaluation is tangible based on the exit polls -- as compared to reality
Spin much?
Perish the thought!!
Distort, obfuscate, dissemble, "spike," maybe, but "spin?" Never! /s
Nobody wants to say that they wouldn’t vote to elect the black man, that is called the “Wilder effect”. In 1990 Douglas Wilder became the first African American to be elected as governor of Virginia, by a very narrow margin. For the white population of Virginia, anxious to lose their “racist” label, this effect suggested that white voters were more likely to tell pollsters that they would support non-white candidates in given contests than to actually cast their votes for them.
I suspect the same thing is going on now.
but Obama did win in the end
“Nobody wants to say that they wouldn’t vote to elect the black man”
Nobody CAN say that anymore.
One thing I find uplifting is that the Dems have done so poorly since Obama was elected in states that he won in 2008 (NJ, MA, VA, now WI) - and when you factor in the mid-term results, I honestly believe he will get crushed because votes, not polls, decide outcomes.
People on both sides wondered why he didn’t assume a role in the WI battle; he knew it was a lost cause and he didn’t want to be perceived as “the loser”. He’s been losing since he was elected.
Agree with your post 6.
There are absolutely no “coattails” with Zippy.
That is why no one WANTS him to campaign with them.
I have never seen anything like it—no Dem wants the leader of their party anywhere near them.
Agree with your post 6.
There are absolutely no “coat-tails” with Zippy.
That is why no one WANTS him to campaign with them.
I have never seen anything like it—no Dem wants the leader of their party anywhere near them.
The media is in full-cover up mode as usual.
Nightline couldn’t even cover the election results on Tuesday evening. That’s how I knew Walker won. Not a peep out of them. I figured it had to be Walker in a landslide.
On Wednesday evening, a full day later, while channel surfing, Gwen Eiffel (PBS) was still quoting the bogus exit poll numbers with Obama leading Romney in Wisconsin.
They just ignore any news that’s unfavorable to them. They really have contempt for their viewers.
Just like living in the USSR. Goebbels would be proud.
This is further evidence that liberalism is a mental disorder. The "elite" media are headed for oblivion because they continue to irrationally spin results instead of learning from their mistakes. Of course, having disordered minds, it is not possible for them to change, IMO.
That is true, because of the heavy “PC” situation this country is now in, you got to keep your voting choices to yourself.
The Wisconsin State Motto is ....Forward.
Not only that, but there is also the issue of union members who might have very valid reasons to lie about what their actual vote was, fearing reprisals.
There is much to like in this piece but so typically of Townhall Towery, so often undone by something so casually wrong.
Missouri is not a swing state. A state that hasn't electorally voted Democrat in 16 years is not a swing state, Matt.
Particularly when the Show Me State broke their 13-straight pick-the-President streak to stay red.
Furthermore, in 2008 the margin for McCain was 3,632, in a high-watermark year for Obama. Which means Obama should fully expect to be on the receiving end of a drubbing in November, losing to Mittens by oh, say by a couple of extra Zeros - 363,200 - not unironically (with Bobo's people flatly stating they're playing off the 'Kerry map') mirroring the Bush margin over Kerry, 53-46
You may be right, I just wish that people would get over worrying about whether someone may call them a racist if they don’t vote for the candidate who claims to be black although he is obviously AT LEAST fifty percent Caucasian. I will vote for the darker skinned candidate when that candidate deserves my vote and never otherwise and I will gladly tell any pollster that Obama never has and never will deserve my vote or the vote of anyone else who believes in America.
It’s typical, remember how they reported on the 2000 election which they still claim was stolen by George W. Bush, they conveniently ignore the fact that all recounts showed Bush winning if only by a small margin. They also ignore the fact that Rather called Florida for Gore well before the polls closed in the panhandle which is largely Republican. There were reports of people stopping and turning around on the way to the polls because they heard Rather on radio. Had Rather kept his mouth shut Bush would no doubt have won Florida by a much larger margin. They also ignore that Tennessee, which Gore claims as his home state, the state that elected him to the Senate, went for Bush, in other words those who knew him best did not want him in the white house! Had Gore carried his own home state he would have won without Florida yet they persist in pushing the meme that Bush “stole” the 2000 election. I believe the obvious truth is that Gore, aided by the media, TRIED AND FAILED to steal the 2000 election.
I have seen it before - it happened later in BJ Clinton’s 2nd term.
“That is true, because of the heavy “PC” situation this country is now in, you got to keep your voting choices to yourself.”
It doesn’t bode well for Dems that the only time ANY Americans get to vent is in the privacy of the voting booth, and that can be organized in anonymity online - there are no people to intimidate in terms of their livelihoods, no places to demonstrate, etc.
As indicated by all elections since Obama took office, Americans DO vent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.