Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama vs Romney Polls: When You Crunch the Numbers, Romney is Actually Doing Very Well
Townhall.com ^ | September 25, 2012 | Jesse Merkel

Posted on 09/25/2012 5:30:24 AM PDT by Kaslin

Editors' note: this piece originally appeared at PolicyMic.

Two things typically happen after the major parties conventions come to an end. People that normally do not pay attention for most of the year start to pay attention to the news and polls more, and voter enthusiasm jumps up as a result. The major polls that are appearing on the daily newscasts, in the newspapers and on the internet have become incredibly important. While meant to accurately reflect the views of the nation, these polls today have unfortunately turned into a weapon.

Many major organizations have skewed their polls as of late. They do this a couple of subtle ways that most people will not notice unless they bother to do a little digging. By over-sampling Democrat voters and under-sampling both Republicans and Independents, the poll organizations have been able to make it appear as though President Barack Obama has a decisive lead over former Governor Mitt Romney.

Aside from over-sampling, they also base their samples on previous voter turnout. Typically this is done with the last major voting year, which would have been 2010. Unfortunately for all of us, most polling agencies are basing their samples off of the 2008 turnout model. In 2008, the Republican vote was depressed, while Democrats came out in record numbers. In 2010, the Republicans returned in force, resulting in one of the most dramatic turnovers in history.

Considering that the GOP has maintained relatively high voter enthusiasm, there is no reason to believe that their numbers will be as low as in 2008. In fact, according to Rasmussen, Republican Party affiliation is at an eight year high, while Democratic Party affiliation is over four points behind. While Democrats have been registering more people over the past month, it is highly unlikely they will be able to overtake the GOP's lead.

So why should we believe that Democrats will come out in such superior numbers?

Conventional wisdom says that Obama should be trailing Mitt Romney in the polls, and the fact that he doesn’t appear to be doing so means that Romney must just be that weak of a candidate. Thankfully, some people have "unskewed" the polls, showing what looks to be a much different race than what we’ve all been fed by the mainstream media.

A look at the Unskewed polls shows us a spread of Mitt Romney being nearly 8 full points ahead of President Obama. While conservatives will naturally want to jump for joy, they should first remember the wise words made famous by President Reagan: Trust, but verify.

Rasmussen shows the current party affiliation as 37.6% Republicans, 33.3% Democrats and 29.2% Independents. However, the sample from the latest Washington Post/ABC News poll shows an over-sampling of Democrats by 8%! Instead of the plus four margin that the GOP should be enjoying to accurately reflect the current voter rolls, the Democrats are instead being reflected by a plus four margin. With the data unskewed and the appropriate number of independents reflected, Mitt Romney would actually lead by a near 7-point margin.

One sample is an outlier. Two or more? That's something else.

A recent New York Times/CBS poll came out showing 49% for Obama and 46% for Romney. Again, the data was wildly skewed in favor of Democrats. Unskewed data shows Romney with a lead again, 51% to 44%. The sample for that poll broke down with 44% Democrats, 39% Republicans and 18% Independents.

Polls have constantly shown Romney leading with Independent voters by double digits. Massive over-sampling of Democrats and under-sampling of Republicans and Independents was used again to make it appear that Obama is doing much better than he normally would be.

Each polls that the website shows leads to an Examiner article that breaks down the data. Each article links to the polls and the raw data. After looking though the data, it becomes obvious that the analyst was spot on. The links are there for everyone to see. Click on the stats if you have questions and add up the percentages for yourselves. When one takes into account the high levels of party loyalty, the truth becomes apparent. Again, trust, but verify.

The ultimate question is, why skew the data for President Obama? The answer to that is simple.

Polls can be used as a weapon. The result is a de facto means of voter suppression. Those that may be hoping for a Romney victory may see poll after poll with President Obama supposedly in the lead, and believe that it’s not worth voting. Even if it were to peel off 1% or 2%, it could end up having an effect on the election. If you don't believe so, ask Al Gore if a scant few votes can make a difference.

This is not the result of some grand liberal media conspiracy. Rather, it is a time honored technique that liberal-leaning groups have used for years. This is nothing new.

Two Gallup polls that came on Thursday should have the Obama administration worried. Even though the numbers were slightly lopsided and they were polling registered voters instead of likely voters, the polls showed bad news for President Obama. One poll showed Obama and Romney tied at 47% each, while the other showed Obamas approval rating back down to 46%.

In an age when it seems like every news company and organization has an agenda, it always helps to read between the proverbial lines. When you look through the samples that each poll puts out there, the truth beomes clear.Obama does not have an unsurpassable lead, and Romney is not a weak candidate.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012polls; riggedpolls; unskewed
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-62 next last
To: sickoflibs

Wrong, all of the polls showed the Dems either holding the house or losing around 5-10 when they lost 65. I remember since I was saying they would lose 100 and was laughed at until the election.
They showed Brown losing, Walker losing and lately tons of Tea Party candidates losing primaries.
Freepers love being negative, it makes them feel smart.

This will be a landslide.


21 posted on 09/25/2012 6:18:09 AM PDT by bray (If you vote for a communist what does that make you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

Many older southerners registered D decades ago. They vote R. There were only a few thousand Republicans (registered as such) in Louisiana in the late 1980s.


22 posted on 09/25/2012 6:19:27 AM PDT by TigerClaws
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

I can’t cite it or link it, but on poll threads I have read that RAS is not using his current Repub/Dem breakdown results or the 2010 turnout in his current polls.

Just what he IS using has been guessed at, or surmised, by people who study these things, and they claim it’s either past models or somewhere in between then and now, and 08 and 2010.

IOW, just because he has alternative info to what the clearly flawed polls are using doesn’t mean the most updated info is baked into his polls. He picks and chooses like a cafeteria menu, they are saying.

His polls obviously are better than the ones showing Obama with a sizable lead.

That’s about the size of what we can claim for RAS.


23 posted on 09/25/2012 6:23:36 AM PDT by txrangerette ("HOLD TO THE TRUTH...SPEAK WITHOUT FEAR." - Glenn Beck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The most troubling poll to conservatives is the Fox News poll. I doubt Fox News would be part of a liberal conspiracy.


24 posted on 09/25/2012 6:26:40 AM PDT by dinoparty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bray
This will be a landslide.

My opinion as well and I've held that opinion since this time last year.

25 posted on 09/25/2012 6:27:18 AM PDT by 6ppc (It's torch and pitchfork time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: bray
Wrong, all of the polls showed the Dems either holding the house or losing around 5-10 when they lost 65. I remember since I was saying they would lose 100 and was laughed at until the election. They showed Brown losing, Walker losing and lately tons of Tea Party candidates losing primaries. Freepers love being negative, it makes them feel smart. This will be a landslide.

Yes I remeber on Fox guys like Krauthammer, Barrone and Hume all handwringing, that meme "Don't get all excited, pollsters say..blah, blah". Well election night a.... big DUH!!!!! Ok this is fairly simple and proven out through about 15 election cycles now, if the MSM shows a tie the Republicans win. if they show a small lead for the R, its a blowout. If ALL the polls like 2008 with Oblameo with a 5-7 point lead then we can be fairly certain the R will lose. I thinks its a 3-5% fudge factor for the Democrats, they do it every election cycle. Obama as it stands right now is going to lose period. Some Freepers can mine info to the contrary, but book it, its over.

26 posted on 09/25/2012 6:31:26 AM PDT by pburgh01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: bray; jps098; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; DoughtyOne; Gilbo_3; Impy; stephenjohnbanker; NFHale
RE :”Wrong, all of the polls showed the Dems either holding the house or losing around 5-10 when they lost 65

really? All the polls said that HUH?? Did Rush just say that?

District-by-district polls already show 2010 should eclipse 1994. (So make it happen!) Various poll sources ^ | 9-6-10 | Dangus Posted on Monday, September 06, 2010 7:46:37 AM by dangus

Funny thing, I dont see any complaining that these polls dont mean anything on that thread.

27 posted on 09/25/2012 6:32:09 AM PDT by sickoflibs (Romney is still a liberal. Just watch him. (Obama-ney Care ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

28 posted on 09/25/2012 6:34:04 AM PDT by Izzy Dunne (Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

www.unskewedpolls.com


29 posted on 09/25/2012 6:43:22 AM PDT by bigbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pburgh01; jps098; dinoparty; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; DoughtyOne; Gilbo_3; Impy; ...
RE :”Yes I remeber... (2010)

Really ???

I remember this

District-by-district polls already show 2010 should eclipse 1994. (So make it happen!) Various poll sources ^ | 9-6-10 | Dangus Posted on Monday, September 06, 2010 7:46:37 AM by dangus

Is Rush using mass hypnosis now? What is it with these crazy 'We all thought we were losing in 2010' comments?

30 posted on 09/25/2012 6:45:46 AM PDT by sickoflibs (Romney is still a liberal. Just watch him. (Obama-ney Care ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
I found the below on another site. This guy created what he calls "Polls Adjustment Calculator" to recalculate the polling results based on more realistic party ID breakdown on November 6 2012. This is what he posted:

You can download the "Polls Adjustment Calculator" fron the link below: "

http://www.fileconvoy.com/dfl.php?id=g0f9a1c6111e9b12e14951111d0a0649192bfc3

The first section is to enter the results from a media poll, including % of democrats, % of Republicans, % of Independents, enter % Obama, % Romney, % Undecided, % Others for each of these groups ( i.e. demorats, Republicans, Independents)…

The second section is to t adjust the % democrats, % Republicans, % of Independents to match a more realistic elections turnout for each group. The worst case scenario would be democrats + 3% over Republicans. Make sure that when you do the adjustments for each of these group that they add to 100%.

The third section is the assignment of the % of undecided to each Romney and Obama. So you need to enter the % of undecided for Romney and those for Obama. Historically the undecided go 2:1 for the challenger… "

31 posted on 09/25/2012 6:46:49 AM PDT by Conservative12345
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

I do not think that Rasmussen is using R +4 in his polling. The evidence is that Romney is winning independents in the vast majority of Rasmussen polls (as well as other media polls including the biased ones) but still Romney is tied in Rasmussen, slightly ahead, or slightly behind. I think Rasmussen is using D+3 in his pollings.


32 posted on 09/25/2012 6:46:58 AM PDT by Conservative12345
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
By over-sampling Democrat voters and under-sampling both Republicans and Independents, the poll organizations have been able to make it appear as though President Barack Obama has a decisive lead over former Governor Mitt Romney.

Even with the over-sampling, these polls are hardly showing Obama with a "decisive" lead. The Gallup and Rasmussen polls have showed basically a dead heat and state polls clearly show Republicans in a stronger position then in 2008, which is why Romney was out in Colorado over the past weekend (a state that went to Obama by nearly 10 points in 2008).

33 posted on 09/25/2012 6:50:17 AM PDT by SamAdams76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
I dont remember any polls showing Dems would win in 2010. In 2010 Freepers loved the polls then. Where was the grand conspiracy then?

Because they didn't use the 2008 model for the mid term polls. Even so, the polls understated the Repub landslide - most had it in the 30-40 range, not 60+.
34 posted on 09/25/2012 6:52:10 AM PDT by nhwingut (Sarah Palin 12... No One Else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: nhwingut; pburgh01; jps098; dinoparty; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; DoughtyOne; Gilbo_3; Impy; ...
RE :”Because they didn't use the 2008 model for the mid term polls. Even so, the polls understated the Repub landslide - most had it in the 30-40 range, not 60+.

??? You too? Mass hypnosis? WTF?? You folks are scary.

This 2010 FR post says polls were showing Rs 47 leading, 52 total ahead and another 20 in danger , thats 72 total. Yet some freepers here remember polls saying Republicans would lose seats 2010, or break even.

Republicans are now leading in 47 congressional districts held by Democrats. (This is up 8 just since last week.) There are another 5 seats held by retiring Democrats in significantly Republican-leaning districts which have not been polled. That's a total of 52 seats, almost equal to the number gained by Republicans in the 1994 election (54). There are another 20 where Republicans have pulled very close to Democrats, and the Democrats are polling well below 50%, normally a sign of grave danger this early in the election season. And of course, although the media tend to poll the races where the suspect the greatest likelihood of a strong challenged, there are still dozens of competitive seats which have not been polled yet.
District-by-district polls already show 2010 should eclipse 1994. (So make it happen!) Various poll sources ^ | 9-6-10 | Dangus Posted on Monday, September 06, 2010 7:46:37 AM by dangus

35 posted on 09/25/2012 7:02:07 AM PDT by sickoflibs (Romney is still a liberal. Just watch him. (Obama-ney Care ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Considering the failure of this incumbent this race should not even be close nationally. It is. The only ads and spin I see coming from the Obama campaign are personal negative attacks vs the challenger basically because Obama has no record to run on and absolutely no ideas.I see no negative Obama ads put out by Romney. Romney needs to bring a gun to this knife fight.Can the soaring rhetoric for now and go negative on Obama and the Obama economy all the time to get Obama’s numbers back down.I want to see ads with plenty of foreclosure signs, unemployment office lines,high gas price signs, out of business signs ending with a photo of Obama on the golf course to emblazon this failed economy on the minds of the short term memory voters currently distracted by shiny objects the MSM and Obama campaign is flashing at them to distract them from the issue of this failed economy.


36 posted on 09/25/2012 7:02:21 AM PDT by chuckee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Conservative12345

Rasmussen seems to have Romney mired in about a -1 position. Romney seems “stuck”.

I’d like to see some movement out of that rut....


37 posted on 09/25/2012 7:12:36 AM PDT by ConservativeDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
I think you need to peruse this diddy 2010 article

Lets not cherry pick info to buttress our negativity, shall we.

38 posted on 09/25/2012 7:12:58 AM PDT by pburgh01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: pburgh01

That’s Newsweek. Who cares about what they think?

That reminds me of someone on FNC yesterday calling MSNBC Maddow the MSM.


39 posted on 09/25/2012 7:18:24 AM PDT by sickoflibs (Romney is still a liberal. Just watch him. (Obama-ney Care ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
You stated: I dont remember any polls showing Dems would win in 2010. In 2010 Freepers loved the polls then. Where was the grand conspiracy then?

I responded because I too don't remember any Dem win polls. To prove your point you post a couple of Freeper posts. That hardly proves there were not your type of "realist" postings that the Republicans would be lucky to break 25 seats.

Check the old threads and you will read plenty of "Republicans are blowing it" posts from the same posters, just like today.
40 posted on 09/25/2012 7:25:39 AM PDT by jps098
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-62 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson