[Sans-Culotte]

Your post takes me back to 2008, when several Freepers made similar posts. I actually thought going into Election Day that McLame/Palin were going to win because so many “knew” the polls were skewed. I’m sure they are. I just hope they are as skewed as you think.

[Leto]

The stats are based of the party ID polls that Rasmussen has been doing for 10 years. The public polls ignore this and make up the numbers they need to produce the desired result.

[Sequoyah101]

Yup, it is like Deja Vu all over again.

[tuwood]

Your post takes me back to 2008, when several Freepers made similar posts. I actually thought going into Election Day that McLame/Palin were going to win because so many “knew” the polls were skewed. I’m sure they are. I just hope they are as skewed as you think.

I know what you're saying I feel the same way. However, McCain last time around was fairly even like Romney is now until the big mortgage crash. Then everything went down hill from there, so I think Obama got the big bump by tying McCain and the economy to Bush. So, much like last time around some big event could easily blow up the election in either direction regardless of what the polls are today.

[justlurking]

Your post takes me back to 2008, when several Freepers made similar posts. I actually thought going into Election Day that McLame/Palin were going to win because so many “knew” the polls were skewed. I’m sure they are. I just hope they are as skewed as you think.

2008 was an unusual year. When you combined the Bush fatigue, the disenchantment with McCain, the "historic" factor in voting for Obama, and the implosion of the economy, you ended up with a turnout model that favored the Democrats.

But, party identification with the Democrats peaked in 2008. It's been declining ever since, then shifting in favor of the Republicans -- for the first time since Rasmussen started polling back in 2004:

Summary of Party Affiliation

A lot of people thought the polls were skewed unreasonably back in 2008 toward Democrats -- and they were skewed. But, it turned out to be accurate. The party identification peaked at +10 points for the Democrats.

But now, it's +4 for the Republicans, and the poll turnout models aren't reflecting that. Back in October, 2010, it was still +3 for the Democrats, and shifted to +1 for the Republicans in November. Remember how the election turned out?

If the turnout is anything close to the party identification polls, and the independents break for Romney, then Obama doesn't have a chance.

[ConservativeDude]

You are quite correct in your recollection on 2008.

So...we have to take freeper condemnation of the polls with a bag of salt.

That said....Rasmussen shows Romney up nationally, and just a hair behind in the states that matter.

With about a two point bump nationally (very doable) and two or three in each of Ohio, VA and FL, Romney will be in good shape.

Remember: he is only down by 3 in Gallup as of today.

McCain was never this close.

Are the polls skewed? Maybe. But ultimately in 2008 the good ones (especially Rasmussen and the RCP average) they were quite right. The propaganda organizations did tend to under poll McCain’s final numbers. But it didn’t matter.

In any event...you are, again, right and this is all just context that we must keep in mind.