Three-day moving averages, such as Rasmussen uses in his daily tracking numbers, can sometimes give very misleading results. And for that reason, I think this morning’s number is close to meaningless.
It looks to me as if the Big Ø was hit by a severely out-of-range Rasmussen poll on Monday night, which made yesterday morning’s “Index” come in very low (-17), with today’s report even lower (-19). Nothing magic or significant here, probably just random statistical noise.
Moreover, the effects of that Monday night poll will still be embedded in tomorrow morning’s number. So look for the Index tomorrow to remain in the vicinity of ca. -17 to -19. Note that such a result can hold EVEN IF last night’s and tonight’s “raw numbers” for the Index are back around the current ten-day average of ca. -12.
In other words, don’t get excited about today’s -19 or the similar number we’re likely to see tomorrow. Pay attention to Friday morning. At that point the Index will probably be trying to move back up toward -12.
But if I’m wrong and it stays down around -19, then shout Halleluia — for a new downward shift will probably have been confirmed!
if I’m wrong and it stays down around -19, then shout Halleluia — for a new downward shift will probably have been confirmed!
I will say a little prayer tonight. :)
Something that's not helping Zero's cause that hasn't been mentioned here is the latest news on the Arizona bill.
I think it's possible that there are enough folks who can read who have heard three senior Obamanoids each admit to not even having read it to account for at least part of the movement to today's and yesterday's numbers.
I agree. It's not a trend until the daily numbers align with the 10-day moving average.
What? Moving averages are excellent for moderating real world variation in time based data. Natural chatter often masks significant trends (up/down/steady) so by using a moving average these trends become more easily recognizable. If anything, I would like to see a greater than 3-day moving average used with the Rasmussen daily data. For example, I've used up to 30-day moving averages (extreme example I admit) in some types of data to discern significant trends more readily.
Adding adverbs like “strongly” to any verb is going to create more statistical noise, since the word “strongly” is an added layer of subjectivity for the respondent to decipher. That’s why I just tend to look at the approve/dissaprove number.