Here’s the assumption the site you mentioned : www.unskewedpolls.com makes:
The QStarNews poll works with the premise that the partisan makeup of the electorate 37.6 percent Republicans, 33.3 percent Democrats and 29.1 percent independent voters. Additionally, our model is based on the electoral including approximately 41.6 percent self-described conservatives, 32.6 percent self-described moderates and 25.8 percent self-described liberals.
SO, THEY WORK WITH THE ASSUMPTIONS THAT THERE ARE 4.3% MORE REPUBLICANS WHO WILL VOTE THAN DEMOCRATS, WHILE MOST OTHER POLLS ASSUME THE OPPOSITE.
The all important question then is this -— WHOSE ASSUMPTIONS ARE MORE IN LINE WITH REALITY?
We might WISH that www.unskewedpolls.com is correct, but wishing does not necessarily make it so.
What GOOD REASONS are there to believe that www.unskewedpolls.com weighing assumptions are correct?
My thinking is they are on the right track, but it would be nearly unprecedented for their model this time to be correct. That said, the polls mostly use 2008 results and aren’t realistic, which is what the site is trying to correct. I would guess maybe GOP +1 (as Gallup shows) or slightly Dem, maybe Dem +2 max.
Let’s do this, since no one seems to be in agreement. Dems had a huge turnout in 2008. GOP did well in 2010. In the polls we seem to be arguing about which way the numbers should be skewed due to historical assumptions. I do not have time to do the math, but what would the results of these polls be if they were weighted 33% dem/ 33% GOP and 34% Independent. I realize that the party affiliation as a whole will be higher for the GOP, but to weight it in this way should compensate for those areas where there is a Dem advantage. I am just guessing here, trying to come up with a tenable solution.
2010. Unlikely that tsunami is still running as high in 2012, but I believe the water is still high enough to sink Bobo. R1+I3 would do it.