Poll: Obama ahead in Minnesota; Klobuchar way ahead (D+9 Sample)

Minneapolis Star-Tribune ^ | October 9, 2012 | by: Rachel E. Stassen-Berger

[Oldeconomybuyer]

A new poll of Minnesota voters shows Democratic President Obama with a ten percentage point advantage over Republican Mitt Romney and Democratic Senate incumbent Amy Klobuchar with a 26 percentage point advantage over Republican Kurt Bills.

The poll of Minnesota voters actually showed the president support narrowly increased from 51 percent to Romney's 44 percent in September to 53 percent to Romney's 43 percent in the recent polling. The PPP poll of Minnesota was done on Saturday and Sunday, perhaps mitigating the Obama dip of immediately after the Wednesday debate.

The pollster, which works with Democrats but releases public polls on races all over the nation, continues to produce results showing Klobuchar, a first-term Senator, is one of the most popular senators in the nation.

[Oldeconomybuyer]

Its sample included 38 percent self-identified Democrats; 29 percent Republicans and 32 percent independents or other. Thirty-seven percent of those polled self-identified as somewhat or very conservative; 33 percent self-identified as somewhat or very liberal and 30 percent consider themselves moderate.

[Huskrrrr]

Mon-dull, Jesse Ventura, Al Franken. Need we say more?

[Brad’s Gramma]

Aren’t there a LOT of Muslims in Minneapolis? They *own* the airport, that’s for sure.

[TitansAFC]

The sampling model is actually not bad for MN.

This is probably failrly accurate.

Sad.

[Carriage Hill]

MN is actually “MD of the north”, with a lot more cold and snow.

[jmaroneps37]

With an over sample like this maybe Mitt can take Minnesota :-)

[FroggyTheGremlim]

I think I’ll stay out of Minnesota - forever.

[Perdogg]

Obama won Minnesota in 2008 54.06%-43.82% +10.24% in a year where he beat McCain by 7.2% of the vote. I find it hard to believe that 0bama 12 is out performing 0bama 08.

Plus it is ppp.

[Williams]

Well we probably aren’t going to win every state. Heck, if NY and California could be in play we wouldn’t be such a nation at risk.

[thingumbob]

Mon-dull, Jesse Ventura, Al Franken. Need we say more?

Glittering jewels of wisdom all on a horses @ss.....well, almost all, anyway.....

[nhwingut]

I noticed a few state polls out today with dates from 10/5-10/8. All weekend days to help Obama. None included Thursday which would have been a huge day for Romney.

[AmonAmarth]

It is actually a very beautiful state, when it is not winter... - left Minnesota 16 years ago for Denver and will never go back. I grew up in MPLS schools and they brainwashed me for the longest time until I read Rush Limbaughs books when I was in my late teens and cleared my head of a lot of falsehoods.

[Huskrrrr]

LOL!

[Perdogg]

I understand what you say, but we are going into every election with states that ‘we have no chance in winning’. Well, we might actually win some of them if we compete for them.

[PA Engineer]

Internals

[Thorliveshere]

This is not a statement on my fellow conservatives here in Minnesota. God knows we try in an uphill battle, but in all reality, Minnesota will probably be the only red state on the map this election cycle.

[Thorliveshere]

URGH! I meant BLUE state.

[Steely Tom]

Maybe I'm stupid, but I thought the idea of statistical sampling went like this: you have a few million marbles in a hopper, and each marble be red or blue. You don't have time to count them all, so you shake and turn and stir the hopper so the marbles inside become randomly distributed, and after you do that you put on a blindfold and draw out a sample of few hundred marbles at random from the randomized hopper.

Then you count the red and blue marbles in your sample, and - if you know some statistical formulas, or have a table of statistical data - you can now estimate the total number of red and blue marbles in the entire hopper on the basis of the count you come up with in your sample.

That's why it's called statistical sampling.

OK. Fine. We know all about that. If there are just a few marbles in your sample, the chance that your estimate will be off is higher. If, on the other hand, you draw out a lot of marbles for your sample, your estimate can still be off, but the probable error of your estimate will be smaller than it would have been if you'd only picked out a few marbles.

But now, we add a wrinkle. The red and blue color on the marbles is only a wrapper on the real marble. Inside the red wrapper you usually find a red marble, and inside the blue wrapper you usually find a blue marble... but not always. Sometimes you open a red wrapper and find a blue marble, and sometimes a red marble hides inside a blue wrapper.

What the polling organizations seem to be doing is this: they draw the random sample, count the red and blue wrappers, and - based on the number of red and blue marbles inside the wrappers in the last trial - they throw out a certain number of red-wrapped marbles until the color ratio of the wrappers is the same as the color ratio of the marbles inside the wrappers found the last trial. After they throw away red-wrapped marbles, they open all the wrappers and count the red and blue marbles that were inside.

Now, as I said, maybe I'm stupid, but this seems like false mathematical reasoning on the part of the polling organizations. If they stuck to basic statistical polling methods, the sampled ratio of people who say they're going to vote for Obama to the sampled ratio of people who say they're going to vote for Romney would work out by itself without any post-sample tweeking.

[annieokie]

NO. Gosh what is in their milk, what are those cows eating?

Do some people just get their thrills by being stupidly antagonistic? Think so.

[Aevery_Freeman]

Don't forget Governor Goofy (who looks kind of like the state fish - the Walleye).

Ex-alcoholic blasted out of his skull pharmacy style.