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

To: snarkytart
"And this report is saying Rasmussen badly missed in 2010 and was bias toward Republicans"

2010 was an epic blowout for Republicans. As I read it -- in essence -- Nate Silver's criticism of Rasmussen in 2010 is that he predicted even more of a blowout for Republicans than actually happened. But that's not unusual. In 1996 Clinton/Dole, Gallup predicted 55% for Clinton but he actually won 49%. In 1964 Johnson/Goldwater, Gallup predicted 64% for Johnson and he actually won 61%. If the outcome is approaching certainty, some aren't going to bother to vote, and I suspect that's even more evident in off-year elections. Rasmussen predicted a Republican blowout in 2010 and there was a Republican blowout in 2010...

As I remember events in 2010, Nancy Pelosi was shocked when she learned that she was going to need to pack up her office and move. And she had access to the Democrat's internal polling. So if Rasmussen was inaccurate, so were a lot of other pollsters.

My own thought is that in 2012 many of the pollsters -- Gallup and Rasmussen are the main exceptions -- are "correcting" their results to match party ID in 2008, and they're doing it because "everybody else" is doing the same thing.

75 posted on 09/20/2012 3:48:06 AM PDT by Sooth2222 ("Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of congress. But I repeat myself." M.Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies ]


To: Sooth2222

Thank you for the reassurance. It’s hard to stay positive with the world against us and even FR gets so negative I have to leave for awhile.


79 posted on 09/20/2012 4:23:05 AM PDT by snarkytart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies ]

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