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

Skip to comments.

Rasmussen Reports polls get the election really, really wrong
examiner.com ^ | Nov 7 2012 | By: Ryan Witt

Posted on 11/07/2012 3:13:40 PM PST by NoLibZone

For the past year conservatives have put their trust in one pollster and one pollster alone. While nearly every other pollster showed President Obama leading throughout the last year’s presidential race, Rasmussen Reports consistently showed better numbers for Romney, and had Romney leading through much of the last month. Conservative pundits claimed that Rasmussen was the only pollster showing the true state of the race, even though previous studies suggested that Rasmussen’s numbers actually leaned too far to the right in previous elections. The Election Day results are now in, and Rasmussen was not only off in their projection, but far off in many cases. Consider the following numbers:

Rasmussen’s last national poll had Romney with a one point lead (49 percent to 48 percent). Obama ended up winning by two points (50 percent to 48 percent). Rasmussen had Romney winning Virginia by two points (50 percent to 48 percent). With 97 percent of precincts reporting Obama is winning Virginia by three points (51 percent to 48 percent). Rasmussen Reports final Iowa poll had Romney winning the state by one point (49 percent to 48 percent). With 96 percent of precincts reporting Obama is winning Iowa by six points (52 percent to 46 percent). Rasmussen had Romney and Obama tied at 49 percent in Wisconsin. With 98 percent of precincts reporting Obama is currently winning Wisconsin by seven points (53 percent to 46 percent). In Colorado, Rasmussen Reports had Romney winning by three points (50 percent to 47 percent). With 90 percent of precincts reporting Obama is winning Colorado by four points (51 percent to 47 percent). In Ohio, Rasmussen Reports had the race tied at 49 percent. With 90 percent of precincts reporting Obama is currently winning the state by two points (50 percent to 48 percent).

(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012poll; poll2012; rasmussen
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 next last

1 posted on 11/07/2012 3:13:45 PM PST by NoLibZone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

Search has been disabled. Sorry if its a dupe.


2 posted on 11/07/2012 3:15:37 PM PST by NoLibZone ("When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

Maybe he got it exactly right, but failed to take into account Democrat election fraud?


3 posted on 11/07/2012 3:16:43 PM PST by Arthurio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

I cancelled my premium membership to rasmussen today.

He is personna non-grata to me


4 posted on 11/07/2012 3:17:11 PM PST by TexasFreeper2009 (Obama lied .. the economy died.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arthurio

The other polls turned out to be more realistic in the ginned up D vote.


5 posted on 11/07/2012 3:21:52 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (cat dog, cat dog, alone in the world is a little cat dog)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

If I saw their last poll correctly, Gallup got it wrong too. That’s make their 3rd miss since FDR.

No one counted on the Free Stuff effect.


6 posted on 11/07/2012 3:23:34 PM PST by bigbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

two issues:

1) conservatives should not put up with second rate products or services just because the supplier is “conservative”

2) the polls in aggregate were wrong, the final average of the real clear polls was more than 3 standard deviations from the actual result

the thing about polls is that the non-sampling error is larger than the sampling error. the big errors are from non-response bias, likely voter identification, party weighting etc. these things are guesses and this election cycle’s hero will be next cycles goat

someone like Nate Silver can come up with an overfitted model that fits the past data well. its like economic forecasting, as long as future elections are similar to the past, he will be accurate. when there is a dramatic shift (like 1980) Nate Silver will never catch it, just like all the “blue chip” forecasters don’t ever forecast things like financial crises.


7 posted on 11/07/2012 3:24:32 PM PST by Reverend Wright (Obama explains the ALCS: the Yankees actually played great but lost due to mistakes by Joe Torre)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasFreeper2009
I had always planned to cancel after the election, and perhaps sign up again in 2014. Now, I'll still cancel, but we'll see about 2012.

-PJ

8 posted on 11/07/2012 3:26:24 PM PST by Political Junkie Too (If you are the Posterity of We the People, then you are a Natural Born Citizen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

“For the past year conservatives have put their trust in one pollster and one pollster alone.”

yeah we can’t do that anymore. There are no ‘wonder’ polls. Look at all the polls and not just from the guy who got it most right in the past.

Nate Silver may also be next year’s Rass if he’s all by himself. So don’t forget this.


9 posted on 11/07/2012 3:26:45 PM PST by ari-freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reverend Wright
someone like Nate Silver can come up with an overfitted model that fits the past data well.

Because he factors in voter fraud ...pure and simple

10 posted on 11/07/2012 3:27:26 PM PST by The Citizen Soldier (Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Arthurio

Absolutely, I’m sure they stole minimum 5 million votes - in the right places - to steal the election. Never can be convinced otherwise.


11 posted on 11/07/2012 3:27:39 PM PST by C. Edmund Wright ("DONE: The GOP Establishment Has Now Lost 2 In a Row")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Arthurio

I honestly think it’s to the point where they just phone in phony numbers. Most polls had Romney up and up big in FL & VA. No one lookd at all surprised when that went to Obama.

And the big thing for me is that they’re saying the Republicans stayed home, didn’t turn out. I just flat out don’t believe that. If anyone stayed home it was Dems.


12 posted on 11/07/2012 3:38:32 PM PST by Kenny (<p)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Arthurio
Maybe he got it exactly right, but failed to take into account Democrat election fraud?

I don't discount that as a possibility. I don't think, even from the very start of his regime, 0bama felt he could win re-election without cheating, and I don't think he expected to win even up until yesterday. The electronic voting machines in use by most states are ripe for fraud. They can be programmed to do virtually anything.

You have to ask yourself, with the Country in such sad shape and with 0bama having absolutely nothing to run on, how did he achieve such a victory?

13 posted on 11/07/2012 3:39:58 PM PST by The Sons of Liberty (Never Underestimate the Power of Evil or Evil Doers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

Not if there was some major organized election stealing. Trillions of dollars are at stake, after all.


14 posted on 11/07/2012 3:44:58 PM PST by FreeAtlanta (christian.bahits.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kenny

And the big thing for me is that they’re saying the Republicans stayed home, didn’t turn out. I just flat out don’t believe that. If anyone stayed home it was Dems.


2008 Obama 69 million votes, McCain 59 Million

2012 obama 60 Million votes, Romney 57 Million
Numbers show both sides stayed home


15 posted on 11/07/2012 3:53:16 PM PST by Joshua
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Arthurio; P-Marlowe; Yashcheritsiy

Election fraud?

Rush Limbaugh rejected that explanation today. He basically said it was impossible to prove and there were other reasons that better explained the loss.

His explantion? America now numbers more takers than contributors.

I hope that Rasmussen wasn’t being political just to curry favor. I don’t want my intel section to be giving out soothing info. What could conservative workers have done if they knew that the obama minions were turning out in smaller numbers than previously, but still pretty large?

The RNC deserves a hit here because it shouldn’t matter which candidate wins a primary for them to know they should be setting up campaign centers throughout America’s precincts.

That strikes me as just about the only legitimate reason something like a republican national committe would have to exist. Their job should be sinking their organizational teeth into America’s precincts. Other than being a traffic cop, I really don’t see how it’s their business to be controlling who the candidates are. For every Akin horror story you tell, I’ll tell a Tommy Thompson story. One made a “right wing” misstep and lost. Apparently, the other lost, too, without a misstep. Which is actually worse?


16 posted on 11/07/2012 4:11:37 PM PST by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! True supporters of our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: The Sons of Liberty

We need to document the fraud and show the evidence to the world. The libs are saying there is little fraud and voter ID is just voter repression. We need FACTS to prove them wrong.


17 posted on 11/07/2012 4:14:52 PM PST by GeorgiaFreeDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Joshua
Something doesn't smell right to me. We heard of record turnout in Republican areas yet the turnout for Romney was less than McCain after 4 years of the Marxist? That just does not make any sense to me at all. I don't know how they did it... I just know that they did. It is much easier to “lose” our votes than to gin up their own.
18 posted on 11/07/2012 4:30:30 PM PST by fireman15 (Check your facts before making ignorant statements.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: NoLibZone

Maybe Rasmussen was dead right, but there was 2-3% cheating!


19 posted on 11/07/2012 4:34:24 PM PST by schmootman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Citizen Soldier

someone like Nate Silver can come up with an overfitted model that fits the past data well.
Because he factors in voter fraud ...pure and simple

is there anyone in their right mind who believes that after the dems believed bush stole 04, that they would not do anything to win?
and think about this. a bus can pull up to a polling place, in for example, inner city philly. a bunch of illegals get off, told how to vote, and the complicit poll workers register them right there.

question for all of you. do you think the lsm would report that? they know they can get away with it. as a matter of fact, we’re never going to win another election again.
the soviet union without using a single bullet.


20 posted on 11/07/2012 4:38:40 PM PST by willywill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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