Posted on 09/23/2002 9:56:31 AM PDT by StopDemocratsDotCom
Sorry, but that ain't history. He's been the most consistently correct. All the blather about "Dem voter fraud" is beside the point: I doubt that it contributed much more than a fraction of a percent, though we'd all like to believe it was a million votes or more.
I'm telling you, FReepers: If you have to poll-watch, watch Zogby. Don't buy in to the "feel-good" polls that show a big Pubbie lead like we did in 2000 with Rasmussen. You'll get killed that way.
I repeat: Pay attention to Zogby. That's the one I'd use to figure out what's going to happen.
But this far out, it's all garbage.
Bear in mind that this was all knocked into a cocked hat just as soon as election day rolled around, and Zogby was right on the money.
I don't think he's trying to rewrite anything. He said nearly all the polls showed a close race. Yes, it's true that Rasmussen's poll was way off. But we know now that was an automated telephone response outfit, similiar to SurveyUSA (the poll that had Torricelli down by 13 and 14 points). The Battleground poll also showed a bigger lead than the others, but I've never trusted them, either. They automatically assume a base 35% for each party, which I've also found suspicious. But that's it. Every other poll had the race within 3 points the day before the election. You're right on one count -- some people did put way too much stock in the Rasmussen poll. But that's what happens when you selectively look at only one set of data, instead of the entire preponderance available.
Agree with adding Smith to the list, but I got called by a poll last week.
It was so much fun to give the pollster all the GOP picks!!!!!
No, Portrait of America hasn't gone out of business. Their numbers weren't very far off, IIRC...no farther off than Zogbey (in hindsight, the evidence of massive vote fraud in the 2000 election more than accounted for the apparent errors in the error ratio of Rasmussen's polling numbers)
POA predicted George Bush would win the 2000 election. They were right about that too.
Oh, ugh!
Ignore the fact that Zogby's a Dem--or at least, just take it into account--and face FACTS. His polls are consistently accurate come election day.
That's a USEFUL thing. If he's saying something we don't like, well, maybe we need to listen to the message instead of attacking the messenger.
If we could find a way to get "Louie The Loonie" Farrakhan over to NJ to "stump" for Torrecelli, his fate would probably be sealed.
What part of "nearly" don't you comprehend? One example of yours does not make my statement any less true. And the Zogby special sauce jokes were around LONG before the election.
Speak for yourself. Dales kept a comprehensive spreadsheet of polls from all sources, including Rasmussen. I occasionally chipped in with a poll or two. You can keep trashing Scott Rasmussen all you like, but the polls showed a very close national race, with the distinct possibility that Bush could have a big electoral win. Had the DWI not occured, that's probably what would have happened. Look how close he still came to NM, IA, WI, OR, and WA. Even MI and PA could have come back into play. The polls pointed to a close national race; we got a [too] close [for comfort] national race.
True, more or less. The other thing one has to know about all these apparently close races is what the media buys have been so far.
Traditionally the dems tend to have a rather substantial advertising advantage in battleground races because of independent expenditures by (primarily) organized labor. This is invariably misreported by the media, which tends to look only at the FEC filings by candidates and party organizations (where Republicans will typically have a modest advantage) and ignore massive spending by the unions.
The traditional Republican counter is to concede the early ad advantage but make sure we are competitive in the closing weeks. Unless the pubbie is dead and buried early, he will typically gain ground in October.
That's the generic historical pattern. There have been anecdotal reports that this is happening again this year in the races we're following here, but I've not seen any detailed rundown.
Republicans must go for the throat - - no mercy, no quarter.
The very future of traditional America and its families is at stake.
Cogent point, its difficult to poll the dead and the insane to see what the real numbers are.
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.