Non-Gallup/Rasmussen tracking polls thread

[J. J.]

First of all, Rasmussen is not unchanged.

Second of all, regardless of where those individual polls are going, the composite change is probably less than 0.5% (is it not?).  Yesterday, based on those same standards, I believe Obama had a composite gain of less than 0.5%.

Yes, if you ignored Rasmussen and assumed that any composite change is probably significant, then sure we'd have a change -- but "ignoring Rasmussen" is a laughably random caveat.  Can you prove that your "trend" reaches statistical significance at the 50% confidence level?

Alcon, my point is, I'm not "ignoring" Rasmussen.  If the 'bot was not working yesterday, or Scott Rasmussen decided to become a marine biologist, I'd say that there was a trend for McCain.  Rasmussen in a pollster and the 'bots were working.  I'm calling the results mixed and not showing a trend, because of Rasmussen.  (If I did the math right, subtracting Rasmussen and BG (which hasn't polled for two days), I come up with a +1.5 McCain.)

[J. J.]

Any real pollsters have any state polls for PA?

[J. J.]

I'll wait for Gallup and TIPP, but this have been the tightening I was talking about yesterday.  In terms of trends, McCain supporters should be very happy about any shift to McCain on R2K, because of the weighting.

[J. J.]

I'll wait for Gallup and TIPP, but this have been the tightening I was talking about yesterday.  In terms of trends, McCain supporters should be very happy about any shift to McCain on R2K, because of the weighting.

That particular tracking poll pointed to a neck-and-neck race between Obama and McCain when it began tracking. McCain is back to the point he was a week ago

Dave

It currently over weighted to the Democrats.  I'd be worried about the moves there (BG is the converse).

Let me put it this way:  If someone from Tripoli, Libya says there is heavy rain, I might not consider the rain heavy.  If someone from London, UK, tells me there is heavy rain, it's probably heavy rain. 

I really would like to see if there is any movement of TIPP and Gallup.

[J. J.]

Gallup and TIPP will show if there is any real movement.  Sam, your summaries are excellent as usual.

[J. J.]

I'll wait for Gallup and TIPP, but this have been the tightening I was talking about yesterday.  In terms of trends, McCain supporters should be very happy about any shift to McCain on R2K, because of the weighting.

So now you start looking at R2k as if it has value?  Because I tried to include it in my daily update just for that reason (trends) and you forced me to stop by aggravating me about it every day.  I think that's highly hypocritical and if R2K showed a trend in the opposite direction, you wouldn't give it the time of day.

No, but I'd worry a bit about any Obama drop on that poll, if I was supporting Obama.  I'll worry about any loss for McCain on BG.  Neither is a good poll, because of the weighting.  I think I've posted within the last two days.

Alcon, if the polling was showing across the board increases for Obama, I'd say it. 

 I really give a great of weight to to Rasmussen, Gallup (traditional after reading Sam's comments), and TIPP.  After those ABC/WP and Hotline.  The lessers are GB, R2K, and Zogby.

Of the top three, two show gains for McCain; the third one unchanged.  The second tier is split Obama and no poll.  The two third tier two show a McCain gain, and one no poll.

Is the numbers were reversed, I could not Obama was gaining.  I cannot say McCain is gaining today.

In all fairness, I try to ignore Zogby.  GB and R2K are really third tier polls, because of their weighting (and I've said if R2K fixed the weighting, I'd give it a higher rank).  It's third tier because of the weighting, which is overly pro-Democrat.  This is an overly pro-Democrat poll that is showing the Democratic candidate dropping.  It just could be a bad sample, but it could be a trend.  That's why I look all polls (except Zogby), and didn't proclaim tightening yesterday.

[J. J.]

IBD/TIPP - 10/27/08
Obama 47.0% (+0.5%)
McCain 44.2% (+0.9%)
Undecided 8.8% (-1.4%)

If that gap was with a Bradley Effect, I'd believe it.  That gap just seems too low.

[J. J.]

btw, I have a rumor that IBD/TIPP today will be Obama +4 (whatever that means in tenths of a percentage)

That would be reasonable.  2.8 seems low.

[J. J.]

R2000/DailyKos - Wednesday Oct. 29:

Obama 50 (nc)
McCain 44 (+1)

McCain had a good Tuesday sample (50-45 Obama)

It's an overly weighted poll for the Democrats.

[J. J.]

IBP/TIPP has, um, 'corrected' their process:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Clicky

I personally think he's making some amateur pollster mistakes in 'correcting' his poll.  It's a little Zogbyian, but make your own decisions.

So J.J. can stop hiding from lightning and admit he was wrong and we were right?

I'm not sure that he was, though obviously the subsample was.

[J. J.]

Diageo/Hotline - Saturday, November 1:

Obama 51 (+3)
McCain 44 (+3)

Diageo/Hotline might join the ranks of "It's Zogby," after this election.  They are either brilliant or idiots, but I don't know which.

[J. J.]

TIPP 11/1/08


   
McCain  43.4% (-0.4)
   
Obama  47.9% (-0.3)
   
Undec.   8.7%
   
+4.5 Obama (+0.1)

[J. J.]

WP = Obama codpiece

Talking codpiece?

That's a really weird metaphor

But quite Freudian. 

[J. J.]

WP = Obama codpiece

Talking codpiece?

That's a really weird metaphor

But quite Freudian. 

I'm lost.  The Washington Post is secretly Democratic because their athletic wear may talk, threatening their masculinity and causing them to lust for their mothers?

The metaphor was Freudian.

[J. J.]

R2Kos final poll

Obama 51 (nc)
McCain 46 (+1)

Made up of +4 Sat, +4 Sun and +7 Mon

This is a bizarre poll.

[J. J.]

Final Zogby/Reuters Tracking poll:

Obama 54.1 (+3.2)
McCain 42.7 (-1.1)

doesn't Zogby's family have ties to terrorism?

No, see my first post.

[J. J.]

Obama over polled on nearly every poll.

IBD/TIPP:   7.2
Gallup:     11.0
R2K:           5.0
Zogby:     11.4 of course.
Hotline:      5.0
ABC/WP:   11.0
'bots:          4.92
Average:     8.3

Nationally, it looks like 5 points.  Bradley?

[J. J.]

Obama over polled on nearly every poll.

IBD/TIPP:   7.2
Gallup:     11.0
R2K:           5.0
Zogby:     11.4 of course.
Hotline:      5.0
ABC/WP:   11.0
'bots:          4.92
Average:     8.3

Nationally, it looks like 4 points.  Bradley?

What? Numbers are still coming in from the west. We won't know the real PV for awhile I would imagine.

Aye. California's only 28% in, and it's huge, plus Oregon and Washington, also barely in. Obama's lead is also up to 5 points since he posted that. (Plus, J. J. amusingly included known trash like Zogby while ignoring Rasmussen.)

In any case, the state polls seem to have understated Obama's position much more often than they overstated it. There are exceptions: Obama overpolled in Georgia and North Dakota (the only two counterexamples). But he underpolled much more severely in Pennsylvania and across the Northeast. Elsewhere, the state polls, in aggregate, seem to have been pretty much exactly on target (maybe slightly understating Obama in Florida and Ohio as well).

I was calling for a Bradley Effect of 1-2 points. The 'bots are Rasmussen, BTW.  Zogby is, well, Zogby.  R2K, interestingly, Hotline and Rasmussen nailed it.  R2K had weighting problems (TIPP's initial weighting looked better).  Gallup, until yesterday, was the gold standard.  A six point gap there, and on ABC/WP; that is of course Zogbyesque.    It's well out of the MOE on Gallup and ABC/WP.

My question is, were people a little more honest when they were speaking to a robo-call, if they could tell it was a robo-call? 

Now, does anybody have the weighting for Hotline and their polling methods (robo-calls?)?

I do want to look at the state polls.

[J. J.]

*slams head into wall*

Lunar, if you think that a Gallup poll, with an MOE of 2, that shows Obama winning by 11 points was an accurate snapshot of the electorate, slamming your head repeatedly against the wall will not cause any more damage.  This isn't an outlier, because we have ABC/WP showing the same thing. 

This is the kind of numbers we'd expect (and got) on Zogby.

Even conservatively, it looks like in the final national polls, Obama overpolled rather dramatically.  Sorry, it is there.

Two notable exceptions, Rasmussen and Hotline.  Rasmussen uses the 'bot, which is one difference.  What does Hotline polling process look like?

[J. J.]

Based on the current national lead of 6.2% for Obama,

Pew, CNN, Ipsos/McClatchy, Hotline, FoxNews, Rasmussen, and Battleground (Lake) were ALL within 1% of the correct number. 

The average of the 15 pollsters in the RCP average (7.3%) is only off by about 1% (I'm not sure why the RCP posted average isn't actually the average...). 

The Batlleground number is split with two results as you noted (if you don't like one you can use the other).  FoxNews was barely within the MOE (and Obama overpolled). Ipsos/McClatchy had McCain just outside of the MOE and the gap just within the MOE. http://www.mcclatchydc.com/election2008/story/55193.html

Rasmussen and Hotline were noted, and the question asked, why are these two so close?

I've tried to keep it two the main polls, but if you want to cherrypick, we could at the 9 point gap in the CBS "poll."

[J. J.]

The Ipsos/McClatchy number I'm going off of is the one once they push leaners:  53-46 Obama.  This nails McCain exactly, and is within 1 on the margin (even the 8% before leaners are included only 1.8% off, the MoE is 3.6%).

You can't compare McCain's 42 in the 50-42 numbers (before leaners pushed) to his 46 in the final results (where every leaner by definition decided) -- it's apples and oranges. 

Also, I'm not sure how a margin of Obama +7 from FoxNews (following the link from the RCP polling average) is "just barely within" a 3 point error margin of the current Obama +6.2 results.  

The predicted number for McCain.  Remember, I've basically said that Bradley undercounts the white opposition; it tends to list them in the undecideds.  It isn't someone saying, "I'm voting McCain but I'll tell the pollster I'm voting for Obama."

I wonder if Hotline pushes or uses robocalls.

[J. J.]

I'm slamming my head into the wall because I'm incredibly annoyed.

EVERYONE knows that if Obama underperformed the average of polls in Pennsylvania by even 0.75%, you'd be up there declaring the victory of the Bradley Effect.

Plls can be wrong for many reasons.  Cherrypicking and then averaging national polls to prove the Bradley Effect when a simple analysis of your Pennsylvania Bradley obsession proves you wrong.  Obama strongly overperformed the polls in the state that you were certain would contain at least a small Bradley Effect.

If you can't admit that polls, especially bad ones, can't overestimate the Democrat for any other possible reason besides race, you're...well...there are several dozen reasons why a poll could be off and doing this makes you look bad.

*slams head into wall*

Two polls, that much wrong, well outside of the MOE and saying the same thing?  And always under counting the white candidate, and doing in in 2006 as well?  We are not talking about bad polls, but the one called the "gold standard," not by me.  And we have two polls that didn't, that hit the numbers exceptionally close.  We know one does two things, uses robo calling and pushes participants.  What about the other?

Yes, I thought that PA would be one of the states where it occurred and it didn't.  I didn't expect to see it on Galllup, and I do.

[J. J.]

For every poll that Obama overperforms in, it's 100% due to race.

No, but I want to look at all polls to see what effects there are.  Right now, we have, with Gallup, the worst failure I have ever seen in a presidential poll from Gallup.  Good God, this is almost literally a Zogby number.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In how many states did McCain overpolled outside of the MOE?  Or in a national poll.

I'm interested in knowing how Hotline got it about right.  Robocalls?  Pushing the voter?  Coincidence?

BTW:  Race isn't really the factor.  Not wanting to look like a racist is the factor.  Those are two different things.

[J. J.]

So the main difference between the results of Gallup and Rasmussen is the robo-factor?  I assume most would say their weighting schemes....

And the main difference between robo-calls and live-interviewers is not "standardization vs. higher response rate," but rather people trying to not appear as racist?

Suddenly, for J.J., the Bradley Effect has switched from people lying to people lying to live interviewers, out of retroactive convenience.

*bangs bloody head against wall*

Lunar, if you actually had paid attention to your thread on it, weeks ago, you would not that in the three races, the white candidate tended to under poll.  You would also note that one possibility discussed was that people would be more comfortable answering to a machine instead of to a live person. :rolleyes:

That is a possible reason why Rasmussen is more accurate.  Another possible reason is that Rasmussen "pushes" people to answer.  I'm asking if Hotline shares either of these characteristics.

[J. J.]

The projected popular vote margin posted on this site is now 7.03%, which would put CNN, FOX, and McClatchy as the spot on pollsters if it holds up. 

Maybe its worth waiting a while before we compare polling methods...or just not worry about it in a case where almost every pollster was well within the margin of error (exceptions looking like Zogby and Gallup on the Democratic side and Battleground(Lake) on the Republican side)

Currently, CNN has McCain at 46.88% and Obama at 53.12%, they are showing a 6.24% gap.

With rounding:

IBD/TIPP:   O +1 
Gallup:       O +4.8
R2K:           O -1.2
Zogby:       O +5.2  (Okay, that is expected; it's Zogby)
Hotline:      O -1.2
ABC/WP:    O +4.8
Ras:           O -1.3
Ipsos         O +1.8


McCain difference from actual (46.9% rounded):


IDB/TIPP:         -2.6
Gallup:             -4.9
R2K:                 -0.9
Zogby:              -4.1 (It's Zogby!)
Hotline:            -1.9
ABC/WP:          -3.9
Ras:                 -0.4
Ipsos:              -4.9

Every one of these polls under projected McCain, though many were in the MOE.  Obama was undercounted in some, but not all.