Rasmussen Tracking Poll [Obama vs McCain]

[Kalimantan]

CARLHAYDEN, are you really this thick or just taking the piss?

[Kalimantan]

Yeah I also got that only Republicans put their country first. I also got that tax cuts must be given to the rich because obviously only they deserve it. I also got that giving back to your community is faggy and you should rather make lots and lots of money for yourself, so the republicans can reward you with even more money with tax cuts. Oh I also got that apparently parents want a choice for their kid's education. Sorry left that out of the first comment.

well said

Nope, you didn't get it.

Then please enlighten me.

Edit: Let me just say this. I don't really believe that all Mccain offers is his Vietnam service. I think he has some ideas for issues but I disagree with them, thus I am supporting Obama. You guys can also show us the same respect and say that I have studied Obama's views on the issue and I disagree with them, thus I am voting for Mccain. Don't just say "OMGZ HOPE N CHANGE LOLZLOLZLOLZ".

[Kalimantan]

Forty-nine percent (49%) of voters say they trust McCain more than Obama on the economy while 45% trust Obama. These figures are updated weekly and have generally found voters evenly divided.
[/i]

Convention bounce half-way gone, but if this figure is true we should see a swing back towards McCain this week.

[Kalimantan]

Taking a gander through the internals of the bailout numbers Rasmussen posted this morning, which should contain the same sample for his Prez election numbers, I'm willing to make the educated guess that the sample for today is *roughly* McCain +2.

So, expect the topline numbers to remain the same, since this is *roughly* the same sample as what dropped off.

I would find it really strange that, at a time when Obama appears to be around +5 or better in the trackers, and in a day just after the debate in which Obama was considered to have done better than McCain by the watching focus groups, McCain could have a +2 sample.

On the same point, I also find it really strange that the R2K tracker is producing consecutive daily figures in sequences such as O+5, O+6, O+7, O+5, O+4 etc., and yet you are claiming that Ras, with a sample size three times larger, is flicking between such extremes as, for example O+11 and M+2 on consecutive days.

[Kalimantan]

I don't really trust the R2K/Daily Kos alliance, for good reason.  You may disagree, but I stand by my principles here.

You're saying you don't trust R2K to be honest - i.e. you think they are changing or making numbers up to support their client's political leanings? I find that a bit of a stretch myself.

[Kalimantan]

Last five days:

              M+3        O+8      O+12      M+1       O+6      O+10   
Obama 50.44% (50.43%/49.81%/49.95%/49.47%/49.40%)
McCain 45.05% (44.35%/44.37%/45.16%/45.96%/46.56%)

Sample today is *roughly* McCain +2.07.  Rowan may come in and correct me later on this number.

EDIT:  My sleepiness makes it not McCain +2.07%, but rather McCain +3.22%.  Ugh.

Thats just really really silly. Of course there is noise within a tracker, but O+10 to M+1, back to O+12 and then down to M+3 is completely illogical. If those are the actual results (and we know ras doesn't release them) then there is something badly badly wrong with his polling. But I don't believe those are his figures and thats just someone somewhere (maybe you?) taking the piss. There will be 1 to 3 point movement from day to day, thats all - backed up by the tracker only moving 1 or 2 points every day.

[Kalimantan]

Last five days:

              M+3        O+8      O+12      M+1       O+6      O+10   
Obama 50.44% (50.43%/49.81%/49.95%/49.47%/49.40%)
McCain 45.05% (44.35%/44.37%/45.16%/45.96%/46.56%)

Sample today is *roughly* McCain +2.07.  Rowan may come in and correct me later on this number.

EDIT:  My sleepiness makes it not McCain +2.07%, but rather McCain +3.22%.  Ugh.

Thats just really really silly. Of course there is noise within a tracker, but O+10 to M+1, back to O+12 and then down to M+3 is completely illogical. If those are the actual results (and we know ras doesn't release them) then there is something badly badly wrong with his polling. But I don't believe those are his figures and thats just someone somewhere (maybe you?) taking the piss. There will be 1 to 3 point movement from day to day, thats all - backed up by the tracker only moving 1 or 2 points every day.

Who the heck makes you the resident expert on tracking polls?

No-one and nothing. Just like to see a bit of logic being used, thats all.

I mean, if you're telling me that its perfectly normal for wild 15 point swings to occur from one day to the next in tracking polls, and yet the three-day tracker to not move over that time, well I think you're a loon.

[Kalimantan]

Look folks, so long as the ladder Rowan has provided is correct, the guesses as to the actual daily numbers will be correct.

I really don't see why that should be the case. I like Kevin's reasoning better.

But when I don't have advanced maths on my side, I try and use logic. In the absence of anything to change the political landscape, the best possible pollster out there will get the same result every single day. I think Rasmussen is a good (if not infallible) pollster. The idea that we should expect random jumps because everybody isn't being polled or different peeps pick up the phone rather denies the ability of Rasmussen to be a good pollster.

[Kalimantan]

God I love you muon2

[Kalimantan]

"Obama is now viewed favorably by 58% of voters, McCain by 55%. However, 40% have a Very Favorable opinion of Obama while 26% have a Very Unfavorable view. The comparable numbers for McCain are 26% Very Favorable and 24% Very Unfavorable. "

40% Very Favorable - thats good...

[Kalimantan]

Still trying to isolate the McCain number, but I'm still 99.9% sure the sequence is incorrect.

Well, that has seemed likely for a while now. Why not check Alcon's thread. https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=84114.0

[Kalimantan]

Its probably damn close, although why he puts it down to two decimal places is strange. Anyway, unless you get the exact figures, any mathmatical attempt to deduce the daily figures won't be 100%. At least these ones look about right.

[Kalimantan]

Monday - October 6, 2008:

Obama - 52% (+1)
McCain - 44% (nc)

[Kalimantan]

beat you to it

... and interesting stat of the day - thats 25 straight days that Obama's support hasn't declined by a single point.

[Kalimantan]

New polling will be released tonight at 6:00 p.m. Eastern with statewide results from Colorado, Florida, Missouri, Ohio, and Virginia."

Which means they've dropped Pennsylvania from their Sunday swing-state polling, and added Missouri instead

[Kalimantan]

Time to start looking to 2012. Who's up? Palin? Romney? Huck?

With those names, you should start looking to 2016

[Kalimantan]

Time to start looking to 2012. Who's up? Palin? Romney? Huck?

With those names, you should start looking to 2016

Believe me, if the economy doesn't improve in the next 4 years, Obama will be out in a heartbeat. Anyone will be able to beat him.

I don't believe you. They will blame it on Bush

[Kalimantan]

Actual:

				samp goes tom	samp went today
Obama	51.15%	(51.06%	51.22%	51.17%	50.85%)
McCain	44.52%	(44.36%	44.39%	44.72%	44.89%)

I haven't updated this for a few days, but I should...

Clearly, a strong McCain sample entered today in comparison to the previous numbers.  Determining whether it is an outlier or a trend will take a few days to sort out.

			samp goes tom	samp went today
Obama	50.87%	(52.07%	52.14%	51.46%	51.15%)
McCain	44.64%	(43.51%	43.92%	44.24%	44.52%)

Can we have a poll to see how many people actually understand what Sam's on about with these figures?

[Kalimantan]

Gallup is competing with DailyKos for who shows the biggest Obama lovefest.

Everyone else is closer to Rasmussen.

Well, Obama's numbers are similar - Gallup at 52, Kos at 51, Ras at 50. The big gaps are in McCain's numbers, varying from 40 - 45. That is probably due to differences in pushing leaners? I'm guessing McCain's numbers are bound to rise as unenthusiastic Republicans realise how close an Obama presidency is. So I'd go with Ras right now.

Plus, Ras and Kos use a LV model and Gallup a RV model, if that matters at all.

[Kalimantan]

I'm not an idiot. Even, if I did support Obama on policy (which I don't), I would not support his corruption. People are also going from one extreme to another to make up for the previous extreme.

The republic is failing.

Whats up with the 'Obama is corrupt' talking point? Haven't heard anything on that so far?

[Kalimantan]

You cryptically mentioned 'Obama being corrupt' in the last two threads I read (this and the non-gallup one). So I'm taking it as your new talking point.

Anyway, thats semantics - what do you mean?

[Kalimantan]

You cryptically mentioned 'Obama being corrupt' in the last two threads I read (this and the non-gallup one). So I'm taking it as your new talking point.

Anyway, thats semantics - what do you mean?

Have you been paying attention?

BTW, how many voter registrations have you filled out? I'm up to number 186!

Oh, you're talking about ACORN. Well thats not corruption, and Obama isn't involved with the fradulent registrations. Corruption is use of political power for financial gain, and its abhorrent. Show me Obama is corrupt and I won't vote for him.

[Kalimantan]

No you're not the only one, but good luck finding a McCain supporter that agrees with you

[Kalimantan]

You cryptically mentioned 'Obama being corrupt' in the last two threads I read (this and the non-gallup one). So I'm taking it as your new talking point.

Anyway, thats semantics - what do you mean?

Have you been paying attention?

BTW, how many voter registrations have you filled out? I'm up to number 186!

Oh, you're talking about ACORN. Well thats not corruption, and Obama isn't involved with the fradulent registrations. Corruption is use of political power for financial gain, and its abhorrent. Show me Obama is corrupt and I won't vote for him.

That's not the definition.

You guys just don't catch on, do you?

Whats your definition then, and explain why Obama is corrupt. I'm trying to have a conversation with you here, so stop speaking in cryptic soundbites. Ta.

Its only me, by the way, not 'you guys'

[Kalimantan]

It's using a position of trust in a dishonest way. That's the actual definition.

And it is 'you guys.'

I can assure you there is only one of me.

I can't argue with your definition. How does that describe Obama?