Tea Parties Have Good Favorables

[Brittain33]

Only shows how out of the mainstream this forum (and the media) really is.

It's mostly on forum 11.0 that we've proven that Rasmussen is positioning themselves as a Republican media pollster, and slants their polls accordingly. They had Democrats with only a narrow advantage over Republicans on the generic ballot in early November, both before and after the election and since then have been providing fodder for Republicans to claim "we've drawn even" every few weeks. RowanBrandon never acknowledged it, but any objective analysis of Rasmussen polls will take it into account.

[Brittain33]

Rowan, just because you want to believe this poll does not mean that it is accurate in the face of conflicting evidence.

[Brittain33]

Rowan, just because you want to believe this poll does not mean that it is accurate in the face of conflicting evidence.

Conflicting evidence? Do share.

First, I've pointed out on the other forum that Rasmussen's results skew Republican.
Second, Dan the Roman has been posting about structural flaws in the design of the poll.
Third, Rasmussen's media strategy, including Scott's appearances on Fox News, has been to position themselves as a generator of numbers for Republican media messages.

Your response has been, basically, "c'mon guys, I think it still makes sense."

[Brittain33]

First, I've pointed out on the other forum that Rasmussen's results skew Republican.

That's your opinion. He was one of the most accurate pollsters in 2008.

They had Democrats leading on the generic ballot by 6 points a couple of days before the election and 2 points immediately afterward with absurdly high undecideds. (Actual numbers were 47%-41%, 43%-41%.) The House vote on Election Day was 53%-44%.

Lying with undecideds is one of the hallmarks of partisan polls designed for campaigns.

[Brittain33]

6 points isn't that far off from 9 points. There is a MOE on polls you know.

That's not quite how MOE works. They had Democrats at 47% or 43%; the actual results were 53%, way off the MOE. They were much closer with Republicans, pegging them at 41% when they got 44%. By upping undecideds to an unreasonable number at the expense of Democrats, you get results reassuring to Republicans who you hope will buy your poll results in the future.

There were not 12% undecideds before election day or 16% afterward. If there were any undecideds, they were people who were not going to vote and probably couldn't find the ballot box with both hands.