NC: PPP: Romney +.2

[Ljube]

Best news of the night. Now we know for sure PPP is hacking it up. Early voting in NC is way off this number, probably 5 points.

LOL. I am shocked they gave Romney Montana.

Seriously, Seriously?? PPP has a slight but significant (about 2% ±1) Democrat-friendly deviation from the polling average some to most of the time. They're not the Democratic equivalent of Wenzel or pre-last-week Gravis.

Nate Silver rated them something about +3.2 D if I remember correctly. That was against the consensus of polls, which, in my opinion, already has a slight D lean. Judging by all polls together, they seem to have a D house effect, but how large, it’s anyone’s guess.

Their previous polls had Romney ahead. They started skewing their results when early voting picked up steam.

I believe that they have increased their house effect due to early voting and the difficulties it poses to pollsters.

My projection for North Carolina is Romney + 5 because I think that Romney will win the popular vote by about 1%. If I am wrong and Obama wins the popular vote, North Carolina should be closer and can be anywhere within 2-4 %.

[Ljube]

Best news of the night. Now we know for sure PPP is hacking it up. Early voting in NC is way off this number, probably 5 points.

LOL. I am shocked they gave Romney Montana.

Seriously, Seriously?? PPP has a slight but significant (about 2% ±1) Democrat-friendly deviation from the polling average some to most of the time. They're not the Democratic equivalent of Wenzel or pre-last-week Gravis.

Nate Silver rated them something about +3.2 D if I remember correctly. That was against the consensus of polls, which, in my opinion, already has a slight D lean. Judging by all polls together, they seem to have a D house effect, but how large, it’s anyone’s guess.

What evidence do you have that polls in general have a slight D lean? Or is this just a coping mechanism?

No real evidence at the moment, of course. The evidence will come on Election Day. Or not, in which case the poll averages will have proven right and I will have proven wrong. I can live with that.

[Ljube]

Best news of the night. Now we know for sure PPP is hacking it up. Early voting in NC is way off this number, probably 5 points.

LOL. I am shocked they gave Romney Montana.

Seriously, Seriously?? PPP has a slight but significant (about 2% ±1) Democrat-friendly deviation from the polling average some to most of the time. They're not the Democratic equivalent of Wenzel or pre-last-week Gravis.

Nate Silver rated them something about +3.2 D if I remember correctly. That was against the consensus of polls, which, in my opinion, already has a slight D lean. Judging by all polls together, they seem to have a D house effect, but how large, it’s anyone’s guess.

What evidence do you have that polls in general have a slight D lean? Or is this just a coping mechanism?

No real evidence at the moment, of course. The evidence will come on Election Day. Or not, in which case the poll averages will have proven right and I will have proven wrong. I can live with that.

So you think there is a D lean only in this election? I thought you were saying that polls in general have a D lean.

Even then, what do you see inside the polling that you find troubling? Even in those polls which have a large difference in party ID, there are a lot of independents in those polls raising the question who exactly they are (tea party members perhaps). Also if you look at things like racial or age turnout (demographic characteristics which do not change rapidly), they seem to be in line with what one would expect. Actually, whites are being oversampled if anything.

Whites aren’t breaking enough for Romney, which is hard to believe.

[Ljube]

Best news of the night. Now we know for sure PPP is hacking it up. Early voting in NC is way off this number, probably 5 points.

LOL. I am shocked they gave Romney Montana.

Seriously, Seriously?? PPP has a slight but significant (about 2% ±1) Democrat-friendly deviation from the polling average some to most of the time. They're not the Democratic equivalent of Wenzel or pre-last-week Gravis.

Nate Silver rated them something about +3.2 D if I remember correctly. That was against the consensus of polls, which, in my opinion, already has a slight D lean. Judging by all polls together, they seem to have a D house effect, but how large, it’s anyone’s guess.

What evidence do you have that polls in general have a slight D lean? Or is this just a coping mechanism?

No real evidence at the moment, of course. The evidence will come on Election Day. Or not, in which case the poll averages will have proven right and I will have proven wrong. I can live with that.

So you think there is a D lean only in this election? I thought you were saying that polls in general have a D lean.

Even then, what do you see inside the polling that you find troubling? Even in those polls which have a large difference in party ID, there are a lot of independents in those polls raising the question who exactly they are (tea party members perhaps). Also if you look at things like racial or age turnout (demographic characteristics which do not change rapidly), they seem to be in line with what one would expect. Actually, whites are being oversampled if anything.

Whites aren’t breaking enough for Romney, which is hard to believe.

Hasn't Clinton been in the state lately? If so, that might have helped. Romney's certainly not doing worse than whites with McCain.

He should be doing way better. Everywhere.

Because, Obama hasn’t lost any of his black support. He may have lost some of his Hispanic support, though.