PA: Muhlenberg/MC: Sestak 40/Toomey 48 (10/24-10/27) DO NOT ENTER UNTIL 27 DROPS

[Smash255]

Someone check on Phil.....

[Smash255]

http://www.mcall.com/media/acrobat/2010-10/56899431.pdf

[Smash255]

Are you sure those are new numbers? It looks like they just didn't update yet since the Gubernatorial race numbers are the same.

And it also still says 17th to 20th.

[Smash255]

I'm still shaking my head at this one. What happened here? Toomey seemed to have anywhere from a 4-10 point lead for half a year. This one seems more and more like a toss-up, where I had assumed it would be a GOP pick-up.

1) Most importantly, the PA democratic electorate is finally coming home (as is the case with everywhere in the US, and in PA dem's outnumber republicans in registration).  If the election happened on any given day in August or September, of course without people knowing, Toomey would have won handily.  Obviously no major election is unknown to the electorate, so this is completely unrealistic.  I think that most voters in PA, and every other state for that matter, aren't as engaged as the people who use DailyKos, RedState, USElectionAtlas, etc. and only start getting involved in the last month.
2) Sestak is a closer.  He showed it quite well in May with the primary.  He was down pretty big early, and had the primary happened on any given day before April, Specter would have won handily.
3) PA is very blue collar, and I think a lot of voters still use television, radio, and even newspapers as their primary source of information (where as you and others on this forum probably use liberal/conservative blogs or news websites).  I am inclined to believe the electorate in PA is a bit more influenced by the media-based advertising machine.

Agreed.  I never saw this race winding up as a solid Toomey win.  Quite simply the math just doesn't allow for that.  Someone as far right to the right as Toomey doesn't have a chance in hell at suburban Philly.  Without suburban Philly you don't give yourself much room for error and give yourself no chance to win anything other than a nail biter.   

The real question is can Sestak run up the margins in suburban Philly that make it virtually impossible for Toomey to overcome elsewhere in the state? or is Toomey able to hold down the margins in suburban Philly enough to give him the chance to run up the margins elsewhere to win?

[Smash255]

Toomey stays the favourite because dems are overrepresented in polls like PPP and Mulhenberg. But I agree with Rasmussen: sestak has cut the toomey lead in solidifying his base.

The 2 polls are actually miles apart when it comes to party registration:

Muhlenberg has 49% Republicans and 46% Democrats.

PPP has 48% Democrats and 41% Republicans.

By average it's 47% Democrats and 45% Republicans. While the Exit Poll will certainly show less Democrats and Republicans and more Independents, the 2% average lead for the Democrats should be OK, also in the Exit Poll.

The first muhlenberg had 46-46. Change the party id and, oh surprise !, the final result is changed...

Problem for dems is that indep will vote in large margin for toomey. Hence, overpolling dems and underpolling ind give a fake advantage to Sestak, even if the gap between dems and rep is correct.

What makes you think is oversampling of Dems??  The Democrats have a rather large registration advantage in PA (51-37 at the end of 09).  Even if you take into consideration party id not always matching registration, and stronger GOP turnout than Democratic turnout (Muhlenberg btw asks registration not ID) I don't see how you can really say the party id in the polls is off.

[Smash255]

Toomey stays the favourite because dems are overrepresented in polls like PPP and Mulhenberg. But I agree with Rasmussen: sestak has cut the toomey lead in solidifying his base.

The 2 polls are actually miles apart when it comes to party registration:

Muhlenberg has 49% Republicans and 46% Democrats.

PPP has 48% Democrats and 41% Republicans.

By average it's 47% Democrats and 45% Republicans. While the Exit Poll will certainly show less Democrats and Republicans and more Independents, the 2% average lead for the Democrats should be OK, also in the Exit Poll.

The first muhlenberg had 46-46. Change the party id and, oh surprise !, the final result is changed...

Problem for dems is that indep will vote in large margin for toomey. Hence, overpolling dems and underpolling ind give a fake advantage to Sestak, even if the gap between dems and rep is correct.

What makes you think is oversampling of Dems??  The Democrats have a rather large registration advantage in PA (51-37 at the end of 09).  Even if you take into consideration party id not always matching registration, and stronger GOP turnout than Democratic turnout (Muhlenberg btw asks registration not ID) I don't see how you can really say the party id in the polls is off.

DO you think that 46 % of the voters will be democrats ?

Better chance of that happening than 49% Republican, considering registration is 51-37 in the favor of Democrats.

[Smash255]

I thought Catholics were a majority in PA? The Muhlenberg poll has 49% of the electorate as Protestant and 33% as Catholics, as of the day three pdf.

Have they released the day 4 pdf yet?

I can't find it, only day 3 is on Muhlenberg's website.  It is always so hard to find them.

I waisted an hour myself looking for it.

It's on the right hand side of their Politics page but it seems like their Twitter account is updated before the website.

The update is on the website for the results, but they were talking about the PDF file with the cross tabs.

[Smash255]

And then there were nine...

I thought Catholics were a majority in PA? The Muhlenberg poll has 49% of the electorate as Protestant and 33% as Catholics, as of the day three pdf.

Yeah, I think the numbers are supposed to be reversed.

When did you hear this?  I'm pretty sure Protestants outnumber Catholics in every state in the US (Expect maybe Hawaii, but that doesn't count).  I think they even do in New Mexico given that the state has a large population of Protestant Hispanics.

NY, NJ, CT, RI, MA,VT, NH, CA & NM Catholic is the largest group.

http://www.usatoday.com/graphics/news/gra/gnoreligion/flash.htm

[Smash255]

And then there were nine...

I thought Catholics were a majority in PA? The Muhlenberg poll has 49% of the electorate as Protestant and 33% as Catholics, as of the day three pdf.

Yeah, I think the numbers are supposed to be reversed.

When did you hear this?  I'm pretty sure Protestants outnumber Catholics in every state in the US (Expect maybe Hawaii, but that doesn't count).  I think they even do in New Mexico given that the state has a large population of Protestant Hispanics.

NY, NJ, CT, RI, MA,VT, NH, CA & NM Catholic is the largest group.

http://www.usatoday.com/graphics/news/gra/gnoreligion/flash.htm

You're not adding up the individual Protestant groups.  They add up to more than the Catholics do in New York, New Jersey, etc. (unless all the "others" are non-Protestant Christians,  which they most likely are)

I'm guessing you flunked Math.....

[Smash255]

     Is it me or do the numbers for New York in that link only add up to 93%?

It is 93%, keep in mind you have some that are less than .5% that don't show up, that brings you into the 95 or 96% range, rest could be due to rounding.  It looks like its the same in most states.

[Smash255]

And then there were nine...

I thought Catholics were a majority in PA? The Muhlenberg poll has 49% of the electorate as Protestant and 33% as Catholics, as of the day three pdf.

Yeah, I think the numbers are supposed to be reversed.

When did you hear this?  I'm pretty sure Protestants outnumber Catholics in every state in the US (Expect maybe Hawaii, but that doesn't count).  I think they even do in New Mexico given that the state has a large population of Protestant Hispanics.

NY, NJ, CT, RI, MA,VT, NH, CA & NM Catholic is the largest group.

http://www.usatoday.com/graphics/news/gra/gnoreligion/flash.htm

You're not adding up the individual Protestant groups.  They add up to more than the Catholics do in New York, New Jersey, etc. (unless all the "others" are non-Protestant Christians,  which they most likely are)

I'm guessing you flunked Math.....

Lets do the Math then:

100% -38% (Catholic) - 13% (Non-religious) - 5% (Jewish) - 1% (Buddist) - 2% (Islam) -2% (other--see below) = 39% (all other minor religions listed were Protestant or Christian in nature, and I'm willing to bet at least half the "other" is small protestant churches)

39%>38%.  Epic problem-solving fail on your part

Others does not exactly mean Protestant, nor does simply saying Christian, nor does Non-Denominational  ,

Baptist 7%
Methodist 6%
Lutheran 2%
Presbyterian 2%
Protestant (no Denomination given) 2%
Pentecostal 2%
Anglican 2%
Assemblies of God 1%
Evangelical 1%


Thats 25%, now if you add all of Christian (4%) thats 29% and all of others,4%, that is 33%.  Rounding might bring it up slightly higher, but not higher than 38%, and not all of Christians or Others are Protestant.

[Smash255]

And then there were nine...

I thought Catholics were a majority in PA? The Muhlenberg poll has 49% of the electorate as Protestant and 33% as Catholics, as of the day three pdf.

Yeah, I think the numbers are supposed to be reversed.

When did you hear this?  I'm pretty sure Protestants outnumber Catholics in every state in the US (Expect maybe Hawaii, but that doesn't count).  I think they even do in New Mexico given that the state has a large population of Protestant Hispanics.

NY, NJ, CT, RI, MA,VT, NH, CA & NM Catholic is the largest group.

http://www.usatoday.com/graphics/news/gra/gnoreligion/flash.htm

You're not adding up the individual Protestant groups.  They add up to more than the Catholics do in New York, New Jersey, etc. (unless all the "others" are non-Protestant Christians,  which they most likely are)

I'm guessing you flunked Math.....

Lets do the Math then:

100% -38% (Catholic) - 13% (Non-religious) - 5% (Jewish) - 1% (Buddist) - 2% (Islam) -2% (other--see below) = 39% (all other minor religions listed were Protestant or Christian in nature, and I'm willing to bet at least half the "other" is small protestant churches)

39%>38%.  Epic problem-solving fail on your part

Others does not exactly mean Protestant, nor does simply saying Christian, nor does Non-Denominational  ,

Baptist 7%
Methodist 6%
Lutheran 2%
Presbyterian 2%
Protestant (no Denomination given) 2%
Pentecostal 2%
Anglican 2%
Assemblies of God 1%
Evangelical 1%


Thats 25%, now if you add all of Christian (4%) thats 29% and all of others,4%, that is 33%.  Rounding might bring it up slightly higher, but not higher than 38%, and not all of Christians or Others are Protestant.

So the Problem is where the extra 4-5% Comes from in the poll (which we thought was probably rounding error).  Odds are it goes heavily to the Protestants (as they have more denominations to be rounded off)

Even taking that into consideration, some the rounding could also be Jewish, or Buddhist, or Muslim, or No religion, etc

[Smash255]

Guys, who cares?

I could really careless, I just find it rather interesting he can't do basic math.

[Smash255]

Guys, who cares?

I could really careless, I just find it rather interesting he can't do basic math.

*Sigh.  It's like banging my head against a wall here.  Do you have any idea how much more likely .5% rounding error would make difference across 16 separate values (some of which round to Zero) rather than 5?

As for whether or not this matters, I agree it doesn't--I just find it odd that his understanding of math doesn't stretch beyond "38 is bigger than 37" and fails to understand basic logical analysis, and that he sees this as a failure on my part.

Assuming that every single one that said Christian, every single one that said others are Protestant as well as assuming every single rounding error works in favor of Protestant is just plain silly and irrational. 

Anyway back to the topic at hand.  Tonight and the results Tuesday Night will be interesting.  They are the days in which the days that swung to Toomey will drop off. 

[Smash255]

Cross tabs

http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/track4.pdf

Interesting things to note.  PA registration is 51-37 in favor of the Dems, its obviously going to be more Republican that that this year, but 14% Dem advantage to 2 point Dem advantage?  Seems a bit of a high swing especially considering the registration question over party id.

Another odd thing to note, poll that showed Sestak up 3, had a McCain 49-43 sample, this poll showing Toomey up 5 has a 48-46 sample favoring Obama  The 48-46 sample favoring Obama makes sense, but weird considering its a more GOP sample and more Toomey sample than the 3 point Sestak lead.

Also the electorate is only 11% 18-39.   Obviously voters under 40 are going to see a bigger drop off than those over 40 and make up a lower % of the electorate than in 2008, but 35% to 11%??

[Smash255]

Usually updated on twitter about now, but the account seems delayed.  Last night's posting appears as 8 hours ago. 

[Smash255]

http://twitter.com/search?q=%23pasen

Someone says its 48-40 Toomey in the Morning Call poll (different person that who normally has the update) someone else says 46-45 Toomey, but no mention of the poll so not sure what to think of that

[Smash255]

It's been confirmed: 48% to 40%

Any idea what the 46-45 Toomey mention vote Dems out is referring to?

[Smash255]

Party Registration,  48% Republican, 43% Democratic


http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/track5.pdf

[Smash255]

Party Registration,  48% Republican, 43% Democratic


http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/track5.pdf

Okkkkkkkkkaaaaayyyyy. Uhh...

The gap in party id in PA is generally less than the registration gap, but even if you take that consideration and look at this as party id as opposed to party registration, GOP + 5??  Thats absurd.

[Smash255]

You were all praising this pollster as being the most accurate in Pennsylvania and now many of you are tearing it apart because Toomey is up. 

Not pointing fingers.  Just keeping it fair and balanced.

I'm not exactly tearing it apart, and it has nothing to do with who is ahead.  It has to do with a party breakout which makes absolutely no sense.    The question wasn't party id, but party registration.  Dem + 14 is the statewide registration numbers, its obviously going to be more Republican than that, but GOP + 5??  Not a chance.  Even if you go by party id (though the question did not ask that), it was +7 in 2008.  Obviously going to be more Republican than that, but its not going to be GOP +5, even under the best circumstances for the GOP.  That just isn't happening, period.   

A true registration question should probably be somewhere between Dem +5 to Dem +8 taking into consideration the friendly GOP a year.  A party id based question perhaps even to Dem + 2 or 3, considering it was Dem +7 in 08 and this is obviously a more GOP year, but GOP + 5?  No way.  The 12% under age 40 is also very strange.

[Smash255]

http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/track6.pdf


48% Republican,  45% Democratic,  11% under 40

[Smash255]

PDf file to last night's release

48% Republican, 43% Democratic.......

http://www.muhlenberg.edu/pdf/main/academics/polisci/2010TrackingRelease9_October28.doc.pdf

[Smash255]

PDF file from last night

47% Republican, 43% Democratic......

[Smash255]

PDF file from last night

47% Republican, 43% Democratic......

What was the partisan breakdown when Sestak was leading?

46, 46.  Registration is 51-37