National Tracking Poll Thread

[J. J.]

How did Ipsos/Reuters do in 2008?

[J. J.]

What a surprise, Rasmussen is already hard at work on a Romney bounce but Gallup isn't showing anything. lol.

First, we won't see the bounce until tomorrow at the earliest and probably not until mid week.

Second, Rasmussen was unchanged from last week.

LOL.

[J. J.]

Why would it take that long for a bounce to appear JJ? We should be able to tell by the weekend or early next week...though it is labor day weekend. Is that what you meant?

First of all, the polling was yesterday afternoon/evening, so you don't a third of the convention, including Romney's or Rubio's speech.  You also have one sample from Tuesday afternoon/evening, prior to most or all of the speeches.

Yes, Labor Day polling will present a problem, because people travel or just decide not to answer their phones.

[J. J.]

I wasn't saying much at all, just asking JJ a question. Trying to understand his thought process is always an exciting endeavor. The bounce should be apparent on polling done today imho.

Not if it is a weak one, 2-3 points (which was my prediction).  Tuesday, Isaac was the lead story, it stepped on some of that.  Unless there is an exceptional speech (good or bad), nobody notices the rest.

Even a good one (Obama, 2004), I don't think moved the numbers too much.  It took a while for Buchannan's 1992 speech to register, and I think it killed the bounce for the most part.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Rasmussen isn't showing anything, but Gallup is showing a slight increase.

"Today's polling" won't show up until tomorrow, at the earliest.

[J. J.]

I looked around and didnt find a number for today.

Nor I.

[J. J.]

Rasmussen: Romney +3
Obama     44 (u)
Romney     47 (+2)

It's probably the start (or peak) of a small bounce.  I expect it to be ephemeral.

[J. J.]

The height of Romney's convention bounce should be around now:

Mid week is more like it.  You still have samples from Wednesday afternnoon in the numbers.

[J. J.]

First, a "house bias," may result in the number being off, but shouldn't have any effect on the change.

If a Rasmussen gives candidate R 47%, maybe R is really at 45%.  If a later poll gives R 50%, maybe he's really at 48%, but there would still be a 3 point change.

Second, looking at the FL polling, Rasmussen has shown a 10 point gain for Nelson.  Quinnipiac has shown a 9 point shift the same way.

[J. J.]

The point is that the measure of accuracy should be the poll against the election results, not the poll against the polling average as the average can be wrong.

If there is a "house bias," which you claimed, then that should not effect the change in the poll, only the final number.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Here is the link you posted:

http://en.wikipedia.orgwiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Florida,_2012#Polling_2

It shows Nelson:

Rasmussen Reports:    July 9, 2012        37%    
Quinnipiac:    June 19-25, 2012:             41%    

Then it shows Nelson:

Quinnipiac    August 15-21, 2012                    50%
Rasmussen Reports    August 15, 2012     47%    

The polls show a gap of 4 points at most.  Rasmussen shows a gain of 10 points; Quinnipiac  shows a gain of 9 points.

[J. J.]

They've been objectively better so I don't doubt them to the same degree as Rasmussen.

What I like about them is that they release all the cross-tabs and poll questions aside from the main race like state legislature ballots, approval ratings for other officials/issues, etc.

False equivalency is always nice.

Yes, and you are making a false equivalency by comparing a "house bias," i.e. how much the poll varies from the result, with swings internal to multiple polls.  As was demonstrated, both Quinnipiac and Rasmussen showed about the same shift to Nelson, roughly over the same period.

[J. J.]

The height of Romney's convention bounce should be around now:

Mid week is more like it.  You still have samples from Wednesday afternnoon in the numbers.

This is a dangerous game you're playing J.J.  You could just accept a 1 point bounce for Romney at his weekend.  Saying this and you run the risk of the DNC going over well and Romney's midweek bounce being Obama +2.

No, I've actually expected a 1-3 point bounce, nothing dramatic.  It will take time for the RNC numbers to go in, and the same amount of time for the DNC numbers to go in.  We won't see DNC bounce, fully, until 3-4 days later.

It's not a game; it's just how polling works.

[J. J.]

Obama regains the lead! We can only hope that John Ker... err Mitt Romney keeps bouncing like this!

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/01/us-usa-campaign-poll-idUSBRE87U1CJ20120901

Obama 44%
Romney 43%

I actually thought Romney would end the convention with a 5-point lead, but this is much better.

But still, their Independent breakdowns are nuts. Obama/Romney are tied at 27% (!!!) among Indies, with the rest voting for someone else or undecided. Probably hijacked by Gary Johnson and Ron Paul people, since its an Internet poll.

I've been saying 1-3 points overall, but I don't we'll get it until Monday to Wednesday.

[J. J.]

The 'bots seem to be capturing something; Romney's up by 4.

I doubt it will last.

[J. J.]

The 'bots seem to be capturing something; Romney's up by 4.

I doubt it will last.

By "'bots" do you mean "only Rasmussen"?

Gallup hasn't reported yet.  Yes, Rasmussen = the 'bots. 

[J. J.]

I really don't know why everyone is attacking the polls.  There normally is a post convention bounce; we've all been expecting one.  It isn't gigantic. 

Now it's starting to show up.  If it's like the rest, it won't be around for long.

J. J.'s First Rule of Elections:

If a candidate that say something like “I don't look at the polls,” or “The only polls that matter are the ones on Election Day,” that candidate will lose.

That could apply in this case.

[J. J.]

When did Barack Obama or Mitt Romney say either of those things?

Just a reminder, Lief.  Just a reminder. 

[J. J.]

I really don't know why everyone is attacking the polls.  There normally is a post convention bounce; we've all been expecting one.  It isn't gigantic. 

Now it's starting to show up.  If it's like the rest, it won't be around for long.

J. J.'s First Rule of Elections:

If a candidate that say something like “I don't look at the polls,” or “The only polls that matter are the ones on Election Day,” that candidate will lose.

That could apply in this case.

LOL where were you when people were discounting polls earlier this summer that showed Obama up big? You're such a lovable hack.

What polls showed Obama up big?

Right now, I think it is too early to use the polls to make a prediction about November, but that doesn't mean that I think the polls are bad, especially the main ones.

[J. J.]

I really don't know why everyone is attacking the polls.  There normally is a post convention bounce; we've all been expecting one.  It isn't gigantic. 

Now it's starting to show up.  If it's like the rest, it won't be around for long.

J. J.'s First Rule of Elections:

If a candidate that say something like “I don't look at the polls,” or “The only polls that matter are the ones on Election Day,” that candidate will lose.

That could apply in this case.

LOL where were you when people were discounting polls earlier this summer that showed Obama up big? You're such a lovable hack.

What polls showed Obama up big?

Right now, I think it is too early to use the polls to make a prediction about November, but that doesn't mean that I think the polls are bad, especially the main ones.

Plenty.

Which ones, other than those that exist only in you own mind?

[J. J.]

I really don't know why everyone is attacking the polls.  There normally is a post convention bounce; we've all been expecting one.  It isn't gigantic. 

Now it's starting to show up.  If it's like the rest, it won't be around for long.

J. J.'s First Rule of Elections:

If a candidate that say something like “I don't look at the polls,” or “The only polls that matter are the ones on Election Day,” that candidate will lose.

That could apply in this case.

LOL where were you when people were discounting polls earlier this summer that showed Obama up big? You're such a lovable hack.

What polls showed Obama up big?

Right now, I think it is too early to use the polls to make a prediction about November, but that doesn't mean that I think the polls are bad, especially the main ones.

Plenty.

Which ones, other than those that exist only in you own mind?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/08/09/fox-news-poll-obama-lead-grows-as-romney-support-slips/

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/08/09/rel7b3.pdf

http://www.tipponline.com/presidency/news/presidency/obama-widens-lead-over-romney

http://www.ipsos-na.com/download/pr.aspx?id=11840

http://www.people-press.org/files/2012/08/8-2-12-Topline-for-release.pdf

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/MSNBC/Sections/A_Politics/_Today_Stories_Teases/12768_July_Poll.pdf

The worse was using registered voters and showed 9 points, which might have been an outlier. 

Even that one had Obama below 50% (barely).  Those were not "big," as was suggested.

It's been showing an election that looks close.  It still does.

[J. J.]

You're laughable. How about you just admit that you were wrong for once?

Because these numbers never showed a great lead.  This has been close race so far.  On the whole, and there were outliers, the polls have been pretty good.

[J. J.]

Thursday update 9/6/12 - NO BOUNCE from Rasmussen, YET.

With one night of Rasmussen's surveys being taken AFTER the Michelle Obama speech, Rasmussen finds Romney maintaining his 3 point lead over Obama from yesterday, while with leaners included, Romney moves into a 4 point lead.

Rasmussen: Romney +3
Obama: 44% (-1)
Romney: 47% (-1)

Rasmussen w/ leaners: Romney +4
Obama: 45% (-2)
Romney: 49% (-)

Gallup:

Ipsos:

I wouldn't look for a bounce on Rasmussen until at least tomorrow or Saturday, at the earliest.

[J. J.]

The Rasmussen bounce came from fiddling with the party IDs. Until they're changed back, of course Romney's bounce won't dissipate.

I think he's talking about a Democratic bounce (which probably won't show up until the weekend).

[J. J.]

LOL where were you when people were discounting polls earlier this summer that showed Obama up big? You're such a lovable hack.

No, but there is a corollary to the first rule:

Corollary to J. J.’s First Rule of Elections:  Never trust just one poll.  Trust several and remember that the electorate changes its mind quickly.

[J. J.]

ARG  Sep 4-6

Obama     46%
Romney    49%

Likely Voters

http://americanresearchgroup.com/


Romney has truly closed the gap since Mid-August. Are we looking at Bush vs. Gore 2000 all over again?

ARG is a troll/joke pollster...

Not a great pollster, but not a Republican one.

[J. J.]

Rasmussen's R+5 national sample with a one point Romney lead really doesnt show promising signs for the GOP. That poll is designed for Romney to always be in the lead.

It probly is less than 5 points, though there is a "house effect" that skews it GOP.