NC: PPP: Romney +.2

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

And in 2010, Nate Silver did a piece about how PPP polling NC actually leads to them getting pretty bad results. PPP had the 2010 NC race as a toss-up, don't forget...

It's going to be close and PPP has nailed every statewide election they've done here... in 2008, a Democratic year, and 2010, a very weird Tea Party/GOP year.  

Okay, what, exactly, did PPP's final 2010 polls say?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Yeah this probably will be the closest state in the country.

[J. J.]

Are you wondering why I think PPP might have a house bias?  

Really sort of doubt PPP is skewing its result.  Isn't it based in NC. And, at this stage, this is game time for pollsters. They know their reputation (and future revenue) are at stake. Almost no incentive for a polling firm like PPP, to not produce as accurate result as possible.

It is not intentional.  It is something internal to their polls.  

[Minnesota Mike]

Based on everything I am reading, it really does seem like the black turnout/enthusiasm, is not going to be that far off from what it was in 2008.  If that is the case, the PPP poll makes complete sense, as does PPP's +4 in Virginia while at same time showing only +2 in (whiter) Iowa.

Agree completely. Gun to my head I say Romney pulls it out but IMHO this is a 1-2% race either way, probably closest state in the nation.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I guess the decimals make PPP a junk pollster!

LOL, I never understood that rule. Of course the 0.2 difference is remotely statistically significant, but whatever.

[Lief 🗽]

60% of the vote is in and Repubs have gained 5 point since 2008. That is a fact. Its not a poll. Its what has happened. How can you guys argue this poll can possibly be accurate?

That doesn't mean the state is swinging 5 points to Romney. It means that, unlike in 2008, Republicans are banking some of their votes early. And in this poll Obama is up 54-45 with early voters, which is if anything a slightly R-leaning result when you look at the registration breakdown of the early vote.

[Speed of Sound]

Are you wondering why I think PPP might have a house bias?  

Really sort of doubt PPP is skewing its result.  Isn't it based in NC. And, at this stage, this is game time for pollsters. They know their reputation (and future revenue) are at stake. Almost no incentive for a polling firm like PPP, to not produce as accurate result as possible.

It is not intentional.  It is something internal to their polls.  

No-one is freaking wondering why you think they have a house bias. Everyone is wondering why you think they're house effect is D+5 in Ohio when the average poll shows Obama up 3 and they have him up 5. No one doubts the PPP general house effect. It's nowhere near 5 points.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

I don't think this is accurate, actually... I'll grant 3 pts to Romney.  Guess what?  He needed to do a lot better than winning NC by 3 to extrapolate a win on the national level.  

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

And in 2010, Nate Silver did a piece about how PPP polling NC actually leads to them getting pretty bad results. PPP had the 2010 NC race as a toss-up, don't forget...

It's going to be close and PPP has nailed every statewide election they've done here... in 2008, a Democratic year, and 2010, a very weird Tea Party/GOP year.  

Okay, what, exactly, did PPP's final 2010 polls say?

Nailed the Senate race, R+12

[jatt978]

Something else to keep in mind is that PPP is releasing 20 state polls tonight.  That means that even if their polls are perfect there will still be one poll that will miss the final result by more than the margin of error (about 3 or so percent), assuming the margin of error is the 95% confidence interval.

So, when we look back on today's PPP polls on Wednesday there will be one or two that missed very badly.  That's not PPP's fault. That's just statistics.

[Seriously?]

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.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

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.

[Gass3268]

I really like the fact that they give cross-tabs by area code. Wish they could do that for other states.

[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 %.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

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 %.

That was many months ago. They're closer to the polling consensus now, not further away.

[Eraserhead]

Don't buy that NC is this close.

I think Gravis Marketing's last poll (Romney +4) is probably going to come very close to the actual result, hilariously enough.

[Sbane]

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?

[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.

[Sbane]

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.

[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.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

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.

[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.

[User157088589849]

I need to see the final early vote total for the state before calling it.

We just to need see what electorate is going out to vote. It seems -3d on on 08 at the moment.

[Sbane]

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.

I don't get why that is hard to believe.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

It doesn't make sense. Obama hasn't even been to NC since the convention, Romney was there once. If it was tied you would think somebody would be there in the final week or for that fact the final month of the campaign.

Clinton and Michelle were there just the pass couple of days.

Anyway, PPP knows their state....so I don't see why posters are dismissing them. Historically, they have been very accurate when it comes to NC, and VA for that matter.

If NC is this close, the election isn't close and Obama would be there to run up the score. Bill has been all over the map this week, it is almost like they don't trust the numbers that they have and you could say the same about Mitt's campaign.

Nah.  Obama doesn't need to run up the score.  If he thought he had this election in the bag, he'd be going to states with downticket races he could help with, and North Carolina doesn't.  No Senate race and the GOP will win the Governor race there.