KS-Rassy: Orman+12
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 04:34:56 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2014 Gubernatorial Election Polls
  2014 Senatorial Election Polls
  KS-Rassy: Orman+12
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Poll
Question: Should this poll be entered to the FORUM poll database ? (please read thread)
#1
Yes
#2
No
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results


Author Topic: KS-Rassy: Orman+12  (Read 3960 times)
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,611


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: October 09, 2014, 04:28:02 PM »

Glad to see the Roberts lead confirmed.
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,841
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: October 09, 2014, 08:03:42 PM »

Median poll is still Orman +5. Ras/Marist are pro-Orman outliers, CNN/Fox pro-Roberts outliers. How nice and neat. Smiley
Logged
Eraserhead
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,405
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: October 09, 2014, 09:15:06 PM »

Seems like we have a race here that people just don't know how to poll.
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,173
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: October 10, 2014, 01:35:14 AM »

Looks like this result was so out of line with other polls that Rasmussen decided not to release it after all, despite announcing earlier that they would:



PPP has done the same thing a few times, when the outlier was really obvious.
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,841
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: October 10, 2014, 01:36:30 AM »
« Edited: October 10, 2014, 02:13:13 AM by IceSpear »

Looks like this result was so out of line with other polls that Rasmussen decided not to release it after all, despite announcing earlier that they would:



PPP has done the same thing a few times, when the outlier was really obvious.

It would've been no more of an outlier than FOX's was. Pretty sketchy from Ras to go the Gravis route. "Result too good for Democrats? I guess we'll throw it away and do a new one!"
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,173
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: October 10, 2014, 01:41:07 AM »

Is this poll still on the Rasmussen private website?  It's not on the public website and someone from RRH said it has been removed without comment.

It's still there:

http://www.redracinghorses.com/showComment.do?commentId=279970

But Rasmussen decided not to release it for some reason.
Logged
morgieb
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,625
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -8.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: October 10, 2014, 02:13:48 AM »

Poll is still a poll. Pretty weird they wouldn't release it, despite the numbers looking way off.

The only thing this suggests is that the Roberts surge doesn't seem to be happening.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,615


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: October 10, 2014, 03:18:36 AM »

LOL, a rare day that Rasmussen is biased against the Republican.
Logged
Andrew1
Rookie
**
Posts: 102
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: October 10, 2014, 01:05:31 PM »

If this poll had Orman up 12, presumably Davis was comfortably ahead as well, will we ever see those numbers?

I seem to recall Rasmussen's last KS-Gov poll, in September, appeared & then mysteriously disappeared for a few days, before resurfacing. Perhaps something similar is happening.
Logged
Panda Express
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,578


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: October 10, 2014, 05:24:26 PM »

omg wtf Rasmussen you sketchy son of a bitch. Just when I was starting to have faith in you again.
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,173
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: October 12, 2014, 08:32:19 AM »

Should this poll be entered to the database ?

I mean it was released by Rasmussen to premium subscribers and then taken back for some reason (maybe because they didn't like the numbers ?)

But we still have the results, the time when it was conducted and the sample.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,611


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: October 12, 2014, 08:35:13 AM »

Should this poll be entered to the database ?

I mean it was released by Rasmussen to premium subscribers and then taken back for some reason (maybe because they didn't like the numbers ?)

But we still have the results, the time when it was conducted and the sample.

I understand the desperation to continue this false narrative that Orman has a double digit lead but if a poll is only released to a select group then retracted, it shouldn't be entered.
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 58,173
Austria


Political Matrix
E: -6.06, S: -4.84

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: October 12, 2014, 08:44:54 AM »

Should this poll be entered to the database ?

I mean it was released by Rasmussen to premium subscribers and then taken back for some reason (maybe because they didn't like the numbers ?)

But we still have the results, the time when it was conducted and the sample.

I understand the desperation to continue this false narrative that Orman has a double digit lead but if a poll is only released to a select group then retracted, it shouldn't be entered.

The question is not if Orman is ahead by double-digits (I don't think he is, more like ahead by 3-6 points).

The thing is that Rasmussen released it to premium subscribers and then retracting it without even writing a notice about why they did.

If they didn't release the numbers at all, then I wouldn't question it (PPP did the same thing a few times).

But we have the numbers that they released and it should be put into the database (besides, the map would not change with this poll, because it would go from "tie" to "Orman+2").

I'm creating a poll and then ask Dave if a majority votes in favour.
Logged
tmthforu94
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,401
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.26, S: -4.52

P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: October 12, 2014, 08:50:01 AM »

The poll had Obama's approval at 45%. They probably retracted it because it is clearly a bad sample.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: October 12, 2014, 08:53:31 AM »

The poll had Obama's approval at 45%. They probably retracted it because it is clearly a bad sample.

Retracting polls because you don't like their results is just plain wrong. There is no excuse.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,611


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: October 12, 2014, 08:56:38 AM »

The poll had Obama's approval at 45%. They probably retracted it because it is clearly a bad sample.

Retracting polls because you don't like their results is just plain wrong. There is no excuse.

Facts didn't like the results either: there's no way Obama is at 45% approval in Kansas. He's lucky to have that rating in PA right now!
Logged
windjammer
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,512
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: October 12, 2014, 09:05:22 AM »

As I always said,
Rasmussen polls are I-N-A-C-C-U-R-A-T-E.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: October 12, 2014, 09:08:35 AM »

The poll had Obama's approval at 45%. They probably retracted it because it is clearly a bad sample.

Retracting polls because you don't like their results is just plain wrong. There is no excuse.

Facts didn't like the results either: there's no way Obama is at 45% approval in Kansas. He's lucky to have that rating in PA right now!

That's not how polling works.
Logged
KCDem
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,928


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: October 12, 2014, 09:08:44 AM »

The poll had Obama's approval at 45%. They probably retracted it because it is clearly a bad sample.

Retracting polls because you don't like their results is just plain wrong. There is no excuse.

Facts didn't like the results either: there's no way Obama is at 45% approval in Kansas. He's lucky to have that rating in PA right now!

It doesn't matter because Orman will still win Cheesy
Logged
Chancellor Tanterterg
Mr. X
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,203
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: October 12, 2014, 09:12:53 AM »

As I always said,
Rasmussen polls are I-N-A-C-C-U-R-A-T-E.

I agree that Rasmussen is awful, but if we include yougov polls in the database, I don't see why this shouldn't be included as well.  I'm not necessarily saying we should leave out yougov polls (undecided on that), but I do think the argument for excluding them (they don't even use random sampling) is far stronger than the argument for leaving out a poll that was conducted, posted, and then yanked without explanation (quite possibly because the firm that conducted it simply didn't like the result).
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,611


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: October 12, 2014, 09:16:33 AM »

The poll had Obama's approval at 45%. They probably retracted it because it is clearly a bad sample.

Retracting polls because you don't like their results is just plain wrong. There is no excuse.

Facts didn't like the results either: there's no way Obama is at 45% approval in Kansas. He's lucky to have that rating in PA right now!

That's not how polling works.

Ah, I understand. But disputing other findings in polls is still enough reason to throw them out, right?
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: October 12, 2014, 09:25:48 AM »

The poll had Obama's approval at 45%. They probably retracted it because it is clearly a bad sample.

Retracting polls because you don't like their results is just plain wrong. There is no excuse.

Facts didn't like the results either: there's no way Obama is at 45% approval in Kansas. He's lucky to have that rating in PA right now!

That's not how polling works.

Ah, I understand. But disputing other findings in polls is still enough reason to throw them out, right?

No, a poll should never been thrown out because of what its results show. It can be thrown out because it uses a crappy methodology or because it was done on behalf of a partisan cause, but disregarding a polls because its results "don't look right" is inherently stupid.
Logged
windjammer
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,512
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: October 12, 2014, 09:50:50 AM »

As I always said,
Rasmussen polls are I-N-A-C-C-U-R-A-T-E.

I agree that Rasmussen is awful, but if we include yougov polls in the database, I don't see why this shouldn't be included as well.  I'm not necessarily saying we should leave out yougov polls (undecided on that), but I do think the argument for excluding them (they don't even use random sampling) is far stronger than the argument for leaving out a poll that was conducted, posted, and then yanked without explanation (quite possibly because the firm that conducted it simply didn't like the result).

We shouldn't include yougov too.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,611


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: October 12, 2014, 10:30:50 AM »

The poll had Obama's approval at 45%. They probably retracted it because it is clearly a bad sample.

Retracting polls because you don't like their results is just plain wrong. There is no excuse.

Facts didn't like the results either: there's no way Obama is at 45% approval in Kansas. He's lucky to have that rating in PA right now!

That's not how polling works.

Ah, I understand. But disputing other findings in polls is still enough reason to throw them out, right?

No, a poll should never been thrown out because of what its results show. It can be thrown out because it uses a crappy methodology or because it was done on behalf of a partisan cause, but disregarding a polls because its results "don't look right" is inherently stupid.

I think we are misunderstanding each other, my friend. I'm not saying the President's (inaccurate) approval rating per this poll is a reason to exclude it from the database but I do think it's further proof that the poll is junk. 
Logged
Flake
Flo
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,688
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: October 12, 2014, 10:37:06 AM »

This poll shouldn't be entered into the database, as Tmth said, it's just a really bad sample.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.054 seconds with 15 queries.