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.
I'm not claiming the opposite. Actually, I doubt anyone on the forum actually thinks Orman is leading by 12. Still, just like we included those crappy polls that showed Brown ahead in NH, we should include this one.
Poll
