|           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 26, 2020, 10:51:40 pm
News:
If you are having trouble logging in due to invalid user name / pass:

Consider resetting your account password, as you may have forgotten it over time if using a password manager.

  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 3403 times)
Trends are real, and I f**king hate it
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 51,908
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #50 on: October 12, 2014, 10:45:47 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. 

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.
Logged
SUSAN CRUSHBONE
a Person
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 9,751
Antarctica


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #51 on: October 12, 2014, 10:57:01 am »

if it was retracted it shouldn't be entered, yeah
Logged
Lief 🐋
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,754
Dominica


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #52 on: October 12, 2014, 10:58:21 am »

Considering that it hasn't been entered into RCP or Huffintgon Post Pollster, no.
Logged
Dr. RI
realisticidealist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,384
Vatican City State


Political Matrix
E: -0.39, S: 4.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #53 on: October 12, 2014, 11:33:04 am »
« Edited: October 12, 2014, 12:04:25 pm by realisticidealist »

This poll shouldn't be entered into the database, as Tmth said, it's just a really bad sample.

That's hardly stopped us before. If we excluded every poll with a "bad sample", we'd have half the polls in the database that we do now.

Considering that it hasn't been entered into RCP or Huffintgon Post Pollster, no.

We include lots of polls not included by them.
Logged
#JusticeForCarolyn
DrScholl
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,027
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -3.30


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #54 on: October 12, 2014, 11:37:57 am »

Are we really at the point where people want polls they don't like kept out of the database? The only thing that should be excluded is internals. Not every single poll is accurate, but they still get entered regardless.
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,958
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #55 on: October 12, 2014, 01:09:19 pm »

The poll is clearly an outlier, but that has never been a valid reason for excluding one from the database. Ras published it, so had somebody entered it quickly, would we be pulling it now just because Ras pulled it later? Probably not.
Logged
cinyc
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,259


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #56 on: October 12, 2014, 09:56:30 pm »

Are we really at the point where people want polls they don't like kept out of the database? The only thing that should be excluded is internals. Not every single poll is accurate, but they still get entered regardless.

Because the pollster recalled the poll.  This would be like the Gravis poll that was recalled and replaced. The pulled Gravis poll would have to be removed from the database and replaced with the new one as Gravis doesn't stand behind the original poll. There is no October Rassmussen Kansas poll to put into the database at this moment.  Rasmussen recalled it.
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,512
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #57 on: October 13, 2014, 10:58:16 am »

New Rasmussen KS poll out later today.

(Will Rassy pull a Gravis and show Roberts ahead, because they didn't like the original results ?)
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,512
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #58 on: October 13, 2014, 12:33:35 pm »

New Rasmussen KS poll out later today.

(Will Rassy pull a Gravis and show Roberts ahead, because they didn't like the original results ?)

Weird.

I got the daily Rasmussen email and it says that they release the new KS poll at 1pm Eastern.

It's already 1:30 pm and it's still not out.

Are the results not "right" again ?
Logged
Tender Branson
Mark Warner 08
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,512
Austria


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #59 on: October 13, 2014, 12:39:28 pm »



They released the Columbus Day thing already, so where's KS ... ?
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,958
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #60 on: October 13, 2014, 03:30:13 pm »

Maybe Scott Rasmussen sabotaged Rasmussen's polling data.
Logged
Watermelon sin Jamón
Zanas46
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,899
France


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #61 on: October 14, 2014, 05:57:47 am »

Outlying polls to each side of the race is how you get an average of polls that show you where the race is going. The more polls you have, provided they are done with a valid methodology and not to serve a partisan purpose, the more sense an average of polls make and the more chance you have that your average can predict the outcome more or less correctly.

I'm with Antonio on this.
Logged
Recalcuate
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 444


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #62 on: October 14, 2014, 09:21:47 am »

Outlying polls to each side of the race is how you get an average of polls that show you where the race is going. The more polls you have, provided they are done with a valid methodology and not to serve a partisan purpose, the more sense an average of polls make and the more chance you have that your average can predict the outcome more or less correctly.

I'm with Antonio on this.

It's only an outlying poll if the poll was publicly released. Obviously, this one wasn't ready for prime time. They held short of a wider release and retracted it. It amazes me that people want to include bad information solely because it looks good for one candidate over another.

Bad information is bad information. It should not be included if you are intellectually honest. Something was wrong as a matter of science or Rasmussen would have released the poll to not just subscribers.
Logged
IceSpear
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,958
United States


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -6.43

P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #63 on: October 14, 2014, 04:45:35 pm »

Outlying polls to each side of the race is how you get an average of polls that show you where the race is going. The more polls you have, provided they are done with a valid methodology and not to serve a partisan purpose, the more sense an average of polls make and the more chance you have that your average can predict the outcome more or less correctly.

I'm with Antonio on this.

It's only an outlying poll if the poll was publicly released. Obviously, this one wasn't ready for prime time. They held short of a wider release and retracted it. It amazes me that people want to include bad information solely because it looks good for one candidate over another.

Bad information is bad information. It should not be included if you are intellectually honest. Something was wrong as a matter of science or Rasmussen would have released the poll to not just subscribers.

There's plenty of good information that never gets released and bad information that does get released, so I'm not sure what your point is here. You have no proof that Ras didn't release it because it was "bad science", it's probable they just realized afterward that it was far off the consensus and didn't want to embarrass themselves by releasing an obvious outlier.
Logged
Recalcuate
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 444


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #64 on: October 14, 2014, 06:18:56 pm »

Outlying polls to each side of the race is how you get an average of polls that show you where the race is going. The more polls you have, provided they are done with a valid methodology and not to serve a partisan purpose, the more sense an average of polls make and the more chance you have that your average can predict the outcome more or less correctly.

I'm with Antonio on this.

It's only an outlying poll if the poll was publicly released. Obviously, this one wasn't ready for prime time. They held short of a wider release and retracted it. It amazes me that people want to include bad information solely because it looks good for one candidate over another.

Bad information is bad information. It should not be included if you are intellectually honest. Something was wrong as a matter of science or Rasmussen would have released the poll to not just subscribers.

There's plenty of good information that never gets released and bad information that does get released, so I'm not sure what your point is here. You have no proof that Ras didn't release it because it was "bad science", it's probable they just realized afterward that it was far off the consensus and didn't want to embarrass themselves by releasing an obvious outlier.

Give me a break. Everyone else has this race within a few percentage points either way. This particular poll which was never publicly released, has this race in a different universe. There's no logical explanation other than the poll was not released because it was a bad poll.
Logged
KCDem
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,929


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #65 on: October 14, 2014, 06:19:54 pm »

Outlying polls to each side of the race is how you get an average of polls that show you where the race is going. The more polls you have, provided they are done with a valid methodology and not to serve a partisan purpose, the more sense an average of polls make and the more chance you have that your average can predict the outcome more or less correctly.

I'm with Antonio on this.

It's only an outlying poll if the poll was publicly released. Obviously, this one wasn't ready for prime time. They held short of a wider release and retracted it. It amazes me that people want to include bad information solely because it looks good for one candidate over another.

Bad information is bad information. It should not be included if you are intellectually honest. Something was wrong as a matter of science or Rasmussen would have released the poll to not just subscribers.

There's plenty of good information that never gets released and bad information that does get released, so I'm not sure what your point is here. You have no proof that Ras didn't release it because it was "bad science", it's probable they just realized afterward that it was far off the consensus and didn't want to embarrass themselves by releasing an obvious outlier.

Give me a break. Everyone else has this race within a few percentage points either way. This particular poll which was never publicly released, has this race in a different universe. There's no logical explanation other than the poll was not released because it was a bad poll.

It wasn't released because Rasmussen's Republican subscriber base revolted.
Logged
Abandon hope all ye who register here
Kalwejt
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 56,510


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #66 on: October 17, 2014, 03:42:45 am »

Rest In Pieces, Senator Roberts.
Logged
Recalcuate
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 444


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #67 on: October 17, 2014, 08:53:33 am »

Outlying polls to each side of the race is how you get an average of polls that show you where the race is going. The more polls you have, provided they are done with a valid methodology and not to serve a partisan purpose, the more sense an average of polls make and the more chance you have that your average can predict the outcome more or less correctly.

I'm with Antonio on this.

It's only an outlying poll if the poll was publicly released. Obviously, this one wasn't ready for prime time. They held short of a wider release and retracted it. It amazes me that people want to include bad information solely because it looks good for one candidate over another.

Bad information is bad information. It should not be included if you are intellectually honest. Something was wrong as a matter of science or Rasmussen would have released the poll to not just subscribers.

There's plenty of good information that never gets released and bad information that does get released, so I'm not sure what your point is here. You have no proof that Ras didn't release it because it was "bad science", it's probable they just realized afterward that it was far off the consensus and didn't want to embarrass themselves by releasing an obvious outlier.

Give me a break. Everyone else has this race within a few percentage points either way. This particular poll which was never publicly released, has this race in a different universe. There's no logical explanation other than the poll was not released because it was a bad poll.

It wasn't released because Rasmussen's Republican subscriber base revolted.

They'd be revolting en masse this cycle then because, if anything, Rasmussen-less Rasmussen has been slightly more favorable to the Democrats than other pollsters this cycle.
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 0.291 seconds with 18 queries.