CO: PPP says Gardner+3
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 09:42:52 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
  CO: PPP says Gardner+3
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3
Author Topic: CO: PPP says Gardner+3  (Read 4592 times)
Maxwell
mah519
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,459
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: October 21, 2014, 12:26:31 PM »

The pundit in me just can't see a Udall going down unceremoniously in Colorado. The pollster in me acknowledges it's not looking good. Considering Hickenlooper and the almighty Colorado Brewer interests are also trying to pack this thing, it would not surprise me to see a Quinn/Reid 2010 thing happen here.

Or hell, the final RCP average for Bennet-Buck was Buck+3.

Can people stop citing RCP averages while at the same time yelling junk poll whenever Rassy polls? PICK ONE PEOPLE.
Logged
King
intermoderate
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,357
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: October 21, 2014, 12:45:56 PM »

Rasmussen aside, final PPP was Buck +1, final Marist was Buck +4, final CNN was Buck +1
Logged
Maxwell
mah519
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,459
Germany


Political Matrix
E: -6.45, S: -6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: October 21, 2014, 12:55:14 PM »

Rasmussen aside, final PPP was Buck +1, final Marist was Buck +4, final CNN was Buck +1

Which is a +2 Buck margin, which is well-within the general margin of error for most polls.
Logged
Atlas Has Shrugged
ChairmanSanchez
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,096
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.29, S: -5.04


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: October 21, 2014, 01:05:17 PM »

Where is KCDem and Dr.Scholl?
Logged
Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon
Dwarven Dragon
Atlas Politician
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 31,580
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.42, S: -0.52

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: October 21, 2014, 01:11:00 PM »

They've gone away quietly, thankfully....
Logged
King
intermoderate
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,357
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: October 21, 2014, 01:14:42 PM »

Rasmussen aside, final PPP was Buck +1, final Marist was Buck +4, final CNN was Buck +1

Which is a +2 Buck margin, which is well-within the general margin of error for most polls.

The margin of error for one poll. Multiple polls being systematically a couple of points wrong, all in the direction of one candidate is something different.

I'm not saying the same thing is going to happen, because pollsters clean up their methods and improve over time, but it's foolish to say it DIDN'T happen in 2010.
Logged
DrScholl
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,935
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: October 21, 2014, 01:37:02 PM »


I'm still here, sorry if that upsets you.
Logged
Free Bird
TheHawk
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,918
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.84, S: -5.48

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: October 21, 2014, 01:50:27 PM »


At least you can somewhat have a civil conversation and don't resort nearly as quickly to personal insults
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 #33 on: October 21, 2014, 02:13:10 PM »

It's Colorado, so Udall still has a decent chance, but it's undeniable at this point that Gardner is the favorite.
Logged
Negusa Nagast 🚀
Nagas
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,826
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: October 21, 2014, 02:19:38 PM »

I thought the Republicans over the past decade made it clear that nominating idiots (especially idiots from political dynasties), is generally a recipe for disaster. Democrats did not learn that lesson.
Logged
Vosem
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,625
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.13, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: October 21, 2014, 03:20:14 PM »

Buck was ahead +3.0; Gardner is ahead +3.8 and gaining right now. (I'd also note that Udall was ahead +12.5 in 2008 and only won +10.3, even as Obama significantly underperformed in polling; we can't rule out, based on Udall's history, that it is Gardner polls are underestimating).

Also, +8 on the generic ballot looks fantastic for our chances at the state legislature. If Beauprez pulls it out, we could have a trifecta and bring the Midwestern reform efforts of Snyder and Walker to Colorado.
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 #36 on: October 21, 2014, 03:25:55 PM »

Buck was ahead +3.0; Gardner is ahead +3.8 and gaining right now. (I'd also note that Udall was ahead +12.5 in 2008 and only won +10.3, even as Obama significantly underperformed in polling; we can't rule out, based on Udall's history, that it is Gardner polls are underestimating).

Also, +8 on the generic ballot looks fantastic for our chances at the state legislature. If Beauprez pulls it out, we could have a trifecta and bring the Midwestern reform efforts of Snyder and Walker to Colorado.

Isn't Democratic overreach basically the entire reason Democrats are hurting in CO right now? If they try to Walker-ize Colorado, you can probably expect them to be in deep trouble in 2016/2018.
Logged
Consciously Unconscious
Liberty Republican
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,453
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: October 21, 2014, 03:27:09 PM »

Way to go Colorado.  Gardner will be a great senator.  And of course,  KCDem is nowhere to be found. (I'm sure he thinks that this is a junk poll though)
Logged
DrScholl
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,935
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -3.30

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: October 21, 2014, 03:29:20 PM »

If Republicans get the trifecta, the overreach will be huge. Beauprez thinks Obama wasn't even born here, so you can imagine what sort of craziness him and Republican legislature would come up with. That would destroy Republicans in 2016.
Logged
Vosem
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,625
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.13, S: -6.09

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: October 21, 2014, 03:53:49 PM »

If Republicans get the trifecta, the overreach will be huge. Beauprez thinks Obama wasn't even born here, so you can imagine what sort of craziness him and Republican legislature would come up with. That would destroy Republicans in 2016.

Oh, lots would be accomplished. And I'm sure Beauprez would be in as much trouble as Snyder and Walker are in. (Depending on to what extent the Democratic bench is destroyed, y'all might even be in store for a Branstad/Kasich situation. But I'm fantasizing right now -- Beauprez, unlike Gardner, has yet to even pull away from his Democratic opponent.)
Logged
Sbane
sbane
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,303


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: October 21, 2014, 04:06:56 PM »

Buck was ahead +3.0; Gardner is ahead +3.8 and gaining right now. (I'd also note that Udall was ahead +12.5 in 2008 and only won +10.3, even as Obama significantly underperformed in polling; we can't rule out, based on Udall's history, that it is Gardner polls are underestimating).

Also, +8 on the generic ballot looks fantastic for our chances at the state legislature. If Beauprez pulls it out, we could have a trifecta and bring the Midwestern reform efforts of Snyder and Walker to Colorado.

Isn't Democratic overreach basically the entire reason Democrats are hurting in CO right now? If they try to Walker-ize Colorado, you can probably expect them to be in deep trouble in 2016/2018.

If they try to enact fiscally conservative reforms, there may not be a backlash. If they go social conservative, which they likely will, there will be a backlash. Beauprez seems like a crazy. I really hope he doesn't win.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,611


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: October 21, 2014, 04:18:32 PM »

Fire up the truck!

Love that pathetic approval rating for the soon-to-be-former Senator.  Meanwhile, Gardener has a +3 favorability rating. Amazing!
Logged
krazen1211
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,372


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: October 21, 2014, 04:42:32 PM »

If Republicans get the trifecta, the overreach will be huge. Beauprez thinks Obama wasn't even born here, so you can imagine what sort of craziness him and Republican legislature would come up with. That would destroy Republicans in 2016.

Wishful thinking. The Colorado Democrats (especially in the state House) are the beneficiaries of a vicious gerrymander. They cannot lose that chamber.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: October 21, 2014, 04:47:18 PM »

Buck was ahead +3.0; Gardner is ahead +3.8 and gaining right now. (I'd also note that Udall was ahead +12.5 in 2008 and only won +10.3, even as Obama significantly underperformed in polling; we can't rule out, based on Udall's history, that it is Gardner polls are underestimating).

Also, +8 on the generic ballot looks fantastic for our chances at the state legislature. If Beauprez pulls it out, we could have a trifecta and bring the Midwestern reform efforts of Snyder and Walker to Colorado.

Isn't Democratic overreach basically the entire reason Democrats are hurting in CO right now? If they try to Walker-ize Colorado, you can probably expect them to be in deep trouble in 2016/2018.

If they try to enact fiscally conservative reforms, there may not be a backlash. If they go social conservative, which they likely will, there will be a backlash. Beauprez seems like a crazy. I really hope he doesn't win.

If anything, Hickenlooper is ahead. Even if Gardner wins, if Hick stays, probably the House does and the CO Dems will still be the most successful state party in a purple except for maybe a little better than Virginia's and perhaps the same as New Hampshire's.

In terms of what would happen if Beauprez wins, if he does things like cut the income tax, repeal the gun laws and make fracking easier and makes it easier to recreate on state lands, he probably gets praised as a moderate hero.

If he does stuff like try to force a repeal of the repeal of prohibition or lets there be drilling in popular hunting and camping areas or does to abortion/birth control what Hick did with guns, there could be trouble...especially if they are disciplined until 2016, the national party wins big then and decide on a right-wing push like in North Carolina, Texas, Wisconsin and Ohio.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: October 21, 2014, 04:48:07 PM »

If Republicans get the trifecta, the overreach will be huge. Beauprez thinks Obama wasn't even born here, so you can imagine what sort of craziness him and Republican legislature would come up with. That would destroy Republicans in 2016.

Wishful thinking. The Colorado Democrats (especially in the state House) are the beneficiaries of a vicious gerrymander. They cannot lose that chamber.

But if the GOP did win, they will be under a lot of pressure to pursue a very unreasonable agenda.
Logged
SPC
Chuck Hagel 08
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,004
Latvia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: October 21, 2014, 05:38:58 PM »
« Edited: October 21, 2014, 05:48:01 PM by SPC »

Rasmussen aside, final PPP was Buck +1, final Marist was Buck +4, final CNN was Buck +1

Which is a +2 Buck margin, which is well-within the general margin of error for most polls.

The margin of error for one poll. Multiple polls being systematically a couple of points wrong, all in the direction of one candidate is something different.

I'm not saying the same thing is going to happen, because pollsters clean up their methods and improve over time, but it's foolish to say it DIDN'T happen in 2010.

Okay, let us suppose that we pooled the 2010 PPP, Marist, and CNN polls together. While we are at it, we should probably include the SUSA poll that showed that race tied (or are we excluding that on the basis that it does not fit the narrative of Colorado possessing some mysterious polling ether?). Those combined four polls would have a sample size of 3124, which corresponds to a margin of error of 2% (I would say 1.75% but muh decimuls!). So, even when taking into account that the polling average reduces the overall margin of error, the polling average predicting a Buck +1 victory (PPP gets weighted more since their sample size was bigger) when a Bennet +1 victory actually occurred is not some spooky phenomenon that can only be explained by systematic polling error.

Furthermore, an important thing to remember here is that we are not dealing with rocket science; political science is a social science and thus, as Mandenbrot has shown, may not be as applicable to the normal rules of a Gaussian distribution. If we were dealing with atoms placed on a knife's edge, then it would be fair to presuppose that they will split roughly evenly, but such a phenomenon does not necessarily apply to undecided voters. Indeed, when I examined polling averages vs final outcomes for competitive Senate elections between 2006 and 2012, I found that the histogram looked much closer to what a normal distribution would look like if one multiplied the expected standard deviation by three (in other words, the tails were fat). Colorado was not even particularly unusual (Bennet would have had 3:1 odds using this method, rather than the ~40:1 one would expect from the expected standard deviation). Indeed, the only unusual results were West Virginia 2010 (to be expected when PPP has only Rasmussen checking their work) and Nevada 2010 (a more plausible case for systematic polling bias if I have even seen one)
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: October 21, 2014, 05:49:55 PM »

This is looking pretty bad. If anything, the approval rating is the killer here. In mid-terms, turnout is everything, weak approvals suggests that you might have significant problems getting your voters out, let alone swing voters.

I think this one will go down to the wire regardless. I still hold that if the Dem is down by 3 or less on election day, they'll probably win. We'll see how the remaining polling goes.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,611


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: October 21, 2014, 06:09:51 PM »

KEN BUCK PERIOD.
Logged
SWE
SomebodyWhoExists
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,234
United States


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: October 21, 2014, 06:13:11 PM »

Udall will still win because Bennett did, obviously. Likely D.
Logged
Recalcuate
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 444


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: October 21, 2014, 06:19:53 PM »
« Edited: October 21, 2014, 06:29:56 PM by Recalcuate »

Udall will still win because Bennett did, obviously. Likely D.

Gardner will win because Reagan took the state by 24 points 1980 and 28 points 1984. Safe R. /sarcasm

How does the SEC disclaimer go on publicly released 10-Ks? Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results?

I have a hard time pollsters haven't learned from their previous mistakes. If it quacks like Gardner +3 generally across the board, it's Gardner's race to lose right now. Tossup/Slight Lean R.
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 0.062 seconds with 14 queries.