CO-PPP: TIED RACE

[Recalcuate]

48-48

http://bit.ly/10BLOSI

This post should have a giant (D) next to it. This is not a PPP Poll, it's a PPP poll for the League of Conservation Voters, a left-leaning group. Let's at least attempt to be intellectually honest here.

PPP will probably release their own Colorado poll at some point.

[Recalcuate]

Too bad the actual electorate shows Republicans soaring to the mailboxes.

But PPP/League of Conservation Voters (D) suggests it will end up R+1. Remember, remember, remember the Buck.

[Recalcuate]

Actually this was a poll done for LCV, and they excluded third party candidates, so Gardner still has a chance.

The third-party candidate got Bucked in this poll. Utterly and completely Bucked.

[Recalcuate]

The issue isn't that this was done for LCV, it's that LCV only chooses to release polls that are more favorable for Democrats. For all we know, they've had PPP poll CO a bunch of times and then just released the most favorable result (in fact, this is likely). Does this show Udall can still win? Of course. But is Gardner still favored? Of course.

The issue isn't that this was done for LCV, it's that LCV only chooses to release polls that are more favorable for Democrats. For all we know, they've had PPP poll CO a bunch of times and then just released the most favorable result (in fact, this is likely). Does this show Udall can still win? Of course. But is Gardner still favored? Of course.

Or they just released a few shock polls in NC and CO to increase their profile at a time when they can get some free advertising to line their coffers.

You never know the motivations used by an interest group in releasing what they release.  For some reason, LCV left out the third-party candidates, while PPP has included them in other Colorado polls, for example.

You can't treat this poll as anything other than PPP (D) due to the advocacy group they conducted the poll for.

The true PPP poll will be out sometime this weekend.

[Recalcuate]

Remember guys, this was a poll done for LCV.

The PPP/LCV (D) poll had a 39 R, 38 D and 25 I/O turnout breakdown.

The Early Vote has 60% of the 2010 total vote tally in (1 million votes). The current breakdown is 41.6 R, 32.4D, 26 I/O.

I know PPP isn't likely pushing for Party ID. However, the early vote numbers are hard numbers. They are not even in the same ballpark as PPP/LCV (D).

In order to match the 39/38/25, the rest of the vote would have to break down as follows:

Same turnout as 2010 (1.8 million), you'd need a D+10 edge.
If you upped the turnout to 2.0 million, you'd need a D+8 edge.
If you upped the turnout to 2.3 million, you'd need a D+6 edge.
If you matched the Obama turnout of 2.6 million from 2012, D+4.5 edge.

Possible? Sure. But those are some haughty numbers to reach.

[Recalcuate]

Party ID and party registration are different things.

I'd generally agree with you, but not with 60% of the likely vote already in. This is almost like a half-exit poll at this point in time.

I find it hard to believe that partisans are going to lie to pollsters about their party affiliation after going out of their way to cast a ballot to the extent stated in this poll.

You basically would have me suspend belief here to say that 8-9 percentage points of Rs self-identify as Democrats for this sample to work.

If we were modeling against historic turnout, that would be one thing. But these are hard numbers for this particular voting cycle. To be a few points off on an exit poll is one thing. To be off by nearly 10 is not.

Keep in mind that at 60%, the EV numbers begin to become somewhat statistically significant in a larger poll subsample of 600 on their own merits.

By another measure, Democrats would have to push a sample of R+2 the rest of the way to get it within the R+6 they had for the Buck race. We'll see tomorrow, but these EV numbers have not budged much off of R+9 this week.

[Recalcuate]

Party ID and party registration are different things.

Seriously. Republicans are making the same mistake they did going into 2012.

Same mistake? Seriously?

This is not 2012. No one is trying to reskew a poll. I am just pointing out how these self-identified numbers are way off of the reality of what the Colorado electorate looks like right now.

Unlike 2012, we have statistically significant hard data in this race to back up those numbers.

The early voting samples simply do not compute with this poll's findings.

With likely 60% of the electorate all ready voting the numbers suggest an R+10 electorate. (Actually R+9.2, but R+10 due to rounding). It's remained in that range all week.

My point is that unless there is a serious Democrat wave over these last few days, this PPP/LCV (D) poll is an outlier. Democrats are not coming out to their 2010 early vote numbers in Colorado of R+6 right now. The enthusiasm is on the Republican side.

The red hats can gleefully look at this advocacy poll as evidence of a chance for Udall. However, your enthusiasm will wane once the real PPP poll comes out this weekend showing a Gardner lead.

[Recalcuate]

Hopefully actual PPP polls this again to see whether LCV PPP is a shill firm or not. LCV PPP has had some wackier results than normal but looks generally credible, except for this result (which has gone against what most have thought for this race).

I am pretty sure that PPP is coming back to Colorado with their own poll, that includes the third-party candidates this weekend. The CO and NC results for LCV are not posted on their website.

My main issue with this whole thread is that the red hats on here are treating the poll as anything other than an advocacy poll for a D-leaning organization instead of the more accurate PPP/LCV (D).

[Recalcuate]

Party ID and party registration are different things.

Seriously. Republicans are making the same mistake they did going into 2012.

Same mistake? Seriously?

This is not 2012. No one is trying to reskew a poll. I am just pointing out how these self-identified numbers are way off of the reality of what the Colorado electorate looks like right now.

Unlike 2012, we have statistically significant hard data in this race to back up those numbers.

The early voting samples simply do not compute with this poll's findings.

With likely 60% of the electorate all ready voting the numbers suggest an R+10 electorate. (Actually R+9.2, but R+10 due to rounding). It's remained in that range all week.

My point is that unless there is a serious Democrat wave over these last few days, this PPP/LCV (D) poll is an outlier. Democrats are not coming out to their 2010 early vote numbers in Colorado of R+6 right now. The enthusiasm is on the Republican side.

The red hats can gleefully look at this advocacy poll as evidence of a chance for Udall. However, your enthusiasm will wane once the real PPP poll comes out this weekend showing a Gardner lead.

All you are doing is unskewing this poll like Republicans did in 2012. Party registration and party ID are two different things and you would do well to learn that.

I am not unskewing a damn thing. I did not supplant the R/D/I percentage to reengineer the poll and give the Gardner a nine-point edge. Nor have I ever accepted or adopted the Q poll with Gardner +7 as gospel.

I am pointing out that there is hard data suggesting the electorate right now is R+9. Yes, it can and may shrink between now and Election Day. However, it's very unlikely to expect a self-identified electorate eight points off of that number.

The sample size of Early Voters is becoming more and more statistically significant as a subgroup polling number. The number 67% of the 2010 total turnout.

Let's not forget that this is not a straight PPP poll. It's is an advocacy poll that does not exist on PPP's website done for the League of Conservation Voters, who is actively assisting the GOTV effort for the Udall campaign. As such the LCV has a vested interest. It is not a non-partisan poll. It's PPP/LCV (D) and should be treated as such.

That's merely my point.

[Recalcuate]

Again, the hard data you cite is party registration. That has nothing to do with the whims and fancies of people at any given time, which is otherwise known as party ID. A person who is registered as a Republican my feel like a Republican one day and an independent the next. Someone registered independent may want to associate with the democrats one year, but not the next. Party ID is fairly fluid whereas registration is not. In 2010, a Republican wave year, Colorado voters said their party Id was 33-28 in favor of the Democrats. At the same time, I don't believe Democrats have ever had an advantage in party registration in Colorado in recent years.

I get your point about this being an advocacy poll and lo and behold PPP will be conducting another CO poll this weekend. You only diminish your greater point by conflating party registration and party ID.

So the 2010 Exit Poll included interviews of those that voted early, correct?

[Recalcuate]

That is party ID though. It is quite possible people will be more willing to identify with the Republicans this year than with buck on the ballot.

Gee a tie for an advocacy group turns into a R+3 when the non-partisan poll shows up.

Color me not shocked.

This drivel was PPP/LCV (D) all along.