Poll Farce: Pew Oversamples Democrats

[PiggyBank]

Quote from ChkitOut:

ok, ill admit i dont even know who this guy is and am not sure if he is a genius or a wack job. I hope this doesnt hurt my credability here at ET. :eek:

haha if you get caught trolling and own up it's just funny. It is the guys who believe everything they say/write is correct even when their argument gets blown up.. who lose credibility. imo anyway.

 

[jem]

Quote from Ricter:

Actually, you do raise a point I wanted to make earlier but forgot. The composition of the set 'Likely Voters' is not necessarily the same composition as the set 'Actual Voters'. AK47 might be able to help with the history of that variance.

The polling distinction is this.

Registered vs. likely voters.

Republicans vote at a higher ratio then dems so as polls switch to likely voters it gives a bump to R.

check out the Huffpo article I linked to on our Romney looks like the next pres thread.

The polling companies screen for likely by asking registered voters questions about their previous voting history and current motivation.

If they vote a lot they considered likely voters.

 

[AK Forty Seven]

8 polls in this chart are from likely voters ,Obama is winning 5 of them.2 of the likely voter polls Romney is winning is from Rasmussen

 

[jem]

and the ones with Obama in the lead have samples which sample Dems by and extra 7 to 20 points.

While in 2010 the turnout was D 35 R 35 I 30.

Which means if the voters turn out at the same rate they did in 2010, Romney is ahead by a good margin right now.

Quote from AK Forty Seven:

8 polls in this chart are from likely voters ,Obama is winning 5 of them.2 of the likely voter polls Romney is winning is from Rasmussen

 

[AK Forty Seven]

Quote from jem:

and the ones with Obama in the lead have samples which sample Dems by and extra 7 to 20 points.

While in 2010 the turnout was D 35 R 35 I 30.

Which means if the voters turn out at the same rate they did in 2010, Romney is ahead by a good margin right now.

2010 was a not a presidential election.Democrats always have lower turnout in non presidential elections

 

[jem]

Lets look at what we know.

Tons of Dems have the left the party

Of the ones that are left... gallup recently found them to have mult generaltional low enthusiasm.

Obama has lost 10 percent of the Jewish people
The young people are out of work and will never show up like they did.
Polls show Obama has lost more than 10% of the white people who voted for him.
Many Independents who voted for him will not.

Obama needs a 2008 type turnout from dems to make up for R enthusiasm -- only there are far fewer of them , they have record low enthusiasm and some are crossing over to Romney.

The dems will be lucky to get a 2010 ratio.
It could be 2-4 points to the R side.

 

[AK Forty Seven]

Quote from jem:

Lets look at what we know.

Tons of Dems have the left the party

Of the ones that are left... gallup recently found them to have mult generaltional low enthusiasm.

Obama has lost 10 percent of the Jewish people
The young people are out of work and will never show up like they did.
Polls show Obama has lost more than 10% of the white people who voted for him.
Many Independents who voted for him will not.

Obama needs a 2008 type turnout from dems to make up for R enthusiasm -- only there are far fewer of them , they have record low enthusiasm and some are crossing over to Romney.

The dems will be lucky to get a 2010 ratio.
It could be 2-4 points to the R side.

Bush got 50 million votes in 2000.Bush got 62 million votes in 04.McCain got 59 million votes in 08.Republicans got 44 million votes in the 2010 midterms



Obama got 69 million votes in 2009.Even if republicans match Bushs high of 62 million from 04 Obama still has 7 million votes he can lose.I dont think Obama will get 69 million again. I dont think republicans will match Bushs 2004 high of 62 million either


I disagree with your first statements that many independents ,young people etc will not vote for him

 

[Mercor]

Quote from AK Forty Seven:

Bush got 50 million votes in 2000.Bush got 62 million votes in 04.McCain got 59 million votes in 08.Republicans got 44 million votes in the 2010 midterms



Obama got 69 million votes in 2009.Even if republicans match Bushs high of 62 million from 04 Obama still has 7 million votes he can lose.I dont think Obama will get 69 million again. I dont think republicans will match Bushs 2004 high of 62 million either


I disagree with your first statements that many independents ,young people etc will not vote for him

Obama only needs to lose 50k votes from a dozen states each and he loses

Much of the 7million Obama vote spread was from NY,CA and IL

 

[AK Forty Seven]

Quote from Mercor:

Obama only needs to lose 50k votes from a dozen states each and he loses

Much of the 7million Obama vote spread was from NY,CA and IL

state polls show him doing very well .He's doing better in state polls then in national polls.He is even beating Romney on Rasmussens electoral map

 

[mrbill]

Thanks again for posting all the real numbers. I'm still hearing crickets from the righties who say they think Romney will win, but are too scared to bet a few bucks for charity. Typical I guess, too bad, the ASPCA can sure use the money.