116 replies to this topic

[Happy Jack]

Jon, I hope this thread alleviates your concerns.

[quotename='Jon Eisberg' timestamp='1335625375' post='3690814']Oh, and speaking of Gallup, I seem to recall you seemed pretty excited when the Campaign recently began in earnest, and Gallup and others were gonna begin supplying daily tracking numbers...

Any particular reason why you haven't been keeping us up to date, of late?
[/quote]




The Rasmussen Reports

Monday, April 30, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows Mitt Romney earning 47% of the vote while President Obama picks up support from 45%. Four percent (4%) would vote for a third party candidate, while three percent (3%) are undecided.


My Electoral Map

[Happy Jack]

Intrade last month and 10 day averaged trend line.

[benwynn]

The Happy Jack Negative Obama Poll Watch© App is now available for the iPhone. Get instant alerts when negative polls are available, and no pesky notifications if they are positive.

A "must have" for "independents" everywhere!

[Jon Eisberg]

Jon, I hope this thread alleviates your concerns.

Thanks, but I’ll start taking polls a bit more seriously after Romney has actually chosen a running mate. If your boy manages to snag a Jeb Bush or a Chris Christie, he might be looking pretty good… But if he goes with a long shot like Nikki Haley, or a Another Boring White Guy like Rob Portman, I'm not so sure…

This election will likely be a toss-up, and the polls won’t really start meaning anything after Labor Day, and more so after the debates… I think the debates will be HUGE in this election, probably more significant than any election since 1960… Again, if your boy can hold his own, and avoid doing something as dumb as offering to make a $10K bet with the President, he could have a real shot…

Sorry, but anyone who puts much stock in polling this far out is a fool… ANYTHING can happen between now and November… All other things being equal, if you can tell me what the unemployment figures and gas prices (and their respective trends are at the end of October), I might be inclined to hazard a guess…

But absent those figures at this point, I'll make you a friendly wager that Obama wins in a nail-biter, possibly even losing the popular vote... In any event, if Romney does pull it off, I still say he will be just another One Term President…

He's really not much different from Obama, after all - and 4 years in the Oval Office will likely make that pretty clear...

[craigiri]

Obama II for President.


We need a liberal Blue Blood from Ma. to run the country and show us how to be real liberals.

[Spatial Ed]

I hope Dawg pins this thread. So that we can keep flogging HJ every time the polls swing. Either way.

[Happy Jack]

I'll put all my polling posts in this one thread as long as the usual clowns don't stuff it with personal attacks and irrelevancies. Otherwise I have to start a new thread every time. The nice thing is you all get to decide. I put it in your hands.

For the record I've never said early or even late polls are predictive. They serve other purposes. Spot trends. Isolate issues and constituencies. Score events like conventions, speeches and debates. If others want to add legitimate polls e.g. the negative ones , or observations do so. You want to pollute this thread instead then re-read paragraph one.

[Spatial Ed]

If we post polls that are not numbers you like, is that a personal attack?

[Sol Rosenberg]

Polls are awesome. Except when they aren't.

[benwynn]

If we post polls that are not numbers you like, is that a personal attack?

It depends. In order for it not to be a personal attack, you have to call Jack a clown.

Ben

[Remodel]

If we post polls that are not numbers you like, is that a personal attack?

It depends. In order for it not to be a personal attack, you have to call Jack a clown.

Ben

What do you know, there's a poll for that too:

Are Clowns Scary?

[Happy Jack]

[Olsonist]

Missing something there, Jacko?

RCP Average 4/19 - 5/7 -- 45.9 45.6 Obama +0.3

Jacko is always missing something.

[Sol Rosenberg]

Missing something there, Jacko?

RCP Average 4/19 - 5/7 -- 45.9 45.6 Obama +0.3

Jacko is always missing something.

How pathetic must someone be to present a partial screen cap like that? Someone must really want to spread some steaming malarkey. That is a fine example of Simple Jack's integrity, right there.

[Happy Jack]

Missing something there, Jacko?

RCP Average 4/19 - 5/7 -- 45.9 45.6 Obama +0.3

Nope. Polls of Adults have no meaning. Something that RCP needs to correct is that the Tracking polls produce a new result every day but they just overlay that result on the old one hence the very old polls don't get pushed off the list.

So no I did not miss anything.

But let's humor you for a moment because I know how upsetting these new polls must be for you. Lets say Obama is ahead by 0.3%. He still loses almost every time.

Remember the "Incumbent Rule" which roughly stated says 80% of the time 80% of undecided vote for the challenger.



The theory and practice says that if a person after 4 years of experience with the incumbent hasn't decide they like him more than the challenger is likely to vote for the challenger.

Incumbents who poll below 50% but ahead of their rival will say they are winning but the truth is they are in trouble.

IPP = Incumbent-Poll%
CPP = Challenger-Poll%
VPP = Vote Percentage in Play = 100% - Third-party-Poll%
UPP = Undecided-Poll% = VPP - IPP - CPP
WVP = Winning-Vote-Percentage = VPP/2


Challenger wins 80% of the time if:

CPP + 0.8 * UPP > WVP

Let’s try it on the poll that most favors Obama the IBD/CSM/TIPP poll Obama 46 Mitt 43

IPP = 46%
CPP = 43%
VPP = 100%
UPP = 100%-46%-43% = 11%
WVP = 100%/2 = 50%

CPP + 0.8 * 11 = 51.8% > 50% Therefore Mitt wins 80% of the time.

So please take your 0.3% RCP average advantage for Obama and parade it around all you want. Someone once said "Ignorance is Bliss". You must be very Blissful.

[Occams Razor]

Obama odds, 59.5% - which is a bit of a downward slide but still very strong.

[Remodel]

http://elections.huf...a-electoral-map

[Happy Jack]

Obama odds, 59.5% - which is a bit of a downward slide but still very strong.

Where is that fly in from?

[Happy Jack]

Just remember the Incumbent Rule also applies to state polls.

[Mark K]

Missing something there, Jacko?

RCP Average 4/19 - 5/7 -- 45.9 45.6 Obama +0.3

Nope. Polls of Adults have no meaning. Something that RCP needs to correct is that the Tracking polls produce a new result every day but they just overlay that result on the old one hence the very old polls don't get pushed off the list.

So no I did not miss anything.

But let's humor you for a moment because I know how upsetting these new polls must be for you. Lets say Obama is ahead by 0.3%. He still loses almost every time.

Remember the "Incumbent Rule" which roughly stated says 80% of the time 80% of undecided vote for the challenger.



The theory and practice says that if a person after 4 years of experience with the incumbent hasn't decide they like him more than the challenger is likely to vote for the challenger.

Incumbents who poll below 50% but ahead of their rival will say they are winning but the truth is they are in trouble.

IPP = Incumbent-Poll%
CPP = Challenger-Poll%
VPP = Vote Percentage in Play = 100% - Third-party-Poll%
UPP = Undecided-Poll% = VPP - IPP - CPP
WVP = Winning-Vote-Percentage = VPP/2


Challenger wins 80% of the time if:

CPP + 0.8 * UPP > WVP

Let’s try it on the poll that most favors Obama the IBD/CSM/TIPP poll Obama 46 Mitt 43

IPP = 46%
CPP = 43%
VPP = 100%
UPP = 100%-46%-43% = 11%
WVP = 100%/2 = 50%

CPP + 0.8 * 11 = 51.8% > 50% Therefore Mitt wins 80% of the time.

So please take your 0.3% RCP average advantage for Obama and parade it around all you want. Someone once said "Ignorance is Bliss". You must be very Blissful.

Interesting. They have any data from past elections to back that up?

[Happy Jack]

Interesting. They have any data from past elections to back that up?

I'm reluctant to respond to you but it is a reasonble question that others might like to know more about.

My link

But our analysis of 155 polls reveals that, in races that include an incumbent, the traditional answers are wrong. Over 80% of the time, most or all of the undecideds voted for the challenger.

The 155 polls we collected and analyzed were the final polls conducted in each particular race; most were completed within two weeks of election day. They cover both general and primary elections, and Democratic and Republican incumbents. They are predominantly from statewide races, with a few U.S. House, mayoral and countywide contests thrown in. Most are from the 1986 and 1988 elections, although a few stretch back to the 1970s.

The polls we studied included our own surveys, polls provided to us directly by CBS, Gallup, Gordon S. Black Corp., Market Opinion Research, Tarrance Associates, and Mason-Dixon Opinion Research, as well as polls that appeared in The Polling Report.

In 127 cases out of 155, most or all of the undecideds went for the challenger:

Another Link http://www.mysterypo...ncumbent_r.html

You will find arguments against the rule but they are usually from someone who has an election to grind and cherry picks their data. Most importantly the rule is strongest for Presidential elections.

[Olsonist]

Missing something there, Jacko?

RCP Average 4/19 - 5/7 -- 45.9 45.6 Obama +0.3

Nope. Polls of Adults have no meaning. Something that RCP needs to correct is that the Tracking polls produce a new result every day but they just overlay that result on the old one hence the very old polls don't get pushed off the list.

So no I did not miss anything.

(Much yammering and charts and graphs

What you missed, or rather what you removed from the RealClearPolitics chart, was that first line containing the RCP average. It's actually gone up since this morning:

RCP Average 4/19 - 5/7--46.3 45.1 Obama +1.2

By trimming out that line it means you're lying. Now Jacko, what's a good Mormon boy like you lying for?

[Mark K]

Interesting. They have any data from past elections to back that up?

I'm reluctant to respond to you but it is a reasonble question that others might like to know more about.

My link

But our analysis of 155 polls reveals that, in races that include an incumbent, the traditional answers are wrong. Over 80% of the time, most or all of the undecideds voted for the challenger.

The 155 polls we collected and analyzed were the final polls conducted in each particular race; most were completed within two weeks of election day. They cover both general and primary elections, and Democratic and Republican incumbents. They are predominantly from statewide races, with a few U.S. House, mayoral and countywide contests thrown in. Most are from the 1986 and 1988 elections, although a few stretch back to the 1970s.

The polls we studied included our own surveys, polls provided to us directly by CBS, Gallup, Gordon S. Black Corp., Market Opinion Research, Tarrance Associates, and Mason-Dixon Opinion Research, as well as polls that appeared in The Polling Report.

In 127 cases out of 155, most or all of the undecideds went for the challenger:

Another Link http://www.mysterypo...ncumbent_r.html

You will find arguments against the rule but they are usually from someone who has an election to grind and cherry picks their data. Most importantly the rule is strongest for Presidential elections.

Says they were dealing with the last week before the election.

· In 1989, Nick Panagakis, president of Market Shares Corporation (the firm that polls for the Chicago Tribune) analyzed results from 155 surveys, most from the late 1980s, all conducted during the last week before an election. In a famous article in The Polling Report, Panagakis found that in 82% of the cases, the undecideds "broke" mostly to the challenger.




Later, it mentions some that were a month before the election, but mentions that is really too far out to be accurate.


The "rule" appears to have some validity for polls very close to the election though.

[benwynn]

You will find arguments against the rule but they are usually from someone who has an election to grind and cherry picks their data.

Is that a fault, or are you it out as a compliment?

Ben

[Happy Jack]

Missing something there, Jacko?

RCP Average 4/19 - 5/7 -- 45.9 45.6 Obama +0.3

Nope. Polls of Adults have no meaning. Something that RCP needs to correct is that the Tracking polls produce a new result every day but they just overlay that result on the old one hence the very old polls don't get pushed off the list.

So no I did not miss anything.

(Much yammering and charts and graphs

What you missed, or rather what you removed from the RealClearPolitics chart, was that first line containing the RCP average. It's actually gone up since this morning:

RCP Average 4/19 - 5/7--46.3 45.1 Obama +1.2

By trimming out that line it means you're lying. Now Jacko, what's a good Mormon boy like you lying for?

So new data was added after I posted "MY" data that make me a liar? Get lost stupid person.

I never represented what I posted as a RCP anything. The averages on the chart I posted were calculated by me.

Did you see any reference to RCP or a link in my thread? So stop lying about me.

Hey, if you think polls favor Obama post them and say why. That's what I did. Calling the messenger names all the time to distract people from the actual argument is complete bull shit.

I used an RCP snip as a starting point because formatting columns in the forum text editor is a real pain. I dropped an old poll of Adults intentionally for the reasons I stated.

I'm well aware any of you can look up RCP’s web page. I lied about nothing the same is not true of you though. SO why don't you act like an adult in that survey and discuss the topic instead of just attacking me and Mormons.

What a stupid dipshit you are.

You will find arguments against the rule but they are usually from someone who has an election to grind and cherry picks their data.

Is that a fault, or are you it out as a compliment?

Ben

What?

[Olsonist]

No Jacko, you removed the RCP summary line. Cherry picking is one thing, but altering a chart is another thing entirely. It means you're a liar.

[benwynn]

You will find arguments against the rule but they are usually from someone who has an election to grind and cherry picks their data.

Is that a fault, or are you it out as a compliment?

Ben

What?

Is that a fault, or are you pointing it out as a compliment?

Ben

[Happy Jack]

Interesting. They have any data from past elections to back that up?

I'm reluctant to respond to you but it is a reasonble question that others might like to know more about.

My link

But our analysis of 155 polls reveals that, in races that include an incumbent, the traditional answers are wrong. Over 80% of the time, most or all of the undecideds voted for the challenger.

The 155 polls we collected and analyzed were the final polls conducted in each particular race; most were completed within two weeks of election day. They cover both general and primary elections, and Democratic and Republican incumbents. They are predominantly from statewide races, with a few U.S. House, mayoral and countywide contests thrown in. Most are from the 1986 and 1988 elections, although a few stretch back to the 1970s.

The polls we studied included our own surveys, polls provided to us directly by CBS, Gallup, Gordon S. Black Corp., Market Opinion Research, Tarrance Associates, and Mason-Dixon Opinion Research, as well as polls that appeared in The Polling Report.

In 127 cases out of 155, most or all of the undecideds went for the challenger:

Another Link http://www.mysterypo...ncumbent_r.html

You will find arguments against the rule but they are usually from someone who has an election to grind and cherry picks their data. Most importantly the rule is strongest for Presidential elections.

Says they were dealing with the last week before the election.

· In 1989, Nick Panagakis, president of Market Shares Corporation (the firm that polls for the Chicago Tribune) analyzed results from 155 surveys, most from the late 1980s, all conducted during the last week before an election. In a famous article in The Polling Report, Panagakis found that in 82% of the cases, the undecideds "broke" mostly to the challenger.




Later, it mentions some that were a month before the election, but mentions that is really too far out to be accurate.


The "rule" appears to have some validity for polls very close to the election though.

Only an election can be used to validate a poll or in this case a rule of thumb about polls. Even then they must close to each other on the time line. However logic would suggest that the same psychology that fuels this rule in the final polls also is in play for earlier ones. I just can’t be proven.

The point I'm making is that unless Obama starts polling near or above 50% his incumbency is in trouble. I am not making the point that these polls predict anything specific

At this stage polls can:

• show Trends
• sometime indicate who won a debate
• characterize the effect of some event (death of Bin Laden etc.)
• create talking points
• be fun or funny

PS: have you turned over a leaf and decided to restrict your posts to the issues and civil debate?

[Happy Jack]

You will find arguments against the rule but they are usually from someone who has an election to grind and cherry picks their data.

Is that a fault, or are you it out as a compliment?

Ben

What?

Is that a fault, or are you pointing it out as a compliment?

Ben

Yes it's a fault. Sarcasm is noted. Maybe someday your posts will mature beyond this phase.

[benwynn]

You will find arguments against the rule but they are usually from someone who has an election to grind and cherry picks their data.

Is that a fault, or are you it out as a compliment?

Ben

What?

Is that a fault, or are you pointing it out as a compliment?

Ben

Yes it's a fault. Sarcasm is noted. Maybe someday your posts will mature beyond this phase.

"Ignorance is Bliss". You must be very Blissful.

There. Instant maturity beyond my last phase.

Ben

[Occams Razor]

Obama odds, 59.5% - which is a bit of a downward slide but still very strong.

Where is that fly in from?

My Bad - Intrade

[Happy Jack]

Obama odds, 59.5% - which is a bit of a downward slide but still very strong.

Where is that fly in from?

My Bad - Intrade

Ah..

[Mark K]

Interesting. They have any data from past elections to back that up?

I'm reluctant to respond to you but it is a reasonble question that others might like to know more about.

My link

But our analysis of 155 polls reveals that, in races that include an incumbent, the traditional answers are wrong. Over 80% of the time, most or all of the undecideds voted for the challenger.

The 155 polls we collected and analyzed were the final polls conducted in each particular race; most were completed within two weeks of election day. They cover both general and primary elections, and Democratic and Republican incumbents. They are predominantly from statewide races, with a few U.S. House, mayoral and countywide contests thrown in. Most are from the 1986 and 1988 elections, although a few stretch back to the 1970s.

The polls we studied included our own surveys, polls provided to us directly by CBS, Gallup, Gordon S. Black Corp., Market Opinion Research, Tarrance Associates, and Mason-Dixon Opinion Research, as well as polls that appeared in The Polling Report.

In 127 cases out of 155, most or all of the undecideds went for the challenger:

Another Link http://www.mysterypo...ncumbent_r.html

You will find arguments against the rule but they are usually from someone who has an election to grind and cherry picks their data. Most importantly the rule is strongest for Presidential elections.

Says they were dealing with the last week before the election.

· In 1989, Nick Panagakis, president of Market Shares Corporation (the firm that polls for the Chicago Tribune) analyzed results from 155 surveys, most from the late 1980s, all conducted during the last week before an election. In a famous article in The Polling Report, Panagakis found that in 82% of the cases, the undecideds "broke" mostly to the challenger.




Later, it mentions some that were a month before the election, but mentions that is really too far out to be accurate.


The "rule" appears to have some validity for polls very close to the election though.

Only an election can be used to validate a poll or in this case a rule of thumb about polls. Even then they must close to each other on the time line. However logic would suggest that the same psychology that fuels this rule in the final polls also is in play for earlier ones. I just can’t be proven.

The point I'm making is that unless Obama starts polling near or above 50% his incumbency is in trouble. I am not making the point that these polls predict anything specific

At this stage polls can:

• show Trends
• sometime indicate who won a debate
• characterize the effect of some event (death of Bin Laden etc.)
• create talking points
• be fun or funny

PS: have you turned over a leaf and decided to restrict your posts to the issues and civil debate?

Now apply that to all those races that showed Mitt trailing badly in the early primarys which he won anyway. Early polls are soft data. Cotton candy soft.



Always have. Fucking corpses is too much even for me though. It's like those posters of Japanese from WW2. I know Egypt fairly well. IYR, I was a bit appalled at the prospect of your daughter learning the dialect common to northern Egypt, thought she might have been contemplating a mission there. Bad idea, and said so.

[Sol Rosenberg]

Simple Jack has clearly demonstrated that if you disregard polls favoring Obama, Romney looks great. If votes favoring Obama can be similarly disregarded, this will be a landslide.

[kmccabe]

[quote name='Happy Jack' timestamp='1335811494' post='3693326']
Jon, I hope this thread alleviates your concerns.

[quotename='Jon Eisberg' timestamp='1335625375' post='3690814']Oh, and speaking of Gallup, I seem to recall you seemed pretty excited when the Campaign recently began in earnest, and Gallup and others were gonna begin supplying daily tracking numbers...

Any particular reason why you haven't been keeping us up to date, of late?
[/quote]




The Rasmussen Reports

Monday, April 30, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows Mitt Romney earning 47% of the vote while President Obama picks up support from 45%. Four percent (4%) would vote for a third party candidate, while three percent (3%) are undecided.


My Electoral Map








[/quote]

Facts are stupid things.

[quote name='sol rosenberg' timestamp='1336513865' post='3704484']
Simple Jack has clearly demonstrated that if you disregard polls favoring Obama, Romney looks great. If votes favoring Obama can be similarly disregarded, this will be a landslide.
[/quote]

Dick Morris thinks its going to be a landslide for Romney - I think he's smoking crack.

[Sol Rosenberg]

Facts are stupid things.

Simple Jack has clearly demonstrated that if you disregard polls favoring Obama, Romney looks great. If votes favoring Obama can be similarly disregarded, this will be a landslide.

Dick Morris thinks its going to be a landslide for Romney - I think he's smoking crack.

See posts 12 and 13 to see what I was referring to. Simple Jack got caught posting a partial clip of a list of polls. Guess which part got clipped out?

It's fun to watch, but the polls mean very little right now.

[Happy Jack]

What you missed, or rather what you removed from the RealClearPolitics chart, was that first line containing the RCP average. It's actually gone up since this morning:

RCP Average 4/19 - 5/7--46.3 45.1 Obama +1.2

By trimming out that line it means you're lying. Now Jacko, what's a good Mormon boy like you lying for?

What you missed, or rather what you removed from the truth, was that first line contained my average not RCP. It's actually gone down since this afternoon :

RCP Average 4/19 - 5/7--46.2 46.0 Obama +1.2

By trimming out the fact that I never attributed my post to RCP you're lying. Now Obo, what's a good Idiot boy like you lying for?



Sorry to plagiarize your post. I was too lazy to waste more time than necessary on you.

[Spatial Ed]

Dick Morris thinks its going to be a landslide for Romney - I think he's smoking crack.

Dick Morris thought 2008 was going to be a Condi vs Hillary race. He even wrote a book on it.

[Olsonist]

What you missed, or rather what you removed from the RealClearPolitics chart, was that first line containing the RCP average. It's actually gone up since this morning:

RCP Average 4/19 - 5/7--46.3 45.1 Obama +1.2

By trimming out that line it means you're lying. Now Jacko, what's a good Mormon boy like you lying for?

What you missed, or rather what you removed from the truth, was that first line contained my average not RCP. It's actually gone down since this afternoon :

RCP Average 4/19 - 5/7--46.2 46.0 Obama +1.2

By trimming out the fact that I never attributed my post to RCP you're lying. Now Obo, what's a good Idiot boy like you lying for?



Sorry to plagiarize your post. I was too lazy to waste more time than necessary on you.

Yep, you plagiarized RCP's data and style, gave no attribution, and stuck in your own 'conclusion.'

Are you Mormon?

[Regatta Dog]

Dick Morris thinks its going to be a landslide for Romney - I think he's smoking crack.

Dick Morris thought 2008 was going to be a Condi vs Hillary race. He even wrote a book on it.

Much better candidates from both sides than are currently running. I wish I could vote for Rice while respecting her opponent.

[Happy Jack]

I estimated the trend lines since Romney became the presumed nominee. You can argue the absolute value of slopes but not their signs.

[kmccabe]

Facts are stupid things.

Simple Jack has clearly demonstrated that if you disregard polls favoring Obama, Romney looks great. If votes favoring Obama can be similarly disregarded, this will be a landslide.

Dick Morris thinks its going to be a landslide for Romney - I think he's smoking crack.

See posts 12 and 13 to see what I was referring to. Simple Jack got caught posting a partial clip of a list of polls. Guess which part got clipped out?

It's fun to watch, but the polls mean very little right now.

ahhh you're kidding...

ya know...

[Happy Jack]

Look bad for Romney in the newest AP/GfK/Roper poll on RCP.


















Until you read the punch line.



Bada Bing

[Jon Eisberg]

Until you read the punch line.



Bada Bing

With a candidate as weak as Romney, who's been running for President for 7 years and yet has never polled much above 25% within his own party until the last of an incredibly weak field has finally given up, it might be a bit too early for such cocky self-congratulation...

This one might rate saving... Still at least a 50-50 chance your "Bada Bing" could wind up being your "Yoo-Hoo" of 2012...

[Happy Jack]

Until you read the punch line.



Bada Bing

With a candidate as weak as Romney, who's been running for President for 7 years and yet has never polled much above 25% within his own party until the last of an incredibly weak field has finally given up, it might be a bit too early for such cocky self-congratulation...

This one might rate saving... Still at least a 50-50 chance your "Bada Bing" could wind up being your "Yoo-Hoo" of 2012...

What are talking about? I posted a flawed poll and illustrated why it is flawed. Even in Pelosi's dreams 49% of America is not a Democrat.

Never mind. I don't think you are capable of understanding and by all means post "Bada Bing" all you want.

[Happy Jack]

More whining from the Obama team about Polling ...

Obama campaign deputy manager Stephanie Cutter dismissed today's CBS/New York Times poll showing that 67 percent of people believed Obama made his decision on gay marriage for political reasons. Only 24 percent said that Obama did it “mostly because he thinks it is right.”

Host Chuck Todd asked Cutter about the poll, admitting that the methodology of the poll was different, because it was a callback poll. "Put those caveats aside that's a lot of people saying that he did this for political reasons," Todd said, noting that it was a 3-1 margin.

"We can't put the methodology of that poll aside, because the methodology was significantly biased." Cutter insisted on MSNBC this morning.

When pressed by Todd, Cutter said that she didn't want to bore the viewers with talk of methodology, but repeated that she believed the poll was flawed.

Todd encouraged her to continue. "They're junkies, they like this stuff," he said of his viewers.

"It's a biased sample, so they re-biased the same sample," she concluded.

This isn't he first time the Obama campaign complained of methodology problems in polls that looked bad for the president. In April, David Axelrod complained that a Gallup poll showing Romney leading Obama was "saddled with some methodological problems."

[kmccabe]

The only poll that matters is the one in November. I may not love Obama - Romney will be worse for the country. its really that simple.

[Mark K]

The only poll that matters is the one in November. I may not love Obama - Romney will be worse for the country. its really that simple.

Sometimes I think the media "refs the scoreboard". They need drama. Somehow they always had the "not Mitt" leading in many of the states where Mitt creamed them, up until the last week or so. Somebody pays for those polls.

As Matt Taibbi put it:

"The people who work for the wire services and the news networks are physically incapable of writing sentences like, "This election is even more over than the Knicks-Heat series." They are required, if not by law then by neurological reflex, to describe every presidential campaign as "fierce" and "drawn-out" and "hotly-contested."

But this campaign, relatively speaking, will not be fierce or hotly contested. Instead it'll be disappointing, embarrassing, and over very quickly, like a hand job in a Bangkok bathhouse. And everybody knows it."

Read more: http://www.rollingst...7#ixzz1us5DcHjW

[Happy Jack]

Here is my Handy Dandy Incumbent Rule Chart. The Rule states that 80% of the time 80% of undecided break for the challenger. The chart has 80% 70% and 60% variants..

[Occams Razor]

Uh oh Happy - this might not make you happy:

16-May

President Obama tops Republican Mitt Romney in a head-to-head matchup, according to the latest Fox News poll, which finds American voters feeling more positive about the economy.

Obama would have an advantage of 46 percent to 39 percent over Romney, if the election were held today. Three weeks ago the candidates were tied at 46 percent each.

The national poll, released Wednesday, shows the president’s lead is just outside the poll’s margin of sampling error.

<br style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; font-size: 12px; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; "><br style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; font-size: 12px; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">Read more: http://www.foxnews.c.../#ixzz1v6KztqYl

[Regatta Dog]

Uh oh Happy - this might not make you happy:

16-May

President Obama tops Republican Mitt Romney in a head-to-head matchup, according to the latest Fox News poll, which finds American voters feeling more positive about the economy.

Obama would have an advantage of 46 percent to 39 percent over Romney, if the election were held today. Three weeks ago the candidates were tied at 46 percent each.

The national poll, released Wednesday, shows the president's lead is just outside the poll's margin of sampling error.

<br style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; font-size: 12px; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; "><br style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; font-size: 12px; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">Read more: http://www.foxnews.c.../#ixzz1v6KztqYl

Fox News Poll? You are as bad as that guy who gets all his crap from Drudge, fer fuck's sake.

[Happy Jack]

Uh oh Happy - this might not make you happy:

16-May

President Obama tops Republican Mitt Romney in a head-to-head matchup, according to the latest Fox News poll, which finds American voters feeling more positive about the economy.

Obama would have an advantage of 46 percent to 39 percent over Romney, if the election were held today. Three weeks ago the candidates were tied at 46 percent each.

The national poll, released Wednesday, shows the president’s lead is just outside the poll’s margin of sampling error.

<br style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; font-size: 12px; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; "><br style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; font-size: 12px; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; ">Read more: http://www.foxnews.c.../#ixzz1v6KztqYl

Look at my hand dandy Poll Translator above

Now trace over to Obama 46% and Mitt 39% Hmmm I didn't cover that range. No matter, I know the formula. Undecided = 15% ... 15% * 0.8 = 12% ... 39% + 12% = 51%

Romney wins 80% of the time.

[Happy Jack]

May 17, 2012

Romney Registers Personal Best 50% Favorable Rating

Up from 39% in February, but one of lowest for a presumptive nominee

by Jeffrey M. Jones


PRINCETON, NJ -- Fifty percent of Americans now have a favorable opinion of presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, up from 39% in February and his highest by 10 percentage points. His current 41% unfavorable rating, though, leaves him with a net score of +9, after being at -8 in February. In roughly half of the 28 measurements Gallup has taken of Romney since 2006, more Americans have viewed him negatively than positively.




http://www.gallup.com/poll/154703/Romney-Registers-Personal-Best-Favorable-Rating.aspx

[Happy Jack]

Gov. Mitt Romney holds a 47 - 41 percent lead over President Barack Obama in Florida, where 63 percent of voters say the president's support of same-sex marriage will not affect their vote, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today. Another 25 - 11 percent of voters, including 23 - 9 percent among independent voters, say Obama's support of gay marriage makes them less likely to support his candidacy.

Adding Florida U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio to the GOP ticket would give the Republican Romney/Rubio team a 49 - 41 percent lead over President Obama and Vice President Joe Biden.

Romney's lead in the horse race compares to a 44 - 43 percent tie in a May 3 survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University and a 49 - 42 percent Obama lead March 28.

[Happy Jack]

May 3, 2012 - Romney Bounces Back In Two Of Three Key States, Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll Finds; Obama Widens Lead In Pennsylvania; Ohio, Florida Tied

FLORIDA: Romney 44 - Obama 43 OHIO: Obama 44 - Romney 42 PENNSYLVANIA: Obama 47 - Romney 39

Riding the voter perception that he is as good as or better than President Barack Obama at fixing the economy, Republican challenger Mitt Romney catches up with the president in Florida and Ohio, two critical swing states, while the president opens an 8-point lead in Pennsylvania, according to a Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll released today.

This compares to the results of a March 28 Swing State Poll by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University showing President Obama ahead of Gov. Romney 49 - 42 percent in Florida, 47 - 41 percent in Ohio and 45 - 42 percent in Pennsylvania.

[Occams Razor]

In other news, the smart money has Obama at 58% (intrade)

and yes, it's down a bit.

[Sol Rosenberg]

Will Dum Dum stick around (with this ID) if his horse doesn't win? I guess not. He's not a fan of the Yoo Hoo.

[Happy Jack]

In other news, the smart money has Obama at 58% (intrade)

and yes, it's down a bit.

Romney is not even nominated yet. He has not chosen a running mate and still he is trending up and Obama is trending down. These may not predict the final outcome but the trend has to be worrying Obama.

[badlatitude]

[quote name='Happy Jack' timestamp='1337811944' post='3724758']
[quote name='Mitch' timestamp='1337810163' post='3724729']
In other news, the smart money has Obama at 58% (intrade)

and yes, it's down a bit.
[/quote]

Romney is not even nominated yet. He has not chosen a running mate and still he is trending up and Obama is trending down. These may not predict the final outcome but the trend has to be worrying Obama.
[/quote]

So Romney gives a speech to the Latino Coalition and doesn't have the cojones to mention Immigration even once. How do you win an election by doing that? Apparently his lack of fortitude is producing dramatic results:

[quote]

A new national NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Telemundo poll finds President Obama holds a 34-point lead over Mitt Romney among registered Latino voters, 61% to 27%.

In 2008, according to the exit polls, Obama defeated McCain among this key voting bloc, 67% to 31% [http://politicalwire...ng_latinos.html
/quote]

[VwaP]

[quote name='Happy Jack' timestamp='1335811494' post='3693326']
Jon, I hope this thread alleviates your concerns.

[quotename='Jon Eisberg' timestamp='1335625375' post='3690814']Oh, and speaking of Gallup, I seem to recall you seemed pretty excited when the Campaign recently began in earnest, and Gallup and others were gonna begin supplying daily tracking numbers...

Any particular reason why you haven't been keeping us up to date, of late?
[/quote]




The Rasmussen Reports

Monday, April 30, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows Mitt Romney earning 47% of the vote while President Obama picks up support from 45%. Four percent (4%) would vote for a third party candidate, while three percent (3%) are undecided.


My Electoral Map








[/quote]

• 

[Happy Jack]

In other news, the smart money has Obama at 58% (intrade)

and yes, it's down a bit.

Romney is not even nominated yet. He has not chosen a running mate and still he is trending up and Obama is trending down. These may not predict the final outcome but the trend has to be worrying Obama.

So Romney gives a speech to the Latino Coalition and doesn't have the cojones to mention Immigration even once. How do you win an election by doing that? Apparently his lack of fortitude is producing dramatic results:

A new national NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Telemundo poll finds President Obama holds a 34-point lead over Mitt Romney among registered Latino voters, 61% to 27%.

In 2008, according to the exit polls, Obama defeated McCain among this key voting bloc, 67% to 31% [http://politicalwire...ng_latinos.html

Are we talking legal or illegal voters?

[Occams Razor]

In other news, the smart money has Obama at 58% (intrade)

and yes, it's down a bit.

Romney is not even nominated yet. He has not chosen a running mate and still he is trending up and Obama is trending down. These may not predict the final outcome but the trend has to be worrying Obama.

So Romney gives a speech to the Latino Coalition and doesn't have the cojones to mention Immigration even once. How do you win an election by doing that? Apparently his lack of fortitude is producing dramatic results:

A new national NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Telemundo poll finds President Obama holds a 34-point lead over Mitt Romney among registered Latino voters, 61% to 27%.

In 2008, according to the exit polls, Obama defeated McCain among this key voting bloc, 67% to 31% [http://politicalwire...ng_latinos.html

Are we talking legal or illegal voters?

Watch out, your racism is showing.

Note the text "registered voters". Assuming the local Secretaries of State and their bureaucracy are doing their job, you tell me. If they aren't - sounds like a local issue to be dealt with locally.

[badlatitude]

[quote name='VwaP' timestamp='1337813978' post='3724798']
[quote name='Happy Jack' timestamp='1335811494' post='3693326']
Jon, I hope this thread alleviates your concerns.

[quotename='Jon Eisberg' timestamp='1335625375' post='3690814']Oh, and speaking of Gallup, I seem to recall you seemed pretty excited when the Campaign recently began in earnest, and Gallup and others were gonna begin supplying daily tracking numbers...

Any particular reason why you haven't been keeping us up to date, of late?
[/quote]




The Rasmussen Reports

Monday, April 30, 2012

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows Mitt Romney earning 47% of the vote while President Obama picks up support from 45%. Four percent (4%) would vote for a third party candidate, while three percent (3%) are undecided.


My Electoral Map








[/quote]

• 

[/quote]

My, How things can change in just a month:

[Happy Jack]

My, How things can change in just a month:

Rove is just hedging against overconfidence.

This map is far closer to the truth and I didn't even need to use the "Incumbent rule to get there.

[badlatitude]

My, How things can change in just a month:

Rove is just hedging against overconfidence.

This map is far closer to the truth and I didn't even need to use the "Incumbent rule to get there.

Rove makes his reputation providing the public with his well researched prognostications. Hedging would not be part of his image pursuit. Anyone who would like us to believe that Romney is just nine electoral votes from the presidency 6 months from election day is well, probably trying to make a living on the side as a heavy metal bagpipe player with a degree from M.I.T. to boot.

[Spatial Ed]

I noticed Happy gave AZ to Romney. Has Romney satisfied the election requirements there yet? I don't he'll be on the ballot there.

[Happy Jack]

My, How things can change in just a month:

Rove is just hedging against overconfidence.

This map is far closer to the truth and I didn't even need to use the "Incumbent rule to get there.

Rove makes his reputation providing the public with his well researched prognostications. Hedging would not be part of his image pursuit. Anyone who would like us to believe that Romney is just nine electoral votes from the presidency 6 months from election day is well, probably trying to make a living on the side as a heavy metal bagpipe player with a degree from M.I.T. to boot.

Well, you can just attack me or mind meld Carl Rove or you could be a man and tell us which of my picks you dispute. And... Why.

[Happy Jack]

BTW I did not change any of the RCP gives to Obama. I think they had him at 257 just the other day... You are right times change.

[badlatitude]

BTW I did not change any of the RCP gives to Obama. I think they had him at 257 just the other day... You are right times change.

I'm out the door to dinner Jack, I'd be happy to answer you a bit later.

[Mark K]

[Happy Jack]

BTW I did not change any of the RCP gives to Obama. I think they had him at 257 just the other day... You are right times change.

I'm out the door to dinner Jack, I'd be happy to answer you a bit later.

That is some dinner. More like a Roman feast with regular visits to the vomitorium.
BTW in the meantime the NY Times has updated their map




Wanna here something funny? Tiny Pic makes you enter a phrase to stop spammers. The phrase to upload this pic was "Right Hand Turn". I kid you not.

[Happy Jack]

PS: They seem to have missed that Florida now leans Romney by 6%

[Spatial Ed]

PS: They seem to have missed that Florida now leans Romney by 6%

But will they be able to check the right box on the butterfly ballot?

[Saorsa]

PS: They seem to have missed that Florida now leans Romney by 6%

But will they be able to check the right box on the butterfly ballot?

You don't check boxes on a butterfly ballot. I figured that since they were put in place by a democrat supv. of elections, you would know that.

[Happy Jack]

PS: They seem to have missed that Florida now leans Romney by 6%

But will they be able to check the right box on the butterfly ballot?

You don't check boxes on a butterfly ballot. I figured that since they were put in place by a democrat supv. of elections, you would know that.

I heard some guy named Chad was to blame.

[Spatial Ed]

He's probably still hanging around in Florida.

[Happy Jack]

[badlatitude]

Oh! I thought this was a polling thread, in that case:

Verizon lays off 1,700 while rewarding CEO with $22 Million dollar payday.


No wonder Obama can't kick start the economy these guys are too busy rewarding themselves to give a shit.

[Jon Eisberg]

And, in yet another stunning humiliation for the President...

At yesterday's Detroit CHEVROLET Belle Isle Grand Prix for IndyCars, held within sight of the title sponsor GM's World Headquarters, Honda-powered cars swept the 3 top spots on the victory podium... This comes only one week after Honda was victorious at the Indy 500...

America cannot wait until the election, Obama should resign immediately ...

[Happy Jack]

And, in yet another stunning humiliation for the President...

At yesterday's Detroit CHEVROLET Belle Isle Grand Prix for IndyCars, held within sight of the title sponsor GM's World Headquarters, Honda-powered cars swept the 3 top spots on the victory podium... This comes only one week after Honda was victorious at the Indy 500...

America cannot wait until the election, Obama should resign immediately ...

Noooooo not Biden....

[Happy Jack]

Oh! I thought this was a polling thread, in that case:

Verizon lays off 1,700 while rewarding CEO with $22 Million dollar payday.


No wonder Obama can't kick start the economy these guys are too busy rewarding themselves to give a shit.

Yes, Verizon and its 234,971 other employees would be much better off if they had fired the CEO and retained the 1,700 for another few months until the 22 million was gone.

You Obamatons are certifiable geniuses.

[benwynn]

Oh! I thought this was a polling thread, in that case:

Verizon lays off 1,700 while rewarding CEO with $22 Million dollar payday.


No wonder Obama can't kick start the economy these guys are too busy rewarding themselves to give a shit.

Three points I notice:

1. The compensation has been trending down.

2. You don't provide a figure of what you personally think Verizon's top five executives are worth.

3. The intrade price on Obama sure makes it a sweet day for "Independents".

[Bus Driver]

All I can say for certain about this poll is that Jack will take issue with it because Romney doesn't fare very well.

[Mark K]

All I can say for certain about this poll is that Jack will take issue with it because Romney doesn't fare very well.

I chalk that up to our Judeo-Christian tradition. Greed is frowned upon still.

[Happy Jack]

All I can say for certain about this poll is that Jack will take issue with it because Romney doesn't fare very well.

I chalk that up to our Judeo-Christian tradition. Greed is frowned upon still.

Silly boys... I love the purple poll

Let's look at what you boys whistled past





http://www.purplestrategies.com/wp-content/uploads/6.2012-Purple-Poll.pdf

[Mark K]

Doesn't have anything to do with what I was commenting on.

[Bus Driver]

Doesn't have anything to do with what I was commenting on.

Why does Jack commenting on a point you never made surprise you?

[Happy Jack]

Doesn't have anything to do with what I was commenting on.

Of course it does silly boy. You were explaining WHY Romney was not doing well in this poll. If you were not subscribing to that other poster's comments then your post would make no sense.

Stop doing the weasel twist.

[Mark K]

Doesn't have anything to do with what I was commenting on.

Of course it does silly boy. You were explaining WHY Romney was not doing well in this poll. If you were not subscribing to that other poster's comments then your post would make no sense.

Stop doing the weasel twist.

You are pointing to different parts of the poll than the article was talking about, and say I'm weaseling?

[Happy Jack]

Doesn't have anything to do with what I was commenting on.

Of course it does silly boy. You were explaining WHY Romney was not doing well in this poll. If you were not subscribing to that other poster's comments then your post would make no sense.

Stop doing the weasel twist.

You are pointing to different parts of the poll than the article was talking about, and say I'm weaseling?

More weaseling. The original post said I was ignoring "THIS POLL". Now your defense is that the poll has parts? Get an extinguisher you tap shoes are on fire.

[Mark K]

Doesn't have anything to do with what I was commenting on.

Of course it does silly boy. You were explaining WHY Romney was not doing well in this poll. If you were not subscribing to that other poster's comments then your post would make no sense.

Stop doing the weasel twist.

You are pointing to different parts of the poll than the article was talking about, and say I'm weaseling?

More weaseling. The original post said I was ignoring "THIS POLL". Now your defense is that the poll has parts? Get an extinguisher you tap shoes are on fire.

Wasn't talking to you, or referring to the OP. I guess thinking everything is about oneself is typical of narcissists.

[Happy Jack]

Doesn't have anything to do with what I was commenting on.

Of course it does silly boy. You were explaining WHY Romney was not doing well in this poll. If you were not subscribing to that other poster's comments then your post would make no sense.

Stop doing the weasel twist.

You are pointing to different parts of the poll than the article was talking about, and say I'm weaseling?

More weaseling. The original post said I was ignoring "THIS POLL". Now your defense is that the poll has parts? Get an extinguisher you tap shoes are on fire.

Wasn't talking to you, or referring to the OP. I guess thinking everything is about oneself is typical of narcissists.

I don't care who you were talking to, I was talking to the two of you.

[benwynn]

Doesn't have anything to do with what I was commenting on.

Of course it does silly boy. You were explaining WHY Romney was not doing well in this poll. If you were not subscribing to that other poster's comments then your post would make no sense.

Stop doing the weasel twist.

You are pointing to different parts of the poll than the article was talking about, and say I'm weaseling?

More weaseling. The original post said I was ignoring "THIS POLL". Now your defense is that the poll has parts? Get an extinguisher you tap shoes are on fire.

Wasn't talking to you, or referring to the OP. I guess thinking everything is about oneself is typical of narcissists.

If Jack wants to know what your actual intent was he will tell you what it was.

Ben

[Happy Jack]

The RCP average has Obama at 45.7 and Romney at 44.9

Does that mean Obama is leading?

Those numbers leave 9.4% unassigned. If we use past cycles as a guide, in the absence of an organized third party, the other candidate votes average less than 2%. This leaves 7.4% to divide between Obama and Romney.

A win in that case is anything over 49%.

Romney needs 49%-44.9% = 4.1% to win or 4.1%/7.4% * 100% = 55.4% of the undecideds.

80% of the time the challenger gets 80% of the undecideds.

As it stands today, then Romney is technically at 50.8% Obama at 47.2%

A margin of 3.6%

[Happy Jack]

A sea of red for the One and a Hint of green for Romney.

For two days Obama's approval has dropped dramatically.

The Press is calling it Mittmentum.

[Bus Driver]

You should be careful.

Getting this worked up about polls so far away from the election could be dangerous.

[Happy Jack]

A lot of news organizations report the Real Clear Politics poll average.

However that poll averages Registered voter polls and Likely Voter polls without any adjustment, in addition they make no allowance for the incumbent effect or sample size, scoring a poll of 3000 the same as a poll of 800.

To explain for those that don't know, likely Voter polls are more predictive of final election results and should be given more weight. In addition the incumbent rule says that undecided tend to split in favor of the challenger. The average seems to be that 80% go to the challenger about 80% of the time. The last tweak is to subtract the third party vote from the undecideds before distributing it.

This an old school BASIC program to do just that. I wrote it years ago and have updated it for this election.

The input is the same data that RCL averages for their result.

it runs on a free interpreter you can get from http://justbasic.com/


just cut and paste the following text into the JBasic edit window and click the run arrow.


10 Input "Sample size (0 to exit) = "; SS

If SS = 0 then end

Input "Respondent code L for Likely Voter or R for registered voter = "; R$

If R$ = "L" or R$ = "l" then SS = SS * 1.1

If R$ = "R" or R$ = "r" then SS = SS * .9

Input "Obama % = " ; OP

Input "Romney % = " ; RP

PC = PC + 1
OP = OP / 100
RP = RP / 100

RT = RT + RP * SS
OT = OT + OP * SS

TS = TS + SS

Print

R = RT / TS * 100
O = OT / TS * 100

print "----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------"
print "Romney ";using("##.#",R);"% delta ";using("##.#",R - O);"%"
print "Obama ";using("##.#",O);"% delta ";using("##.#",O - R);"%"
print
Print "80% of undecides go to incumbent 80% of time with 2% going to third party"
print
print "With 80/80/2 Incumbent Rule applied Romney = ";using("##.#", (98 - R - O ) * .8 + R);" %"
print "With 80/80/2 Incumbent Rule applied Obama = ";using("##.#", (98 - R - O ) * .2 + O );" %"
print
print "-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------"
print

goto 10


Here is a printout for today's RCP data

Sample size (0 to exit) = 1500
Respondent code L for Likely Voter or R for registered voter = L
Obama % = 44
Romney % = 48

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Romney 48.0% delta 4.0%
Obama 44.0% delta -4.0%

80% of undecides go to incumbent 80% of time with 2% going to third party

With 80/80/2 Incumbent Rule applied Romney = 52.8 %
With 80/80/2 Incumbent Rule applied Obama = 45.2 %

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sample size (0 to exit) = 3050
Respondent code L for Likely Voter or R for registered voter = R
Obama % = 45
Romney % = 46

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Romney 46.8% delta 2.1%
Obama 44.6% delta -2.1%

80% of undecides go to incumbent 80% of time with 2% going to third party

With 80/80/2 Incumbent Rule applied Romney = 52.1 %
With 80/80/2 Incumbent Rule applied Obama = 45.9 %

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sample size (0 to exit) = 848
Respondent code L for Likely Voter or R for registered voter = R
Obama % = 45
Romney % = 44

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Romney 46.3% delta 1.7%
Obama 44.7% delta -1.7%

80% of undecides go to incumbent 80% of time with 2% going to third party

With 80/80/2 Incumbent Rule applied Romney = 51.9 %
With 80/80/2 Incumbent Rule applied Obama = 46.1 %

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sample size (0 to exit) = 841
Respondent code L for Likely Voter or R for registered voter = R
Obama % = 46
Romney % = 42

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Romney 45.8% delta 0.9%
Obama 44.8% delta -0.9%

80% of undecides go to incumbent 80% of time with 2% going to third party

With 80/80/2 Incumbent Rule applied Romney = 51.7 %
With 80/80/2 Incumbent Rule applied Obama = 46.3 %

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sample size (0 to exit) = 1152
Respondent code L for Likely Voter or R for registered voter = L
Obama % = 47
Romney % = 46

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Romney 45.8% delta 0.6%
Obama 45.2% delta -0.6%

80% of undecides go to incumbent 80% of time with 2% going to third party

With 80/80/2 Incumbent Rule applied Romney = 51.4 %
With 80/80/2 Incumbent Rule applied Obama = 46.6 %

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sample size (0 to exit) = 907
Respondent code L for Likely Voter or R for registered voter = R
Obama % = 43
Romney % = 43

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Romney 45.5% delta 0.5%
Obama 45.0% delta -0.5%

80% of undecides go to incumbent 80% of time with 2% going to third party

With 80/80/2 Incumbent Rule applied Romney = 51.5 %
With 80/80/2 Incumbent Rule applied Obama = 46.5 %

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sample size (0 to exit) = 895
Respondent code L for Likely Voter or R for registered voter = R
Obama % = 49
Romney % = 46

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Romney 45.6% delta 0.2%
Obama 45.4% delta -0.2%

80% of undecides go to incumbent 80% of time with 2% going to third party

With 80/80/2 Incumbent Rule applied Romney = 51.2 %
With 80/80/2 Incumbent Rule applied Obama = 46.8 %

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sample size (0 to exit) =

[Happy Jack]

The last iteration shows the improved RCP poll average.

Romney went from .6% behind to .2% ahead and when the incumbent rule is applied he wins 51% to 47%

[d'ranger]

You do know that rules are made to be broken, don't you?

[Happy Jack]

You do know that rules are made to be broken, don't you?

Spoken like a true Obama Democrat.