Hey Sno

Tell me again how no incumbent president has ever won with a pre-polling approval average of less than 50%? Did I get that right?



I need a Romney faith boost. It's been a rough week.

CougarClaw wrote:
Tell me again how no incumbent president has ever won with a pre-polling approval average of less than 50%? Did I get that right?



I need a Romney faith boost. It's been a rough week.

It's those dang 47 percenters ;)

True--because historically the undecided and "don't know" voters go to the challenger over the incumbent in a landslide.

snoscythe wrote:
True--because historically the undecided and "don't know" voters go to the challenger over the incumbent in a landslide.

Interesting. because the literature I had read (a long time ago) was a little more nuanced than that--namely that in a "conservative" state the undecideds break 2-1 for the Repulbican candidate, but the reverse is true too--in a more democratic leaning state, the undecideds break for the democrat....I can assure you here in Idaho that when Kerry was running against Bush, the undecideds here in Idaho did not go Kerry...they ending up breaking very heavily for Bush....

Fact: A Mormon has never been elected POTUS.



Fact: A black POTUS seeking re-election has never failed to win.



Conclusion: Mitt & Ann should go ahead get their papers started to serve a mission in 2013.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Won't get a mission call. Didn't you hear, he's "sullied' our religion.

1967cougar wrote:
Won't get a mission call. Didn't you hear, he's "sullied' our religion.

I'd say it's fair to say a man who has served faithfully as a stake president, bishop, and nursery worker is sullying our religion... :roll:

Reid needs time out.

scott715 wrote:
Reid needs time out.

I say make HIM (and his bodyguards) clean the church!

BoiseBYU wrote:

Reid needs time out.

I say make HIM (and his bodyguards) clean the church!

Why do I get the feeling that the church would be dirtier after Harry was finished cleaning ti?

Here are some fun sites for those of you concerned by the "polling" showing Obama pulling ("polling"?) away:



First, a site chronicling just how accurate/inaccurate given pollsters were in 2008:



http://blog.chron.com/txpotomac/2008/11/the-list-which-presidential-polls-were-most-accurate/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



SEVENTEEN of the polls significantly overreported Obama support in 2008....only 3 overreported for McCain, and those three were in the Top-Five most accurate.



Now consider how much closer this race is in 2012 than it was in 2008. To the extent the pollsters are biased, they have more incentive to be biased this year in a close election. Living in Colorado, my wife and I have started trying an experiment. We are both Republican, but we have noted a pretty notable number of "dropped calls" immediately after answering that we consider ourselves Republican. Over the last 10 days or so, we have taken to answering "independent" or "democrat." We've been dropped twice as independents, but neither of us have ever had a dropped call after responding "democrat." In the interest of full disclosure--we terminate the call ourselves when we get to the "who are you going to vote for" if we've misrepresented our affiliation so as not to further skew data. It's fishy as hell the extent to which people are losing connections in these polls, and we get 2-3 calls a night from pollsters since we're registered to vote in CO.



So, taking that, a fellow has put out a site where he "unskews" polls by evaluating who was polled and controlling for discrepancies in representation. If Democrats are oversampled, he adjusts for what the expected electorate on election day will be.



http://unskewedpolls.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.examiner.com/article/mitt-romney-vs-barack-obama-heavily-skewed-swing-state-polls-1?cid=db_articles" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



You'll see he has Romney ahead nationwide by almost 8%, and has Romney winning or tied in all the "Swing States," and tied or within 2% in PA.....which no one has called a swing state before, but where Romney announced was back in play today.



The candidates' behavior is further indicative of the true status of the race. Obama is somewhat frenetically trying to raise money and pleading for donations, skipping things like meeting with Netanyahu to hold campaign rallies. They're lobbing every sort of campaign message into swing states they can think of---emptying their clip in September. Romney on the other hand has not really deviated from his campaign plan other than to address new developments in the Middle East, gaffes, and airplane windows. Despite all the noise generated from the reported polls, it is Obama's campaign that is panicking while Romney's campaing holds to the course. While the media reports what Romney is doing as foolish, stubborn, or naive, to me it is indicative that internal polling and focus grouping that are much more statistically sound than most public polls show the Romney campaign that they are winning and that their message is swaying and holding voters.



That's where I'm at.

That was the Sno answer I was originally hoping for. i hope this guy is right. but...



There's technically nothing wrong with oversampling democrats. As long as you adjust for it when calculating the final answers. And even though it's unusual that they all oversample democrats, I suppose that makes sense given that democrats outnumber republicans generally...