General Discussion

CoffeeCat

(24,411 posts)

78. I heard (from all places, Fox News) last night that the latest Virginia poll...

Sat Oct 13, 2012, 03:35 PM

Oct 2012

...was conducted by a well-known Republican pollster.

I haven't heard this from the MSM.

I think the major polls are reliable for the post part. However, I do think that Rasmussen is often used to numerically cement a meme the right wants validated. They're right most of the time, otherwise they would be unreliable. However, you can see when there are shennanigans happening.

We've be naive to believe that polls aren't used to manipulate.

When it comes to all of these unknown polls that suddenly crawl out of the woodwork--and have disproportionate gains for Romney--yeah, I'm suspicious.

But again--I do have confidence in well-known, established polls that have been around for a while.

I'm feeling better about Virginia--since learning on Fox (!) that a Republican pollster conducted the latest poll that shows Romney ahead by 2.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

85 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

What is UP with Nate Silver these days? [View all] AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 OP

he is using really bad polls. hrmjustin Oct 2012 #1

Isn't he using the same polls he always has? Lex Oct 2012 #35

he is using these polls that have been shown to be gop leaning ARG in particular. hrmjustin Oct 2012 #44

If his model hasn't changed from when Obama was ahead Lex Oct 2012 #48

That's only true if the polls keep the same methodology. Qutzupalotl Oct 2012 #54

I have been wondering that, too. femmocrat Oct 2012 #2

I seriously doubt he's been compromised, though. AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #22

Righties have been pumping out polls a mile a minute since the first debate Godless in Seattle Oct 2012 #50

e doesn't write the polls chemp Oct 2012 #3

He's not interpreting them. He's plugging them into his model and interpreting that. gkhouston Oct 2012 #4

You put it better than I did, thanks, GK. AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #18

Hope so. The undecided voters can't be as swayable by B.S. as we may think.....or can they? AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #25

pres blew the debate blueknight Oct 2012 #5

Somewhat true, but Romney's bounce ended not that long ago. nt AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #16

You don't have to be a genius to see how Cha Oct 2012 #58

nate's numbers are as good as they were when they had us winning arely staircase Oct 2012 #6

I'm not so sure of that anymore. AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #12

im not sure either arely staircase Oct 2012 #17

I hope to start donating myself. Wish me luck. nt =) AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #24

luck upon you arely staircase Oct 2012 #27

Shooting the messenger? LeftyMom Oct 2012 #7

what happen to having a different point of view? DisabledAmerican Oct 2012 #13

Remember a few weeks ago when the right was all about skewed polls and creating their own reality? LeftyMom Oct 2012 #15

I agree, but that isn't what I'm doing. AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #19

Your concern is noted seriously though I'm not buying the concern DisabledAmerican Oct 2012 #23

Are half of your 300 posts accusing people of concern trolling? LeftyMom Oct 2012 #28

Do you even know who the people are that found problems with his info? DisabledAmerican Oct 2012 #32

He adjusts for biased polls. This is not new. LeftyMom Oct 2012 #36

who said I was freaking out I just said this should be entertaining let them look into it DisabledAmerican Oct 2012 #42

This message was self-deleted by its author cthulu2016 Oct 2012 #57

I'm not the one concerned about a person looking into DisabledAmerican Oct 2012 #60

What you've said is true, in a way, BUT....... AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #14

If they are it'll clear up in a few days with new data. LeftyMom Oct 2012 #20

Bingo which is why do not worry if they look into it. DisabledAmerican Oct 2012 #33

Maybe, but maybe not. We'll see. nt AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #37

Or maybe Nate's not perfect? Maybe he is figuring in bad polling data? nm Cha Oct 2012 #59

You Don't Have To Be A Master Aggregator To Know The President Isn't Doing As Good As He Was DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2012 #8

Your concern has been noted DisabledAmerican Oct 2012 #10

What Did I Sat That Is Remarkable? DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2012 #30

This is going to be interesting DisabledAmerican Oct 2012 #9

disagree amborin Oct 2012 #11

I think it's because the debate screwed his numbers so badly budkin Oct 2012 #21

I'm beginning to think so, too.(no conspiracies, though) AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #26

Here's the problem, ProSense Oct 2012 #29

How Come The Only Pollster "We Have" Is PPP And The Pubbies Literally Have At Least A Dozen? DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2012 #31

Three gue$$e$... regnaD kciN Oct 2012 #46

It's the inertia of political events that are affecting the polls-- but it can and will change andym Oct 2012 #34

He's A Political Weathervane. DemocratSinceBirth Oct 2012 #40

I took that all into account before writing this, though. nt AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #45

Nate's a numbers guy Coexist Oct 2012 #38

I won't believe him again until his numbers look better for Obama. tritsofme Oct 2012 #39

It's not like Sam Wang is any more positive in the numbers ProudToBeBlueInRhody Oct 2012 #41

i think his model doesn't just aggregate a day's polling. i think it extrapolates a trend. unblock Oct 2012 #43

I would rather think that ejbr Oct 2012 #47

I have been wondering the same thing Samantha Oct 2012 #49

Thanks, Sam. AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #61

For the most part, I trust him. You realize the right wingers have folks saying the same thing? nt cecilfirefox Oct 2012 #51

Not quite the same thing, Cecil. AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #55

LOL, once again, we love Nate when it looks good and hate him when.... Logical Oct 2012 #52

Here's the thing, Logical. I don't 'hate' Nate. AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #56

Nate know more about right wing polls than the whole DU combined.... Logical Oct 2012 #67

Yeah, but it certainly doesn't invalidate my point. AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #68

LOL, maybe Nate was wrong when he had us winning 80% to 20%. I would love to match your... Logical Oct 2012 #71

C'mon man. AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #75

Nate NAILED the 2008 election and predicted we would get our ass kicked in 2010 and the DU HATED... Logical Oct 2012 #80

Very true, BUT...... AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #81

We should complain because we don't like the polls? MrSlayer Oct 2012 #53

We may have lost ground, but..... AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #62

What makes you think Kossacks can know a 'bounce' has ended? muriel_volestrangler Oct 2012 #65

It's difficult for me to explain right now. AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #70

Sorry, I think Nate Silver knows what he's doing. cali Oct 2012 #63

I'm not really saying he doesn't, BUT...... AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #64

I agree with what you are saying and my guess is that Nate is in the process byeya Oct 2012 #69

I would hope so. AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #76

Recommended for the interesting debate this OP has generated n/t Turborama Oct 2012 #66

Thanks. AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #73

Looks like your theory has been validated here... Turborama Oct 2012 #85

You clearly know how to interpret polls better than Nate. former9thward Oct 2012 #72

Again, the problem is some of his sources, such as Mason-Dixon, etc. n/t AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #74

No that is your problem not his. former9thward Oct 2012 #79

You're not listening, man. AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #82

gigo nt OhZone Oct 2012 #77

Explain, please? nt AverageJoe90 Oct 2012 #83

G.I.G.O - OhZone Oct 2012 #84

I heard (from all places, Fox News) last night that the latest Virginia poll... CoffeeCat Oct 2012 #78