But who is Rasmussen polling - No bump after Osama Bin Laden death

[Mass]

While every other poll including the Gallup tracking poll shows an improvement in president Obama's polling numbers after last sunday's news, Rasmussen has him flat. Not that thee numbers are that important, but, given that the media used Rasmussen numbers a lot to support their argument that the right is well positionned in the 2010 election: it begs the question: who does Rasmussen poll?

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/obama_approval_index_history
May 1rst Fac 50 Unfac 49
Mat 2 49 49
Nay 3 49 50
Mat 4 48 51
May 5 49 50
May 6 50 50

[leftynyc]

1. You mean faux news very own pollster

I'm stunned.

[jezebel]

2. It's Rasmussen. Who knows? But I will say even in Rasmussen numbers the underlying bullshit numbers

have Obama improving. His strongly approve/disapproval numbers are better and his strongly disaprove are the best they've been since 2009.

[Imajika]

3. This is because Rasmussen polls Likely Voters only...

For the last few weeks prior to killing Bin Laden, Rasmussen had the President doing quite a bit better than Gallup. Rasmussen screens for likely voters, Gallup uses adults. Go back and look at the weeks prior to this one, gas prices were spiking and Obama was falling in almost ALL the polls - but NOT in Rasmussen. In Ras's polling the President was holding steady.

What this shows is that likely voters are not moved dramatically one way or the other based on any one or two events. This makes sense as likely voters are the most partisan and committed to their ideology. Measuring all adults on the other hand shows significant swings after any major event, which makes sense as a poll of just adults with no screen will produce a less partisan sample.

[wilt the stilt]

4. this guy is the worst poller

he does change the last day so he "looks" good. He is always trying to influence elections.

[PATRICK]

5. Isn't timing a key abuse issue?

First, the usual MSM "reticence" on ever ever giving any Dems credit for anything added to the United Kneejerks is a real anchor to a bump. The Dem Convention they have to cover often overcomes this drag because it is powerful and televised.

Bumps actually appear a bit later as things really sink in then fade toward what is real- that is what is solidly gained and achieved.

Bush's disasters were always timed the other way, with sinkages evvaded and plotted all around the worst hoping for recovery and then stopping at the best possible result. Or the least damaging(then silence). At least the reportage and use of the polls by the biggest GOP enablers took the selective pulse that way for the GOP and against the Dems.

That's how it seemed to me. When Bush was collapsing before Kerry for example, any slight misstep by Kerry and the fake swiftboating issue was trolled and polled while significant Bush failings were mightily defended. It'd as if during the debates Kerry delivered a KO, went back to his corner, Bush left the ring, the judges declared a split decision, and then a crooked election handed the championship to the incumbent.

Then we get to the individual pollsters whom we have neglected for a few years because Obama has been solidly immune with actual support. The usual suspects, the usual effort to drag his numbers down by hook and crook.

Maybe it is way past time to vet the whole practice and each practioner again, seeing as how Gallup, USA and Rasmussen et. al. are still enthroned as definitive voices for the people and which opinions are ephemeral and which are solid.

Is there a DU resource to help new members revisit the various polling controversdies?

[Nancy Waterman]

6. All those who don't use caller ID or cell phones

The Paleolithic among us who still answer their landlines no matter who is calling. That is who
has been polled here.