Fox ratings

[road kill]

Simply click on the link provided before at http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ..._tracking_poll and read Rasmussen's own description of the poll. Specifically it states:

"The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows that 33% of the nation's voters now Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as President. Thirty-four percent (34%) Strongly Disapprove giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -1." [emphasis added]

I assumed that everyone knew that was how Rasmussen did his index since he states it in every poll. To see his full results, which show a 54% approval rating, go to http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ..._index_history. Note that Rasmussen consistently shows a lower approval rating than other major polls by 3-5% which is presumably associated with methodological differences.

What?

Honesty??

[YardleyLabs]

What?

Honesty??

Once again, if you review Rasmussen's own statements, he provides details on sampling methodology and approaches used for manipulating data to improve projection value. He also provides details of a rating of polls done by a Fordham professor showing that Rasmussen is tied with Pew in predicting the outcome of the 2008 election. The index that Rasmussen uses (i.e. comparing strong approvals to strong disapprovals) is unique to Rasmussen and interesting. If you read my original comments you will find that I said nothing negative about Rasmussen, but only pointed out the facts in a manner that he would accept.

[road kill]

Once again, if you review Rasmussen's own statements, he provides details on sampling methodology and approaches used for manipulating data to improve projection value. He also provides details of a rating of polls done by a Fordham professor showing that Rasmussen is tied with Pew in predicting the outcome of the 2008 election. The index that Rasmussen uses (i.e. comparing strong approvals to strong disapprovals) is unique to Rasmussen and interesting. If you read my original comments you will find that I said nothing negative about Rasmussen, but only pointed out the facts in a manner that he would accept.

Al be it brief, my post questions the methodology of many of the other polls findings, steeped heavily in a slanted agenda and a fervent media bias for "The Obama."

It is what it is.......tingly feeling up your leg regards!!

[YardleyLabs]

Al be it brief, my post questions the methodology of many of the other polls findings, steeped heavily in a slanted agenda and a fervent media bias for "The Obama."

It is what it is.......tingly feeling up your leg regards!!

To question would imply that you actually care enough investigate those methodologies and the predictive track records of the major pollsters (I am not discussing the myriad firms that do push and pull polling in an effort to change opinions.). It's obvious from your comments that you have made no such effort. Rasmussen is an openly conservative republican pollster. In the same manner, there are openly liberal democratic pollsters. Most, however, are still legitimately trying to measure opinion. They do not always have equal resources and that can affect polling accuracy since good polls are very expensive to produce. For their clients, the legitimate pollsters are very open about the strengths and weaknesses of their methods and any biases that are likely to arise. The reason is tat their customers pay them to be right. Rasmussen is a legitimate pollster. Pew is a legitimate pollster. Gallup is a legitimate pollster. There are many others.

You can read more about the methodology used in Rasmussen's daily presidential approval poll at http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ..._polling_firms. On the website, Rasmussen notes that their poll uses automated polling machines to conduct polls. They state: "Rasmussen Reports uses an automated polling methodology while some firms use operator-assisted techniques. Generally, these different methodologies generate about the same level of approval for different political figures, but the automated technology generally registers a higher level of disapproval. There’s no way to be sure why this happens, but it may simply be that some people are reluctant to offer a negative opinion about another human being to a live operator." They then go on to state that the trends in opinion are virtually identical across all the major polls.

Fivethirtyeight.com, the site I referenced before, tracks what they believe is the degree of bias introduced by each of the different political polling firms. I believe that Rasmussen is either third or fourth lowest in their ratings (that is good), scoring worse than Pew and better than Gallup. By the way, I am not implying that those biases are partisan. I believe they are methodological and hinge on technicalities of the type noted on Rasmussen's site. Fivethirtyeight.com uses its modeling of pollster "bias" to adjust each set of polls in an effort to make them more comparable to each other. That method has proven to be extraordinarily accurate in predicting electoral outcomes, making it a fun site to follow during an election.

[Julie R.]

This map tells me that we don't elect our leaders on land area, but votes of actual people.

And this graphically shows that those who live off handouts, WIC, Section 8s and various other entitlement programs paid for by the working stiffs, now outnumber those poor working stiffs and can now outvote those that actually work and pay real estate and income taxes. Scary....

[Lisa S.]

Received this by email and was asked to pass it along. It seems to belong here in this thread:


Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law , St. Paul , Minnesota , points out some interesting facts concerning our recent Presidential election:


* Number of States won by: Democrats: 19 Republicans: 29

* Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000 Republicans: 2,427,000

* Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127 million Republicans: 143 million

* Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats: 13.2 Republicans: 2.1


Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Republicans won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of the country. Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..."

Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase..

If Congress grants amnesty and citizenship to twenty million criminal invaders called illegals and they vote, then we can say goodbye to the USA in fewer than five years. If you are in favor of this, then by all means, delete this message.

If you are not, then pass this along to help everyone realize just how much is at stake, knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.

[YardleyLabs]

Received this by email and was asked to pass it along. It seems to belong here in this thread:


Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law , St. Paul , Minnesota , points out some interesting facts concerning our recent Presidential election:
....

It actually belongs in the garbage since it is both wrong and not written by the alleged author who is a professor at Hamline University, not "Hemline" according to the professor himself. The email started after the 2000 election (the one where Gore won the majority of votes and Bush was awarded the presidency by the Supreme Court). It was grossly inaccurate then and remains wrong today.

[See, for example,http://www.factcheck.org/askfactchec...ph_olsons.html]

[road kill]

To question would imply that you actually care enough investigate those methodologies and the predictive track records of the major pollsters (I am not discussing the myriad firms that do push and pull polling in an effort to change opinions.). It's obvious from your comments that you have made no such effort. Rasmussen is an openly conservative republican pollster. In the same manner, there are openly liberal democratic pollsters. Most, however, are still legitimately trying to measure opinion. They do not always have equal resources and that can affect polling accuracy since good polls are very expensive to produce. For their clients, the legitimate pollsters are very open about the strengths and weaknesses of their methods and any biases that are likely to arise. The reason is tat their customers pay them to be right. Rasmussen is a legitimate pollster. Pew is a legitimate pollster. Gallup is a legitimate pollster. There are many others.

You can read more about the methodology used in Rasmussen's daily presidential approval poll at http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ..._polling_firms. On the website, Rasmussen notes that their poll uses automated polling machines to conduct polls. They state: "Rasmussen Reports uses an automated polling methodology while some firms use operator-assisted techniques. Generally, these different methodologies generate about the same level of approval for different political figures, but the automated technology generally registers a higher level of disapproval. There’s no way to be sure why this happens, but it may simply be that some people are reluctant to offer a negative opinion about another human being to a live operator." They then go on to state that the trends in opinion are virtually identical across all the major polls.

Fivethirtyeight.com, the site I referenced before, tracks what they believe is the degree of bias introduced by each of the different political polling firms. I believe that Rasmussen is either third or fourth lowest in their ratings (that is good), scoring worse than Pew and better than Gallup. By the way, I am not implying that those biases are partisan. I believe they are methodological and hinge on technicalities of the type noted on Rasmussen's site. Fivethirtyeight.com uses its modeling of pollster "bias" to adjust each set of polls in an effort to make them more comparable to each other. That method has proven to be extraordinarily accurate in predicting electoral outcomes, making it a fun site to follow during an election.

Again, I am more interested in the "methodology" the main stream media uses.
Now, go back to the 2-step and answer me with another question.

If words were gas some people would be humvees!!

Brevity, clarity & relevance reign supreme!!

[Matt McKenzie]

Rasmussen is actually the most negative poll by far in its findings over time as compared with all other major pollsters. More than anything else, this appears to be linked to their wording of questions, not to inherent problems with their polling methodologies. Rasmussen is actually one of the primary sources of polling data for fivethirtyeight.com. However, on the issue of whether or not to include a public option in a national health program, Rasmussen evidences dramatically different results from other pollsters. This is shown in this link: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/...ic-option.html.

With respect to Presidential approval ratings, the fundamental difference in Rasmussen's approach is that he is not measuring overall approval. Instead he measures the difference between strong positives and strong negatives, ignoring all in between. Howev er, it is this middle group that actually decides elections while the exteme groups are more likely to drive primaries and financing. The actual fluctuations in Obama's positive ratings have changed little although he is currently at a new low with 58% approval (comparable to Reagan at a similar point in his presidency). The difference comes from the steady growth in strong negative feelings from conservatives and some softening in support from the far left as Obama has governed more from the center than they would prefer.

Jeff,
You are absolutely correct in that this poll only measures strong positives and strong negatives. I interpret that to mean that about a third of voters strongly disapprove and roughly the same number strongly approve. The other third are disinterested and uninformed. The only real information to take away from this is the trend. We'll see if it continues.

[YardleyLabs]

Jeff,
You are absolutely correct in that this poll only measures strong positives and strong negatives. I interpret that to mean that about a third of voters strongly disapprove and roughly the same number strongly approve. The other third are disinterested and uninformed. The only real information to take away from this is the trend. We'll see if it continues.

It sounds like you are saying that one must either be an extremist or ill informed. Having been called by one of the Rasmussen surveys, I can tell you that I said I somewhat approved of Obama's presidency.