Rasmussen admits failure!

[Guest040616]

Over the course of the past few months, how many times did Whirly and the rest of our Far Right Wing-Nut posters boldly (or should I say, blindly) proclaim that Rasmussen had the most accurate polling methodology in the polling biz? If it was posted once, it was posted dozens of times.

Fast forward to November 7, 2012: It became quite obvious that Rasmussen not only got the 2012 Presidential election wrong, they were an abysmal failure.

From Politico: http://www.politico.com/blogs/charli...40.html?hp=r12

Rasmussen explains

By CHARLES MAHTESIAN | 11/11/12 1:05 PM EST


Rasmussen Reports, the prolific automated pollster whose projections fell far from the mark Tuesday, explains what went wrong:

Our final daily presidential tracking poll showed Romney at 49% and Obama at 48%. Instead, the president got 50% of the vote and Romney 48%. We were disappointed that our final results were not as close to the final result as they had been in preceding elections. There was a similar pattern in the state polls. For example, in Ohio we projected a tie at 49% but the president reached 50% of the vote and the challenger got just 48%. Although every individual result in the battleground states was within the margin of error, the numbers we projected were consistently a bit more favorable for Romney than the actual results.


A preliminary review indicates that one reason for this is that we underestimated the minority share of the electorate. In 2008, 26% of voters were non-white. We expected that to remain relatively constant. However, in 2012, 28% of voters were non-white. That was exactly the share projected by the Obama campaign. It is not clear at the moment whether minority turnout increased nationally, white turnout decreased, or if it was a combination of both. The increase in minority turnout has a significant impact on the final projections since Romney won nearly 60% of white votes while Obama won an even larger share of the minority vote.


Another factor may be related to the generation gap. It is interesting to note that the share of seniors who showed up to vote was down slightly from 2008 while the number of young voters was up slightly. Pre-election data suggested that voters over 65 were more enthusiastic about voting than they had been four years earlier so the decline bears further examination.

As mea culpas go, this one is a little thin. While Rasmussen wasn’t alone in misreading the composition of the 2012 electorate and it’s true that all the firm’s battleground state polls were within the 4-point margin of error, there are a few clunkers in there. In Wisconsin, for example, Rasmussen was the only public pollster reporting a 49-49 tie -- in the final two weeks, the five other pollsters in the field there pegged Obama’s lead between 3 and 9 percentage points. The actual result was a 53-46 Obama win.


Colorado was similarly errant. In the final round of polls, Rasmussen was the one reporting the biggest Romney lead -- 50-47 **– but the outcome was 51-46 Obama.


Rasmussen got a few states right – placing Obama in the lead in Nevada and New Hampshire and Romney ahead in North Carolina – but simply getting the winner correct in 3 of 9 battleground states isn’t going to win over the many detractors who regularly dismiss the firm’s polls for their often overly rosy GOP predictions.

[markroxny]

Looks like Rassmusen was "trending" wrong.

LMAO!!!

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by markroxny

Looks like Rassmusen was "trending" wrong.

LMAO!!!

Hey Whirly, this latest polling "Trend" might interest you!

[Jackie S]

A poll is only valid unless you go into it with no predetermined conclusions, ei, wishfull thinking.
It is quite obvious that Rasmussen fell for this very thing.

[Budman]

This is news? It's knid of like the Cowboys admitting that they lost to the Giants. It is obvious he was wrong along with many others.

[CJ7]

Rass doesnt poll cell phone #'s, all their polls are skewed

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by CJ7

Rass doesnt poll cell phone #'s, all their polls are skewed

Let's give some credit to Rasmussen. They probably accomplished their mission and they did it very well! I suspect they were not concerned with accuracy. Instead, they were concerned with giving FAUX News and their ever-faithful Far Right Wing-Nut audience the polling numbers they wanted to hear. Facts be damned!

Rasmussen, FAUX News and their ever-faithful Far Right Wing-Nut audience are all a bunch of LOSERS!

[wellendowed1911]

Originally Posted by Budman

This is news? It's knid of like the Cowboys admitting that they lost to the Giants. It is obvious he was wrong along with many others.

Why don't you admit you were wrong fucker and pay me my 500 dollars- hell I will meet you in San Antonio to collect if it makes you happy. Budman was the only republican on this site that stupidly made a bet with me that Romney would win- now he doesn't want to pay up unless I travel from Dallas to San Antonio- I guess Budman doesn't have postal service, pay pal, money gram, or Western Union in his neck of the woods- pathetic bastard!!!

[Yssup Rider]

DON'T TELL WHIRLYTURD! HE'LL SPONTANEOUSLY COMBUST!

I've been saying all along that Rassmussen was the worst shill for the GOP out there. Nobody would support or refute that.

Guess I've got my chit together.

Can someone help me move it to the next thread?

Thanks!

[cptjohnstone]

Raz was within the margin of error, dipshits, there I said for you asswipe

[Cobain]

The pollsters didn't account for massive voter fraud. How the hell can Obama get over 19,000 votes in 59 Philly divisions and Romney gets zero?

[Whirlaway]

Rassmussen performed better than most other polls.

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Rassmussen performed better than most other polls.

Hey Whirly, Rasmussen is "trending" yes, they were wrong!



As for Whirly's assertion that Rasmussen "performed better than most other polls." If that were the case why did Rasmussen feel the need to "explain what went wrong?" "Simply getting the winner correct in 3 of 9 battleground states isn’t going to win over the many detractors who regularly dismiss the firm’s polls for their often overly rosy GOP predictions"



"While Rasmussen wasn’t alone in misreading the composition of the 2012 electorate and it’s true that all the firm’s battleground state polls were within the 4-point margin of error, there are a few clunkers in there. In Wisconsin, for example, Rasmussen was the only public pollster reporting a 49-49 tie -- in the final two weeks, the five other pollsters in the field there pegged Obama’s lead between 3 and 9 percentage points. The actual result was a 53-46 Obama win.


Colorado was similarly errant. In the final round of polls, Rasmussen was the one reporting the biggest Romney lead -- 50-47 **– but the outcome was 51-46 Obama.


Rasmussen got a few states right – placing Obama in the lead in Nevada and New Hampshire and Romney ahead in North Carolina – but simply getting the winner correct in 3 of 9 battleground states isn’t going to win over the many detractors who regularly dismiss the firm’s polls for their often overly rosy GOP predictions"

Just sayin'

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by bigtex

If that were the case why did Rasmussen feel the need to "explain what went wrong?"

As you know (I hope) most people re-examine if they are wrong with a result, and those who are "right" with a result feel no need to do so. Isn't that how you feel?

Just asking.

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Rassmussen performed better than most other polls.

Originally Posted by LexusLover

As you know (I hope) most people re-examine if they are wrong with a result, and those who are "right" with a result feel no need to do so. Isn't that how you feel?

LL, that question is more appropriate for Whirly. He is the one who said "Rassmussen performed better than most other polls."