Rasmussen Daily Presidential Tracking Poll Nov 16

[nexus7]

Look at newt gingrich, howard dean and pat buchanan. Rasmussen has been historically INACURATE at this stage in time.

I'd take the SCIENTIFIC Straw polls any day of the week over the assmussen poll. If you want to use unscientific polls then you have to include the Fox Tv debate polls where ron won.

I AM being critical. It's called critical and logical thinking.

Bradley strikes me as a passive troll. Promoting and posting MSM stories. Never anything about Straw polls. What is the point to polling if it is unscientific? There's no way to know if they are pollsters. Where are there names and what polling agencies did they work for? Where is their transparency? People lie online all the time.

 

[jgmaynard]

I have never been polled in my life.

My GOD man! We've had like 5 polling calls in the last two days.... Want me to forward some your way?

JM

 

[noztnac]

I'm here in Jeju Do, South Korea with a bunch of expats. The expats here, about 200, are divided almost equally between Ron Paul and Obama. A few Hillary supporters and Gravel people are also in the mix. I don't claim this is representative of anything but college educated people who chose to travel to South Korea to teach but it should be noted that there is not one person here who supports the war in Iraq.

 

[foofighter20x]

Nexus7, I think you are too critical of Bradly DC. He knows his stuff, the guy who worked for gallup on this forum knows his stuff, these polls mean something. They may be way off, but to think we are #1 because of straw polls and text-in-polls is being delusional. The fact is that people still don't know who Ron Paul is.

We must work to get the polls up and get his votes cast. Don't hate on those who say that the polls aren't as meaningless as you put them out to be.

Not to mention that straw polls with only 15-200 participants are ever really going to be a good statistical sample. Most of these straw polls were poorly publicized county-level events, and thus are an extremely poor basis for extrapolating to the state or even national level.

 

[foofighter20x]

Okay, I'm calling Nexus7 out.

You claimed in PM to have been a pollster and also claimed to know that they are calling only 2004 GOPers. Prove it.

Otherwise, you got nothing but your own unfounded opinion.

To those interested, Bradley has posted links to places that have done their own reasearch and written about polling methods here:

For this (and other polls I post here) there is a link to their specific methodology (and it's good to take rational analyses of these kinds of things). I've posted A LOT on polling, etc.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=101077

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=10219

A good place to start would be here:
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/FAQ.php

Nexus7 has offered no proof whatsoever except her word, but then shown nothing that backs up her statements. Right now the preponderance of evidence backs Bradley, but you guys are free to make up your own minds.

 

[mackler]

Yo

Here's your scientific poll:

"Ron Paul Wins by Double Digits with Religious Voters in Zogby Poll"

In a blind telephone poll conducted by Zogby on November 14, potential Republican primary voters rated Ron Paul the most favorable Republican primary candidate based on his biographical details.

"Zogby Poll: NASCAR Fans Favor Ron Paul"

A new Zogby poll finds that more than 32.5% of NASCAR fans nationwide preferred Ron Paul in a "blind-biography" poll where candidates were described but not named.

Paul was their top choice even as NASCAR fans were polled as less likely to vote for a candidate opposed to the Iraq War. (Only 37% of NASCAR fans favor immediate withdraw, as opposed to 52.5% of non-fans in the same poll: See below). Giuliani was the 2nd choice amongst NASCAR fans. Ron Paul's poll numbers doubled those of both Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson-- a correlation which also carried over among 'non-fans of NASCAR.'

 

[Bradley in DC]

Zogby/Alex Jones

At first blush, this would be the best example of a "rigged" poll.
The "blind" descriptions are uneven in bias (lobbyist, Democratic state, etc.), they did not say they rotate the order (a statistically significant number just pick the first person), the poll does not determine if voters are registered much less eligible to vote much less likely to vote....

 

[noztnac]

I've never been polled

I've never been polled and I have yet to meet anyone who has.

But I'll vote.

 

[AgentPaul001]

Did anyone see Bush's Approval numbers in the South Carolina presidential voting poll?

72% Good or Excellent Job.........
14% Fair
15% Poor (Ron Paul Leads this One)

Perhaps that means they are polling only or mostly prior republican primary voters because I have trouble finding 50% of Republicans liking President Bush and far more then 1/7 that are dissapointed.

 

[Liberty]

Excluding the Alex Jones poll, there isn't anyone here that knows for certain how these polls were conducted. Many examples of past polls being way off have been shown on this forum. We won't know until the results are in, regardless if you feel the polls are accurate or not. I believe name recognition is still a problem.

 

[Bossobass]

Try a little test: go door-to-door and interview 100 people or more, introduce them to Dr. Paul. Get back with us as to how many people had even heard of the good doctor or heard enough to identify with his positions (or only heard the Hannity version).

To be fair, include Huckabee, Tancredo, Romney, Kucinich, Dodd, Richardson, etc.

I have been doing just that for the past 4 months, and I have news for you... most Americans haven't the faintest clue who is running on either ticket except for Hillary and Guliani, who have been plastered everywhere from day one.

Put it this way: I personally get more than 5% for RP vs the other names I mention above.

I don't buy 'scientific' poll results.

I'm not discounting the fact that we have to work harder every day until election day. It's imperative to educate as many citizens as humanly possible. Whatever we're doing in this regard will never be enough. That's the attitude I try to keep in the forefront.

I also wish we were well into plans to sponsor credible exit polls. As far as polls go, exit polls are the most accurate and would eliminate the post election count controversies that are inevitable and not contestable without them, IMO.

Bosso