You Won't Believe What Public Policy Polling (PPP) is Saying!

[Jandrsn21]

Just remember to not always blindly trust a polling organization because of an ethical streak that it has. If I remember correctly, PPP did their best to manipulate the polling numbers against Rand Paul in his Senate race in Kentucky.

From what I saw from them in the final month had Paul with a ten point lead. He won by a ten point lead. They were very accurate in Kentucky.

 

[Legend1104]

Polling companies can say whatever they want up until the last few weeks of the vote. They could have had Mr. T. winning in Iowa, but they have to be more accurate the last couple of polls because that is where they are counted as being good and accurate at polling. Even the Des Moines poll can still claim (if Paul wins) that they were accurate. What they have done is be able to have their propaganda and be accurate.

 

[sailingaway]

Their tweets from yesterday already implied a Santorum "surge", but they also implied Paul and Romney are still ahead:

Iowa still looks very close between Paul and Romney but Santorum's within striking distance and has all the momentum

Given the current trajectory I think there's some chance Santorum could win Iowa without ever leading in a poll

I'm really hoping for numbers similar to DMR tonight, only with Paul still ahead of Romney.

they didn't imply Ron was still ahead, last time they didn't have the order right, they just put one first.

 

[sailingaway]

From what I saw from them in the final month had Paul with a ten point lead. He won by a ten point lead. They were very accurate in Kentucky.

Yeah, when they are in the rating window they try to be accurate. Before that, it is a lot harder to tell, because you don't have counter info. Ron's polls compared would say, of course.

 

[One Last Battle!]

they didn't imply Ron was still ahead, last time they didn't have the order right, they just put one first.

I think Romney was initially ahead, then as they polled more Ron pulled to the lead. They generally put the "winners" of the poll in order.

 

[Austin]

Ill say it again. CNN used two different polling methods for Iowa an NH. In Iowa they did just reps, in NH they did reps and indies. I strongly believe that CNN did two polls in Iowa then picked the one they wanted, that one being the one showing Santorum "surging".

Why would they use two different polling methods for two different states that have the same rules about allowing indies and reps vote in the republican primary/caucus.

I reckon you're right. Kinda pathetic, anything to generate a good headline story.

 

[Joey Wahoo]

This article in the DMR says basically the same thing: http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.c...-2-days-left-to-go-santorum-has-the-hot-hand/

Key language:
"The former Pennsylvania senator embodies the old political saw: Work like hell and get lucky at the end. He’s logged over 100 days in Iowa, more than any other candidate, toiling in virtual obscurity. Caucusgoers are traditionally inclined to reward such persistent courting — but they seemed unsure Santorum would make it to the church, let alone the altar. Suddenly, lightning struck, in the form of a CNN poll released Wednesday that showed Santorum in third place.

Selzer said her polling, which started on Tuesday, didn’t show Santorum catching fire until after CNN’s poll came out, with an accompanying stampede of media attention. There’s a difference in methodology between the two polls — CNN surveyed registered Republicans, while Selzer also includes registered independents who intend to participate in the caucuses.

Voters apparently responded to the new information suggesting Santorum was more viable than they had previously thought."

But voters who would change their minds so easily just can't be very committed. Many of them probably won't bother to caucus. I think the passion of the Paul supporters will carry the day.

 

[Agorism]

Murdoch joined twitter and expressed support for Santorum.

I wonder who his underlings on Fox News will support if he says he likes Santorum?

 

[sailingaway]

This article in the DMR says basically the same thing: http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.c...-2-days-left-to-go-santorum-has-the-hot-hand/

Key language:
"The former Pennsylvania senator embodies the old political saw: Work like hell and get lucky at the end. He’s logged over 100 days in Iowa, more than any other candidate, toiling in virtual obscurity. Caucusgoers are traditionally inclined to reward such persistent courting — but they seemed unsure Santorum would make it to the church, let alone the altar. Suddenly, lightning struck, in the form of a CNN poll released Wednesday that showed Santorum in third place.

Selzer said her polling, which started on Tuesday, didn’t show Santorum catching fire until after CNN’s poll came out, with an accompanying stampede of media attention. There’s a difference in methodology between the two polls — CNN surveyed registered Republicans, while Selzer also includes registered independents who intend to participate in the caucuses.

Voters apparently responded to the new information suggesting Santorum was more viable than they had previously thought."

But voters who would change their minds so easily just can't be very committed. Many of them probably won't bother to caucus. I think the passion of the Paul supporters will carry the day.

It is really sad that voter manipulation would be rewarded this way.

 

[BUSHLIED]

If you break down the DMR poll by each day, this is the picture you see:

Dec27
Paul 29%
Romney 22
Santorum 12

Dec28
Romney 26
Paul 22 -7%
Santorum 15

Dec29
Romney 24
Paul 20 -2%
Santorum 19

Dec30
Romney 23
santorum 22
Paul 16 -4%

A total drop of 13%?? The problem with using this model is that when you separate the polls by day, your margin of error skyrockets. That's why I think it is best to stay with the rolling average of 22%.

If the PPP poll has us outside of the margin of error for the 22% DMR rolling average, then I would get nervous, really nervous...In other words, if the PPP poll comes out and we are at 18% or lower, then yes, we are in serious trouble...because that would confirm the DMR Dec30 result and obviously would be a major slip from the last PPP result of 24%.

 

[Kevin Smyth]

Wasn't the day when Paul's poll numbers dropped the day after he was attacked by Michael Savage? I'm wondering if there's a connection.

 

[One Last Battle!]

If you break down the DMR poll by each day, this is the picture you see:

Dec27
Paul 29%
Romney 22
Santorum 12

Dec28
Romney 26
Paul 22 -7%
Santorum 15

Dec29
Romney 24
Paul 20 -2%
Santorum 19

Dec30
Romney 23
santorum 22
Paul 16 -4%

A total drop of 13%?? The problem with using this model is that when you separate the polls by day, your margin of error skyrockets. That's why I think it is best to stay with the rolling average of 22%.

If the PPP poll has us outside of the margin of error for the 22% DMR rolling average, then I would get nervous, really nervous...In other words, if the PPP poll comes out and we are at 18% or lower, then yes, we are in serious trouble...because that would confirm the DMR Dec30 result and obviously would be a major slip from the last PPP result of 24%.

They said he was neck and neck with Romney while Santorum is somewhat-close behind, and that was for the same day as the 16% day with DMR. I don't see any reason for him to be falling that far.

On the other hand, the media hype for Santorum could have taken a portion of our soft "anyone but Romney" vote that was giving us the lead over him. The only thing we can do to get those soft voters is a strong show of force at the caucuses and good organization (many will see how strong Paul is as opposed to Santorum and will be fine with switching).

 

[sailingaway]

They said he was neck and neck with Romney while Santorum is somewhat-close behind, and that was for the same day as the 16% day with DMR. I don't see any reason for him to be falling that far.

On the other hand, the media hype for Santorum could have taken a portion of our soft "anyone but Romney" vote that was giving us the lead over him. The only thing we can do to get those soft voters is a strong show of force at the caucuses and good organization (many will see how strong Paul is as opposed to Santorum and will be fine with switching).

His three interviews today should help, whether or not they are reflected in today's polls. But the networks are trashing him.

 

[Liberty74]

Its true, if you play games with a poll (like not include independents or democrats, have a short time period, small number of participants, and HIGH margin of error) you can get it to say what you want (see Frank Luntz with Penn and Teller) and then that creates the impetus to make articles....its totally false momentum and is a propaganda technique that should be exposed. Props to PPP if they are doing just that.

And if you include Independents and Democrats for the Iowa polling, what percentages are you using?

80% Republicans
15% Independents
5% Democrats

100% Republicans

70% Republicans
22% Independents
8% Democrats

What percentage is "likely" and what percentage includes just registered voters?

You can play with the numbers to get your outcomes like - I dunno - the Communist News Network (CNN).

 

[South Park Fan]

Has anyone asked PPP on twitter if they will release the daily numbers, like Seltzer did?

 

[Kevin Smyth]

Does anyone else think that the Dick Morris smear on Fox News last week when he said that Ron Paul is the biggest leftist to run for president in the last 50 years lost us some Iowa voters?

 

[seeker4sho]

If CNN do cost him this election and its vindicated by the next PPP poll, action by all of us must be taken against CNN.

Can you imagine them laughing in their corporate offices' around a big table reading our comments of despair?


But anywho, thats negative thinking - we'll stay positive and hope that PPP shows a diff picture.

Polls conducted by the MSM, especially CNN and Fox, have repeatedly raised a question of validity in my mind. They have been all over the place. It is obvious to me that the MSM is intentionally inserting themselves in the election to elect one of the establishment candidates. If they open themselves up to a law suit then I say let's go get them. Anyone have a legal opinion?

 

[Cortes]

No. The ideological smears don't convince anyone. The smears that do are the ones where "he can't win" and the vague "out of mainstream" type of comments. These hold the most water; any pathetic effort to claim he is not for limited government always fail.

This is why they get away with referring to him as a libertarian-leaning conservative everywhere in the media, when he is clearly far more conservative leaning overall. The 'libertarian' label is an effort to confuse. But the "left-leaning" smears, everyone laughs at them.

 

[blazeKing]

Does anyone else think that the Dick Morris smear on Fox News last week when he said that Ron Paul is the biggest leftist to run for president in the last 50 years lost us some Iowa voters?

If anyone even cares a tiny little smidge about what Dick thinks, they are already far far gone.

 

[MikeStanart]