HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » This story line that Romn...

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:24 PM

This story line that Romney and his team were shell-shocked is a load of bullcrap.

Pollsters Helped the Republicans
by BooMan
Sun Nov 11th, 2012 at 11:32:34 AM EST

It is very interesting to peruse Nate Silver's post-mortem analysis of the pollsters. The thing that really stands out for me is that, among the most active pollsters, there was only one (Pharos Research Group) that showed a significant skew toward Obama, and that pollster had been flagged as unreliable by Mr. Silver and was not used in his model. The other three pollsters who showed any Democratic skew were basically accurate (RAND Corporation: +1.5%, Quinnipiac +0.3%, and We Ask America +0.1%). By contrast, all other frequent pollsters showed a Republican skew, and the most respected (Gallup) showed the worst skew of all (an astonishing +7.2%). American Research Group (+4.5%) and Rasmussen (+3.7) were also pathetic.

Nate has some observations about polling methodology that you may find interesting, but he doesn't discuss the subject that interests me. What I want to know is what benefit Romney received from the systemic skew of the polls in his favor. If the polls had been accurate, the race would have been considered uncompetitive all throughout the fall, leading to much lower fundraising and enthusiasm on the Republican side. In short, the polls were bullshit, and they created a bullshit picture. No one wants to admit that at least some of the pollsters were intentionally wrong, but that is obviously the case with Rasmussen, ARG, and Gallup. It also appears to have been the case with Romney's internal pollsters, at least to the degree that they released information to their donors.

This story line that Romney and his team were shell-shocked is a load of bullcrap. They have have underestimated Obama's ground game, but not by seven points. They told this lie to keep the money flowing and to keep the media from calling the race early. And I think it enabled them to keep the House.

And I'm pissed.

http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2012/11/11/113234/92

26 replies, 2450 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 26 replies Author Time Post
Reply This story line that Romney and his team were shell-shocked is a load of bullcrap. (Original post)
kpete Nov 2012 OP
Iggy Nov 2012 #1
jsr Nov 2012 #2
reformist2 Nov 2012 #3
bluestate10 Nov 2012 #15
Honeycombe8 Nov 2012 #4
Liberal1975 Nov 2012 #5
Merlot Nov 2012 #17
Spazito Nov 2012 #6
Baitball Blogger Nov 2012 #7
Qutzupalotl Nov 2012 #8
Wellstone ruled Nov 2012 #9
Laura PourMeADrink Nov 2012 #10
Aerows Nov 2012 #11
cleduc Nov 2012 #12
pinboy3niner Nov 2012 #13
coalition_unwilling Nov 2012 #24
IL Lib Nov 2012 #14
GoCubsGo Nov 2012 #16
Ruby the Liberal Nov 2012 #19
GoCubsGo Nov 2012 #22
aletier_v Nov 2012 #18
Coyotl Nov 2012 #21
Cha Nov 2012 #20
Denzil_DC Nov 2012 #23
coalition_unwilling Nov 2012 #25
tavernier Nov 2012 #26

Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:26 PM

1. Correct

 

Rmoney's own internal polling efforts showed Obama wayyyyyy ahead in Ohio.

they knew.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:28 PM

2. They knew months ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:29 PM

3. If Gallup doesn't change their methodology, they should be ignored from now on.


It was only their good name that got them attention this year, even though a lot of people were wondering about their numbers. No more. In my view, if they don't do a complete overhaul of their polling method, they are as discredited as Gravis and UnSkewedPolls.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to reformist2 (Reply #3)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 02:46 PM

15. Gallup will be toast soon unless they change. They were wrong in 2008 too.

Rasmussen is a joke poll. Rasmussen always over estimate republican percentages, to the order of as much as 6%. That Rasmussen predicted a 3.5% Romney win but Obama won by about 2% does not surprise me one bit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:32 PM

4. I think that the Romney team and his supporters really thought he was winning with momentum.

They lived in a bubble, used their own inside polling (which turns out to have been wrong),adn thought their ground game was better than it actually was.

For example, I heard on TV that the reason the Romney team thought they could win PA, even though all five polls in November showed Obama leading there, was because their inside polling showed it as tight there, with the possibility of a Romney win.

Judging from Romney's shellshocked look, the lack of a concession speech...I do believe they had duped themselves in their bubble. They simply didn't believe the outside polling (which turned out to be correct, electoral vote count wise).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:53 PM

5. I think it is possible they really were shell shocked

Red State of all places, has an article that puts forth the theory that consultants and analysts inside the Romney camp purposefully sold the campaign false information as a form of job security. After the Citizens United decision this theory seems plausible to me. Before the decision, when campaigns had much stricter budgets there was more incentive for these consultants to provide accurate results since future employment in campaigns would depend on performance. When a campaign budget balloons to a billion dollars I think it creates enough money\incentive for consultants to misinform in order to keep the cash flowing. I'm not saying that is what happened, we would have to have real hard numbers showing how much the campaign paid out and to who, but with a billion dollars floating around I think it is at least a possibility. Of course, I think the theory you present is also entirely plausible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal1975 (Reply #5)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:07 PM

17. This is plausible. Plus, Obama kept most of his work "in-house"

so less opportunity to be swindled by outside consultants.

Obama's team has trained a new generation how to run a campaign. They took community organizing to a whole new level.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 12:58 PM

6. I agree...

I distinctly remember the Romneys' appearances over the weekend before the election and their tone, body language, etc, clearly telegraphed things were not going well for them, imo.

If there was any genuine shock it would have been that the Ohio Sec of State and the Florida Sec of State had failed in their despicable attempt to block citizens from voting for President Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:08 PM

7. So it was all about maintaining the House.

Interesting. Wonder why they had so many private jets flying in for the ceremony? Because, it seems to me those people were suckered in too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 01:22 PM

8. I don't buy it. Romney would have had a concession speech ready.

This was about Republican blind faith rather than acceptance of unpleasant facts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 02:15 PM

9. Watch and see as the

Whales figure out how they were fleeced by the Harvesting. Willard and crew knew damn well what was what and he Conned the whole damn Press Corp. The question that should be asked is,how much did the Willard and Turd Blossum make on this Stage production.

Cement Boots for the Turd Blossum??? Willard will get his own Planet and his Hairum of wives after his stint as King of the Cult.

Exit stage right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 02:30 PM

10. I think the biggest sin of all is how they duped

The commonplace repuke masses. They were sold bullshit and were utterly shocked that money boo boo didn't win. Why this is bad for us is because they thought he was going to win and they feel robbed and have a lot of animosity.

I think Romney thought he was going to win because god told him that and will now turn to atheism

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 02:33 PM

11. They were terrified

of a landslide by Democratic voters of 400+ proportions. That could have happened, too, because evangelical voters were none to enamored by Romney, and that's most of the South.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 02:36 PM

12. I buy it.

There was a smaller core who knew. They also knew that if they told folks widely about it, the money would dry up.

I posted about why their claim of not knowing their polls were off was bogus:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1789895

There's no good path out for them. Either they tell folks they got their polls wrong or they have to admit they defrauded their donors. The choice between those two is a simple one when looking forward.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 02:39 PM

13. What strikes me is any use of 'shell-shocked' in reference to chickenhawk Romney

The use of a war-related metaphor and his name in the same breath is startling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pinboy3niner (Reply #13)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 11:04 PM

24. Thread winner (as usual). I am in total awe - n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 02:41 PM

14. Same thing I said in another post a couple of days ago.

They were fleecing donors. We should've learned by now that they're all con artists. You could see in their body language they knew they were going to lose. I'm just glad that they're off the stage. Good riddance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 03:02 PM

16. Gerrymandering allowed the GOP to retain the House.

In my state, alone, two out of the seven races were as close as 10-11 points. The rest were rigged toward the GOP, except for Jim Clyburn's seat, where they put most of the Dems in one district. He beat out an independent with 95% of the vote. Joe Wilson ran unopposed. Every state with a republcian-run state legislature was like that. The polls had nothing to do with it. Had we voted based on 2008 districts, there would likely have been a GOP bloodbath. There were FAR more Dems who beat republican incumbents than the other way around, in spite of the gerrymandering.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoCubsGo (Reply #16)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 10:08 PM

19. Joe Wilson is still in his seat?

And he ran unopposed?

*sigh*

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ruby the Liberal (Reply #19)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 10:55 PM

22. Yep.

With redistricting, he is now my congressman. Ugh. But, sadly, the previous guy, Jeff Duncan, is WORSE if you can believe that. He is a teabagger, and is as nutty an asshole as there is. He's right on par with Michelle Bachmann.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 09:12 PM

18. The most convincing lie is the one that you trick yourself into believing

"Keep the money flowing" sounds like motive enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aletier_v (Reply #18)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 10:16 PM

21. Keepiong the voter intent to vote alive is the likeliest reason to conflate a losing situation.

That pays down ticket, in the House races where gerrymandering skews who gets the prize for Conservative turnout.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 10:16 PM

20. I keep thinking Romneys thought they were going to win..

because they have a prophet in the Mormon religion who told them they were destined for the White House. They were some mighty fine actors on Election night if they knew they were going to win.

Booman makes great points.. maybe there was more than a little bit of both goin' on? That would be possible with the double dealing mittload.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 11:02 PM

23. I rate Booman highly, and usually agree with him.

But I'm mixed on this one.

It all hinged on turnout at the polls, and that was something nobody could predict with certainty unless they were psychic - that RV/LV split made an enormous difference if you ever played around with any of the poll map apps, much more of a difference than taking out quite a number of the less reliable polls from the equation.

I think those close to Mitt Romney could well have underestimated the ground game by that seven-point margin, partly through wishful thinking, but partly because the media and their own apparatus fed the myth of Mittmentum and painted a more chaotic picture of the electorate than actually existed.

I do think they were shellshocked, unless all the accounts I've been reading from different sources are wrong.

For instance, from various reports over the course of the election, Mitt leant heavily on his wife, and would "dump" on her about how the campaign was going if they'd been apart for any length of time. She's quoted as being incredulous that they were going to concede late in the evening. If Mitt had known the real situation, I don't think that would have happened.

I do think at least some, if not most, of the consultants engaged in the Romney campaign had a clearer idea of the real situation, though, and probably weren't surprised. I just don't think Romney ran a campaign that rewarded honesty in his subordinates and employees and contractors. Would you want to be the one to tell Mitt that he was going to be trounced by somebody he held in such transparent contempt? Especially after screwing him for big bucks on the promise of results?

We'll learn more about this as more behind-the-scenes revelations emerge in coming months.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 11:08 PM

25. RMoney was able to ignore contradictory polling evidence because of

 

assumptions his campaign made about relative motivation of respective camps. To wit, Rape-publi-scum were supposedly highly energized to vote while Dems were supposedly deeply dispirited.

Of course, you demonize African Americans, gays, women and Latinos at your peril. I think the electorate manifest a collective "F-U RMoney" moment that conventional assumptions was bound to miss. Latinos voted 75-25 for Obama. That is a jaw dropper.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Sun Nov 11, 2012, 11:30 PM

26. I don't know...

but I think rove was sincerely bitch slapped. His face was red, he was stuttering, and he looked like he'd just touched a live wire. I think they should make a major motion picture film out of those seven minutes. I'd attend every night and twice on matinees.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread