Trump up 2 in latest Rasmussen poll

[TomCADem]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by etherealtruth (a host of the Latest Breaking News forum).

Source: Washington Examiner

Donald Trump may be reaping the benefits of his running mate's strong debate performance Tuesday, according to a Thursday poll.

The daily Rasmussen Reports White House Watch poll found Trump slightly increased his lead over Hillary Clinton, and now has 43 percent of the vote nationwide compared to Clinton's 41 percent. That's a bit better than the 42-41 lead he had the day before.

Trump had a 5-point lead over Clinton before their first debate last week, but his appeal dropped significantly after his debate performance was panned.

However, the pollsters reported that by Monday, the two major party candidates were at a near tie and the Republican has risen a point every day since. They said voters are more likely this year to view the vice presidential debate as playing a nearly equal role as the presidential debates in informing their vote.

Read more: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/trump-up-2-in-latest-rasmussen-poll/article/2603789?custom_click=rss

[pnwmom]

1. Rasmussen is always weighted toward the GOP. n/t

[BlueStreak]

12. I have never understood how they get such a high rating from 538

and likewise for LA Times/USC.

In the last 2 election cycles, Rasmussen was way off. Maybe they produced one accurate poll at the last minutes in order to be able to claim some credibility.

[Loki Liesmith]

20. Nate rates how polls perform after he corrects for their bias

He measures how well their corrected numbers do and how consistent that is.

[BlueStreak]

27. Well, he's the expert, but that just seems wrong. You shouldn't get an A for being CONSISTENLY wrong

no matter how consistent you are.

I can see the sense from 538's point of view. If Rasmussen is very consistent, and always has the same bias, then I guess the poll date has meter for 538's algorithm.

But really, he shouldn't allow the crap polls like Rasmussen to enjoy an "A" rating right alongside the legitimate ones like Pew and Quinnipiac.

Maybe a C- for accuracy and an A for consistency.

[ColemanMaskell]

58. Knowing that Trump went up 1 point -- from whatever he was before -- is information.

It's like when you're in a room with a clock that you know is off by 20 minutes from the correct time. As long as it maintains the same 20 minute bias, you can use it to tell time; you just adjust the data by 20 minutes every time you use it.

[liberal N proud]

2. They don't poll Democrats

[Whiskeytide]

61. That's great news, then...

... It means 41% of republicans are voting HRC!

[Trust Buster]

3. B.S. Trump is performing worse than Romney with the AA, Latino, female and college educated

demographics. And, you know what became of Romney. Don't be fooled by the polls.

[Liberalagogo]

4. Pardon me but....

[Renew Deal]

5. Any poll that has the Democrat at 41 isn't credible

[LenaBaby61]

6. The daily Rasmussen Reports White House Watch Poll ....

"Found Trump slightly increased his lead over Hillary Clinton, and now has 43 percent of the vote nationwide compared to Clinton's 41 percent.

Donald Trump may be reaping the benefits of his running mate's strong debate performance Tuesday, according to a Thursday poll."

[Missn-Hitch]

57. LOL!

[Cryptoad]

7. The WashintonExamier???????

Plz................

[Stallion]

8. Rasmussen is Now 8% off the Norm on Pollster and 7% off the Norm from 538.com

it is Republican propaganda and always has been especially in General Elections. They elected President Romney by 1% in 2012 and he lost by 3.9%-a huge miss by 4.9%

[underthematrix]

9. I'm still laughing while I'm typing because

if I recall correctly, it was Rasmussen who had Romney winning 2012 by a blowout

[Stallion]

14. Gallup Had Romney Up by 7 and Rasmussen by About 5 in the Months Before 2012 Election

that was off by 10.9% and 8.9% respectively

[underthematrix]

18. Thank you for reassuring me my memory still serves me fairly well

[jamese777]

22. 2012 Gallup Poll

Gallup had Romney up by 6 during the THIRD WEEK of OCTOBER!
Both Rasmussen and Gallup predicted a President Romney in their final poll.
Gallup is not doing presidential election polling this year.

[forest444]

62. In trying to tilt the 2012 election to Romney, GallOP managed to piss everyone off.

Democrats, for their obvious bias against them; and Republicans, because it wasn't biased enough. Honesty really is the best policy.

[Retired George]

17. You do recall Correctly

It's a waste of time to read or quote a Razzie!

[Binkie The Clown]

10. 538 has Hillary's chances of winning at 87% right now.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/#now

Am I worried about what Rasmussen says?

Nope!

[Buckeye_Democrat]

11. Rasmussen definitely leans Republican, as others have stated.

It's probably off by 3% to 4% from that alone, not to mention regular polling uncertainty.

[BlueWarrior]

13. Rassmussen is in bed with GOP. Don't believe a word they say

[bravenak]

15. How could the VP debate be just as important when it got far far far fewer viewers than the first

Pres debate. I believe they also had Romney winning against O by a few points last time, they were wrong. As they are now.

[still_one]

19. It isn't, this is just the R/W Raz report being puffed up by the right wing Washington Examiner

Here is Nate Silver's analysis:

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo

In fact the number of people that watched the VP wasn't particularly great:

http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/05/media/vice-presidential-debate-ratings/

It also takes several days if there was any impact, unless it was really drastic, and it sure wasn't that

[bravenak]

28. Thank you, it sounded like bulshit anway

I think Kaine won, myself, him interrupting didn't bother me since he was stopping Pence from laying out his smooth lies to use in a campaign video.
This reminds me of the unskewed polls hysteria.

[still_one]

16. Oh FFS, this is the washington examiner puffing up a Rasmussen poll which has always

favored Trump. The Atlantic/PPRI released a national poll today with Hillary +6

The national polls mean diddly. They do not weight the states properly, especially the battle ground states.

Here is Nate Silver's map:

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo

[alcibiades_mystery]

37. TomCADEm has to look long and hard to find the JPR favorable articles

It's sad that they're all in right wing rags.

Some of these people used to be progressives with integrity.

[still_one]

40. Here is its editorial policy

"When Anschutz started the Examiner in its daily newspaper format, he envisioned creating a conservative competitor to The Washington Post. According to Politico, "When it came to the editorial page, Anschutz's instructions were explicit — he 'wanted nothing but conservative columns and conservative op-ed writers,' said one former employee." The Examiner's writers have included Michael Barone, David Freddoso, Tara Palmeri, Rudy Takala, and Byron York.[5]

The Examiner endorsed John McCain in the 2008 presidential election[16] and Adrian Fenty in the Democratic primary for mayor in 2010.[17] On December 14, 2011, it endorsed Mitt Romney for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, saying he was the only Republican who could beat Barack Obama in the general election,[18] releasing a series of articles critical of Obama.[19]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Examiner

[alcibiades_mystery]

42. Imagine the hatred of Hillary causing a progressive to embrace that shit

So fucking tragic.

[mdbl]

60. Just what Murdoch said when starting Fux Noise

He wanted a station that showed everything from a conservative slant. it was the first time in my life I heard someone actually start a so-called journalistic endeavor, call it news, and rig the results. Until then, only the National Enquirer and other rags at the grocery store checkout held that distinction. Conservative idiots (I still miss that column here) all decry media bias when someone with integrity reports on their heinous intentions for our country and government creating the false impression that we needed propaganda on the crooked side to make them feel better. Journalistic integrity, at that point went swirling down the toilet and remains in the sludge with the likes of The Examiner.

[PunksMom]

21. Why do we even care here, what Rasmussen thinks???

[jamese777]

31. Because sometimes they're right

"In the 2004 presidential election, 'Rasmussen...beat most of their human competitors in the battleground states, often by large margins,' according to Slate magazine. Rasmussen projected the 2004 presidential results within one percentage point of the actual vote totals earned by both George W. Bush and John Kerry.

In 2004, Slate said they 'publicly doubted and privately derided Rasmussen' polls because of the methodology. However, after the election, they concluded that Rasmussen’s polls were the most accurate.

According to Politico, 'Rasmussen's final poll of the 2008 general election—showing Obama defeating Arizona Sen. John McCain 52 percent to 46 percent—closely mirrored the election's outcome.' In reference to the 2008 presidential election, a Talking Points Memo article said, "Rasmussen's final polls had Obama ahead 52%-46%, which was nearly identical to Obama's final margin of 53%–46%, and made him one of the most accurate pollsters out there.' An analysis by [Fordham University Political Science professor] Costas Panagopolous in 2009 ranked 23 survey research organizations on the accuracy of their final, national pre-election polls based upon Obama's 7.2% margin of victory; the analysis determined that Rasmussen Reports was tied for 9th most accurate. Democracy Corps, Foxnews/Opinion Dynamic, CNN/Opinion Research, and Ipsos/McClatchy all predicted an accurate seven point spread.

Rasmussen Reports polls predicted the correct winner in 46 states. Its final polls of Florida, Indiana and North Carolina all showed leads for McCain. Obama went on to win all three of these states. Rasmussen's poll of Ohio on 2 November 2008 showed a tied race there. Obama went on to win the state by 4 percentage points."--Wikipedia

[PunksMom]

46. ...and sometimes they aren't.

I'm on this page for positive feedback from other democrats, to know how fantastic Hillary is doing. If I want to know how Don is doing, I can go to Twitter. jmo

[emulatorloo]

53. Tell us about 2012, when they said Romney would win

[George II]

23. One word explains this: Rasmussen

[stopbush]

24. Oh, THAT poll.

[Foggyhill]

25. Full of shit, impossible considering local polls

[Kingofalldems]

26. Same tired act every day.

[alcibiades_mystery]

38. Imagine being so angry about primaries that you'd still be running this act in October!

A sad, sad fall.

[DCBob]

29. Garbage right wing crap.

Why even post this?

[SunSeeker]

30. Why link to the right wing Washington Examiner, TomCADem?

You sure went to extremes to be able to post that bullshit headline.

[INdemo]

32. This was an on line survey where one can delete cookies,refresh, and vote as many times as they

want....this is like taking a survey at a town hall meeting filled with Republicans and or like signing up to win the door prize at the local hardware store..enter as often as you like but you must be 18

[calguy]

33. This is great news

Trump will think he's winning and start in with the crazy shit again, thinking it's a winning tactic for him.
Hey, if Rasmusson has you ahead and you win the Drudge post debate online poll 80%-20%, I mean what more proof do you need?

[MADem]

34. That poll is as sketchy as the source cited-LOL!!!

Anyone who buys that nonsense would believe that poop is ice cream.....

[brush]

35. Rasmussen is a repug poll. It doesn't reflect the entire demographic and is not worth worrying about

[obnoxiousdrunk]

36. Thanks Tom.

[MFM008]

39. Why would anyone post

The results of a Razzy?? They had Romney as president in 2012.

[obnoxiousdrunk]

41. Tom just

Loves these polls.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

50. He'll be the guy on Election Night.....

....posting threads like "Trump wins Oklahoma".

[Coyotl]

43. Daily Kos Elections 2016 forecast: Hillary Clinton's victory odds now back up to 83 percent

Daily Kos Elections 2016 forecast: Hillary Clinton's victory odds now back up to 83 percent

On the morning Monday, October 3, we had a few post-debate polls under our belt … and Clinton’s overall odds were up to 72 percent … but we were still left wondering why everything was so quiet on the polling front. By the end of Monday, though, the deluge had arrived, and with one exception (Quinnipiac’s Ohio poll), everything was very good news for Clinton: among others, a Clinton +11 poll from Monmouth in Colorado, another ​Clinton +11 poll in Colorado from Keating Research, polls from Quinnipiac with Clinton +5 in Florida and +3 in North Carolina, a Clinton +9 poll in Pennsylvania from Franklin & Marshall, a Clinton +3 poll in Nevada from Hart Research, and a Clinton +7 poll in Virginia from Christopher Newport Univ.

It may well have been her single best polling day of the cycle, and by Tuesday her odds had jumped to 82 percent, a one-day gain of 10. That matches the largest single-day gain our model has seen since we started running. That other gain of 10 happened between August 8 and 9; in case you’re wondering what was happening then, that was the Monday after the Democratic convention ended, when the post-DNC polls started to show up. So you could say that the debate was one of the most momentous events of the campaign: if your metric is the effect it had on our model, she got a convention-sized bounce out of it.

The subsequent days have seen even more strong poll results, most notably two different polls on Wednesday (from Monmouth and Anzalone Liszt) giving Clinton a 2-point lead in Ohio ............

[Coyotl]

44. FiveThirtyEight: Who will win the presidency? Hillary Clinton 78.7%

Who will win the presidency?
Chance of winning
Hillary Clinton 78.7%
FiveThirtyEight

[RBInMaine]

45. STOP POSTING THIS SHIT POLLING. IT IS SHIT. TOTAL SHIT. COMPLETE SHIT. UNENDING SHIT. GET IT?

[Kathy M]

47. Washington Examiner ...... Owned by Phil Anschutz , owner of Clarity Media Group

"“Today the Washington Post revealed that while making a fortune off hardworking Coloradans – including LGBTQ Coloradans – billionaire Phil Anschutz has been giving money to organizations that have been designated as hate groups by the Southern Poverty Law Center,” said Dave Montez, Executive Director of One Colorado.

“Instead of investing in individuals and groups that spread misinformation and advocate violence, Phil Anschutz could invest in improving the lives of LGBTQ Coloradans and their families. LGBTQ students still face bullying and harassment in our schools, transgender Coloradans are denied access to the health care, identity documents, and basic rights they deserve, and it is still legal for to subject young people to the dangerous and discredited practice of conversion therapy.”

“Phil Anschutz’s extensive influence in Colorado politics has been known for years, but the degree of his support for anti-LGBTQ groups that fund extremist hate groups like Gordon Kligenschmitt’s ‘Pray in Jesus Name’ is shocking,” said ProgressNow Colorado executive director Ian Silverii. “At a time in American history when discrimination and violence against LGBTQ citizens is on the rise, support for pro-discrimination groups puts Anschutz on the wrong side of Colorado, and on the wrong side of history.”

“The Anschutz name is emblazoned on public institutions across our state,” said Silverii. “Now that it has been revealed that his charity is also going to organizations that support political figures who call for gays and lesbians to be killed, it’s time to ask Anschutz to take a good look at where his money is being spent. "

More at link , also chart inside with pictures and names of people connected to Alliance Defending Freedom

http://www.coloradopols.com/diary/85136/breaking-phil-anschutz-linked-to-anti-lgbt-groups-dr-chaps

No thanks

[Kathy M]

48. Also

"Clarity Media Group purchases The Gazette newspaper

DENVER -- Ryan McKibben, CEO of Clarity Media Group, announced today the purchase of The Gazette -- the Colorado Springs daily newspaper -- from Freedom Communications, Inc.

One of the first decisions made by McKibben, who will also serve as Chairman of The Gazette organization, was to retain Dan Steever in his present post as President and Publisher."

"We have had an interest in the Colorado Springs market for some time. It's a growing, dynamic region...anchored by a robust tourism industry, significant military operations, the US Olympic headquarters and training facility, and several leading hi-tech firms. The Gazette has been an important part of the Colorado Springs community for 140 years"

"About Clarity Media Group

Denver based Clarity Media Group owns The Washington Examiner newspaper in Washington, D.C. and The Weekly Standard magazine. It also owns examiner.com, a network of local websites in 244 markets across North America, powered by "Examiners," a pool of over 85,000 passionate contributors -- who provide original content about all things local. The Internet site is one of the fastest growing local information resources with over 40 million unique visitors each month."

http://www.westword.com/news/phil-anschutz-owned-company-buys-colorado-springs-gazette-5830027

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

49. Thanks Tom

On a day when four or five polls are good for Hillary, we can count on you to find the one bad one.

[still_one]

51. and post the bad one at LBN

[SunSeeker]

55. I've noticed that too. And is AWOL on his own thread. nt

[emulatorloo]

52. Rasmussen predicted Romney would win in 2012, right up to Election Day.

[The_Casual_Observer]

54. Clinton is up by 10 by all rational counting.

This is total horseshit.

[Stargleamer]

56. In order to get their creds, Rasmussen later gets closer to the other polls

but wildly favor Republicans before that

[left-of-center2012]

59. Rasmussen poll and Washington Examiner?

They not only drink the right wing Kool-Aid,
they mix it.

[broadcaster75201]

63. LOL Yeah. OK. nt

nt

[Kingofalldems]

64. I guess you missed this one.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141589949