GOP admits Republican pollsters lied

[cleduc]

8. Here's what I posted on Politico:

Isn't polling supposed to tell you who is and isn't going to show up, etc? (Rhetorical question)

Much of the premise being discussed by the GOP about the polling in the article is fundamentally wrong.

When the GOP howled about the polls being biased in September, Nate Silver, Gallup & Mark Blumenthal (Pollster.com) all weighed in. In fact, Mark cited articles he wrote on the subject when this came up in 2004.

A good poll simply answers the questions about where people are on an issue. It isn't rocket science to design and setup a poll that will give one objective and meaningful results.

So only one of two things happened:

1) The Republican pollsters are or have become incompetent with polling

2) The Republicans digesting the polls knew what was going on but didn't want to let on out of fear their campaign funding would dry up.

Karl Rove has been at this game and interpreting polls since the late 70s. I choose door #2

And this is what I posted on Daily Kos

A common complaint about polling (1+ / 0-)
by the GOP during the election, including by Rove himself, was the "oversampling of Democrats" or party bias that was supposedly skewing the polls.

Nate wrote about it:
Poll Averages Have No History of Consistent Partisan Bias
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/29/poll-averages-have-no-history-of-consistent-partisan-bias/

Mark Blumenthal of Huff Post/Pollster.com weighed in it
'Unskewed Polls' Critics Miss Basics Of Party Identification
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-blumenthal/unskewed-polls_b_1924293.html

Gallup addressed it:
The Recurring -- and Misleading -- Focus on Party Identification
http://pollingmatters.gallup.com/2012/09/the-recurring-and-misleading-focus-on.html

And they shot the claim down.

Here's what happened according to the exit polls (that are not absolutely precise but give us some idea):
http://elections.nytimes.com/...
http://www.cnn.com/...
http://www.cnn.com/...
State Party ID +/- (2008,2004) (+=Dems, =-Reps)
CO Dems +5 (-1,-9)
FL Dems +2 (+3,-4)
IA even (+1,-2)
NC Dems +6 (+11,-1)
NH Dems +3 (+2,-7)
NV Dems +10 (+8,-4)
OH Dems +7 (+8,-5)
PA Dems +10 (+7,+2)
VA Dems +7 (+6,-4)
WI Dems +5 (+6,-3)

When Bush won, Republicans were ahead in the exit polls. When Obama won, Democrats were ahead in the exit polls in the battleground states. The polls weren't lying, biased or skewing.

But again, Rove has been around this game since the late 70s. He knew this. This was not a revelation that only Nate Silver, Mark Blumenthal & Gallup knew.

Karl lied to keep the money rolling in.

So we're supposed to accept a campaign that set a new disgracefully low standard in lying to the American people was above lying about the polls that would detrimentally affect their ability to sucker billionaires and GOP supporters to fund them?

Scott Rasmussen has been around the polling game for a long time. He knew exactly what he was doing. So did Gravis. And they needed others like Gravis because poll of polls only allow one poll from each pollster.

These people knew exactly what they were doing and exactly where they stood. But like everything else about them and their candidate, it was all about using deceit to get power and money. So they're left with two choices:
1. Admit they lied to fleece people for dough
2. Pretend they were incompetent pollsters
#1 is far more damaging to their future so they're doing something they got really good and consistent at: lying about their incompetence.