Rasmussen Ripped

[babylonsister]

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/01/03/rasmussen_ripped.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PoliticalWire+%28Taegan+Goddard%27s+Political+Wire%29

Rasmussen Ripped


"Democrats are turning their fire on Scott Rasmussen, the prolific independent pollster whose surveys on elections, President Obama's popularity and a host of other issues are surfacing in the media with increasing frequency," reports Politico.

"The pointed attacks reflect a hardening conventional wisdom among prominent liberal bloggers and many Democrats that Rasmussen Reports polls are, at best, the result of a flawed polling model and, at worst, designed to undermine Democratic politicians and the party's national agenda."

Andrew Sullivan makes a persuasive case against Rasmussen with two simple charts -- one showing President Obama's approval ratings by Rasmussen and the other showing the aggregated results of other pollsters.

Charts here:

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/12/rasmussen-vs-the-rest.html

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jenmito]

2. K&R. The charts make it SO clear as to the outlier-ness of Rasmussen...

which most of us talk about all the time. MSNBC doesn't ever mention Rasmussen polls, and when a RW "analyst" DID mention a Rasmussen poll, Chris Matthews said, "We don't use Rasmussen polls here."

[Jack Rabbit]

3. I've been noticing this trend for a while. Others at DU have, too

Rasmussen has lost his credibility by feeding the GOP what its leaders want to hear rather than what is really out there.

[Scarsdale Vibe]

4. It's always been this way with Rasmussen.

He will pull his polls back to the consensus two days before an election in order to seem accurate in post-election analysis of polls. He's the Fox News of polling outfits.

[Jack Rabbit]

8. Actually, while he always leans to the GOP side of error . . .

Rasmussen is more out of line than usual now. These findings are so out of line as to be ridiculous. Where is he getting his sample these days? Wall Street and tea parties?

[progressoid]

5. Duh. He's a regular favorite on Hannity's show.

Doesn't take a fuckin genius to figure out he ain't independent.

[HughMoran]

6. I remember laughing out loud at his polls just before the election in 2008

He has something go really wrong in his polling from time-to-time. I can't take his polls seriously at times.

[DLnyc]

7. Bush always showed up 5 to 8 points high on Rasmussen, so it's ironic

that Obama shows up way low.

Actually it's not ironic, it's just dishonest.

I think the technical term for Rasmussen's method is "lying".

[Vincardog]

9. "lying" BINGO.

[GoCubsGo]

11. His polls were like that in 2004, as well.

They were always the outlier back then, too. Kerry ALWAYS polled lower in Rasmussen polls than all of the others.

[BrklynLiberal]

19. Nate SiIver's take...

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/

[SnakeEyes]

24. Was just going to share this

Direct link: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/01/is-rasmussen-reports-biased.html

[Clear Blue Sky]

10. Rasmussen predicted the presidential election results the most accurately.

[senseandsensibility]

14. See post number four above

eom

[johnaries]

15. Yes, the 2004 Stolen Election. I rest my case. nt

[Clear Blue Sky]

22. Actually 2008...

[levander]

18. It indicates, they know how to poll well...

But just usually, don't.

[DLnyc]

28. Yes, I think they poll way off until right before the election,

then move their polls at the end.

[burning rain]

12. Just another fine reason why thou shalt have no poll gods before Nate Silver!

Make thine prayers unto Him Who weareth the geeky spectacles, and lo! He will vouchsafe thee a revelation accurate to +/- 0.1%. :P

[BrklynLiberal]

20. yep

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/

[AspenRose]

30. Did you see what his comments were about Rasmussen?

Interesting-

"It means that Rasmussen has a different model of what the 2010 election is going to look like, one which will feature a more conservative electorate. But that model isn't necessarily wrong, nor does it necessarily reflect bias. The polling firm Public Policy Polling has also tended to show poor results for Democratic candidates in its 2010 polling, relative to other pollsters like Quinnipiac. But Public Policy Polling is a Democratic polling firm. Are they biased too?

What Rasmussen has had is a "house effect". So far in the 2010 cycle, their polling has consistently and predictably shown better results for Republican candidates than other polling firms have. But such house effects can emerge from legitimate differences of opinion about how to model the electorate. And ultimately, these differences of opinion will be tested -- based on what happens next November. If Rasmussen's opinion turns out to be wildly inaccurate, that will impeach their credibility, and believe me, we will point that out. Likewise, if they turn out to be right when most other pollsters are wrong, we will point that out too.

Rasmussen's election polling has tended to be quite accurate in the past. Nor, incidentally, has their election polling has a particularly strong house effect in the past; it is something new to the 2010 cycle. But that's OK; each election cycle features different dynamics in terms of turnout and motivation, and what might be smart assumptions in one cycle won't necessarily carry over to the next.

Now, what you do need to be aware of is that Rasmussen's opinion is one among many. They might turn out to be right -- but so might all of the other pollsters who have a different opinion about the electorate. If you're running a news organization and you tend to cite Rasmussen's polls disproportionately, it probably means that you are biased -- it does not necessarily mean that Rasmussen is biased."

[That Is Quite Enough]

13. I thought some of us (the liberal blogosphere) were aware of this for a long time

[depakid]

16. Gee- polls designed to influence public opinion- rather than reflect it- who'd have thought?

and it ain't limited to the likes of Rassmussen....

[TrollBuster9090]

27. Push polls

Indeed, "push polls" designed to influence rather than reflect public opinion have been part of the slimier side of politics for the last 50 years. But it's a relatively new phenomenon to have mainstream polling companies engaging in push-poll tactics. And whenever there is strong evidence that they're doing this (as in this case) we should smack them down, and (correctly) claim that they have no credibility, and shouldn't be taken seriously.

I agree with what others have said here, that Rasmussen usually calls election results more or less accurately, but that makes these activities even more insidious. When there is actually an election, and the opinion polls are trying to predict the results, it's fairly easy to tell if the results are accurate or not. You just compare the Rasmussen polls from the day before to the actual election results the day after, and then you can tell if they were accurate or not. But IN BETWEEN elections is another story, since there is no absolute way to tell how accurate the polls are. The best you can do is look at the polling consensus, and see if there are any polling firms that deviate far from the consensus.

Those graphs are pretty compelling evidence that Rasmussen probably engages in regular polling DURING elections, and PUSH POLLING IN BETWEEN elections. I'm sure the Republican leadership doesn't believe what the Rasmussen polls say right now (unless Rasmussen gives them a more realistic version, rather than the fudged one they release to the public). The published Resmussen results are just intended to buck up the tea party troops, and keep their fighting spirit high.

[BrklynLiberal]

17. About f**kin time that political tool Rasmussen was exposed!!!

[RepublicanElephant]

21. well, well, well.

let's see now, who's next to have the wool pulled off?

mr. gallup?

p.s. nate rulez!

[ladywnch]

23. I'm shocked.......SHOCKED to find out Rasmussen is in the tank for repubs.

I mean, seriously, who knew? (please don't all scream at once)

[groundloop]

25. I believe a lot of the discrepency is how polling questions are worded

I think Nate Silver touched on this as well. You could ask "do you support a system whereby all Americans have equal access to basic health services?" or "Are you in favor of socialized, government run plan where a beurocacy will make your medical decisions?".

I'd be willing to bet that whomever pays for a poll has a large influence on how questions are worded.

[quakerboy]

26. Shocking. Simply shocking

How could anyone ever dare to question his Independence. He is a pillar of the polling community. A pillar, I tells ya.

[mistertrickster]

29. Rass always had Bush polling HIGHER than the other polls too . . . surprise, surprise. nt

[autorank]

31. Been saying that for years but... k*r

He did a poll where 30% of those under 30 favored socialism. Wonder if that means it was really 40-50%;)