Monday, September 24, 2012

Why You Won't See Accurate
Polls From The Mainstream Media
Until Just Before The Election

The last poll is the only one that anybody remembers.  When that election is rehashed later in the history books, the last poll a pollster put out there will be the only one that really counts, the only one that'll be truly examined.  That last poll is what makes or breaks a pollster's reputation.  So it behooves a polling organization to get it's final poll as close to the actual election results as possible.  

That's why every single election since 1984 that I've watched experiences the same phenomena: In the months leading up to election, during the summer, the Democratic incumbent or challenger will always have a lead, sometimes a really big one.  

Then, as October arrives and the weeks go by, every single election since 1984 suddenly gets 'tighter'.  I can even tell you the exact kind of language you are going to hear starting around the final week of October: 

"The race is suddenly tightening....."
"A sudden tightening of the race...."
"Recent tightening of the race means...."

Why does this always happen?  At least, according to the Mainstream media polls, groups such as ABC News/Washington Post, NBC News, Reuters, Associated Press, Pew, etc.  The polling groups that AREN'T a part of the mainstream media, but just do polling and nothing else, like Gallup and Rasmussen, why don't they ever show this big divergence in the final week or so?  

The answer is contained in this chart: 

During the Spring and Summer months leading up to the fall, Mainstream media pollsters try to shape the campaign news and drive a narrative with their polls.  To accomplish this, they do funky things with the numbers.  

Note that in the past few weeks in polls taken since the beginning of September, 11 of those pollsters shown above in that chart had a sample in their poll that was +4 Democratic or greater.  6 of them expect an electorate on Nov. 6th that is +7 Democrat or greater.  And 3 of them expect Democrats to outvote Republicans by +10 points or more.  

Now in 2008, Democrats DID outvote Republicans by +7.  That was a historic wave election for the Democratic party; you'd have to go back decades to find another election where Democrats outvoted Republicans by anything like that kind of number.  Usually the partisan split between Dems and Repubs is pretty damn close, and if it's not tied within the margin of error, it's between a +1 or a +3 advantage to whichever party gets the upper hand.  So +7 was pretty damn eye-opening in 2008.  

Despite the fact that a lot has changed since 2008, many of these MSM pollsters are using a 2008 template for their polls. That is, they are presuming a huge Democratic voter enthusiasm advantage that pushes the Democratic vote to another big advantage over the Republican vote.  They are assuming Republicans are going to be outrepresented in the actual electorate that votes on November 6 by at least +4 or more.  

However, all the signs point to a big REPUBLICAN voter enthusiasm advantage in this election.  

From CBS New's poll of the swing states of Colorado, Virginia & Wisconsin:;contentBody
Voting enthusiasm has gotten so bad for Democrats that by July even Politico & the Huffington Post had to cover it:

Only 39 percent of Democrats said they were "more enthusiastic about voting than usual," compared to 45 percent in February. The falloff from past elections is even greater: In the summer of 2008, 61 percent of Democrats reported higher enthusiasm levels, as did 68 percent in the summer of 2004.
Since July that trend hasn't changed.  Despite the fact the MSM has been using everything but signal flags to tell the country Obama's got this in the bag because Mitt Romney self-destructed, the polls remain deadlocked: 

Politico was forced to report today as a result of it's latest poll with GWU that Romney is winning the middle class by a substantial margin:
We took a special look at middle-class voters, and middle-class families in particular, in this latest POLITICO-George Washington University Battleground Poll and found that not to be the case. In fact, on every measure it is Romney who is winning the battle for the support of middle-class families.

Overall, Obama leads Romney by just 3 points on the ballot (50 percent to 47 percent) – which before we rounded up, is actually a 2.6 point lead and only up a half-a-percentage point from the 2.1 point lead for Obama in our last Battleground poll in early August. In our latest POLITICO-George Washington University Battleground Poll with middle-class families, which comprise about 54 percent of the total American electorate and usually split in their vote behavior between Republicans and Democrats, Romney holds a 14-point advantage (55 percent to 41 percent).
None of this is surprising.  Yes, Democrats had a huge enthusiasm advantage and turned out greatly over Republicans in 2008.  That was because of the Hope & Change fever, which has now mostly evaporated except for the most die-hard true believers.  

Starting in 2009 the Tea Party surfaced as Obama began compiling an actual record of making executive decisions.  One of which was passing a highly unpopular health care bill.  The electorate responded to that in the 2010 mid-terms just 2 years ago by delivering a huge slap in the face to Democratic incumbents nationwide.  The partisan split in that 2010 mid-term as a dead-even 35% to 35% between Democrats and Republicans.  Voter turnout advantage was exactly 0 points.  Which meant the Independents swinging rightward is what delivered one of the most humongous ass-kickings in American political history to Democrats.  

"Humongous". Great word. I so rarely get to use it.

Right now Romney is winning that Independent vote by a considerable margin.  To make up for this, the MSM pollsters are undersampling Indies and Republicans in their polls and blowing up the Democrats in their samples, sometimes to ABSURD sizes, such as the ABC/News, Reuters, and Democracy Corp polls in that chart at the top of the page.  +7 was a historic turnout for Democrats, yet some of these pollsters desperate to keep Obama way ahead of Romney are claiming a Democratic electorate of +10 or +11.  

These MSM pollsters KNOW what the actual numbers are. Which is why they are in full-blown panic mode the past month and a half, trying to convince anyone who will listen to them that Romney's lost already.  They are seeking to dampen Republican voting enthusiasm because they know if Republicans turn out, it's over.  Their guy, their shining Prince, will lose. 

And their own polls are telling them IT'S NOT WORKING.  Romney's NOT dropping back, even though they continue to oversample Democrats and basically engage in fantasy polling.  

Rasmussen is considered 'Hitler's Pollster' by the Far Left because it NEVER engages in the stupidity that MSM pollsters do, of hugely inflating Democrats in their sample to manufacture headlines to try to drive a Lefty narrative.  The electorate IS essentially deadlocked right now, just as it was in 2010, so a tie between Romney & Obama is far more accurate than an absurd Pew Poll that presupposes a +9 advantage to Democrats to give Obama an 8 point lead.  

After the debates start, and it's apparent that Obama is losing them, MSM true believers will pull out all the stops for the first 3 weeks of October. We may see Democrat over sampling approach the +15 pt level, maybe even to Pew's ridiculous early August poll that had a +19.  

But I guarantee you in that week just before the votes are cast on Nov. 6, they know they have to stop playing these games.  They are going to HAVE to quit skewing absurdly to Democrats and put out a poll that actually reflects the real electorate.  And when they do that, they'll suddenly start reporting as news: 

"The race between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama for the Presidency suddenly tightened today...."

UPDATE:  Here's the Washington Post out today with a new poll that has a +9 Democratic sample that claims Obama leads Romney 52-44

NiceDeb explains that in 2010 Ohio had a virtually even Party ID split in the voting for the mid-terms:

As you can see for yourself, Party ID is evenly split in Ohio among those who actually voted in 2010:

So where the hell does WaPo get off assuming the electorate in that state is now +9 Democratic?  Once again, they are simply engaging in fantasy polling here, hoping to discourage Republicans from voting.   "8 point lead for Obama, you wingnutz in Ohio! Just stay home and don't waste your time on Nov. 6!"


  1. Unless, of course, Dems stick to the skewed polls for cover on the biggest election legitimacy challenge effort since Bush v Gore that will surely follow a Romney win. "Of course Republicans supressed the vote -- just look at the polls!"

    1. Yes, this is exactly what they'll do unless Romney gets a landslide. Maybe even if. They'll just pull out the old 'Republicans stole the election!' canard.

  2. Where is Bush these days? Weird how he's nowhere near Romney.-JF

    1. I'm sure Obama's getting a lot of traction running on Bill Clinton's record.

    2. That's because Bush, regardless of other failings real or imagined, is an infinitely classier guy than The Serial Sexual Predator, Bill Clinton.

    3. Worst president ever. Well, worst puppet ever. They're smart to keep him out of the limelight.-JF

    4. George W. Bush wasn't even within yodeling distance of Jimmy Carter when it came to being a bad President.

    5. He was worse. He f*cked the country forever. For. Ever. But I guess somebody had to pick up the pace.

      Answer the question - why isn't he any part of the Republican scene? -JF

    6. Yeah I made a post discussing the funky things MSM pollsters are doing with their samples, and this immediately warrants a discussion of............George Bush.

      Seriously? Can you explain why this is?

    7. Irony is apparently lost on you. You brought up the irrelevancy of George Bush. I countered with the irrelevancy of Bill Clinton. You went back to.....George Bush. I countered your irrelevancy with another irrelavancy - Jimmy Carter!

      And here we are back to.......George Bush.

      Isn't there an expiration date for Bush Derangement Syndrome?

    8. I was curious, that's all. Not even the MSM is mentioning the conspicuous lack of Bush this election. My theory is that he's a crippling embarrassment to the party.

      As to the polls - why not take your own advice and not care? -JF

    9. Where did I ever say 'don't care about it'? The object is to defeat their narrative of presenting a picture that shows Romney is losing by showing what they are doing in their samples. It's to raise awareness of the MSM's duplicity.

      Also it's good for a laugh. We mustn't overlook that either!

  3. Well done here. This is a nice compilation of the current pitiful state of polling. I took a deep dive into one of the polls here ( and found that the Rasmussen summary of party affiliation also throws cold water on all the national polls that have a +D sampling.

  4. Sure, I get it - polls that don't tell you what you want to hear are rigged, but the ones that do tell you what you want to hear are accurate.-JF

    1. No you don't get it. Polls selling a +7 or greater Democratic turnout this election are pure-D BS. Which is just about every MSM poll out there the past 2 weeks. Voter enthusiasm has swung to the Republicans.

      Deal with it.

    2. I'm also laying the groundwork by clearly showing how the polls are engaging in fantasy so when Mitt wins big, the Left running around waving their hands wildly over their heads shrieking "OMFG THE REPUBLICANS JUST STOLE ANOTHER ELECTION!!1!!!" will be seen for the stupidity it is.

      They believe these absurd MSM polls because it fits their biases, then use them as an excuse to charge fraud when the outcome of the election shocks the f**k out of them.

  5. Are you on Google+, Twitter, or Facebook?