ABC News: Obama has 15 point lead over Romney in health care issues

[The Glory Land]

I am still waiting for Obama, to pay off my mortgage ?    :-\

 

[redgreen5]

Rasmussen (a pollster with a good track record for accurate predictions) seems to have a different opinion.

Actually, Rasmussen does *not* have a good track record.  We had this discussion, right?
http://www.fundamentalforums.org/index.php/topic,885.0.html

As you can see above, Rasmussen's performance was the worst of the major polling organizations. Rasmussen had the highest error factor at 5.8; almost a full point worse than the runner up for worst pollster. Rasmussen also had the 2nd worst bias in the group (i.e., whenever their forecast is wrong, in which direction is it over-weighted).

Quinnipiac had the best performance out of the group.

Part of the difference no doubt is that Rasmussen doesn't do general public polls, but only "likely voters". That's also what makes him better than most predicting election results.

Except that his results are the worst of all the major pollsters at predicting election results.  Part of the reason is because he cuts corners in his polling methodology to save money. The other reason is because his questions contain elements of bias designed to appeal to conservative news outlets and GOP politicians.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/rasmussen-polls-were-biased-and-inaccurate-quinnipiac-surveyusa-performed-strongly/

Rasmussen

 

[redgreen5]

Even in the 2008 race, Rasmussen was at the bottom of reliability:

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/poll_of_pollsters_rating_the_i.php?nr=1

I included all the details in the previous post, but here are the highlights: We sent out invitations to just over a hundred pollsters and had 46 complete the entire survey, although a few more (49) completed the questions about the reliability of the polls in Iowa. Of those, 22 are media pollsters and and 27 campaign pollsters (16 Democrats and 11 Republicans). There is no margin of error because the results represent nothing more or less than the views of the pollsters that participated. Like any survey respondents, we promised to keep their identities confidential.

We started with a simple question asked about each of the 16 pollsters that have released public polls in Iowa: "How reliable do you consider surveys of IOWA CAUCUS goers done by each of the following organizations, very reliable, somewhat reliable, not very reliable or not reliable at all?" We also provided an option to say they "do not know enough to rate" each organization.

Besides being mistrusted in 2008, the actual results for Rasmussen in 2008 were no better:

It isn't just the 2008 race, either. Rasmussen was terrible in 2000:
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/05/blast-from-rasmussen-past.html

Rasmussen had:
* highest error factor;
* highest bias in either direction (Democrat or Republican), almost THREE TIMES HIGHER than the second worst performer in this category;
* highest number of mistakes in calling states for one candidate or the other, over TWICE as bad as the second worst performer in this category;

 

[HeDied4U]

..