Skip to main content

View Diary: AWESOME PPP POLLS...Obama VA 51-46, Warren MA 48-46 (UPDATED) (244 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  polls are amazingly accurate, in my view (6+ / 0-)

    Yeah, some will be off and some will be screwy during the campaigns, but in the end ... it's pretty amazing.  Almost never do they get the winner/loser wrong, even in close races.

    •  I go by what Nate Silver says (16+ / 0-)

      One poll or maybe two might be a bit askew, but when you aggregate them and average them over time and correct for historical wobble or bias on the part of each pollster . . . you get some good results. And Nate was pretty close to right on the money in 2008, and I think he's pretty close to right on the money now.

      You and I are going to spend our sunset years telling our children's children what it was once like in America when 25% of the population was batshit insane.

      by Omir the Storyteller on Sun Sep 16, 2012 at 06:08:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's not just Nate Silver. (13+ / 0-)

        There's a guy named Scott Elliott who is a very conservative Republican who runs a site called  His political views drive me crazy, of course, but he does an excellent job of looking at all the polls.  He has a mathematical formula which he uses (and tweaks from time to time) and his results are pretty accurate - he only got 2 states wrong in 2008 (IN and NC, both of which were very close), and correctly predicted the size of the Republican swing in the House in 2010 to within about 2 seats.

        And Scott has Obama up 332-206.  I suspect his formula will flip the MA Senate seat to Warren as soon as he includes these latest polls.

        "Everybody has won, and all must have prizes." - Lewis Carroll

        by Dave1955 on Sun Sep 16, 2012 at 06:24:38 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I don't care for the way Nate is tweaking (8+ / 0-)

          his projections based upon economic data.

          We are within 60 days of the election, the economic data is baked in already but his projection went down because of some bad manufacturing numbers.

          I prefer Sam Wang at Princeton Election Consortium -

          •  I don't any reports of numbers on the economy (3+ / 0-)

            barring a catastrophic black swan, will have much of an effect going forward. People have made their minds up mostly based on their own immediate financial situation.  

            Hypothetical numbers won't scare people into the Romney camp, no matter how many times Fox repeats them.

            Supporter: "Senator, you have the vote of every thinking person!" Adlai Stevenson: "That's not enough, madam, we need a majority!"

            by Scott Wooledge on Sun Sep 16, 2012 at 07:51:12 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  I remember checking that site in '08... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          StellaRay, Dave1955

          and his outcomes were very similar to Nate's.

          Maybe people should point 'pubs thence when they complain about Nate being biased.

          And maybe we should take note: he's projecting 5 'pub senate pickups.  We got work to do.

          "Stand up--Keep Fighting"--The Wellstone Campaign

          by Many Apples Many Sodas on Sun Sep 16, 2012 at 08:02:16 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Scott Elliott (0+ / 0-)

          Interesting site. Thanks for the info.

          The projections for presidential race look great for us. But the others, yuck! I knew we likely won't retake the House. Elliott right now projects we will lose the Senate. Yikes!

          I haven't paid as much attention to the Senate races, except Bill Nelson, my senator. I figured if he's doing well others would be as well. Warren seems to be turning the corner, and we know McCaskill's tenuous position. But what about Kaine and Tester? Aren't we winning some of the open seats previously held by republicans?

          What gives?

          •  Well, I don't think (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            the latest Warren/Brown polls have been taken into account yet, so that one might flip back, and some of them are very close.  Scott doesn't forecast ties, and his prognostications change over the season to reflect the most recent polls.

            "Everybody has won, and all must have prizes." - Lewis Carroll

            by Dave1955 on Mon Sep 17, 2012 at 04:27:03 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  My first time at that site (0+ / 0-)

              Not familiar with Scott's procedures, so maybe I've gotten ahead of myself. I've worked so hard to re-elect President Obama, and figured a resounding win would mean Democratic pickups in House and Senate. Starting to have doubts. :(

              We should be ahead in Senate races in Virginia, Wisconsin and Montana by now! Well, maybe not Wisconsin. That state's politics are beginning to rival Florida's in strangeness. But surely the others! Why is there energy for the president, but not for the Senate candidates?

              •  It may come. (0+ / 0-)

                Polls are a snapshot of the moment.  Virginia and Montana are very close, and could go either way.  Remember, Dems have more seats to defend than the Reps (due to the sweep in 2006).

                It's not over yet.

                "Everybody has won, and all must have prizes." - Lewis Carroll

                by Dave1955 on Mon Sep 17, 2012 at 05:37:35 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

      •  I'm concerned about Nate Silver this past week. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        FiredUpInCA, blueoasis, JanL

        The Republicans piled on him when he picked up on the race changing after the conventions.
           And then in the past several days he's moderated the numbers somewhat based on rather strange metrics.
           From the time of the pile-on, Obama's chances of winning shrunk from about 81% to 75%, following a simply horrendous  week for Romney?
           It doesn't figure.

        "We the People of the United States...." -U.S. Constitution

        by elwior on Sun Sep 16, 2012 at 11:41:21 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  particularly in presidential races (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Where there are many polls from multiple sources.

      Sure it might be dicier on a race like a state assembly, senate or even some house races which are publicly polled more infrequently and by fewer houses.

      But really everyone is all over POTUS races. Senate too really. It's pretty easy to get an accurate picture.

      Supporter: "Senator, you have the vote of every thinking person!" Adlai Stevenson: "That's not enough, madam, we need a majority!"

      by Scott Wooledge on Sun Sep 16, 2012 at 07:46:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site