tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post1023482743380468031..comments2024-03-18T06:10:07.480-05:00Comments on Public Policy Polling: Pennsylvania Senate tiedTom Jensenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06545052616714485196noreply@blogger.comBlogger51125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-89943182069452111702010-10-22T16:16:49.300-05:002010-10-22T16:16:49.300-05:00Any of the righties out there want to keep denying...Any of the righties out there want to keep denying reality now? Rasmussen came out and had a big Toomey drop today too, so even your favorite pollster couldn't hide from facts on the ground. With Toomey losing 60% of his lead, if you apply the same factor to the gubernatorial race, even Razzie would have Corbett only up by five over Onorato, close to the results PPP got.<br /><br />Pennsylvania is coming home. Republicans hit their high-water mark in August and don't have any remaining voters to engage. Democrats are getting interested late - just as so many political analysts pointed out.NRHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12565160695480579309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-4386411984683737312010-10-20T13:33:01.141-05:002010-10-20T13:33:01.141-05:00The complaint here wasn't with the results, bu...The complaint here wasn't with the results, but with the sample. A 48% Dem/41% Rep electorate is unprecedented in Pennsylvania. The Call has a 46% Dem/46% Rep electorate. That's more Democratic and way more Republican than Pennsylvania elections have been. <br /><br />The Morning Call fails to show how indies are deciding, but it's likely slightly in Sestak's favor. There's no way independents make up 8-11% of the Pennsylvania electorate. They've been 20%, 20%, and 19% in each of the last three elections.<br /><br />If Sestak is indeed within a point or two or three with independents, he'll win.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11928675187803337574noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-8153412667779721752010-10-20T08:22:58.561-05:002010-10-20T08:22:58.561-05:00I hate to tell this to the cry babies on this page...I hate to tell this to the cry babies on this page who doubt this poll (actually I don't), but there is a new poll out today the independent Morning Call of PA poll and guess what? Sestak is up by 3 POINTS in there poll--where in their previous survey he had been down by 7. Here is a link:<br />http://www.mcall.com/news/local/elections/mc-pa-senate-race-20101019,0,4463394.story?trbdc<br />I hate to say it but something is happening in PA and across the country in several races. It's not that the GOP will not make gains but it might not be as many as "the experts" have been predicting.Chuck Tnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-70537669482394484832010-10-20T02:46:02.034-05:002010-10-20T02:46:02.034-05:00Muhlenberg just released the first report of their...Muhlenberg just released the first report of their daily tracking poll and they have Sestak up by 3.<br /><br />So, guys from PPP, just don´t listen to the crybaby-rightwingers who want to bad-mouth your accurate polling ... ;-)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-49900842253082796522010-10-20T01:48:59.996-05:002010-10-20T01:48:59.996-05:00I'm sure Democrats think the electorate this y...I'm sure Democrats think the electorate this year is going to be more Democratic, but intelligent people are skeptical of that.How To Get Your Ex Backhttp://getyourexbacknowhub.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-44891713870131787032010-10-19T23:46:32.689-05:002010-10-19T23:46:32.689-05:00"PPP's stated mission is to help drive a ..."PPP's stated mission is to help drive a liberal/Democrat narrative."<br /><br />>>Actually, no. Show me where it says that on our website.<br /><br />Tom has said this many, many times in blog posts. He claims PPP makes no secret of their motivation and intent. As if anyone who has ever read a PPP blog or press release would doubt it!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-56002263194668907072010-10-19T19:21:24.532-05:002010-10-19T19:21:24.532-05:00If you're a Democrat you really don't want...If you're a Democrat you really don't want the 2008 Obama voters who haven't committed to voting Democrat yet. Many of them are likely independents or people who've voted Republican some or most of the time in the past. They may not be motivated enough to vote this year because the Republicans don't excite them, but probably more than half would vote Republican if you got them to the poll.<br /><br />People seem to confuse "Obama voter" with "Democrat." Obama took independents 52%-44%. He took 9% of the Republican vote. These people aren't reliable Democratic voters.<br /><br />Independents do not consistently show up in lower numbers in off year elections. If you look at the 2006 numbers state by state you'll find them as likely to have their highest percentage in 2006 as they were to have the middle or lowest percentage. <br /><br />Independents made up 26% of the electorate in 2006, about the same as they did in 2000 and 2004. 2008 was 29%, unusually high. That's likely because Republicans were so unmotivated to show up.<br /><br />Independents vary from high interest to low interest voters. Some will be more motivated, some less.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11928675187803337574noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-24061812063522692872010-10-19T16:18:11.168-05:002010-10-19T16:18:11.168-05:00Mr. Ingalls, I see that you respond to some of the...Mr. Ingalls, I see that you respond to some of the comments, but I'd like your response to following:<br /><br />In 2004, EPs were 41D 39R 20I<br />In 2006, EPs were 43D 38R 19I<br />In 2008, EPs were 44D 37R 18I<br /><br />According to your organization, you expect 2010 to be 48D 41R 11I?!!<br /><br />Are you really going to stand by that turnout model? <br /><br />I see the trick you guys did - so as not to be accuse of not show the obvious GOP-DEM enthusiasm gap, you conveniently reduced the number of Independents and increase both GOP and DEM, but to get your 'tie', you how more DEMs showing up than GOP!<br /><br />Nicely done :-)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-19445502873789199632010-10-19T15:18:33.398-05:002010-10-19T15:18:33.398-05:00"PPP's customers are Democrats."
Ye..."PPP's customers are Democrats."<br /><br />Yes, Democrats who want to know where they actually stand so they know if they're in trouble or not.<br /><br />"PPP's stated mission is to help drive a liberal/Democrat narrative."<br /><br />Actually, no. Show me where it says that on our website.<br /><br />"PPP has chosen to conduct their polls in such a way as to show turnout similar to 2006-2008, rather than a neutral year or a Republican wave year."<br /><br />False. As we have said time and again, we don't weight for party or ideology or 2008 presidential results--only gender, race, and age, which are much more predictable and constant factors that can be controlled. Everything we've released publicly this year has used the same methodology as in 2008, and our accuracy in that cycle speaks for itself.Dustin Ingallshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00599131416393266722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-42147794590838803322010-10-19T14:12:26.877-05:002010-10-19T14:12:26.877-05:00"If that poll is correct it would seem to ind..."If that poll is correct it would seem to indicate that 2010 would be a good year for the Democrats if not taking into consideration voter turnout."<br /><br />Of course. We've been making that point all year rather overtly. It doesn't get enough coverage. The media talks about the enthusiasm gap as if it just meant Republicans are more excited emotionally. But they don't often mention the ramifications of the changed makeup of the electorate.<br /><br />"If it is, then doesn't the entire election come down to who is right on the likely voter model? Getting out the vote is what it all comes down to."<br /><br />Pretty much, though independents are favoring Republicans generally by double digits, when the opposite was true in 2008. So it's not entirely due to the enthusiasm gap, but that's a large part of it. Luckily for Democrats, independents generally turn out in lower numbers in midterms, which are typically more heavily partisan--the most frequent voters. We're seeing that's true this year. All this harping about our D-R-I breakdowns is partially that independents are just fed up and are being drowned out by the really excited Republicans and the more excited-than-independents Democrats.Dustin Ingallshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00599131416393266722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-45404546454081507622010-10-19T14:02:31.335-05:002010-10-19T14:02:31.335-05:00So what exactly is the polling sample here? Joe S...So what exactly is the polling sample here? Joe Sestak's immediate family? <br /><br />Democrats, you can live in denial all you want - Lord knows we Republicans did in 2006 - but it just makes the ultimate defeat that much harder to swallow.Paul Zummonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-44347043379266100922010-10-19T13:59:01.760-05:002010-10-19T13:59:01.760-05:00"Abandoning one's credibility in order to..."Abandoning one's credibility in order to further an agenda isn't really a good business model, is it?"<br /><br />Of course it is. PPP's customers are Democrats. PPP's stated mission is to help drive a liberal/Democrat narrative.<br /><br />Look, as a pollster you can 'fix' your methodology to show whatever you want. PPP has chosen to conduct their polls in such a way as to show turnout similar to 2006-2008, rather than a neutral year or a Republican wave year.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-26302596021192038792010-10-19T13:30:18.929-05:002010-10-19T13:30:18.929-05:00I wonder what all the people accusing you of being...I wonder what all the people accusing you of being partisan will way when they see your WA-Sen poll? I'm GOP, but you guys have a great record this season and it's just stupid to try and say that you are trying to prop up Dems when you were the first ones to show Brown leading and more recently, the Raese surge.Zornorphhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18142542507273109059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-47593070851516287622010-10-19T13:21:30.040-05:002010-10-19T13:21:30.040-05:00I'd love for the PPP guys to comment on the po...I'd love for the PPP guys to comment on the point of this post: <br /><br />http://www.thepresidentialcandidates.us/wait-a-second/1282/<br /><br />According to that poll 76% of Obama voters are committed to voting for the Democrat. Yeah, that doesn't sound that great until you read that only 71% of McCain voters are committed to voting for the Republican!<br /><br />If that poll is correct it would seem to indicate that 2010 would be a good year for the Democrats if not taking into consideration voter turnout. In other words, if those #s are correct and 2010 voter turnout were like 2008 then the Democrats would be in a fine position.<br /><br />Is this true?<br /><br />If it is, then doesn't the entire election come down to who is right on the likely voter model? Getting out the vote is what it all comes down to.<br /><br />Perhaps the Democrats are better at getting out the vote than people are expecting.<br /><br />Perhaps Facebook will make it easier to get people out to the polls?<br /><br />By the way: I think a great idea is for everyone to change their profile picture to "VOTE!" on November 1st & 2nd! Let's remind all of our friends and families to get out there and vote Democratic this year.<br /><br />The Republicans are the problem not the solution!Jonny Vhttp://www.vimaxreview.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-67066270755403953182010-10-19T13:13:18.743-05:002010-10-19T13:13:18.743-05:00Very good news. Pat Toomey is a very very VERY far...Very good news. Pat Toomey is a very very VERY far right wing Republican. Way to the right of the average Pennsylvania voter.<br /><br />It's time to GET OUT THE VOTE for Joe Sestak. He will be a great US Senator!Jonny Vhttp://www.vimaxreview.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-12411304337805847462010-10-19T12:46:22.911-05:002010-10-19T12:46:22.911-05:00The funny thing is that if we use the 2004 turn-ou...The funny thing is that if we use the 2004 turn-out this poll would be Toomey +3. While that isn't as strong for a Sestak victory it does show the race tightening. <br /><br />The Democrats have surged with quite a few pollsters in some states. There's no reason to think this race couldn't be down to 3 points. <br /><br />Rasmussen is questionable because they don't publish their in-tabs. PPP gets an "A" for transparency, but you've opened yourself up for criticism based on the in-tabs. If you produced something close to the 2004 electorate, criticism would be muted. By showing a 48% Democratic electorate, you've gotten a lot of people to dismiss it outright.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11928675187803337574noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-62260943168760125742010-10-19T12:33:24.178-05:002010-10-19T12:33:24.178-05:00So is Rasmussen a Democratic fraud now since they ...So is Rasmussen a Democratic fraud now since they have Rand Paul up only 5?Dustin Ingallshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00599131416393266722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-59324597425506689522010-10-19T12:27:19.704-05:002010-10-19T12:27:19.704-05:00This one isn't just believable, it was a predi...This one isn't just believable, it was a predicted outcome. There isn't a shortage of political analysts who've been pointing out for the last two months that Republican support was already maxed out and most of the growth room left was among Obama voters deciding whether to vote for a Democrat or not vote at all. Gallup has also reminded us that their likely voter screens have been known to tighten dramatically in the closing weeks of an election. In a blue state like Pennsylvania, the late-engaging voters are heavily Democratic. Look at the last three major federal races and the polling - in 2004, the RCP average had it Kerry by 1, and it ended up Kerry by 3. In 2006, it polled Casey/Santorum up 11, and Casey won by 16. In 2008, they had Obama up 7 when he won by 10.<br /><br />It's also been noted any number of times that Sestak's campaign style is to conserve money early and go all-in late. It's what he did in the primary (when polls had him down by huge margins just a month in advance) and it's what he's doing now. PPP isn't the only pollster catching the trend, either - look at the Pollster.com chart of the race and pick 'more sensitive' smoothing and you can see the Sestak surge. Even if you exclude PPP from that chart, you can still see the notable upswing in Sestak's line and a downturn in Toomey's.<br /><br />In fact, nobody but Rasmussen has had Toomey above 46% in a month.NRHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12565160695480579309noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-77425440288353464422010-10-19T11:55:36.909-05:002010-10-19T11:55:36.909-05:00"Here are the pollster rankings from 2008 acc..."Here are the pollster rankings from 2008 according to 538. PPP was better than Rasmussen in 2008"<br /><br />Actually, those are the rankings for more than just 2008. We only started polling nationally in the 2008 cycle, and are already in the handful of most accurate pollsters. Rasmussen's been polling since the mid-90s, SurveyUSA and Mason-Dixon since the '80s.<br /><br />"PPP is biased, does donate to the Democratic party on a regular basis"<br /><br />No, the company does not. Our president and owner does.<br /><br />"Why would independents in PA be dead even, while they are heavily favoring the GOP in almost every other race in the country?"<br /><br />We're seeing the enthusiasm gap lessen in a lot of states now, and there wasn't even one to begin with in states like Alaska, Texas, and California.Dustin Ingallshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00599131416393266722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-69473953946191931552010-10-19T11:37:53.644-05:002010-10-19T11:37:53.644-05:00I am not attacking the poll. But I will say that t...I am not attacking the poll. But I will say that the notion that polls don't affect the narrative of the race is not true.<br /><br />Here is Politico's top headline on it's 2010 page:<br />http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/43824.html<br /><br />"PPP: Sestak Takes the Lead"<br /><br />A single poll from a single polling firm leads to a Politico article, which I'm sure will be distributed widely through campaign channels, used to drive fundraising donations for weeks, and to motivate voters.<br /><br />It's easy to say that polling doesn't shape races, but I think that's obviously disproven my this morning's poll.wthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04343481782148411302noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-78782440110550910502010-10-19T11:32:19.493-05:002010-10-19T11:32:19.493-05:00Ryan said...
Chuck T
The problem is that these p...Ryan said... <br />Chuck T<br /><br />The problem is that these polls have begun to start to have a more bluish hue than other results coming from non-partisan firms. PPP is biased, does donate to the Democratic party on a regular basis, and is now affiliated with the uber-liberal Kos. So yes, they may have had and excellent track record, but the numbers this past month have changed reflecting their new relationships.This electorate is not going to be more Democratic than 2008. Keep pushing these out and Kos will drop you like they dropped Research 2000.<br /><br /><br />If you know that PPP polling is crap due to "there new relationship" why do you keep coming here? And by "donate to the democratic party" do you mean cash or because they poll for them? Why do you assume that polls done for campaigns are automatically biased? If a candidate is paying a pollster money they want to know true results not some fantasy numbers pulled out of the air. I still didn't get any response from all of those who thought that the Missouri Senate poll by PPP was crap when the "non-partisan" Fox/Pulse survey came up with an almost identitical result.Chuck Tnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-62954135921849135062010-10-19T11:26:09.629-05:002010-10-19T11:26:09.629-05:00Three questions
why are voters between 30-45 diff...Three questions<br /><br />why are voters between 30-45 different?<br /><br />Why is Sestak doing well among older voters?<br /><br />Is there a Christine O'Donnell factor in eastern PA that is helping Sestak?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-13282559274136177992010-10-19T11:19:07.897-05:002010-10-19T11:19:07.897-05:00As the election gets closer, PPP goes from objecti...As the election gets closer, PPP goes from objective pollster to wishcasting DNC mouthpiece.<br /><br />"You can put Pennsylvania Senate back in the toss up category."<br /><br />Um, no...you can't.<br /><br />RCP Average: Toomey +6.3<br />PPP (D): Sestak +1<br />Rasmussen Reports: Toomey +10<br />Morning Call: Toomey +7<br /><br />Abandoning one's credibility in order to further an agenda isn't really a good business model, is it?Jonathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04657173781097082528noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-84862371275613481132010-10-19T11:04:42.239-05:002010-10-19T11:04:42.239-05:00Hey Chuck - I am also sure you've seen where P...Hey Chuck - I am also sure you've seen where PPP has Reid down 9 and Rasmussen has him plumetting -19? The last set of polls, far enough out from the election so they can say things changed since the last poll, is clearly being designed to keep the Dems chins up...the GB and tide is drufting the GOP way and no slaneted (via turnout) poll is going to change it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2799451770086337664.post-17260343110550776092010-10-19T11:01:50.090-05:002010-10-19T11:01:50.090-05:00Sampling is waaaay off.
In 2004, EPs were 41D 39R...Sampling is waaaay off.<br /><br />In 2004, EPs were 41D 39R 20I<br />In 2006, EPs were 43D 38R 19I<br />In 2008, EPs were 44D 37R 18I<br /><br />No way this year's electorate will be 48D 41R 11I. That is just crazy. Looks like a rescue poll to me.<br /><br />Try running this with a 2004 sample and see what you get.Covenant60https://www.blogger.com/profile/00778037319510838719noreply@blogger.com