Why are Rasmussen & Gallup the DU Bible these days?

[FrenchieCat]

Can Anyone tell me?

I've read 3 threads thus far posting results that are negative towards our candidate.

It appears that I must remind all of us that Rasmussen and Gallup, like most pollsters, are part of the tools used by our corporate media. They make shit up on television, repeat it adnauseum, and pretty soon publish polls that support the contentions that they have made. If the Corporate media can be seen as colluding with the Republicans to manufacture issues and push talking points, what makes any believe that somehow the pollsters are uninvolved in the process of reaffirming the Republican's take on things.

We must be very careful in how we interpret findings from any polling company, or else will be helping them manipulate the public into agreeing with what the Republicans, their Corporate media, and their friendly pollsters are peddling.

For those posting poll results without comments, you are doing a disservice not only to the Democratic party and our Nominee, but you are also enabling the opposition.

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/06/internal-polls.html

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

1. Trolls and "concerned" individuals.

I still believe there is still a lot of sour grapes lingering from the primaries; hence the growing number of "pick Hillary" and "Obama cannot win without Hillary" threads.

[FrenchieCat]

6. Agreed.

They may not be as blatant as the media, but they are essentially carrying Corporate media water here at DU.

[gateley]

14. I resent that, FrenchieCat. I do become concerned and it would never be my

intent to carry water for the Corporate media.

[gateley]

13. You dismiss those of us who actually ARE concerned.

All I know is that when I see Obama's numbers pulling away from McCain's it's exciting, and as I think it should be. When the lead narrows, I can't help but wonder "why"? Are more people believing McCain? Did the press present something that would turn people against Obama? Stuff like that. Our future is riding on this election, and I do worry if the polls don't indicate a commanding lead for Obama.

That being said, I do understand those who caution us that polls don't mean anything - but the must mean SOMETHING.

[Teaser]

16. You are a slave to probability, then

because that's the only thing making the polls swing around.

We've never been far ahead, and we've never been behind at all.

That's that status as of today, too.

[WeDidIt]

2. Attempts at disheartening people

It's pretty blatant.

[FrenchieCat]

5. That is my thought.

Coming from the posters who routinely explain, "I just thought this was an interesting story"....and bat their lashes innocently. Almost reminds you of the Corporate media whores in their demeanor and excuses as to why they do what they do, doesn't it?

[thewiseguy]

3. Because Gallup and Rasmussen are the only pollsters who have daily tracking numbers

In addition to that Rasmussen has state poll numbers.

I think Rasmussen is a RW pollster who provides talking point memo for the asshat Hannity.

[Breeze54]

7. Rasmussen sucks and is a RW mouthpiece on Faux Suxs!

:puke:

[DemocracyInaction]

4. It's a "camparison"

Rather than hearing simply one poll, Gallup, it's been enlightening to compare. Many times it's been different than Gallup but when one starts seeing the same trend in both it becomes significant. I don't give a rat's ass about the actual numbers; it's the "trends". You have to stop living in La-La land and face reality once in awhile. When we see trends we have to be alert and we have to make our voice known to the candidate. Many times campaigns (like Clinton's) have blinders on and don't realize what's happening out here. You can bet all the buzz you have been hearing this last week is because both the Dems and Repubs are taking these trends dead seriously. So should we.

[Breeze54]

8. Gallop and Rasmussen are RWers and they don't poll YOUNG PEOPLE or AA'S!!

:puke:

[elocs]

9. Too many people obsess over any and every poll and wring their hands over any negative ones.

I still contend that this is a 50 state race and national polls are imperfect and don't really reflect what is happening in each state.

[FrenchieCat]

11. Daily Obsessing about anything is never good.

[creeksneakers2]

10. I like Rasmussen

because its daily. It may not be useful to compare Rasmussen to other polls but it is useful to compare days of Rasmussen to other days of Rasmussen. Want to find out if McCain's latest attack ads hurt Obama? Check the following days Rasmussen to see if Obama lost points. Not a perfect indicator, but it gives a more likely guess.

[johnaries]

19. Rasmussen is NOT "daily".

In order to get a large enough sample size, for each "daily" result they average results from the last 3 days. Therefore, if there is a 1-day "bump", it won't show up until 3 days later.

[creeksneakers2]

21. I know its a 3 day average

But a 1 day bump would show up as 1/3 of the next three day's scores.

[DeepModem Mom]

12. I guess I don't see that much personal need to "preach to the converted."

And I'm not engaged enough in combative discussion here to be hyper-aware of possible "trolls."

Maybe I wear rose-colored glasses, but I assume that on a liberal board people can take raw info, like polls, and decide for themselves what to think. Are there any of us here who don't make a personal judgment on a poll, or an article, without "considering the source"? I post lots of commentary, like pieces from Media Matters, that shed light on how the media works against us. I can't imagine, however, that posters here would want to be completely ignorant of current polling.

Again, maybe I'm not clued in enough to undercurrents here, but I do post polls, and lots of other things, without comment. One, frankly, it saves time after sorting through a lot of print each day, and, two, it's always interesting to me to see the variety of things DUers have to say to a posted item.

I understand your point of view, however, FrenchieCat -- and love your posts and your personal 'tude.

[NYC_SKP]

15. Maybe people just don't understand how to use data, or they just like to stir.

Could they be onreading, ignorant fools, or...disruptors or agitators?

I can't tell which but over time the motives become apparent, IMO.

One more time: National polls and the media are poor indicators of what's happening.

Electoral college tracking, like fivethirtyeight, provide the reliable data that any SERIOUS person would be studying.

I also like to see how individual states are tracking over time, at pollster, for example.

Gimme a break.



:banghead:

[depakid]

17. They are as long as they show Obama with a lead...

just as they were when the showed Hillary with a big lead throughout last fall.

[Cha]

18. Rec'd...I'm getting "poll" fatigued just

looking at the captions which I never click on. It's all a part of the black ops.

[BlooInBloo]

20. Because DUers slavishly eat whatever the media feeds them.

[Clear Blue Sky]

22. Weren't there other polls that were more accurate and predictive in

the last election cycle?

[Drunken Irishman]

23. I think both were pretty right on in '04.

[tritsofme]

24. Because Rasmussen and Gallup have solid track records.

They produce good results, you may not like them, but they will more than likely be correct.

That's why I follow these pollsters especially closely.