freeman2 wrote:Go to real clear politics for 2008 the RCP was ok (Ohio--Obama did 2.1 pts better than RCP; Florida, Obama did 1 pt better than Rcp; north Carolina obama beat it by .7; Virginia Obama beat RCP by 1.9; Colorado Obama beat RCP by 3.5 pts; nevada obama by 5.5 pts

Fox new/Rasmussen however was WAY off. (Ohio 4.6; Florida 3.8; nc 1.3; Virginia 2.3; colorado 5; Nevada 8)
So the Republican biased polls were way off last time

I think it is reasonable to think that RCP or silvers averaging of polls gives best sense of election

danivon wrote:A key question with 'Likely Voter' polling is how is the 'likely' part captured and controlled for. Do all companies use the same method to do it? How can it be compared to actual voting patterns - and adjusted to account for the difference between Presidential years and mid-terms?

One way I've seen over here is to ask voters their likelihood to vote out of 10. Some companies only take 10s, others set the bar a bit lower. Those differences could be significant in such a close set of polls.

freeman2 wrote:One poll is not enough-- I like to look at averages of several major polls The consensus is that the race is between a tie and a 1 pt lead for Romney

1. Nate isn’t very good at calling close elections. In 2010, he correctly predicted the outcome of the senate elections with the greatest leads. But in the 5 genuinely close races, he got it wrong in 3. For the House elections, Nate ran this extraordinary headline: “House Forecast: G.O.P. Plus 54-55 Seats; Significantly Larger or Smaller Gains Possible.” So, this oracle predicted that the results could have been “larger” or “smaller” – how prescient. In fact, they were much larger. The Republicans took 63 seats.
2. People make their minds up at the last minute, which confuses the outcome of close elections. Historically, voters have tended to break towards challengers, and particularly Republican challengers, in the last week.
3. Nate weights polls, meaning that he picks and chooses which data sets to run through his model. He has shown particular affection for Democrat-leaning pollsters like PPP, and this bias is evident in his use of state-wide polls. Silver embraces polling organisations that other writers avoid like the plague. Apparently, the New York Times isn’t as discriminating.
4. Nate ignores polls that contradict him. So PPP is right and Gallup is wrong.

freeman2 wrote:RCP is .8 and it is run by conservatives.

Ten polls-- three in favor of Obama, Three ties , four in favor of Romney. And Gallup, which is plus five (the other Romney polls were two plus two and one plus three--within the margin if error of being a tie), has a tie when looking at registered voters.

You are picking and choosing your polls--Rasmussen is not likely to favor Obama and he is only at plus two for Romney. Wishing for a Romney victory won't make it so.

Politico reports on the poll's top-line: Obama 49, Romney 48 percent. But it is the noteworthy last paragraph from Goeas's memo that we're referring to: "In sum, this data indicates this election remains very close on the surface, but the political environment and the composition of the likely electorate favor Governor Romney. These factors come into play with our “vote election model” – which takes into account variables like vote intensity, voters who say they are definite in their vote, and demographics like age and education. In that snapshot of today’s vote model, Mitt Romney leads Barack Obama by five-points – 52% to 47%. While that gap can certainly be closed by the ground game of the Democrats, reports from the field would indicate that not to be the case, and Mitt Romney may well be heading to a decisive victory."