Rasmussen: Wisconsin O: 50% R 48%

[Jennicut]

Looks like WI is looking good for Obama. Rasmussen will always show tighter races then a pollster like NBC/Marist.

This poll was done Oct 18th.

One aside....Rasmussen has opposite info on the early voting:

Ninety-seven percent (97%) of likely Wisconsin voters say they are certain to vote, and the president leads 50% to 48% among this group.

Wisconsin allows early voting, and among those who have already voted, it’s Romney 54%, Obama 43%. Of those who have yet to vote, 90% say they’ve already decided whom they will support. Obama leads 50% to 49% among these voters.

I would say Rasmussen is pretty wrong on this. So, WI is probably better then plus 2 for Obama.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/wisconsin/election_2012_wisconsin_president

[WI_DEM]

1. That's ok, Marquette Law School had it +1 earlier in the week.

[Shivering Jemmy]

2. Ras early voting proportions are altered by their proR demographics

Reweight and compare to other polls.

[aaaaaa5a]

3. Rasmussen weighs their averages for party ID.

They do this regardless of the party ID of their respondents. Therefore how did they tally the early vote?


If the early vote had a strong Dem lean did they keep it? Or did they weigh it to match their overall sample?


I think that could explain the difference.


Because lets be honest, if Obama is losing the early vote b 9%, how could he be up by 2 overall? That makes no sense.

Here are the numbers from Wisconsin over the last 24 hours

O+1 Marquette
O+2 Rasmussen
O+5 YouGov
O+6 NBC

Average 3.5
That is outside the margin of error.

Obama is winning.

Wisconsin+Ohio+ Nevada OR Iowa=270

[Floyd_Gondolli]

4. I'm guessing O+3 on election day

But it could be a little bigger.

[StrongBad]

6. Wow what a well reasoned argument backed by factual data and analysis

Oh wait. Your conclusion is based on the fact that you "know people in WI" .

Nice try.

[StrongBad]

9. Sigh.

The fact that you can't grasp the inherent logical fallacy in the way you're reaching your conclusions proves that I would be wasting my time trying to inform you. You just don't get it.

[Hutzpa]

10. +101

[StrongBad]

15. I'm sorry to see you go...

...but I think you'll be dismayed when you find that the principles of logic and statistics are the same no matter what website you join.

[Jennicut]

11. You cannot make any basis to any lead Romney has there without polling evidence.

Sorry. When even Rasmussen has Obama with a lead there I am inclined to put WI in Obama's column.
Many states have conservative areas and liberal areas in them. Most of the time, Dems win these types of battlegrounds in the cities. You might know tons of conservatives there but it does not mean Romney will win there. Voting is about turnout in certain areas. Even Chuck Todd of all people knows this and shows how this works on election nights. It all depends on where the people you know live and what kind of areas of the state those are.

[StrongBad]

13. Thank you for doing what I didn't have the patience to.

[Jennicut]

16. Your welcome!

I know some people like to go with their gut but I like statistics and logic.

[Hutzpa]

8. That figure is inaccurate

those early voting figures are not correct. After Rachel showing 56% Obama to 44% Romney not possible to over turn that gap.

I call this NBC/Marist poll bullshit and while I'm at it, FUCK you CHUCK TOAD.

[milestogo]

17. I believe Wisconsin went for Gore, Kerry, and Obama

So it will probably go for Obama again.