Thompson was up 9 points in the polls a month ago, and now he's down 9 points. It's useless to fret about whether the Marquette poll is accurate: How inaccurate can it be? How did it happen? Tammy Baldwin ran negative ads against the once presumptively popular Tommy Thompson, and they obviously worked. Here's the one I've seen on TV most often:
That's an AFSCME Independent Expenditure ad, not Baldwin's own campaign. Here's AFSCME's YouTube page, where you can see the kind of specific, effective material they are putting out in many local campaigns. For example, here's one in the Ohio-16 district, using a very similar attack — a politician went to Washington and got allied with "special interests" — and similar — and better — use of animated graphics to present a simple, clear message.
Tommy must have been thinking that he could cruise to victory, but the old man is getting kicked around.
ADDED: Tommy's campaign tried to go negative, via email to various conservative contacts, just before she did her big DNC speech, but Tommy got burned. Tammy supporters were able to portray this material as lesbian-bashing, and, in fact, that meanness — more than the ads — may be at the root of Tommy's troubles.
२० सप्टेंबर, २०१२
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
७७ टिप्पण्या:
The idea that Thompson is down 9, or would lose this election by 9 is silly & ridiculous.
Anyway,
In Colorado and Virginia, GOP voters are more enthusiastic than Democrats by a 15 point margin. In Wisconsin, GOP enthusiasm outpaces Democrats by 16 points.
That is from the CBS/NYT poll released yesterday.
Negative seems to be the way to go if the polling is right. It's so depressing. Politics makes me sad.
@Jay
if not 9 points, then how much do you think it means he is down? The poll certainly isn't compatible with TT being ahead.
How inaccurate can it be? Was it D +11 as I read? If so, then incredibly inaccurate. I cant see Thompson fretting about it at all in that case but Baldwin must be worried.
"The idea that Thompson is down 9, or would lose this election by 9 is silly & ridiculous."
He either wins or loses. And he needs a wake-up call.
I wonder what Eric Hovde would be doing now if he'd gotten the nomination, but GOP types thought it was be safe and easy to go with good old Tommy.
Old Tommy. A sure thing. La la la.
Maybe he needs Mitt Romney to come in and give a private pep talk to some big donors...oh wait...nevermind.....
Seems like a lot of old men have thought they could cruise to victory lately, but it just hasn't worked out.
Arlen Specter
Richard Lugar
Bob Bennett
Elizabeth Warren
After their horrible behavior in the stae and the country in last two years, Wisconsin residents want to put another Dem in the Senate?
Then it ain't the ads. Wisconsin is just nuts.
Hell, since is Obama is driving us into the Second Great Depression and is ahead in the polls, the entire nation is nuts.
Can't fix the welfare mentality. We'll just have to go broke first, it appears.
"Maybe he needs Mitt Romney to come in and give a private pep talk to some big donors...oh wait...nevermind....."
Couldn't hurt. Certainly didn't hurt Romney.
"Seems like a lot of old men have thought they could cruise to victory lately, but it just hasn't worked out.
Arlen Specter
Richard Lugar
Bob Bennett
Elizabeth Warren"
I wasn't aware Warren was a man, but since she faked being an Indian she might also be faking the whole woman thing too.
It's funny to listen to the left whine about "big donors".
Where do you think Obama gets his money?
answer: ...big donors.
Thompson style has been a liberal Republican dedicated to compromise with the Dems. He is too old to be aware of any new ways.
So why would anyone want that style back for the coming final battle to save the US Constitution from replacement by Permanent Crisis Rulership by a media anointed tyrant solving a false crisis?
You really don't grasp sarcasm, do you.
@TWM:How inaccurate can it be? Was it D +11 as I read?
It was D+0. R44/D44.
I linked to the methodology in the other thread.
Re Ann's point about meanness. I wish I could say I lived in a country where the electorate didn't vote based on the superficial appearance of niceness and other such softheaded notions, but I don't. That country does not exist.
Dems surging in Senate races around the country seems to be a trend.
I think one or two more Wisconsin polls come out today. Exciting!
Did Thompson in fact make millions from a lobbying firm? If so that's a major strike against any candidate in my book (though I'd vote for him over Baldwin anyway).
"It was D+0. R44/D44.
I linked to the methodology in the other thread."
Would you mind linking to it again, I'm reading the summary of the poll at the Marquette site, but can't seem to find the in-depth numbers.
"I think one or two more Wisconsin polls come out today. Exciting!"
Leg all tingly, garage?
garage mahal said...
Dems surging in Senate races around the country seems to be a trend
Yes!
U.S. Sen. Scott Brown has moved into a narrow lead over rival Elizabeth Warren while his standing among Massachusetts voters has improved despite a year-long Democratic assault, a new UMass Lowell/Boston Herald poll shows.
The GOP incumbent is beating Warren by a 50-44 percent margin among registered Bay State voters
Boob.
Ann Althouse said...
He either wins or loses. And he needs a wake-up call.
It certainly sounds like it.
I'm guessing he and his campaign thought by putting his name on the ballot he would win.
That only happens when you are a Democrat and your name is Kennedy.
I have no knowledge or wisdom to offer on the race, but here's the Intrade chart. Quite a spike!
@TWM:How inaccurate can it be? Was it D +11 as I read?
It was D+0. R44/D44.
I linked to the methodology in the other thread.
I linked to the surey on RCP- self identify R26/D34/I38. Party id with leaners R40/D51.
Fact check the fact checkers, then check the fact checker's fact checker.
Triangle Man said...
if not 9 points, then how much do you think it means he is down?
Good question.
I would guess he's down on the edge of the MOE 4-5.
At most.
I linked to the surey on RCP- self identify R26/D34/I38. Party id with leaners R40/D51.
That's the way I read it too. It takes a D+11 to get to Baldwin +9, so ... Thompson +2? Much more believable.
"I linked to the surey on RCP- self identify R26/D34/I38. Party id with leaners R40/D51.
Fact check the fact checkers, then check the fact checker's fact checker."
Okay, I'm gonna stick with my D +11 statement since they do indeed show R40/D51 leaners in the poll. And even going with the self-identify you're looking at a D +8 sample.
Grabriel, if you have a link to other data, let me know.
We'll just have to go broke first, it appears.
We already are.
@TMW: You're right about the Baldwin poll. I was thinking of the Obama poll and that's what I linked to before. That poll was D+0. This pole was D+10, weighted to D+11 using 2009 numbers.
For the Obama poll they used 2011 numbers and weighted D+0. Why?
If I put on my tinfoil hat, I would say that deliberately oversampling Ds in constant polling could result in disenchanting Rs and suppression of turnout.
Thus, if polling shows an Obama win as inevitable, would it suppress R turnout at all?
"For the Obama poll they used 2011 numbers and weighted D+0. Why?"
I was thinking that maybe they think Dems will vote for Obama but not for Baldwin? Seems illogical but everything about Wisconsin politics seems a little illogical to me.
"Thus, if polling shows an Obama win as inevitable, would it suppress R turnout at all?"
Not one bit I think. On the other hand it might just make the more lazy Dems stay home because they don't think their vote is needed.
The Marquette pollster says if they adjusted the poll to match voter participation from last year Baldwin still leads 48%-43%
"It was D+0."
Proof of bias!! Why not R+0?!
"The Marquette pollster says if they adjusted the poll to match voter participation from last year Baldwin still leads 48%-43%."
Last year meaning when? 2010? What adjustment did they make? D+ what?
@garage:The Marquette pollster says if they adjusted the poll to match voter participation from last year Baldwin still leads 48%-43%
Certainly true from what I can see of the numbers in the methodology, but why didn't they current numbers? Why did they sample from 2009 knowing it inflates the lead? They sampled Obama to D+0 using 2011 numbers. Why the difference?
"We'll just have to go broke first, it appears.
We already are.
On the ledger, sure.
But really being broke is a different animal. You can still fake it when you're allowed to borrow, and manage the illusion of progress or even prosperity.
But then it stops, even for a nation.
Shit, we ain't seen nothing yet.
It will take less than one generation for us to become uniformly poor, save for our Dear Leaders, who will all be fine.
From the Marquette methodology statement:
289 Republicans sampled
349 Democrats
62 independent
5 don't know
They adjusted that to D+11 using Gallup polls of all adults from 2011. (I swear last time I read it said 2009...) Not likely voters, not registered voters, but all adults.
I see. In the Obama poll they sampled much closer to D+0, and adjusted to D+0--using the same 2011 data. (2009 is for religious affliation.)
But I don't see how that makes sense. Is the voting population D+0 or D+11? They need to weight to whatever it actually is, don't they? Otherwise it's Dewey Defeats Truman again.
They adjusted that to D+11 using Gallup polls of all adults from 2011
In other words, the poll is laughable and poor garagie has his knickers in a twist over nothing.
Marquette is just accounting for the Franken votes, by trunkful, by helpful Chicagoans, and suddenly locating all those disappeared black Milwaukee residents.
This morning I saw an ad that is suppose to be negative on Baldwin showing her exclaiming Damn! I think this clip of a young candidate with energy may just backfire on old Tommy who has to fake his conviction, when he can remember to.
Then the sample's a joke.
As for Thompson, Bill Simon blew his race on the Sunday before the election.
Don't get cocky, as they say.
garage mahal said...
Dems surging in Senate races around the country seems to be a trend.
Yeah, Linda McMahon, Scott Brown, Charlie Summers.
Lotsa Demos.
"But I don't see how that makes sense. Is the voting population D+0 or D+11? They need to weight to whatever it actually is, don't they? Otherwise it's Dewey Defeats Truman again."
Bingo. They are trying to depress R turnout and increase enthusiasm among the Ds. Sometimes it works, but this time things are so noticeably bad out there it isn't playing this time.
I can really see a Dewey thing happening this time, but that's not bad for the Dems either since they can cry "but the polls, the polls" as evidence of R voter fraud.
I'm thinking it won't even have to be close for them to cry fraud this time.
Last year meaning when? 2010? What adjustment did they make? D+ what?
2011.
They over-weighted Dems by nearly twice the margin of the 2008 Dem wave election to get the "headline" number they wanted.
WI was D+6 when Obama was elected. To think that WI will be D+11 this year, after three straight Republican state-wide election victories and a WI native son on the R ticket is wishcasting of a high order.
Or deliberate propagandizing to help the "home team" of Democrats.
Has Baldwin been hammering Thompson with negative ads? Of course. Does that matter to the margin? Of course.
Will WI voters elect a Madison radical lesbian who has never run state-wide over a moderate conservative they elected governor multiple times when the electorate was more Dem than it is today? No way in hell.
Romney/Ryan win WI by 2.5% and Thompson wins by at least 9%.
This poll was an attempt at R voter-enthusiasm dampening and has been cut apart thoroughly for it's obvious flaws in less than 24 hours.
The Marquette pollster says if they adjusted the poll to match voter participation from last year Baldwin still leads 48%-43%
I'll say this as politely as I can: bullshit.
Think about what you're saying.
1. D+11 means you think there is an 11% advantage for Dems in the population that's going to translate into likely voters. Should we ask Tom Barrett if he agrees?
2. Then you say that if this polling discrepancy is corrected, presumably in a toss-up state that has leaned R in all recent statewide elections, to a best case D+0 by reducing D sampling by 11%, that support for Baldwin only drops by 2%. More wishful than credible.
"2011"
Bad choice for current polling data.
The Marquette pollster says if they adjusted the poll to match voter participation from last year Baldwin still leads 48%-43%
Then why the hell not do that? Or at least come closest to the latest party ID/turnout model?
Inexplicably shoddy work.
EMD, it isn't "inexplicable" at all. The only reason to move off of their previous methodology for this poll was to try to present a better "headline" number for the Democrats.
They didn't all of a sudden get stupid, so the simple explanation is they did it to help the Dems.
This is only going to continue for the next month and a half. These polling outfits don't care about their reputations any longer. They are all-in for saving Dear Leader.
What have they got to lose by being open about it now?
The recent poll updates pushed Baldwin's chances of victory to 61%, up from 40% yesterday, in Nate Silver's forecast.
Calypso
Take it up with Charles Franklin, I just relayed what he said. I do find it hilarious that some here think there is a conspiracy going on with Charles Franklin carrying water for the Dems though. Charles Franklin!
PPP is coming out with a poll today. They teased they had Obama way up as well.
I don't think he needs to go "negative". He just needs to talk about here support for socialism, big government and debt. If all people here is Tammy's bashing of Tommy they will shy away from him, but as folks here see how much of a leftist she is I doubt she'll make it this year. If we wanted Baldwin we could have stuck with Feingold. Plus there are the big O's negative coat tails too. $16 trillion in debt thanks Tammy!
Nate Silver is a hack who only was "accurate" in 2008 because the Obama campaign was feeding him their internals. His function today is to keep the troops from fleeing the field of battle. He'll still be saying the Rs have no chance of taking the Senate as McConnell is being voted majority leader in January.
He's a waste of time to read.
garage mahal said...
PPP is coming out with a poll today. They teased they had Obama way up as well.
Can't wait to see the skew.
In Massachusetts, both Warren and Brown took non-PAC pledges. If a PAC runs an ad, the opponet donates to a pre-chosen charity.
Both have high favorabilty ratings with voters.
Nice discussion of survey methodology.
The bigger issue is that Tommy Thompson's campaign (as far as I can see it from MSN) is mailing it in.
Don't let that smoke from the hubris get in your eyes.
"PPP is coming out with a poll today. They teased they had Obama way up as well."
You need to complain about them teasing you, garage, it can't be good for your blood pressure.
Can't wait to see the skew.
Funny how there was no skewing going on months ago when the polls were showing Republican leads in these races. Now all of a sudden, all of the pollsters are skewing everything. Everywhere!
Garage: Yes, I am sure that the entire country has decided that 8% unemployment, double the number of people on welfare, staggering new disability claims, 16 Trillion in debt and 1 Trillion annual deficits are the way to go. You would not have noticed the jobless claims today since you are a.) a trust funder and b.) buried in polls and insider scoop on the double secret grand jury that deliberates on and on. But the numbers, again, are shitty.
"Funny how there was no skewing going on months ago when the polls were showing Republican leads in these races. Now all of a sudden, all of the pollsters are skewing everything. Everywhere!"
So you're not saying D+11 in this poll and D+13 in that recent CBS poll are not skewed? How many polls have you seen skewed to the R side, garage?
Take it up with Charles Franklin...
Oh I know you're just parroting, gm, and mostly using the poll as a stick to poke the Althouse bees nest, but I was simply asking those here to THINK about what Marquette is selling. It doesn't pass the smell test.
Calypso
All I can tell you is I dug thru these Marq/PPP polls that were showing consistent Walker leads. And I just didn't believe them. "They are oversampling 262 area code!" They are oversampling the elderly!" They undersampled 608 area code!" "They expect a larger R turnout than the last election!"
In the end, none of it mattered.
Garage is a trust funder? That explains a lot.
hmm, Althouse giving advice to Tommy.
Cruel neutrality indeed lol ~ Keep hope alive!
"The idea that Thompson is down 9, or would lose this election by 9 is silly & ridiculous."
I agree. For that degree of turnaround, Tommy would have to have been found in a Motel 6 with a young boy. Since that didn't happen, I'd say this is either bad polling or biased polling.
@garage:All I can tell you is I dug thru these Marq/PPP polls that were showing consistent Walker leads.
If so, you said nothing about it at the time.
So the two Marquette polls use the same Gallup data that says adults are D+5. One poll oversamples R and corrects to D+0. One poll oversamples D and corrects to D+11.
Does it not bother you that they ostensibly used the same data to get such different estimates?
Are you actually interested in knowing the truth? Or are you happy to have any hook to hang your desired result on, regardless of how well-secured it might be?
While I address you specifically, my question is equally directed to everyone else here. Why don't we make a collective effort to understand how the poll is supposed to work, before we decide we can ignore it, or treat it as gospel?
ADDED: Tommy's campaign tried to go negative, via email to various conservative contacts, just before she did her big DNC speech, but Tommy got burned.
Why would he need to go negative to conservative contacts? I think Tommy has forgotten how to campaign.
52-45 Obama in Wisconsin.
34D 31R 35I
Document the atrocities!
too bad they didn't survey the senate race.
Funny how there was no skewing going on months ago when the polls were showing Republican leads in these races. Now all of a sudden, all of the pollsters are skewing everything. Everywhere!
We can at least check.
Oh, look weighted sample of 45 D to 44 R!
"Why don't we make a collective effort to understand how the poll is supposed to work,"
Spending (3) years at Nate Silver's FiveThirtyEight.com, before Nate moved to NYT's 538.com would have been good training for anyone fascinated w/polls, skewed or otherwise.
Nate exposed Research2000 for fraud!
Only foolish folk bet against Nate!
btw, Rasmussen Obama job approval 51/48 ~ General Obama 47/45.
Thus ends today's lesson re: polls.
34D 31R 35I
Document the atrocities!
too bad they didn't survey the senate
It's still off, but closer.
"34D 31R 35I"
Forget the tingle, garage has a boner!
I'm very scared now . . .
Document the atrocities!
OK.
BROWN OPENS 6-POINT LEAD OVER DEM IN MASS...
D+11, likely vs. registered, etc., etc....
Why do I even bother looking at all these poll numbers?
What Pogo said at 7:48 AM!
"BROWN OPENS 6-POINT LEAD OVER DEM IN MASS..."
Evidently they're getting smarter in Mass. and dumber in Wisc. Who'd a thunk it?
@garage:34D 31R 35I
Document the atrocities!
Pointless as usual to engage with you. You've answered my question.
@but I am a robot:Why do I even bother looking at all these poll numbers?
And so have you.
The point of questioning the poll methodology is not to dismiss it and say that all polling is worthless or whatever. That attitude gets you to where Kerry-Edwards voters were in 2004.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा