PDA

View Full Version : New polls



pjohns
10-08-2014, 08:14 PM
There are some new Fox News polls out today that I find rather interesting. (All were conducted between October 4 and October 7--so they are very recent--and all are of likely voters.)

Those who reflexively dismiss all things Fox News should feel free to stop reading now.
Anyway, here are some of their findings:

In Alaska, the Republican challenger, Dan Sullivan. leads the Democratic incumbent, Mark Begich, by four percentage points, 44-40. This is just slightly less than the RealClearPolitics average of 4.5 points in favor of Sullivan.

In Colorado, the Republican challenger, Cory Gardner, has now widened his lead over the Democratic incumbent, Mark Udall, to six points, 43-37. This is significant because Colorado was only recently considered to be a fairly easy win for the Democrat.

In Arkansas, the Republican challenger, Tom Cotton, has widened his lead over the Democratic incumbent, Mark Pryor, to seven points, 46-39.

Perhaps most significantly, in Kansas--where Democrats have been pinning their hopes upon the Independent candidate, Greg Orman--the Republican incumbent, Pat Roberts, has now zoomed ahead, 44-39. This dovetails--somewhat, at least--with a recent CNN/Opinion Research poll of likely voters, which showed Roberts ahead by one percentage point. And it reflects a significant shift from the 10-point lead that an NBC/Marist poll (conducted between September 27 and October 1) had given to Greg Orman.

Interesting...

Peter1469
10-08-2014, 08:20 PM
I would expect a democrat route in November. But nobody knows how to seize defeat from the jaws of victory better than the GOP.... :shocked:

Mac-7
10-08-2014, 08:30 PM
I would expect a democrat route in November. But nobody knows how to seize defeat from the jaws of victory better than the GOP.... :shocked:

The pollsters have never learned how to estimate the dead voters who always show up for the democrats on Election Day.

Green Arrow
10-08-2014, 08:38 PM
I don't put much stock in polls from any source, because they are always vulnerable to the biases of the authors.

That said, I fully expect the GOP to pull out a Senate majority next month. Ultimately, it all comes down to Louisiana. A runoff in Louisiana could actually hand the election to Landrieu.

Peter1469
10-08-2014, 08:43 PM
I don't put much stock in polls from any source, because they are always vulnerable to the biases of the authors.

That said, I fully expect the GOP to pull out a Senate majority next month. Ultimately, it all comes down to Louisiana. A runoff in Louisiana could actually hand the election to Landrieu.

I expect a run off in Louisiana. It is too easy to get.

Green Arrow
10-08-2014, 08:49 PM
I expect a run off in Louisiana. It is too easy to get.

Right, me too. That may be what the majority hinges on, and it's incredibly unlikely that Cassidy could pull out a runoff win.

Peter1469
10-08-2014, 08:53 PM
Right, me too. That may be what the majority hinges on, and it's incredibly unlikely that Cassidy could pull out a runoff win.

The regime is going to hold off on executive action regarding illegal migration until after this election, precisely because they know it would kill Landrieu if they did it before the election.

Mac-7
10-08-2014, 09:08 PM
I don't put much stock in polls from any source, because they are always vulnerable to the biases of the authors.

That said, I fully expect the GOP to pull out a Senate majority next month. Ultimately, it all comes down to Louisiana. A runoff in Louisiana could actually hand the election to Landrieu.


You our don't put stock in polls but expect a runoff in la to decide the senate.

how did you arrive at that conclusion if not by taking stock in the polls?

a crystal ball?

tea leaves?

Green Arrow
10-08-2014, 09:54 PM
You our don't put stock in polls but expect a runoff in la to decide the senate.

how did you arrive at that conclusion if not by taking stock in the polls?

a crystal ball?

tea leaves?

It's a combination of research and paying attention. Polls are part of it, but a very minor part. I also know people on the ground over there.

Redrose
10-08-2014, 09:58 PM
[QUOTE=Peter1469;790331]I would expect a democrat route in November. But nobody knows how to seize defeat from the jaws of victory better than the GOP.... :shocked:[/QUOTE

I understand why you would say that, but in defense of the GOP everything they say and do...good and bad...is grossly distorted over overplayed by the left leaning media. They slam every letter to advance their own agenda.

Romney's every syllable was criticized, some justified some not, while obvious idiotic and damaging statements by Pelosi, Reid, Biden and Obama were glossed over or literally ignored.

We may never see an honest media ever again, so we must educate the voter to see past their biased reporting and make their voting choices based on the truth, not the partisan slanted media lies.

pjohns
10-08-2014, 10:11 PM
Ultimately, it all comes down to Louisiana. A runoff in Louisiana could actually hand the election to Landrieu.

I, too, expect a runoff in Louisiana in December. But Mary Landrieu's chances of winning it are less than excellent. In a two-way runoff between Landrieu and Cassidy, RealClearPolitics shows a lead for Cassidy of anywhere between three and 13 points, depending upon the poll; and an average lead of 5.6 points: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2014/senate/louisiana_senate_race.html

That said, it is almost two months until a (likely) December 6 runoff in Louisiana; so these numbers are certainly not set in concrete.

Green Arrow
10-08-2014, 10:15 PM
I, too, expect a runoff in Louisiana in December. But Mary Landrieu's chances of winning it are less than excellent. In a two-way runoff between Landrieu and Cassidy, RealClearPolitics shows a lead for Cassidy of anywhere between three and 13 points, depending upon the poll; and an average lead of 5.6 points: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2014/senate/louisiana_senate_race.html

That said, it is almost two months until a (likely) December 6 runoff in Louisiana; so these numbers are certainly not set in concrete.

The problem that the poll is probably not accounting for is that it's extremely hard to drive turnout for a runoff. In a situation like that, the incumbent has the advantage.

pjohns
10-09-2014, 01:11 AM
The problem that the poll is probably not accounting for is that it's extremely hard to drive turnout for a runoff. In a situation like that, the incumbent has the advantage.

I agree with the first half of the equation, above.

However, high turnout typically helps the Democratic candidate. I would expect a diminished turnout, therefore, to aid the Republican challenger.

Mac-7
10-09-2014, 03:10 AM
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2014/senate/louisiana_senate_race.html

That said, it is almost two months until a (likely) December 6 runoff in Louisiana; so these numbers are certainly not set in concrete.

In two months Obama could be so toxic that even dems who are well liked in their state are afraid to touch him.

And Landrieu is not very popular.

For instance there is a 2nd person in Dallas who is being treated for Ebola symptoms.

This one is an American, a Dallas County sheriff's deputy who was in the apartment that the illegal aliens from Africa stayed in before Duncan went in the hospital.

So much for the assurances of Obama and his flunkies that casual contact cannot spread the disease in America.

WalterSobchak
10-09-2014, 09:20 PM
In two months Obama could be so toxic that even dems who are well liked in their state are afraid to touch him.

And Landrieu is not very popular.

For instance there is a 2nd person in Dallas who is being treated for Ebola symptoms.

This one is an American, a Dallas County sheriff's deputy who was in the apartment that the illegal aliens from Africa stayed in before Duncan went in the hospital.

So much for the assurances of Obama and his flunkies that casual contact cannot spread the disease in America.


http://www.wfaa.com/story/news/health/2014/10/09/ebola-test-results-negative-dallas-county-deputy/16984093/


The Texas Department of State Health Services says negative results were returned from a lab in Austin Thursday, indicating that a Dallas County deputy who had fallen ill does not have the Ebola virus.


Oops. Unfortunately for you, the CDC, WHO and all the experts that have been saying that Ebola is NOT Airborne were correct.

nic34
10-09-2014, 09:32 PM
The pollsters have never learned how to estimate the dead voters who always show up for the democrats on Election Day.

Are those dead voters we always see in those long lines in minority districts?

Bob
10-09-2014, 09:42 PM
I don't put much stock in polls from any source, because they are always vulnerable to the biases of the authors.

That said, I fully expect the GOP to pull out a Senate majority next month. Ultimately, it all comes down to Louisiana. A runoff in Louisiana could actually hand the election to Landrieu.

What poll did you get that from?

Bob
10-09-2014, 09:43 PM
Are those dead voters we always see in those long lines in minority districts?

Democrats learned how to use the names of the dead when they return to vote over and over.

nic34
10-09-2014, 09:46 PM
Democrats learned how to use the names of the dead when they return to vote over and over.

Too many dead voters cause long voting lines?

Cigar
10-09-2014, 09:53 PM
Too many dead voters cause long voting lines?

My Dog is well Behaved in Line :grin:

Cigar
10-09-2014, 09:54 PM
Too many dead voters cause long voting lines?



The Greatest Insult to The Republican Party came when there were still long lines waiting to Vote even after Obama was declared the Winner. :laugh:

nic34
10-09-2014, 10:05 PM
Oh, so those voter suppression laws didn't work after all.

del
10-09-2014, 10:12 PM
Too many dead voters cause long voting lines?

long and smelly

i asked someone why we never see any kind of story about candidates who have been screwed following up on the epidemic of voter fraud- bringing suits, indictments, trials, etc

i was told it was the mainstream media covering up for their elite masters.

i should have known

gamewell45
10-09-2014, 10:13 PM
In my opinion, the best poll is the one that is held on election day! :)

PolWatch
10-09-2014, 10:16 PM
I'm still waiting for someone to claim the $$$ offered in Alabama & Mississippi for voter fraud cases. I'm sure there will be a lot of publicity when someone claims the $$$.

Kurmugeon
10-09-2014, 10:33 PM
Does the poll and your analysis factor in the potential of massive voter fraud?

Green Arrow
10-09-2014, 11:20 PM
What poll did you get that from?

I didn't get it from a poll. I got it from my own research of the races.

Green Arrow
10-09-2014, 11:20 PM
Does the poll and your analysis factor in the potential of massive voter fraud?

No, mostly because it doesn't exist.

PolWatch
10-09-2014, 11:24 PM
Its going to be interesting to see how elderly voters with invalid id's are treated at the polls. The GOP may have just disenfranchised their most loyal voters.

pjohns
10-10-2014, 01:41 AM
Its going to be interesting to see how elderly voters with invalid id's are treated at the polls.

Why would their IDs be considered "invalid"?

nic34
10-10-2014, 08:57 AM
The midwife at the 1949 home birth in rural South Carolina delivered a healthy baby girl but didn't file a birth certificate. Donna Jean Suggs grew up, got a Social Security card and found work as a home health aide. Try as she might, though, she couldn't get a birth certificate. That meant she couldn't get a driver's license or register to vote.

Nearly one in five citizens over 65 — about 8 million — lacks a current, government-issued photo ID, a 2006 Brennan Center study found. Most people prove their eligibility to vote with a driver's license, but people over 65 often give up their license and don't replace it with the state-issued ID that some states offer non-driving residents. People over 65 also are more likely to lack birth certificates because they were born before recording births was standard procedure.


http://www.aarp.org/politics-society/government-elections/info-01-2012/voter-id-laws-impact-older-americans.html

Mac-7
10-10-2014, 09:00 AM
The midwife at the 1949 home birth in rural South Carolina delivered a healthy baby girl but didn't file a birth certificate. Donna Jean Suggs grew up, got a Social Security card and found work as a home health aide. Try as she might, though, she couldn't get a birth certificate. That meant she couldn't get a driver's license or register to vote.

Nearly one in five citizens over 65 — about 8 million — lacks a current, government-issued photo ID, a 2006 Brennan Center study found. Most people prove their eligibility to vote with a driver's license, but people over 65 often give up their license and don't replace it with the state-issued ID that some states offer non-driving residents. People over 65 also are more likely to lack birth certificates because they were born before recording births was standard procedure.


http://www.aarp.org/politics-society/government-elections/info-01-2012/voter-id-laws-impact-older-americans.html

Any person can get a state issue photo id.

just because many older Obama voters choose not to does not mean they can't.

nic34
10-10-2014, 09:04 AM
Any person can get a state issue photo id.

just because many older Obama voters choose not to does not mean they can't.

Did you bother to read the article?

Mac-7
10-10-2014, 09:06 AM
Did you bother to read the article?

Older Obama voters can get a photo id without a birth certificate.

Peter1469
10-10-2014, 09:18 AM
If someone can't get an ID, they likely aren't smart enough to vote. I call bull shit on the article.

del
10-10-2014, 09:25 AM
If someone can't get an ID, they likely aren't smart enough to vote. I call bull shit on the article.

well, that settles it then, because she should have been smart enough at birth to make sure the midwife filed a birth certificate.

lol

Peter1469
10-10-2014, 09:47 AM
well, that settles it then, because she should have been smart enough at birth to make sure the midwife filed a birth certificate.

lol

Or find another way to get a valid ID. It isn't rocket science.

Private Pickle
10-10-2014, 09:55 AM
The midwife at the 1949 home birth in rural South Carolina delivered a healthy baby girl but didn't file a birth certificate. Donna Jean Suggs grew up, got a Social Security card and found work as a home health aide. Try as she might, though, she couldn't get a birth certificate. That meant she couldn't get a driver's license or register to vote.

Nearly one in five citizens over 65 — about 8 million — lacks a current, government-issued photo ID, a 2006 Brennan Center study found. Most people prove their eligibility to vote with a driver's license, but people over 65 often give up their license and don't replace it with the state-issued ID that some states offer non-driving residents. People over 65 also are more likely to lack birth certificates because they were born before recording births was standard procedure.


http://www.aarp.org/politics-society/government-elections/info-01-2012/voter-id-laws-impact-older-americans.html

What is it you're arguing for here? Are you arguing that people shouldn't require an ID or are you suggesting that we need to do a better job with our record keeping?

Mac-7
10-10-2014, 10:01 AM
A birth certificate is not required to get a photo id.

PolWatch
10-10-2014, 10:09 AM
invalid drivers license...I know a lot of elderly folks who have allowed their license to expire (they don't drive anymore).

Mac-7
10-10-2014, 10:13 AM
invalid drivers license...I know a lot of elderly folks who have allowed their license to expire (they don't drive anymore).

But they still manage to crawl down to the polling place on Election Day to vote for democrats ?

Peter1469
10-10-2014, 10:16 AM
In Virginia you can get a driver's license (photo ID) by doing (http://www.dmv.org/va-virginia/apply-license.php):



Prove your identity (two forms of proof if you are 19 or older). (http://dmvnow.com/webdoc/pdf/dmv141.pdf)
Show legal presence in the United States.
Show Virginia residency.
Show your Social Security card.
Pass a vision test.
Complete an application (only available at the DMV).
Pay a fee of $3 for a learner's permit, plus the driver’s license fee of $4 per year (up to 8 years).

nic34
10-10-2014, 02:17 PM
In Virginia you can get a driver's license (photo ID) by doing (http://www.dmv.org/va-virginia/apply-license.php):


Prove your identity (two forms of proof if you are 19 or older). (http://dmvnow.com/webdoc/pdf/dmv141.pdf)
Show legal presence in the United States.
Show Virginia residency.
Show your Social Security card.
Pass a vision test.
Complete an application (only available at the DMV).
Pay a fee of $3 for a learner's permit, plus the driver’s license fee of $4 per year (up to 8 years).


That's a poll tax essentially.

nic34
10-10-2014, 02:24 PM
What is it you're arguing for here? Are you arguing that people shouldn't require an ID or are you suggesting that we need to do a better job with our record keeping?

Photo ID requirements are not necessary to maintain election integrity


Voter identification requirements are bad policy designed to solve problems that virtually don't exist while creating a host of new problems.


Supreme Court stays Wisconsin voter-ID law


http://hotair.com/archives/2014/10/10/supreme-court-stays-wisconsin-voter-id-law/


Face it, these laws are aimed solely at suppressing democratic votes. That's what I'm arguing.

Private Pickle
10-10-2014, 02:48 PM
What is wrong with producing an ID to vote?

PolWatch
10-10-2014, 10:50 PM
But they still manage to crawl down to the polling place on Election Day to vote for democrats ?

nope, most of 'em are loyal gop voters...

Bob
10-10-2014, 11:00 PM
Photo ID requirements are not necessary to maintain election integrity


Voter identification requirements are bad policy designed to solve problems that virtually don't exist while creating a host of new problems.


Supreme Court stays Wisconsin voter-ID law


http://hotair.com/archives/2014/10/10/supreme-court-stays-wisconsin-voter-id-law/


Face it, these laws are aimed solely at suppressing democratic votes. That's what I'm arguing.

You need photo ID to hunt, drive, fish and see the secured sights in DC, but nobody needs to prove who there are despite names showing up on voter rolls, huh?

Your case is Democrats are too dumb to get a photo ID yet Republicans are just that smart.

Damnest argument of all times.

Redrose
10-10-2014, 11:07 PM
What is wrong with producing an ID to vote?



Absolutely nothing.

pjohns
10-11-2014, 01:08 AM
Most people prove their eligibility to vote with a driver's license, but people over 65 often give up their license and don't replace it with the state-issued ID that some states offer non-driving residents. People over 65 also are more likely to lack birth certificates because they were born before recording births was standard procedure.

If Democrats' concern is truly that Americans "over 65" would be disproportionately affected by voter-ID laws, those Democrats should probably celebrate, since seniors tend to vote in large numbers for the GOP--just as young people, conversely, are a Democratic client group...

pjohns
10-11-2014, 01:13 AM
invalid drivers license...I know a lot of elderly folks who have allowed their license to expire (they don't drive anymore).

They might still want to keep that expired driver's license, for purposes of identification. (For several years now, I have kept an expired driver's license in my wallet--together with an up-to-date one--for identification purposes, since only the former contains a picture of me on it.)

Mac-7
10-11-2014, 06:47 AM
nope, most of 'em are loyal gop voters...

Sez you.

but other libs argue repubs are for voter id because it suppresses the clueless Obama voters in the hood.