October 13, 2016

Post-Debate Bounceback?

Filed under: MSM Biz/Other Bias,Taxes & Government — Tom @ 9:26 am

Rasmussen, one of the few polling organizations most of the public doesn’t directly associate with the largely despised establishment press (meaning that it should have a better chance of getting a genuinely representative sample than those who are recognized as part of the media), has Donald Trump up by 2 points on Hillary Clinton in its latest poll turning around a 7-point deficit from three days ago.

Keeping in mind that, like the others, Rasmussen probably isn’t getting a survey completion rate any greater than 10 percent — so the chances that those surveyed don’t genuinely reflect the general public’s opinion — the turnaround is pretty impressive:

The full results from Sunday night’s debate are in, and Donald Trump has come from behind to take the lead over Hillary Clinton.

The latest Rasmussen Reports White House Watch national telephone and online survey shows Trump with 43% support among Likely U.S. Voters to Clinton’s 41%. Yesterday, Clinton still held a four-point 43% to 39% lead over Trump, but that was down from five points on Tuesday and her biggest lead ever of seven points on Monday.

Yes, it’s only one poll. In the other one which has consistently shown Trump ahead for weeks, the LA Times/USC poll shows Trump with the tiniest possible lead of 0.1 percent.



  1. Regarding the poll, that Trump fell in love with (for predictable reasons):


    Both the Rasmussen and LATimes polls have been outliers similar to the NBC/WSJ poll from the other day (just in the other direction).

    Comment by Anonymous — October 13, 2016 @ 12:25 pm

  2. I anxiously await the Times report on artificially weighted people in other polls. Let me know when you find one.

    The LAT/USC poll claims “was once again the most accurate statewide poll in California reflecting the outcome of yesterday’s heavily contested Democratic presidential primary contest.”

    Also, “In 2012, we correctly predicted the winning side of all ballot measures we tested.”


    Comment by Tom — October 13, 2016 @ 12:50 pm

  3. Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research, the company tasked to make the poll you are referencing, is the one making the claim here. The daily tacking poll is done by the University of Southern California itself and uses a vastly different methodology (as outlined in the NYT article above).

    AFAIK, nobody takes uncapped weighting to the same extreme as USC does. While interesting as a novel approach you should be able to see the problems generated by this method. Nonetheless the poll is useful, as it tracks the major developments of the campaign quite closely.

    Comment by Anonymous — October 13, 2016 @ 1:30 pm

  4. “AFAIK, nobody takes uncapped weighting to the same extreme as USC does.”

    You don’t know that, because most pollsters don’t enable people to dive as deeply as USC does; e.g., if you’re only polling 500 people (NBC/WSJ) AND doing weighting, I would expect some extreme weighting to be taking place.

    Comment by Tom — October 13, 2016 @ 2:38 pm

  5. And now a lighter note, a 4 minute Russian take on our elections. It’s funny as S$^$#, make sure you put your drink down and complete swallowing before watching:

    Top Russian Pol CRUSHES Hillary: ‘Has a Major Illness – She’s a Witch, a Vicious Snake’


    Comment by dscott — October 13, 2016 @ 3:26 pm

  6. I know that I have never seen weighting like this and I did see the methodologies of a lot of polls. Sorry.

    Comment by Anonymous — October 13, 2016 @ 5:17 pm

  7. Well, you haven’t seen a lot of others because they won’t let you, so BFD.

    Comment by Tom — October 13, 2016 @ 8:15 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.