Superdude's Endorsement: Lifts Huckabee's Popularity Confirms Rasmussen/AP - Political Forum

superdude17* · 02-11-2008, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Friday, Rasmussen didn’t even poll Republicans on their primary choice; the national news media already announced McCain had won the nomination. Saturday Rasmussen did release their poll: McCain trounced Huckabee, 55-24. Sunday, as the nation learned Huckabee was still a candidate, Huckabee improved, but still trailed greatly, 49-29. Monday’s poll shows Huckabee pulling to within 12 points, 46-34.

This seemed in monumental conflict with Gallup, which showed McCain winning over those same three days, 56-25. But now another poll, AP/IPSOS shows the race just about as close as Rasmussen, 44-30. (The GOP establishment should be nervous that Ron Paul also polled at 9% nationally.)

But is it even closer than Rasmussen shows? All three polls were taken over the same time period. Only Rasmussen released results each day. With them having done so, we can extrapolate from the data roughly which percentage of respondents supported each candidate each day. Saturday McCain won 55-24. To have dropped to a 49-29 lead, McCain must only have led in Sunday’s poll, 43-34. And to have dropped further to a 46-34 lead, McCain seems to have actually lost Monday’s poll, 40-44.

Some caution is necessary: When splitting hairs like this, the effect of rounding and statistical error is amplified. Depending on rounding, McCain and Huckabee could have tied at 43 percent in Monday’s poll. And the margin of error for such a small sample is six percent… which means McCain could have gotten six percent more, and Huckabee could have gotten six percent less. Which means McCain could actually have led Huckabee by twelve percent in the most recent day’s polling data. (But, by the same logic, Huckabee could be winning by twenty percent.)

AP/IPSOS’ three day results are very similar to Rasmussen. Unfortunately, AP/IPSOS didn’t release day-to-day numbers. So we can’t tell if Rasmussen’s results are the result of an amazing tightening, or just bizarrely flukish data on Monday’s release cancelling out equally bizarre data the other way on Sunday. But it seems safe to say that AP/IPSOS confirms that Rasmussen’s overall three-day data is realistic.

So why is Gallup’s so skewed in comparison? Gallup polled “voters” not those who were were most likely to vote. It’s likely less politically active voters were less likely to realize that there was still a battle to be fought. Also, Gallup’s polls counted independents, even though independents won’t be allowed to vote in most remaining states.

It’s still worse for McCain coming up. Whereas California, New York, New Jersey, Florida, Delaware, and New Hampshire all have large numbers of moderate Republicans, and all voted for McCain, of the remaining states, that’s only Oregon, Maryland and Vermont tend towards moderates. (I’d also suppose McCain could do well in the military-heavy states of Virginia and Hawaii.) And what happens if McCain voters believe the media hype and don’t bother to vote, while Huckabee’s supporters swarm to the polls?

The notion that Huckabee can’t win simply isn’t at all true. Republican states are mostly winner-take-all, so Huckabee can still nearly every remaining delegate with 51% of the remaining votes. (And even that doesn’t account for the Paul voters.) Even winning scarcely more than half of the remaining delegates could force a brokered convention. Or, more likely, a negotiated victor with Romney supporters and state party leaders picking the winner. Whereas such a deal would haunt Clinton or Obama, who have already considerably tapped potential primary donors, Huckabee could campaign full-throttle on what are legally "primary" funds.

The GOP needs to tell McCain to step aside. Candidates are dropping out...and he is losing ground. Thats bad. McCain didn't win a single state last weekend, because Washington was a virtual tie, so the delegates split.

Of course I don't like either candidate, but Huckabee is the lesser of two evils.

Bradgriff · 02-11-2008, 06:18 PM

Forget about it Superdude. The far right is through. Nobody wants to represent them. Gulianni and Romney proved this. Anything that can be remotely traced back to the far right is out of style and the both of them knew they were in novotesville.

We had this phenomenon after Watergate. You're parents were young then my good man Supe! And between 1973-1980 it was a bad thing to be a Republican period, nevermind conservative or moderate. After the shame of George Bush's name has been washed away by the years your party may win elections again, if the fragmentations don't become permanent.

Unitl then, McCain has by far the best chance against Hillary, and not as good against Obama. Huckabee has zero chance against either.

The next eight years are going to be a Democratic Presidency, Cabinet, House, and Senate.

You would spend your time best by helping your fragment of the Republican party by donating money to the RNC for thier investigations of whomever wins and thier families and aquaintences for dirty crap to exploit and for Rush to complain about. You should also write letters to Rush/Ingraham/Savage/Coulter so they think some people still care. They will have plenty to complain about in the coming administration and will need you to be outraged and furious as part of the plan. You'll have plenty of work to do after your party looses absolutely, it'll be fun like Kenneth Starr and the Clinton days. If you really lucky Hillary might kiss someone.

superdude17* · 02-12-2008, 02:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bradgriff

Forget about it Superdude. The far right is through. Nobody wants to represent them. Gulianni and Romney proved this. Anything that can be remotely traced back to the far right is out of style and the both of them knew they were in novotesville.

We had this phenomenon after Watergate. You're parents were young then my good man Supe! And between 1973-1980 it was a bad thing to be a Republican period, nevermind conservative or moderate. After the shame of George Bush's name has been washed away by the years your party may win elections again, if the fragmentations don't become permanent.

Unitl then, McCain has by far the best chance against Hillary, and not as good against Obama. Huckabee has zero chance against either.

The next eight years are going to be a Democratic Presidency, Cabinet, House, and Senate.

You would spend your time best by helping your fragment of the Republican party by donating money to the RNC for thier investigations of whomever wins and thier families and aquaintences for dirty crap to exploit and for Rush to complain about. You should also write letters to Rush/Ingraham/Savage/Coulter so they think some people still care. They will have plenty to complain about in the coming administration and will need you to be outraged and furious as part of the plan. You'll have plenty of work to do after your party looses absolutely, it'll be fun like Kenneth Starr and the Clinton days. If you really lucky Hillary might kiss someone.

I hardly believe that. Put a liberal as the nominee, its going straight to the republicans, moderates and independents that so valiantly voted in George W. Bush.