I’ve asked Tardo several times if he supports this, but he tends to disappear apparently lacking the stones to answer. Then Tim, ghillie or boob shows back up. He can spin a pile of bullshit, but he can’t answer questions.

I went to pollster.com on Tano’s advice.

If you are into the calculus of probability and statistics, you might enjoy your time there. It is certainly much ado about nothing.

Playing around with the results of polling without attention to the methodology used in each poll is a fool’s errand.

However, if you are up to your chin in reading polls and tea leaves, I image it is the site to access.

Rasmussen is in the business of selling his polling services. He seems to be in business. If Sears only sold shoes for the right foot, they would soon be out of the shoe business except for the occasional peg-leg.

That’s not cool. Racism fail or attempted irony fail.

Any day now, Tardo. I’m sure I’m not the only one who would love to know.

The analysis that Andrew did was pretty simple and straightforward, and can be repeated by anyone, irrespective of their political ideology. Just go to pollster.com, use the “Tools” function in the graphs, and remove Rasmussen – and see the result. Then go back and remove everyone else except Rasmussen, and see the result. That is all Andrew did, and he posted the resulting graphs.

How can you argue that this demonstration is underminded by who Andrew is, or whatever problem you have with him.
(btw, I saw him, a few weeks ago, refer to you as an old friend. Some friend!)

” Because no one ever votes on whether or not they approve a president, it’s near impossible to determine the accuracy of presidential approval surveys”

Well that is obviously true – which is why I stated that either Rasmussen is right and everyone else is wrong, or v.v.

“electoral polls–and on that score, Rasmussen is remarkably accurate.’

And I referenced that study too – to point out that they were tied with Pew on the final results for 08, but several other firms were statistically indistinguishble from the two first place finishers. So yeah, they can do good work – that makes their performance on these approval polls even more problematical.

“apply that liberal point of view to the points I’ve made.”

Was kinda hard to track your point. On the one hand you seem to be defending Rasmussen as accurate – on the other hand you seem to be saying that they are just doing for the right what the other polling firms do for the left.

Tano’s silence on any thread where the president’s actions are indefensible, speaks volumes in and of themselves.

I don’t recall any pacifist movement advocating that the Death Eaters just need to be understood and the Ministry is certainly not trusted to do much about it.

In the last HP, the “wireless” acts as a bypass around the MSM where bloggers get the truth out.

In the end, the bad guy gets it.

(And I know way too much about this… hmmm)

Snort!

If you’re going to come on this site and claim, as you have in past threads that you’re here to engage us, why instead of addressing my points do you just spit out left-wing talking points?

You bring up the gap in various polls between the president’s approval and disapproval as other polls all seem to register lower levels of disapproval, but also have a larger number of failure to states. Only two polls show the approval outside a narrow range of 46-51 and given the standard margin of error, that puts Rasmussen right with all the others and CNN and AP as the outliers.

But, you might have seen that had you actually looked at the polling data instead of spitting out liberal talking points.

So, please, Tano, if you’re going to come to this blog and claim you’re here to engage us and offer a liberal point of view, apply that liberal point of view to the points I’ve made.

So you have to face the fact that Rasmussen is ridiculously biased versus ALL other polling outfits.

Oh my! Look how Tano proves your point with his spinning head, gnashing teeth and flying spittle!

No, Tardo, the fact that Rasmussen has different results does not make those results less accurate. I know you libs dont understand logic but it doesnt work that way. The truth is not an average of what all the pollsters say it is, the truth is the truth. And accuracy is determined by who comes closest to it.

We already know that Rasmussen is THE MOST ACCURATE because his poll results come closest to matching real election results — according to an independent university study.

And sorry, but PEW, like the rest of the biased polls you cling to, CHANGE THEIR METHODOLOGY when the election draws near. Pew polls “Adults” to get the results they want most of the year, then swithces to polling likely voters, like Rasmussen, when the election draws near, to get the most accurate election results.

Most of the polls you cite do the same.

Rasmussen does not change his methodology, he always polls the people who are going to vote, which is why his polls are consistently the most accurate, throughout the year.

Which also illustrates that it is the polls YOU cite that are the most biased. They change their methodology to get the results they want, ask biased questions, drastically oversample Democrats, and when even Democrats as a group are souring on Obama, they drastically oversample black people, as I saw one major liberal pollster do the other week. Why? Because that group supports Obama FAR more than any other, so oversampling them gives the most drastic swing to the left.

But continue frothing at the mouth and gnashing your teeth, it doesnt change the facts, but it is deeply amusing.