Almost all polls except Gallup and Rasmussen feel the need to take the Raw Poll results and weight them based on democrat/Republican turn out from 2008. That is the reason Obama has what appears to be a commanding lead. This is 2012 and Raw Poll data shows the race as a statistical tie. Obama is leading in the Raw Poll data but within the margin of error. If pollsters are going to weight the turnout seems 2010 would be the election data to use.

News is their business. People in misery and countries distressed and conflicted makes MUCH better news than people going to work and no terrorism to report.

Follow the money

If these news organizations were trying to drum up business, they would be manipulating their data to show the race as closer than it really is. If the race is closer, more people will read and tune into their election coverage. Showing the race as a blowout is bad for business. But these are communists, so what do they care about dollars?

(09-27-2012 09:34 AM)Max Power Wrote:  If these news organizations were trying to drum up business, they would be manipulating their data to show the race as closer than it really is. If the race is closer, more people will read and tune into their election coverage. Showing the race as a blowout is bad for business. But these are communists, so what do they care about dollars?

I think MSNBC and CNN have proven they don't know what it takes to attract viewers.

Not necessarily dollars today, though 46/47 for the last 2 months is close...

They want O relected for better business, part of that is telling Conservatives there's no no reason to go to the polls.

Why would the New York Times, CBS, ABC, NBC, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal and all the other outlets releasing these polls do better business if Obama wins? Fox News I'll give you, because they can tap into the conservative outrage with more crazy sensationalism.

(09-27-2012 09:21 AM)OLD DIRTY Wrote:  News is their business. People in misery and countries distressed and conflicted makes MUCH better news than people going to work and no terrorism to report.

Follow the money

(09-27-2012 10:37 AM)Max Power Wrote:  Why would the New York Times, CBS, ABC, NBC, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal and all the other outlets releasing these polls do better business if Obama wins? Fox News I'll give you, because they can tap into the conservative outrage with more crazy sensationalism.

Without comprehension, reading is useless.

the simple answer.........

to get it right. We shall see if they were my friend.

I honestly don't know. I lived through 2000 and 2004. The polls told me that Gore and Kerry would win. I believed it. For a time I was convinced it was shenaingan voter fraud by the GOP. To be honest I still believe some fraud happened but I digress. I really like Intrade. I wish it were around in 2000 and 2004. That's your best straw poll. The futures market is an excellent barometer. These poll numbers and intrade seem to go hand in hand. That's why I believe something is right about them. Who knows.

(09-27-2012 11:05 AM)OLD DIRTY Wrote:  

(09-27-2012 09:21 AM)OLD DIRTY Wrote:  News is their business. People in misery and countries distressed and conflicted makes MUCH better news than people going to work and no terrorism to report.

Follow the money

(09-27-2012 10:37 AM)Max Power Wrote:  Why would the New York Times, CBS, ABC, NBC, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal and all the other outlets releasing these polls do better business if Obama wins? Fox News I'll give you, because they can tap into the conservative outrage with more crazy sensationalism.

Without comprehension, reading is useless.

But you've described a Romney administration. War with Iran, children starving and homeless because aid is slashed-- I get why that's good for them. But my question is, what reasons do they have for helping Obama?