| nuckles87 said: Not really. Mitt does this a lot. He took very different positions earlier in the year and is now reversing himself on all of them because that is now more politically expedient. Rasmussen was biased an innacurate in 2010: http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/04/rasmussen-polls-were-biased-and-inaccurate-quinnipiac-surveyusa-performed-strongly/ Rasmussen was not the most accurate. They were mediocre: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2010/05/blast-from-rasmussen-past.html They were also very innacurate in 2000, again biased towards Republicans. |
Again... state polls... not remotely the same thing.
National polls they were number 1 for the last two presidential elections in a row.
Until proven wrong it's silly to claim otherwise when they were number 1 the last two elections in a row.
The 2000 mention is just silly, since it was Rasmussen's first year doing a national poll, and they were number 1, the next two presidential polls.
Anyone with any credibility who knows how polling works would consider that a stupid thing to bring up... what them being the best... the last two times.
They clearly adjusted their polling procedures. As tends to be what people do. Like how VGchartz is more accurate now then it was when it started.
And right now... nationally it doesn't get more accurate then Rasmussen. There is no argueing it with a straight face without a good level of cognitive dissonance, because all they need to say is... "Scoreboard."
