Seems like the voters haven’t yet adjusted to the fact that Mitt is almost out. Having said that, he’ll be relieved to have got several wins under his belt in non-home states. But it wasn’t enough…
What is this “fight to the convention” crap? Do you really think this is ‘76 all over again, with McCain as Ford and Romney as Reagan? Romney is NOT going to come to the rescue in 2012 if McCain loses in ‘08. Even, as unlikely as it is, Romney were to get the nomination in ‘12 in that scenario, he would get his clock cleaned in the Clinton/Obama re-election campaign.
Romney wouldn’t go anywhere in 2012. To win at the second attempt you need to be an elected official with a long record behind you (see McCain, John). If you’re out of office at the time of your first run, and don’t re-enter the fray before running, you don’t have a hope (see Edwards, John).
Nixon is an exception, but a two term VP is quite different to a one term Governor.
A few days ago, I posted about Rasmussen’s bias toward Romney (unintentional bias, I’m sure, but bias nonetheless). I think it’s appropriate to give a post-2/5 summary — which confirms the earlier findings.
The following are the fifteen states holding primaries thus far. The three numbers are the final RCP average, the Rasmussen final poll, and the actual result (all expressed as the McCain/Romney margin):
So there you have it — in 15 out of 15 cases, Rasmussen shows McCain doing more poorly than the RCP average, and in 14 of 15 cases, he showed McCain doing more poorly than the actual result (GA is the one exception).
The differences relative to the RCP range from the minuscule (0.3 in CA) to the quite large (10 or more in NY, NJ, AL, and MA). The average difference is 6.2.
The difference relative to the actual is even bigger. In GA, as noted, he slightly favored McCain, but he missed by more than 20 in MA, and more than ten in IL and SC. On average, he understated the McCain/Romney margin by just over seven points.
The RCP average overstated McCain’s margin in six cases, understated it in eight, and was dead on once. The average miss was less than one point. Not bad.
The margins of Rasmussen’s misses, though, are less troubling than their consistency. Again, I don’t think his bias is intentional, but I really hope he goes back to the drawing board and works on his model, before he destroys his previously fine record.
February 6th, 2008 at 8:15 pm
Go McCain!
February 6th, 2008 at 8:22 pm
Even Scotty has gotten the message now
February 6th, 2008 at 8:32 pm
What’s amazing is that Mitt still stays at 30%. Regardless of McCain’s virtual lock on the nomination, people still think Mitt is a hit.
February 6th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Go mitt! Make mccain fight to the convention floor!
February 6th, 2008 at 8:45 pm
Seems like the voters haven’t yet adjusted to the fact that Mitt is almost out. Having said that, he’ll be relieved to have got several wins under his belt in non-home states. But it wasn’t enough…
February 6th, 2008 at 8:47 pm
What is this “fight to the convention” crap? Do you really think this is ‘76 all over again, with McCain as Ford and Romney as Reagan? Romney is NOT going to come to the rescue in 2012 if McCain loses in ‘08. Even, as unlikely as it is, Romney were to get the nomination in ‘12 in that scenario, he would get his clock cleaned in the Clinton/Obama re-election campaign.
Romney is NOT Reagan and NEVER will be!
February 6th, 2008 at 8:50 pm
Romney wouldn’t go anywhere in 2012. To win at the second attempt you need to be an elected official with a long record behind you (see McCain, John). If you’re out of office at the time of your first run, and don’t re-enter the fray before running, you don’t have a hope (see Edwards, John).
Nixon is an exception, but a two term VP is quite different to a one term Governor.
February 7th, 2008 at 12:04 am
A few days ago, I posted about Rasmussen’s bias toward Romney (unintentional bias, I’m sure, but bias nonetheless). I think it’s appropriate to give a post-2/5 summary — which confirms the earlier findings.
The following are the fifteen states holding primaries thus far. The three numbers are the final RCP average, the Rasmussen final poll, and the actual result (all expressed as the McCain/Romney margin):
NH — 3.6 — 1 — 5.5
MI — -2.7 — -12 — -8.2
SC — 12.2 — 6 — 18.1
FL — 0.6 — 0 — 4.9
AL — 19.0 — 8 — 19.0
AZ — 16.3 — 9 — 13.0
CA — 0.3 — 0 — 8.0
CT — 22.0 — 16 — 19.1
GA — 3.3 — 2 — 1.4
IL — 15.7 — 8 — 18.7
MA — -22.0 — -32 — -10.3
MO — 5.5 — 3 — 3.7
NJ — 26.2 — 14 — 27.0
NY — 31.4 — 19 — 23.4
TN — 6.0 — 3 — 8.2
So there you have it — in 15 out of 15 cases, Rasmussen shows McCain doing more poorly than the RCP average, and in 14 of 15 cases, he showed McCain doing more poorly than the actual result (GA is the one exception).
The differences relative to the RCP range from the minuscule (0.3 in CA) to the quite large (10 or more in NY, NJ, AL, and MA). The average difference is 6.2.
The difference relative to the actual is even bigger. In GA, as noted, he slightly favored McCain, but he missed by more than 20 in MA, and more than ten in IL and SC. On average, he understated the McCain/Romney margin by just over seven points.
The RCP average overstated McCain’s margin in six cases, understated it in eight, and was dead on once. The average miss was less than one point. Not bad.
The margins of Rasmussen’s misses, though, are less troubling than their consistency. Again, I don’t think his bias is intentional, but I really hope he goes back to the drawing board and works on his model, before he destroys his previously fine record.