Election 2009 actual results: Bob McDonnell 58.6 percent for a 17.4 percent margin of victory. Virtucon rankings are based upon total amount the two numbers deviate from the actual numbers.
1. Survey USA (10/30-11/1) – 58% / 18% (deviation 1.2%)
2. VCU (10/21-25) – 54% / 18% (deviation 5.2%)
3. (TIE) PPP (10/31-11/1) – 56% / 14% (deviation 6%)
3. (TIE) Roanoke College (10/21-27) – 53% / 17% (deviation 6%)
5. Suffolk Univ. (10/26-28) – 54% / 14% (deviation 8%)
6. Rasmussen (10/27) – 54% / 13% (deviation 9%)
7. Washington Post (10/22-25) – 55% / 11% (deviation 10%)
8. Times Dispatch / Mason Dixon (10/28-29) – 53% / 12% (deviation 11%)
9. Daily Kos / Research 2000 (10/26-28) – 54% / 10% (deviation 12%)
10. Virginia Pilot / CNU (10/8-13) – 45% / 14% (deviation 17%)
11. Clarus (10/18-19) – 49% / 8% (deviation 19%)
Next time you see a poll, judge it by its past performance. Here is how they rank in terms of accuracy based upon the 2008 presidential election:
MOST ACCURATE:
1T. Rasmussen (11/1-3)**
1T. Pew (10/29-11/1)**
3. YouGov/Polimetrix (10/18-11/1)
4. Harris Interactive (10/20-27)
5. GWU (Lake/Tarrance) (11/2-3)*
6T. Diageo/Hotline (10/31-11/2)*
6T. ARG (10/25-27)*
8T. CNN (10/30-11/1)
8T. Ipsos/McClatchy (10/30-11/1)
POLL REVEALED TO BE FRAUDULENT AND REPUDIATED BY DAILYKOS:
10. DailyKos.com (D)/Research 2000 (11/1-3)
----------------
(If you're below DailyKos, you don't deserve to be taken seriously for another four years. Better luck in 2012.)
POLLS THAT WERE WORSE THAN A FRAUDULENT POLL:
11. AP/Yahoo/KN (10/17-27)
12. Democracy Corps (D) (10/30-11/2)
13. FOX (11/1-2)
14. Economist/YouGov (10/25-27)
15. IBD/TIPP (11/1-3)
16. NBC/WSJ (11/1-2)
17. ABC/Post (10/30-11/2)
18. Marist College (11/3)
19. CBS (10/31-11/2)
20. Gallup (10/31-11/2)
21. Reuters/ C-SPAN/ Zogby (10/31-11/3)
22. CBS/Times (10/25-29)
23. Newsweak (10/22-23)
Dems must be thinking “what strange times we live in”….
I’m going to assume that this (among other things) is why there is a sudden movement among lefty bloggers to have the Senate change the number of votes needed for cloture reduced from 60 to 55.
Doesn’t Scott Brown support requiring people by law to obtain health insurance? That’s what the 2006 Massachutts health care law (signed in by Mitt Romney) requires and he says he supports that. All you have to do is check Scott Brown’s own website under Issues
Scott Brown seems like another politician who uses partisanship to get elected. I do not see him as the type to stand on principle if elected.
This kind of reminds me how conservatives were so excited about getting Arnold Schwarzenegger elected Governor in California. Well they aren’t too excited about him now are they?
Conservatives seem to be doomed to repeat history over and over again.
Alex…no matter what your politics are…you seem worried.
I, personally, want to see Obama’s comments after a Scott win in Uncle Teddy’s own personal State.
It makes me wonder if a couple of Massachusetts Congressional seats could be put into play this fall.
The GOP can win seats in MA if they have a good candidate. They had 4 GOP governors in a row — Weld, Cellucci, Swift and Romney (although Swift was never elected in her own right.) In 1992, MA elected TWO Republicans to Congress — Peter Blute and Peter Torkildsen and each served two terms. I’ve been out of the MA loop for quite some time now, but Brown may be the tip of the iceberg…
If only.!!!
Still, to have aRepublican THIS CLOSE in Mass….is unheard of, unless there’s a serious problem in the Dem camp.
So, I suppose this signals that THERE IS MOST DEFINITELY a serious problem in the Dem camp!!!
A race this close in MA has to striking fear into the hearts of many democrats on Capital Hill. That’s what they get for ignoring the will of the people.
I object to calling out the Bengals when most of their fans are also Republicans!