Putting the Polls in Perspective

With Hickenlooper's

With Hickenlooper's name in the mix, the poll is completely invalid.

Poor Denver Post - they just couldn't wait for Hick to decide, they paid for a poll that uses invalid data.

'Garbage in, garbage out'.  Any first year business student could see the error in this.  And yet they published it anyway.

Way to go, Denver Post.

---

by: BadMoonRising @ Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 06:00:00 AM UTC

Funniest thing I have read in a long time...

Interesting the Beauprez Camp has to come up with a tag line for Ritter in order to keep people away from Beauprez's own tag line of "Both Ways Bob". I just read this on BB's website. Makes you laugh, especially the "flip flop."

See link for more...

http://www.beauprezf...

---

by: Handy Dandy @ Mon Aug 14, 2006 at 20:31:52 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

See my post in the o

See my post in the other thread.  The Rocky and Post polls are consistent with the private polls I have seen particularly with regard to the inability of Both ways Bob to get any traction beyond the base Republican registration.

His negatives in the private polls I have seen are very high.

Coloradans are clearly not in the mood for the Republican candidates currently running for Governor.

---

by: Roger D @ Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 06:00:00 AM UTC

Roger, I've seen you

Roger, I've seen your other post - but your logic is as faulty as the polls that have "consistently" used Hickenlooper in the mix.

For all the good it does to have Hick's name in the polling data, why don't we add Wellington Webb's name, or hey - maybe we could add Harry Truman's name into the poll - just to see how he'd fare against BB or MH?

The bottom line is that the results are invalid because of bad data used (Hickenlooper) The results should be labeled "For entertainment purposes only".

---

by: BadMoonRising @ Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 06:00:00 AM UTC

Favorable vs. Unfavo

Favorable vs. Unfavorable

Bob Beauprez +1 favorable compared to Bill Ritter

Bob Beauprez -7 unfavorable compared to Bill Ritter

............

???
Well, which is it?  + 1 or -7?

Typo, maybe?

---

by: BadMoonRising @ Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 06:00:00 AM UTC

Scratch that... I ne

Scratch that... I need my eyes checked.

+1 favorable
-7 UNfavorable.

Oy. Please tell me today is Friday....

---

by: BadMoonRising @ Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 06:00:00 AM UTC

BMR: You must have

BMR:

You must have never worked at a polling firm or taking a class in statistics.  By adding Hicks name to the poll does not make it invalid.  The poll was conducted as a head to head race for two candidates at a time, so Hick has no impact on the numbers for anyone else. There is no casual relationship between having Hicks name in one question and the result of a Ritter vs. Beauprez race.  If the question was a list of several candidates and people would be asked to choose one, then your point is valid, but given how the Denver Post did the poll, there was no garbage in, and thus no garbage out.

---

by: Polling guy @ Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 06:00:00 AM UTC

Come on BMR - you ju

Come on BMR - you just sound like a bitter Republican more than a smart first year business student.  The fact of that matter is - if the election were held today (yes, I know, it's not) Ritter would be governor.  Plain and simple.

---

by: YoungDeminCD6 @ Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 06:00:00 AM UTC

PollingGuy: I'd ag

PollingGuy:

I'd agree with you if they were different polls, then you could conceivably toss out the polls with Hickenlooper in them, with no significant damage to the other results. 

But when you add in bad variables, it easily skews the data - and I'm not saying the results might NOT be accurate, I am saying they can be called into question.  By the way - there's no explanation in the article about how the poll was conducted, and that makes the Hickenlooper variable a valid question to raise.

Frankly, I don't give a rip about the results of a poll taken in February for an election in November.  For me, the only polls that matter are the ones taken on election day, period.

But for a major newspaper to publish this stuff (hey, let's all feel bad for the Post because they paid for a poll to be taken and then "Ooops, Hick's not running.")  The Post should have waited for Hick to decide, THEN taken the poll and then it would have more significance.

Again, I'm not saying the results might not be accurate, but that accuracy is questionable, and anybody and their brother can hypothesize on one outcome or another, but it's all hypothesis at that point, and irrelevant. 

Pollingguy, what would you say if a poll had entered Alice Madden's name as well as Hick's?  or perhaps Madden's name (prior to her announcement) vs. Ritter?  Don't you think that would influence how people might respond?  My guess is that Ritter might not have done as well - and that's the problem with this poll.  Take them AFTER the primaries and you can have a true head-to-head data gathering.  But this poll is nonsense because it uses bad data.

---

by: BadMoonRising @ Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 06:00:00 AM UTC

The fact of that mat

The fact of that matter is - if the election were held today (yes, I know, it's not) Ritter would be governor. Plain and simple.
(YoungDemCD6)
.............

So in spite of the facts.... "yes, I know it's not"...

...it's meaningless.  The election's nearly nine months away, there are primaries to be held, debates, yada yada yada... 

And I haven't even mentioned that the poll was taken of registered voters.  Well, in the last off-year election, Colorado's voter turnout was an anemic 49%.  The second knock on this poll is that using registered voters is questionable.

You don't know me from Adam, YoungDem, so schlep your 'bitter Republican' bit elsewhere.  As I've said, I coudln't care less about polls taken so far away - I'd venture a guess and say the governor's race is well of the radar screens of a vast majority of LIKELY VOTERS at this stage, much less the registered voters.

---

by: BadMoonRising @ Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 06:00:00 AM UTC

Fair play, Voyageur,

Fair play, Voyageur, and thanks for pointing out the bigger picture.

I still think it's far from time to go into panic mode on this, for any candidate, quite frankly.

I agree heartily on the points re: Holtzman - that's not going over well, and it isn't getting any better, though I doubt he'll drop out prior to the primary.

Can anyone else recall the (in)famous John Zogby poll that had Kerry winning as POTUS?  (By 4 or 5 points, IIRC). It makes me wonder where he was mining his polls numbers.

My take on this early (and flawed) poll is this:  If a good poll taken of LIKELY voters shows Ritter leading strongly in a true head-to-head with Beauprez (AFTER the primary) then it'll be time to worry.  But I still maintain that there are too many questions with this poll.
a) Register voters;
b) Hickenlooper in the mix (yes, Virginia, bad data points CAN and DO influence the results)
c) It's early;
d) Still an unknown factor is Madden;

Until those points are resolved, it's simply "Onward to the primaries."

---

by: BadMoonRising @ Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 06:00:00 AM UTC

Agree with you on al

Agree with you on all points, BMR.  I don't expect Holtzman to drop out either, I just hope he will lay off the negative attacks on BB.  It was a Democrat, Gene Nichol, who stuck Tom Strickland with "Millionaire Lawyer Lobbyist" to the double good fortune of Dick Wadhams and Wayne Allard.  All you can draw from these way early polls is that, as of now, BB runs better than Holtzman  and BB has much better name ID than Holtzman.  Holtzman has enough money to start building a strong name ID so, we'll just see.  The real value to early polls isn't to predict winners, its to see where strength and weakness area: i.e., Jones is perceived as "tough on crime" so maybe Smith should stress he supports the death penalty, etc.  But as to that famous formula, "if the election were held today" -- Well, it ain't held today.  And if by some chance it were, the runup to it would have radically altered the landscape shown in these early snapshots.

---

by: Voyageur @ Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 06:00:00 AM UTC

"The real value to e

"The real value to early polls isn't to predict winners, its to see where strength and weakness area: i.e., Jones is perceived as "tough on crime" so maybe Smith should stress he supports the death penalty, etc."

...............

Bingo.  You said it much better than I could have.

---

by: BadMoonRising @ Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 06:00:00 AM UTC

Who's leading at the

Who's leading at the moment isn't terribly interesting because the elections are so far off. What's interesting is how anemic Beauprez?s numbers are given his overwhelming advantage in name recognition - an astronomical 80% last October. Compared to Marc Holtzman, who is just beginning to introduce himself to voters (44% know his name), Beauprez's sky-high negatives leave little room for improvement. While not everyone will agree with Marc's stand against the Amendment C tax increase, no one will doubt his sincerity and commitment to principle. Unfortunately, Beauprez's stance seemed more pretense than conviction, and the voters know it. Hickenlooper?s supporters in the business community will now back Marc.

Marc will be Colorado's next governor. Get used to it.

---

by: Hey Joe its time to go @ Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 06:00:00 AM UTC

"While not everyone

"While not everyone will agree with Marc's stand against the Amendment C tax increase, no one will doubt his sincerity and commitment to principle."
-0-
oh, boy, the sound of the shill has been heard in the land.  I sure as hell doubt Holtzman's sincerity and commitment to principle -- and so does everybody I know.  He's leggitt's marionette, broke his word to Owens, double crossed everyone in sight and shrillly called voters "PIGS" in a desperate and cynical attempt to court favor with right-wing voters.  The business community despises Holtzman as the cheap demagogue they know him to be.  Hickenlooper supporters will either move to Beauprez or to Ritter.  Mobody will move to Holtzman.  Only a gross shill could look at his 20 point deficit and trumpet it as a triumph for Snarky Marcy.

---

by: Voyageur @ Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 06:00:00 AM UTC

BadGasRising Try so

BadGasRising

Try some Maalox.

---

by: BadMoonRising @ Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 06:00:00 AM UTC

Couldn't disagree wi

Couldn't disagree with you more. Those negatives are pretty darned high; even I was surprised with them. I heard Beauprez trump out these numbers at a breakfast this morning, and I was impressed, but then read the actual article and looked at the movement (forward) of those bad numbers since November (I think) and it became clear -- BB is actually increasing his negatives rather than decreasing, while increasing his name ID.

Also, as an aside, I have to say -- Mason Dixon is the weakest of the weak when it comes to credibility.

---

by: CD7 @ Fri Feb 10, 2006 at 06:00:00 AM UTC

BMR, It's more li

BMR,

It's more like 5 1/2 months until the election. It just feels like nine after hearing from the shills on a daily basis.

Nice to see you back, Voyageur.

"I wouldn't characterize caloric intake as "professional development." c rork

---

by: Middle of the Road @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

I hope little boy Ma

I hope little boy Marc stays in until the end.  Both Ways BeauBeau deserves to be savaged.

---

by: JoshPenryIsGOD @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

I love milking Bessi

I love milking Bessie and I feel like it has given me great skills to be your governor.

---

by: BothWaysBob @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

My hands on here war

My hands on here warm teats will be like my hands on the government, light, loving, delicate, with just the right amount of tug...

---

by: BothWaysBob @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

I wasn't really a fi

I wasn't really a fighter pilot, but I look good in that suit, huh?  You should see me in my rubber boots wading through shit.  Perfect skills for the legislative session.

---

by: BothWaysBob @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

I can't wait to be g

I can't wait to be governor!  I look forward to selling off the rest of our fine state to my corporate sponsors!  Texas-north, we'll call it!

---

by: BothWaysBob @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

Get out of here, Bob

Get out of here, Bob.  We're going to call it "Pennsylvania West."

---

by: MixedMessageMarc @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

"Little Marky" needs

"Little Marky" needs to fling more crap at "Both Ways" so Bill Ritter can get a bump in the polls........

---

by: One Queer Dude @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

Can BothWaysBob do i

Can BothWaysBob do it?

---

by: 121votes @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

Yep, the world looks

Yep, the world looks pretty good for Holtzman...as long as you don't read the polling data or know anything about statistics.

Once again, the only thing that can be gleaned from polls measuring a general election taken midst a primary are general election matchups, name recognition, and voter perceptions of the candidates (and, as in any poll, party preference). The importance in polls such as these are who are the leaders from each party.

However, keep it up Holtzmanites--trying to bail the water off the ship while it sinks is probably a really good workout. :-)

---

by: wow... @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

Voice of Reason...wo

Voice of Reason...would you happen to be related to Beauprez? Just wondering...I don't know. Just saw something one time that pointed to that.

Maybe I'm wrong.

---

by: BB Alert @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

Nope...but I am curi

Nope...but I am curious what you saw that pointed to that...

---

by: wow... @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

The only sense one c

The only sense one can make of these polls is that there is basically a three way dead heat in this race.  Each candidate is within the nargin of error of +/- 4.5% points.  Like a football game, it would appear that on any given day, in any particular situation, any of them could win.

The real changes will occur after the intra-party stuff. We will have to see how they fare outside of their own parties and into the unaffiliated voter mix.  The validity issue I have with these polls is how did they randomly utilize Hicks name?  For example, did they rotate the names in sequenc?  How were the registered voters represented, (i.e. mainly Denver, Boulder, etc.)? 

Did they use registered voters who may have just registered last week, or voters who have voted regularly in two or three consecutive elections?  I dare say that if you went to the general public at large, registered voters, you would find much lower name id responses?  Maybe there should be someone in the mix that people know, such as Ben Vareen, Joe Garigiola, or some version of a fictitious name, then you will get a better grasp of real name i.d.

Problem that Bb faces is his rising negatives.  Is it because he is doing things that drive those negatives up, or is it because the pool of registered Republicans who are party activists are more representative?  Whatever the reason, if you add BB's negatives, factor in the margin of error, and you have BB behind.  Something is wrong with this campaign strategy.  It's not working.

It could be the True Conservatives are forming their own backlash in response to the establishment.  Add to that, the dislike for career politicians in general (i.e. Congress, etc.) among the general electorate, the environment is ripe for some interesting results.

---

by: MrHandy2001 @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

mrhandy, Once aga

mrhandy,

Once again, saying a lie over and over again doesn't make it true. Your use of propoganda is somewhat scary when compared with the tactics of other propoganda masters.

Beauprez campaign not working, eh? I think you must be confusing Beauprez's and Holtzman's numbers. From Rasmussen:

" Beauprez is viewed favorably by 48%, unfavorably by 31%. Holtzman is viewed favorably by just 35%" (oh, that 35% is 5 points lower than last month).

Beauprez is viewd unfavorably by 31% in the most recent poll, so if as you say, his unfavorables should be higher in the poll one moth ago, before Holtzman ran into legal trouble, right? Well let's take a look:

From last month: "{Beauprez is viewed} unfavorably by 34%."  Well I'll be damned...the most recent poll shows a decrease in unfavorables.

Quit with the Holtzmanure, mrhandy. I'm beginning to wonder if you are actually Dick "Lying is spinning" Leggitt. If not, you sure take your cues on how to lie well from him.

---

by: wow... @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

Oh, and I wouldn't b

Oh, and I wouldn't be happy that this samples a greater number of Republican activists as you propose.

"Among Republicans, Beauprez is viewed favorably by 69%, Holzman by 51%."

Notice, that is an 18% difference. Within the entire poll, there is a 13% difference between the two. That doesn't bode well for Marc, my friend.

---

by: wow... @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

If I were a candidat

If I were a candidate that had a 34% unfavorable rating, I would forget running.  Thankfully, there isn't a third person in this race.  If there were it would bode worse for BB.  The 34% unfavorables would go to the third candidate more than likely.

problem is that they are viewed favorably in relation to Ritter.  How about BB and MH.  How could you have a 69% and a 51% then?  Answer:  You couldn't because you are not polling only 100 people.  Which then goes to the question, how is it tha Bb is falling in the overalls?

If Bb has a 69% favorable rating among Republicans, how is it that he is falling backwards?  is it plausable that a person may view someone favorably but not enough to vote for? 

Speaking of spin Mr Brainiac, what you (we paint our sky a special colora in Beauprezville) would like people to think, and I can't wait for your spin doctors to go spewing this garbage (such as you folks did during the caucuses) 69% like Bob and only 31% like MH.  Can't wait to hear this garbage.

Let's assume you folks are right.  That would mean that in a worst cvase scenario, Holtzman gets a minimum of 31% at the Assembly.  That in and of itself hurts your plan.  Got the MYLANTA for BB yet?

The among Republicans can include all types of Republicans, to include the I renewed my driver's license yesterday Republicans.  18% difference?  Get real.  Generally, these number are off by 10% (at least) when it comes to intraparty rivalry.  That leaves 8%, which then means it is a dead heat.

Sorry you flunked stats in college.  Sorry you live in a different world than most folks, especially when your trying to keep your job.  If I were as desperate as you, I would say and do almost anything to keep my job.  Thankfully, I don't have to rely upon elected officials to keep my job.

Voice of Reason, The Doctor just called.  He said for you to do two things: 1) stay on you meds, and )2 stick with you therapy and you'll be okay.  Life is nice in Beauprezville. 

My how nice thing are here in Beauprezville.  Kindda reminds me of Jimmy Carter.  Than again, wasn't he a good conservative, christian, kind of from down on the farm kind of guy???

---

by: MrHandy2001 @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

"Thankfully, there i

"Thankfully, there isn’t a third person in this race."

Amen, Mr. Handy.  Good job on actually coming to grips w/ reality that it is a two-way race between Beauprez and Ritter.  I knew you would see the light.

---

by: senor manejoso @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

I wouldn't place muc

I wouldn't place much into the polling of rasmussen.  He is a devoted RED STATE fellow and is running on the coat-tails of his knowledge of the stuffed ballot boxes in the 2004 selection. 

If you go to his website, you can CLEARLY SEE that he a REPUBLICAN WACKO.  He doesn't even have any articles on his blog that are current or accurate.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/blog/2006/04/immigration_issue_could_lead_t.html

---

by: Patriot @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

Rassmussen only call

Rassmussen only calls 500 likely voters, he says.

---

by: Patriot @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

"If I were a candida

"If I were a candidate that had a 34% unfavorable rating, I would forget running. Thankfully, there isn’t a third person in this race. If there were it would bode worse for BB. The 34% unfavorables would go to the third candidate more than likely."

Once again, you lie. There is no 34% unfavorable in the most recent poll.

"problem is that they are viewed favorably in relation to Ritter. How about BB and MH. How could you have a 69% and a 51% then? Answer: You couldn’t because you are not polling only 100 people. Which then goes to the question, how is it tha Bb is falling in the overalls?"

This just shows that you don't understand how polls are done. First, why in the world would they only have to poll 100 people? Your point makes no sense. Second, how could you have 69% and then 51%? It wasn't a direct matchup wherein those polled could only answer favorable for one candidate. There is a overlapping--some polled answered favorably for both candidates.
How is bb falling in the overalls? Very easily--3% is well within the MOE.

I don't even get your 69%/31% stuff...and how would 31% hurt Beauprez's plan? These aren't delegates being polled--although seeing that all you can think about is delegates definately gives greater backing to the idea of you being paid by Holtzman and stuck in assembly mode.

"18% difference? Get real. Generally, these number are off by 10% (at least) when it comes to intraparty rivalry. That leaves 8%, which then means it is a dead heat."

Huh? Once again, it wasn't a choose one or the other--there had to be overlapping. 10% off huh? Then your fictitious 8% is a dead heat. And you think it is the Beauprez camp that is trying to paint the sky a different color?

The rest of your post is just ad hominem attacks, which I have to tell you, I enjoy greatly. Your analysis shows you have no facts on your side, and when you follow it up with ad hominem attacks you greatly weaken any chance of presenting yourself as a reasonable, trustworthy person. You should have learned lying and throwing around personal fireballs doesn't pay off from Mr. Leggitt.

---

by: wow... @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

Oh, and maybe Marc s

Oh, and maybe Marc should take your advice--his unfavorables are only 1% away from 34%

You aren't helping your candidate here, mrhandy.

---

by: wow... @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

"I wouldn’t place mu

"I wouldn’t place much into the polling of rasmussen. He is a devoted RED STATE fellow and is running on the coat-tails of his knowledge of the stuffed ballot boxes in the 2004 selection."

It's the right-wing conspiracy, man. His polls weren't accurate he just, like, got memos from Karl Rove or some dude and helped rig the election, man. Kerry totally won.

---

by: Pompeius Magnus @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

"It’s the right-wing

"It’s the right-wing conspiracy, man. His polls weren’t accurate he just, like, got memos from Karl Rove or some dude and helped rig the election, man. Kerry totally won."

ROFL :-D

---

by: wow... @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

A Story: One day

A Story:

One day a man and his son entered a candy store.  Daddy, the boy asked.  May I have a piece of candy?  Well son, the father quipped, I'll have to see how much money I have.

The son then said to his father, Daddy, Please may I have a piece of candy?  It's only 10 cents.  Oh, okay the father replied.  But I only have a dollar bill, so bring me back the change.  I will said the son.

Shortly thereafter, the son returned to his father.  When asked where his change was, the son replied "I spent it."  You spent it the father replied.  Why?

Because I wanted more candy.

The moral of the story, give govenment your money and you will never see it again.  Like a child in a candy store, it will disappear.

Americans enjoy an (inflation adjusted) lower standard of living than in 1975.  We give them $3.7 billion and they want $5 billion. 

Marc Holtzman had it right when he said the correct answer to this problem is 1) never give government more than they need, 2) never give them more than they want, and 3) give back what is over and above what the taxpayers were told government needed.

Bob Beauprez said in the Rocky Mountain News (a deal is a deal."  yes Bob, a deal is a deal.  The REfs C & D supporters wanted $3.7 billion, they now project more than what was neede, and they want to keep it.  Oh sure, you'll give it to me in the form of an energy credit.  Whoopee!!!

What if I need the money for food?  How about gasoline? How about paying a medical bill?  Starting to see why the Dems and Repubs couldn't agree on what to do with the excess in the legislature.

If a deal is a deal, take only what you need and give the rest back.  That's the correct answer.  Gee, the principled conservative is now moving ever closer to the middle.

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/elections/article/0,2808,DRMN_24736_4681730,00.html

---

by: MrHandy2001 @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

"What if I need the

"What if I need the money for food? How about gasoline? How about paying a medical bill? Starting to see why the Dems and Repubs couldn’t agree on what to do with the excess in the legislature."

Then you can take the money you aren't spending on your energy bill due to the credit and use it to buy food, gasoline, or pay a medical bill...

And giving money back to the people that is in excess of what they agreed to give the government...man, you are right, that has liberal written all over it...(note the sarcasm)

---

by: wow... @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

Oh, so I'm going to

Oh, so I'm going to get a check for my energy bill?  And all I have to do is cash the check and then I can spend it on anything else I want.

Hey, where do I sign up?!!! That's what I do with my welfare checks and food stamps.  I goes down to the local liquor store, cash them in for cash and then I can buy my liquor and drugs.

That works for me!!! Hey, what if I don't own a home??? Do I still get the check anyways???

(note the sarcasm)

It has liberal written all over it because government should be required to live within their means.  When BO calls for cuts of less than 1% to government, something is wrong.  On any given day, someone can find at least 10% of fraud, waste, and inefficiency in their budget.  These moderate Repubs and Dems should have been forced to work harder.  the easy answer is always to raise taxes.  My dog, walking backwards, intoxicated, and blindfolded could do better.

Where do I take my utility credit??? Will ther bea utility window in some government building??? How much will this dog and pony show cost???  Will there be the comensurate 10% in administrative fees???  Wiill there be celebrities appearing on TV and Radio???? How much will they cost???

Nice intentions, wrong idea.  go back to the drawing board.  I'll take my money back in the way government received it - thank you.  CASH not CREDIT.

---

by: MrHandy2001 @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

Let me get this stra

Let me get this straight.  Lets say my utility bill this month is $195.00.  I pay the $195.00 and then I apply for my credit.  I receive a credit from the government of say $50.00, I use it to pay toward my utility bill.  Where's the remaining cash??

This scheme only works if the amount received in the energy credit is greater than your utility bill.  If the credit is in the form of a coupon and has to be turned in to your utility company, do you honestly think that they are going to give you cash back?

If so, I have a oceanfront property in Phoenix for sale.  They will use the excess as a credit toward yopur next month's bill.  Always have, always will.

See what I mean.  This idea has flawed written all over it.  The best petition to circulate would be one that calls upon government to give back the excess.  No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

If I'm not mistaken, isn't that part of the Marc Holtzman Campaign platform?  I think so. 

My disappointment is that Caldera and the II would even attempt such a flawed notion.  As a big "C" conservative I can tell you it will not work.

---

by: MrHandy2001 @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

Just a reminder, peo

Just a reminder, people are never as stupid as politicians think they are.  Moreover, most voters aren't nearly as stupid as many politicians look.

You can fool most of the people some of the time, and some of the people most of the time, but you can't fool all the people all the time. -- Abraham Lincoln

---

by: MrHandy2001 @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

As far as this polli

As far as this polling thing goes, I would actually like to see a poll conductred with all three candidates.  A question in the form of the following:

Of the three canidates currently seeking election to the office of Governor, if the election were held today whom would most likely vote for?

Or

Better yet.  One that included a candidate form an independent, third party.  Names would be reandomly selected, but would always include the three major candidates.

Then, I think you would actaully see whare the candidates stand against one another.  Problem is that not all three will be running in a general election.  Guess that makes sense.  However, other candidate names should be included to determine the internal and external validity of the sampling population.

---

by: MrHandy2001 @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

As far as the pollin

As far as the polling goes, I agree, a poll that was stated like that would give the most readable results.

And what in the heck are you talking about getting cash back? The fifty dollars (to use your number) would be applied to your energy bill that you owe. That means instead of paying 195 out of pocket, you pay 145 out of pocket, and the 50 that stays in your pocket becomes discretionary income. You can use it how you want. Now, if it is in excess and it goes toward your next bill as a credit, it will still save you out of pocket payments and boosts your discretionary income. This is not a liberal bill...a liberal bill would say "ooo let's keep all of it and spend it on more welfare programs."

---

by: wow... @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

Well, that's what I

Well, that's what I get for skimming the Rocky article and not reading...here is how it would work:

"The amount of Ref C money above the $3.7 billion mark would be divided by the total number of exemptions claimed on state income tax returns. The head of the household would receive a check each October based on how many people live in the household."

---

by: wow... @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

You mean they will finally start giving

money back to the households - finally. When the my party was in charge they didn't quite feel the same obligation - just that someone had to get it back. The reason I sometimes feel more comfortable with my party in the minority - when that happens we want to give money back to individuals to show we can give them money the Ds won't. When Rs were in power, they seemed happier to give it to businesses. I like this way better.

---

by: El Paso Rockefeller Republican @ Thu Sep 28, 2006 at 03:06:12 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Hey there HandyMan,

Hey there HandyMan,  my grandaddy always used to tell me "He who borrows sells his freedom." 

Tell me, why are Republicans putting shackles on our children's economic future by running up the biggest deficits in history?

Why do they refuse to deal with a Social Security system that will start running deficits in 2019 -- as if our children didn't have enough to worry about.  They'll be up to their eyeballs in alligators just paying the interest on the massive debt we're running up today! 

And let's not forget that the black gold that helps keep our economic engine humming will become too expensive to burn sometime in the next 50 years.

Maybe you're willing to sell you kid's future for a little beer money in your pocket today, but I'm not, and I will fight people like you to the end to see to it that we don't go down in history as THE most thoughtless, selfish, short-sighted generation in American history.

Don't lecture us about responsibility when your party acts like a kid in a candy shop with a stolen credit card in hand.

---

by: Pay Your Own Way @ Mon May 08, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

<blockquote>Hey, whe

Hey, where do I sign up?!!! That’s what I do with my welfare checks and food stamps. I goes down to the local liquor store, cash them in for cash and then I can buy my liquor and drugs.

Good luck getting your life back together, MrHandy.

---

by: MixedMessageMarc @ Tue May 09, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

I seem to recall tha

I seem to recall that it was the Republicans and a Republican president that had a plan to deal with Social Security and the Democrats didn't like it.

For some reason I seem to recall the Democrats cheering during the President's State of the Union address when the President mentioned that congress failed to pass any significant reform to social security.

---

by: Kaiten @ Tue May 09, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

the reporikan plan w

the reporikan plan was simply to postpone the inevitable, like all the Republican plans these days.  How to pay for a war withut end....$70B tax cuts (benifitting primarily the richest 10% of the nation). 

How to fund the massive increase (under the GOP) in discretionary budget?  Deficit spending!

---

by: JoshPenryIsGOD @ Tue May 09, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

oh, I forgot to ment

oh, I forgot to mention funding the war and tax cuts through borrowiny money from that bastion of democracy and human rights--China.

---

by: JoshPenryIsGOD @ Tue May 09, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

Patriot, I wouldn't

Patriot, I wouldn't slander Rasmussen so quickly. (And I'm not even an R!)  I think his polls do a good job, he does a good job explaining them, and I've never had trouble interpreting his numbers.  Yes, the way he weights for party affiliation tends to cause a "house effect" that's about 4 points more Republican than some other polling houses, but you should never look at absolute numbers at this stage in a race anyway.  You should be looking at motion.  Since February, Ritter/Beauprez has been bouncing around within the poll margin of error.  Now it looks like undecideds might be resolving Ritter's way.  I say "might" because we still haven't had a real two-way poll without the noise of Marc Holtzman.  And the candidates haven't started throwing grenades at each other yet, at least outside of the Republican party. I'll be most interested to see it there's a trend when the June results come out.

Mystery Pollster has a great discussion of the Rasmussen "house effect" and how his polls (at least his nightly presidential tracking poll) relate to others here:

http://www.mysterypollster.com/main/2006/05/rasmussen_updat.html

It's an update to two previous articles, but the prior articles are linked from there.

It might be early, but it's time for Pols to turn that blue arrow rightside up.  Even if its temporary.

---

by: HearingListener @ Fri Jun 09, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

<blockquote>The nati

The national telephone survey of 500 Adults was conducted by Rasmussen Reports May 25, 2006. The margin of sampling error for the survey is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.

Useless survey.

---

by: BadMoonRising @ Fri Jun 09, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

Go to 7-11 or the gr

Go to 7-11 or the grocery store and read Beauprez’s profile by Susan Greene. Here’s how it reads in the Post, “The Russian Connection. Beauprez took a $21,000 trip to Israel to speak out against the U.N. The foundation of a “reputed mobster” paid for it.” The story goes on to say, “According to the FBI and Interpol reports quoted in Fortune magazine and elsewhere, Cherney - A.K.A. Mikhail Chernoy - took over much of Russia’s aluminum industry through alleged embezzlement, money laundering, and murder. The Center for Public Integrity calls him a ‘reputed mobster’ targeted in investigations throughout much of Western Europe, Russia, Israel, and the U.S…”

---

by: Russian Connection @ Sat Jun 10, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

I'm posting this to

I'm posting this to both threads on the Rasmussen Colorado Governor survey.

I spoke to the Rasmussen folks today (6/12/2005) and they assured me that the poll was a statewide poll of 500 likely Colorado voters, not a national poll.

The "national poll" statement at the bottom is boilerplate that was erroneously included at the bottom of the article.

By the time you read this, the incorrect statement at the bottom of the article should be fixed.

---

by: HearingListener @ Mon Jun 12, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

Please note that the

Please note that the date of my call to Rasmussen was 2006, not 2005.

I've been typing for 40 years and I still can't deal with the top row.

---

by: HearingListener @ Mon Jun 12, 2006 at 05:00:00 AM UTC

what in the world is BB doing?

Has anyone even SEEN him?  What in the world is Both Ways Bob doing?  It seems he's just dropped off the race of the earth.....

---

by: what?!? @ Sat Jul 15, 2006 at 04:17:13 AM UTC

It's a bird...it's a plane...

He was on my flight from DC to Denver yesterday.  He must be working the district this weekend....or not.

---

by: FarmBoy @ Sat Jul 15, 2006 at 06:18:58 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Good question

I assume he is in DC working, because I hear very little about his campaigning anywhere.

---

by: Lauren Bacall @ Sat Jul 15, 2006 at 12:00:51 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

He must be...

Lost!

Beauprez!

(sorry - been hearing that ad a lot on the radio lately. :)

"We're below sharks and contract killers." -- Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), speaking on Congress's 9% approval rating

---

by: Phoenix Rising @ Mon Jul 17, 2006 at 18:33:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I missed the ad

but your enthusiasm is infectious, I'll have to tune in to hear it:)

---

by: Lauren Bacall @ Tue Jul 18, 2006 at 12:10:17 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Where is BB?

Where is Bob Beauprez? Bob Beauprez is wherever there is a cow that needs bumping, a Russian mafioso with extra change, or there is anything remotely relating to Colorado and/or cows.

Where is Bob Beauprez? Bob Beauprez is off fighting for ballot issues he may or may not support.

Where is Bob Beauprez? He's off fighting against special interests in DC by taking so much of their money they'll go broke.

And when Bob Beauprez gets back to Colorado, will he fight for Colorado values and what-not? You bet he might.

---

by: Pompeius Gnaues Magnus @ Sat Jul 15, 2006 at 08:47:15 AM UTC

Beauprez?

Where is Bob?

www.bobislost.com

"Suddenly, it may be cool to be American again" - William J. Kole

---

by: Go Blue @ Sat Jul 15, 2006 at 16:07:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yawn.

Wake me up when it's Labor Day.  Why are you people buying these silly polls. Do you actually trust Zogby?  I do trust Rasmussen but it's stil summer.  Beauprez has been down before but he'll come back with some ease.  Do you know how annoying Ritter sounds?  He is such a whiney liberal which grates on people's nerves.  Once BB gets on TV and the real facts start to come out, Ritter will be drowning.

---

by: FFF @ Tue Aug 29, 2006 at 00:20:51 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

hee hee

Good one, FFF. And I didn't think you had a sense of humor.

"Thank you for putting your rank political motives on display." - ArapaGOP

---

by: Aristotle @ Tue Aug 29, 2006 at 00:34:38 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

You don't trust Zogby?

That's funny, Zogby's fluke of a last month poll showing Beauprez trailing slightly less than the other polls is still being touted by the Beauprez campaign as a great victory. The Beauprez campaign obviously trusts them, you aren't trying to have it both ways, are you?

http://beauprezforgo...

---

by: Pompeius Gnaues Magnus @ Tue Aug 29, 2006 at 02:22:40 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

as i have said

repeatedly.

These polls continue to reinforce the situation in Colorado.

BWB is holding in the upper 30%.  He is polling his base, and cannot get above that.  Ritter polls his base and the swing vote.

If BWB cannot get much above 40% in any poll over the last year, then he is toast.  Ds, moderate Rs and Unaffiliates are breaking to Ritter and that is not going to change.

---

by: Roger D @ Mon Sep 11, 2006 at 20:08:06 PM UTC

The more things change

BB's numbers are consistent.  No up movement.  No down movement. 

---

by: what?!? @ Mon Sep 11, 2006 at 20:11:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

the past as prologue.......

  What did Rollie Heath get in '02?  Was it 35%?  I don't mean to actually compare Rollie Heath (Rollie was a good guy and would have made a fine governor) to Both Ways, just trying to get a perspective on which party has a bigger base turn out on Election Day.

---

by: One Queer Dude @ Mon Sep 11, 2006 at 20:18:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Rollie didn't really campaign

I was told at a political traininglast year that Rollie Heath really didn't campaign.  He was just the spot holder, because Owens was certainly going to be reelected.  His numbers are considered to be the hard core Democratic vote, because he really wasn't trying.

I don't know if this is accurate - I wasn't paying much attention to politics at that time - but that is what I was told.

---

by: Emma Anne @ Mon Sep 11, 2006 at 23:15:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Rollie did campaign

he went into the race with the idea of winning.  It was not a year that a candidate like rollie was going to win (if there ever was one).  He actually would have made an excellent Governor.  the skills and life experience he has/had made him an ideal Governor, but not necessarily a great candidate.

If he were running today instead of Bill Ritter, he also would be winning and would undoubtedly win on election day.

Timing is everything.Rollie: bless you for what you did and what you have meant to the Dem party.

---

by: Roger D @ Tue Sep 12, 2006 at 02:24:23 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Love the numbers

But Zogby/WSJ Interactive Polls are notoriously inaccurate.  Maybe they're getting better, maybe not.  But I think the only think this is good for is adding another data point to the mix.

Let's face it, Zogby has a number of Republicans in more trouble than most people think they really are.  Not that I won't take Zogby's numbers as poll results in a heartbeat come election day...

"We're below sharks and contract killers." -- Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), speaking on Congress's 9% approval rating

---

by: Phoenix Rising @ Mon Sep 11, 2006 at 20:24:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well...

Zogby's numbers also show a lot of Republicans doing better than they have in previous polls (Kean, Santorum, DeWine).

Considering Beauprez has an internal poll showing the same thing, I'm inclined to buy it.

---

by: Pompeius Gnaues Magnus @ Tue Sep 12, 2006 at 03:16:50 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

What is thought on the Whitman poll

released by Fawcett over on Colorado Confidential today showing Fawcett leading?

---

by: El Paso Rockefeller Republican @ Tue Sep 12, 2006 at 01:58:49 AM UTC

Wow

I dont know this company and I am generally skeptical of most polls, but that is amazing. For arguments sake lets say that it is a worthy poll. What surprised me the most was the 1/3 who are unsure of who they are going to vote for. In that district that blows my mind that they are not lining up for Lamborn. And this poll being pre-Hefley that has got to affect the numbers for Lamborn in an adverse way. I hate to agree with Hotaling, but I am waiting for the questions and demographics to come out before I start referring to Jay as Congressman Fawcett

---

by: Mr. Toodles @ Tue Sep 12, 2006 at 02:33:21 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Listen up

.....listen to Keith Olberman in this piece:

http://www.crooksand...

It's a few pieces down, and worth the wait.

We are living in a great shame.....because of the republican administration and Congress. Admit to it...and hold them accountable!!!

We are a much greater country than the low bar that has been put in place over the last five years. Let us all elucidate this historically stunning fact. Let us all remember what we can be as human beings, and as Americans.


Exercise your right to peaceably assemble and reclaim the commons. Stop the militarization of America.

---

by: Sir Robin @ Tue Sep 12, 2006 at 05:22:11 AM UTC

Uh, isn't this the thread on polling

I don't see how KO's opinion on the President has anyhting to do with Beauprez getting killed in the polls.  Doesn't this site have an open thread?

---

by: DanJ75 @ Tue Sep 26, 2006 at 15:16:31 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Wow...

Those numbers make no sense. Even according to their own poll three weeks ago, that would mean that Ritter has lost popularity and that BWB has gained significant popularity. Looking at the past few weeks, i'm not quite sure how that could have happened.

---

by: Aaron @ Thu Sep 28, 2006 at 15:44:09 PM UTC

Ritter's probably 8 pts. ahead of Both Ways

  I'm sure Moonracker (the Both Ways' shill who regularly rants on here) would attribute it all to the plea bargain commercials! 
  An accurate number is probably somewhere between Zogby's poll (statistical tie) and Survery USA's poll (16-17% lead by Ritter). 

---

by: One Queer Dude @ Thu Sep 28, 2006 at 19:20:33 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

There you go with that word again.

If you got rid of that guy this site would just be a bunch of guys grunting in agreement with each other.

I think "shill" is becoming the "N" word of the Internet. 

Can't you just call him "the gentleman of the right who regularly posts here"?  Didn't your mothers teach you about calling names?

I know it is fun to talk numbers like this, but how many of you are statisticians?

---

by: andy bradshaw @ Fri Sep 29, 2006 at 04:23:51 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

There are job qualifications to post here??

I'd be willing to bet that the people here understand stats better than the average voter. And since this is an election, and not math class, the perception of the voters is all that counts.

As to being a statistician... that is not my sole job but I have studied statistics. I can tell you this much... a random sampling is key to a good poll. In fact, a random sampling... coupled with the number of people polled, is what give you the margin of error. Zogby Interactive doesn't use a random sampling.

The American Association for Public Opinion Research says that even REPORTING a margin of error in an online poll like Zogby Interactive is misleading at best.

http://www.aapor.org...

---

by: WinstonSmith @ Sat Sep 30, 2006 at 05:50:35 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Pols...you are an embarassment...

Drop the Zog...
Stupid BWB campaign is robocalling now as we speak for volunteers...so you know the poll is crap because BWB does EVERYTHING wrong. 

---

by: guesswho @ Thu Sep 28, 2006 at 23:32:27 PM UTC