Rasmussen daily poll in graph form

[DavidDvorkin]

Here's the current Rasmussen daily poll situation:

[rinsd]

1. Thanks (nt)

[Adelante]

24. What's that big bump 7/30, do you know?

Thanks.

[DavidDvorkin]

25. Dunno. Maybe a sampling glitch.

That's always a possible problem with daily polls, and a reason why many people don't look at them and prefer three-day rolling averages, to smooth such bumps out.

I like this one, anyway, because Rasmussen publishes the daily numbers and, ignoring the bumps, one can see long-term trends.

[Adelante]

26. It's really great that you're doing this regularly

Thanks very, very much :)

[DavidDvorkin]

27. Thanks.

Maintaining it isn't difficult. Putting all the numbers in the spreadsheet at first was tedious.

If I cared about the Republican side, I'd do the same for them, but I don't give a damn!

[KansDem]

71. Looks like it coincides with a drop in"Other"

One looks like an inversion of the other. Interesting...

[Rock_Garden]

2. Thank you, David.

[durrrty libby]

3. Steady as she goes

[robcon]

4. A daily poll like Rasmussen needs to be displayed graphically

The day-to-day changes mean nothing, but week-to-week is more revealing.

[DavidDvorkin]

8. Agreed

That's why I finally decided to do this. I can't really grasp tables of numbers in a meaningful way.

[goodgd_yall]

5. I'm at the point

of believing this is pretty much how it is going to stay from here into February and the last of the primaries in June.

[Alamom]

6. Thank you.nm

[DavidDvorkin]

7. I think this will update automatically

In a sense. I'll try to add the new numbers to my spreadsheet each day, regenerate the graph, and then upload it to the same place. That way, if you open up that original post, you should always see the latest version of the graph. I think.

[DavidDvorkin]

9. Good. It does update automatically.

By reloading the image from the URL each time. That's nifty and convenient.

The dip in Edwards' number isn't nifty. Daily noise. I suppose I should calculate and graph three-day running averages, or something of that sort, but I'm not that ambitious.

[XemaSab]

23. Pop a trend line in!

:bounce:

[Catchawave]

10. What was Hillary doing on July 30?

That little spikey bounce she had was interesting :D

Does Ras have a graph for the 'pubs? I bet the Undecideds are still beating everybody :rofl:

[DavidDvorkin]

11. Interesting question

Little bounces and dips could just be statistical noise. That's the misleading thing about daily polls and why people usually look at three-day rolling averages, to smooth out those anomalies.

Ras does have the same kind of numbers for the Republicans, but only for three of them, I think. For the Democrats, too, the three I put on the graph are the only ones Ras lists on the Web site.

[Catchawave]

12. Polls are interesting, but sometimes never predictable

much like a horse race ! As Craig Crawford said: "Politics is the only sport that the spectators can participate in"

Oh, and here's a little trip down memory lane....slmost 4 years to the date, from the CNN archives:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/09/22/elec04.poll.bush.clark/index.html

This should bring back great memories for the Clark supporters ! Edwards wasn't even a blip on the radar !

Thanks for posting the graph....I wonder if Edwards will get a little bump from his fine ad last night ?

[DavidDvorkin]

13. I'd prefer a big bump :)

[DavidDvorkin]

14. Not what I was hoping to see

But there it is.

[Cameron27]

15. Thank you,

nice work. K&R

[DavidDvorkin]

16. 9/18 - Little change

Edwards up 1, Clinton and Obama unchanged.

Long term, it strikes me that there hasn't been much change for any of the three.

[Colobo]

17. Obamaniacs and Edwarites should unite to save the country...

[jcrew2001]

18. Exactly, Hillary is only winning because

Edwards and Obama have split the opposition vote.

I would take Obama or Edwards over Hillary any day.

[DavidDvorkin]

19. That would require one of them dropping out, wouldn't it?

Endorsing the other, perhaps becoming the semi-official v.p. candidate.

So ... which one does that? :) That's the catch.

[Colobo]

29. Any of them. Edwards/Obama or Obama/Edwards.

[DavidDvorkin]

30. I mean, realistically

I don't mean which one of the two would it take. I meant that I can't envision either one of the two men doing it.

[faithfulcitizen]

125. Totally agree, both should drop out and support Biden

sorry, I couldn't resist :)

[DavidDvorkin]

20. 9/19/07 - Steady as she goes

I'm surprised by the lack of change. Opinions are strong here, as we all know, but is the country as a whole not paying that much attention yet?

[DavidDvorkin]

21. 9/20/07 - Really stable

[DavidDvorkin]

22. 9/21/07 - Ugh

Long term, the three of them are bouncing around in a narrow range. Short term, ugh.

[mac2]

159. Obama, Clinton, and Edwards

What about their global agenda? Is that Constitutional? Good for America?

[DavidDvorkin]

160. I don't think I understand the question

What is their global agenda?

[DavidDvorkin]

28. Now with exciting 3-day rolling averages!

To smooth the curves out and maybe show trends more clearly.

[DavidDvorkin]

31. It looks even spiffier now

Ever spiffier! Greater spiffiness on a daily basis! Until eventually the graph attains a level of spiffishism that was heretofore only seen in dreams!

At least, until the next spiffishness iteration.

Last weekend, someone posted snarkily somewhere on DU that Edwards supporters only post poll numbers when they're favorable. Harrumph, I say. And harrumph again. I post these daily. But not on weekends. Rasmussen seems to post all their weekend numbers on Monday, not during the actual weekend. So I won't be able to update this until some time on Monday evening. That update will contain three days' worth of numbers.

Harrumph.

[Colobo]

32. But Obama is at 25% today... in the graph it looks he's a bit lower than that.

[DavidDvorkin]

33. Yes, because it's a three-day rolling average

And he was lower than 25% for the last three days.

Maybe I should post a graph of the actual daily numbers, as before, as well as the three-day averages?

[DavidDvorkin]

34. 9/24/07 - Added a line to the graph

I added a line for the total of the three candidates shown. I thought it would be interesting to show how close the three of them combined are to 100% of the total.

[DavidDvorkin]

35. 9/25/07 - Edwards up today

Clinton steady, Obama down. All those movement are slight, as they all have been from the start. Since the lines on the graph are three-day rolling averages, small daily changes don't have a large, visible effect unless they're maintained.

I can't decide if I should leave the total line on there. It's interesting, and it does show how little the remaining candidates pull compared to the top three. However, including it flattens the lines for the three candidates and makes it harder to see what trends there are in their lines.

[rinsd]

37. Perhaps instead of a total line you could add an others line?

That way it would be more or less equal to the Big 3 removing the "flattening" effect.

[DavidDvorkin]

38. That's a good idea

Rasmussen doesn't list the others, so it would be 100-total. And you're right - it would be closer to the three in magnitude.

Thanks. I'll do that tomorrow.

[rinsd]

40. No, thank you. The graphs really help in visualizing (or rationalizing - ;-) )the trends.

:thumbsup:

[jmp]

36. Nice job.

:)

[DavidDvorkin]

39. Thanks

I've always loved the way graphs make numbers look like they really mean something. :)

[DavidDvorkin]

41. 9/26/07 - Edwards and Clinton holding, Obama dropping

In the daily numbers. Nothing dramatic or long-term enough to show up strikingly in the three-day rolling averages yet.

Following rinsd's excellent suggestion, I replaced the Total line with Others. That eliminated the flattening effect while still making it possible to track the status of the other candidates as a group.

[DavidDvorkin]

42. I think this needs a kick

[DavidDvorkin]

43. A loving kick, you could say

[DavidDvorkin]

44. 9/27/07 - Clinton slightly down, Obama up, Edwards down

But still no real long-term trends. I thought doing this graph would be exciting, but not only is it the opposite of encouraging for an Edwards supporter, it's also surprisingly boring. Perhaps it's true that most voters still aren't paying a lot of attention. Or that their minds are pretty firmly made up. For now, anyway.

Rasmussen doesn't say when the daily numbers were collected. The numbers dated 9/27 obviously are from 9/26 at the latest, and maybe from 9/25 or 9/24. That makes it hard to know when to look for an effect, if any, from a particular event, such as a debate or an announcement.

[DavidDvorkin]

45. 9/28/07 - Clinton and Obama slightly down, Edwards steady

The next update, on Monday, will include three new daily numbers (Saturday, Sunday, Monday), so maybe it will show a dramatic, startling, astonishing change! But probably not.

[DavidDvorkin]

46. 9/28/07 - Clinton and Obama slightly down, Edwards steady

The next update, on Monday, will include three new daily numbers (Saturday, Sunday, Monday), so maybe it will show a dramatic, startling, astonishing change! But probably not.

(I posted in the wrong part of the thread before, so I'm repeating this in the right place.)

[DavidDvorkin]

47. Clinton up, Obama unchanged, Edwards up slightly

44%, 22%, 15% respectively.

I'll update the graph tonight. I just noticed on the Rasmussen page that the daily numbers are actually four-day rolling averages. Duh. So my three-day averages aren't meaningful, and I'll switch the graph back to what Rasmussen calls the daily numbers.

[rinsd]

48. Thanks as always David (nt)

[DavidDvorkin]

49. 10/1/07 - Overall, no real change

Obama may be trending slowly down, in the long term, but it's hard to see anything happening.

Note that these are the actual Rasmussen numbers, because those are already four-day rolling averages.

[DavidDvorkin]

50. 10/2/07 - Clinton rising at Obama's expense?

Edwards is staying fairly steady (if too low, sob). Long term, Clinton seems to be rising while Obama declines.

[DavidDvorkin]

51. 10/03/07 - Holding pattern

How many different ways can I come up with to say that nothing much has changed?

Long-term, it begins to look like Clinton and Edwards are taking support from Obama.

[avrdream]

52. Thank you.

I DO read this whenever it bumps up.

[Capn Sunshine]

53. uh oh....Hillary's has a head and shoulders formation

wait, so does Obama's.....

[DavidDvorkin]

54. Well, they're all jagged and pointy

But I don't think one can read anything into that. :)

I tried adding trendlines, but that didn't show anything new. It just cluttered the graph up all the more.

[DavidDvorkin]

55. 10/4/07 - Obama up, Clinton and Edwards down

But all three are still bouncing around within fairly narrow limits.

[Colobo]

56. Let hope that trend continues.

[DavidDvorkin]

58. You can hope for that

But as an Edwards supporter, I'm hoping for something different. :)

[Colobo]

59. If not Edwards, then Obama? Deal?

:hi:

[DavidDvorkin]

63. Deal!

Of the three, he's my second choice. If Clinton wins, I'll certainly vote for her; no question about that.

I admit to being easy, though. If Gore enters, all bets are off.

[Beaverhausen]

57. Who are they polling? What are the raw numbers?

[DavidDvorkin]

64. Dunno. Dunno.

It may describe the sample somewhere on the site, but I haven't looked for it. The reason I chose this one to graph is that it seems to be the only one that publishes daily numbers -- which I thought would provide interesting trends, when I started doing this, although instead nothing is happening.

As for the actual raw numbers, I don't think they provide those. I had assumed these were the raw numbers, but they're actually four-day averages.

[Beaverhausen]

69. If this is a nationwide poll, it's pretty useless

Only the first few primary states are really getting to know the candidates and their stands on the issues, etc. A nationwide poll at this point is pretty useless IMHO.

[illinoisprogressive]

60. Rassmuessen has clintonista, Doug Schoen, working for them

[jenmito]

61. Thanks. At the site, it says Obama's at 26% today, and the durrrty libby didn't believe me

and claimed s/he couldn't find the link. Thanks again! :hi:

[DavidDvorkin]

65. I'll add the link to the site

I should have been doing that all along.

The page showing the numbers in table form isn't always updated on time. There's another page titled something like Discussion of Daily Numbers where they sometimes give the day's numbers before they update that table.

[jenmito]

72. Thanks, DavidD!

I know. Sometimes they don't post the latest numbers at the same time for some reason. :hi:

[calteacherguy]

62. This race hasn't changed significantly for months, and there is no reason to think it will. nt

[ncabot22]

66. Okay, Debbie Downer

:)

Sorry, your comment just made me think of the SNL skit. hehe. No harm intended.

[DavidDvorkin]

67. 10/5/07 - Obama up, Clinton and Edwards down

One percentage point, in each case.

Short term, as an Edwards supporter, I'm unhappy. Long term, there's still no real movement.

Rasmussen links: Data in tabular form. Discussion.

[Colobo]

68. I hope the trend continues!

[jenmito]

70. Well, there IS a trend showing Clinton and Edwards falling and Obama rising...

Today, 10/5:

Clinton-42%


Obama-27%


Edwards-12%


10/05/07

There are months to go yet, but being an Obama supporter, I LIKE the trends.

[rinsd]

73. Its a daily tracking poll prone to dips and rises. So be careful about declaring trends.

That is why I didn't say a peep when Obama went down to the low 20's last week/earlier this week.

I also haven't said much when Hillary went back to the low 40's from the high 30's.

Ya know a whole 2 weeks after you declared Hillary to be slipping. :evilgrin:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3538697&mesg_id=3538697

[jenmito]

74. I know what it is. I GOT this site from a Hillary supporter...

and when I wrote yesterday that Obama was up to 26% according to the Rasmussen poll, a mean poster, durrrty libby, said s/he couldn't find it and acted like s/he didn't believe me, so I posted the link. And today the trend continues. That's all I'm sayin'.

[DavidDvorkin]

75. It's a daily poll, but those are four-day averages

No doubt the actual daily numbers would show much wackier ups and downs and would be much more exciting/depressing (but not meaningful).

[rinsd]

76. Thanks.

I hadn't realized this was Ras's weekly report.

[DavidDvorkin]

77. It is their daily report, not the weekly report

But they only show the four-day rolling averages, not the actual daily numbers.

[DavidDvorkin]

78. 10/6-10/8/07 - Such stability!

Rasmussen links: Data in tabular form. Discussion.

[DavidDvorkin]

79. 10/9/07 - Flatline!

All three unchanged. First time that's happened.



Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion.

[smalll]

80. On a related note -

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3593602

[DavidDvorkin]

81. 10/10/07 - Clinton steady, Obama down, Edwards up

The usual insignificant change.



Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

82. 10/11/07 - Clinton up, the boys down

Clinton up big.



Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

83. 10/12/07 - Clinton pulling away, Obama and Edwards stalled

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

84. Kick for Saturday

This thread tends to drop out of sight during the weekend.

[DavidDvorkin]

85. Kick for Sunday

[DavidDvorkin]

86. 10/13/07-10/15/07 - Other's doing well!

I'm sure this all means something.



Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[Alamom]

87. Thanks.nm

[DavidDvorkin]

88. 10/16/07 - Yawn

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[sampsonblk]

89. Obama and 'Other' duke it out for 2nd Place - nt

[DavidDvorkin]

90. It would be interesting to know how Other breaks down

But Rasmussen only publishes the top three, so I calculated Other by subtracting the total of the top three from 100%.

[Auntie Bush]

91. It looks like it's time for Edwards to hang up his coat.

I bet most of the other is Biden. I can't believe Edwards has never scored above Other. I thought he was at least always third or above.

[DavidDvorkin]

93. I think Richardson is third

At 4% or 5%.

Note that the Other line is calculated, by me, as 100% minus the sum of the top three. In other words, Rasmussen didn't include Other as a choice in the poll.

Anyway, the nominee isn't chosen in a national primary poll, so no candidate should hang up his coat or declare victory based on this or any other national poll. I think it's somewhat interesting, and I'm hoping to see some sort of national trend, but I don't know how much more one can say about this poll than that.

[Adelante]

95. Richardson would be fourth, wouldn't he?

At 4% or 5%.

[DavidDvorkin]

96. Whoops, right

That should have been fourth, not third.

[Adelante]

97. Thanks again for keep us up on this, David

I really look forward to it :)

[DavidDvorkin]

98. I wish I could always do it in the morning

As soon as Rasmussen puts the new numbers up, instead of the evening. I also wish Rasmussen would publish their weekend numbers during the weekend.

[DavidDvorkin]

92. 10/17/07 - Still Yawning

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[rinsd]

94. Thanks again David.

[DavidDvorkin]

99. You're certainly welcome

[DavidDvorkin]

100. 10/18/07 - You're Getting Sleeeepy

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[Rhythm and Blue]

101. Edwards is sputtering downwards, it seems.

[DavidDvorkin]

102. The graph doesn't show that

It shows the three of them staying within a fairly narrow range with no real long-term change.

[DavidDvorkin]

103. 10/19/07 - Small Changes, Nifty New Graph!

I've added a graph. The second one shows the differences between the three top candidates. This one does show a bit of a trend (which is partly easier to see because of the stretched vertical scale): Clinton generally increasing her lead over the other two, while Obama and Edwards bounce around but remain roughly the same relative to each other.





Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[denem]

104. Thank you for the new graph!

and all your work. Much appreciated.

[DavidDvorkin]

105. If nothing else, it's bouncier and more interesting to stare at

:)

[DavidDvorkin]

106. 10/20/07-10/22/07 - Clinton's Taking Over

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

107. 10/23/07 - Clinton Drops! Obama Stalls! Edwards Rises!

I'm trying to create the illusion of excitement.





Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

108. 10/24/07 - Clinton Stalls, Obama Drops, Edwards on the Move!

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

109. 10/25/07 - Clinton Up, Edwards Down, Obama Flatlining!

Or, if you're being picky, not much is happening.





Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[martymar64]

110. Polls aren't votes

Votes aren't votes anymore either.

It's all for show.

[calteacherguy]

111. There is a clear and present trend beginning 10/8/07. nt

[DavidDvorkin]

112. 10/26/07 - Clinton Down, Obama Down, Edwards Holding

Nothing significant. Note that Obama is below All Others now.





Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

113. 10/27/07-10/29/07 - Dullsville, Man

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

114. 10/20/07 - Buncha Nothing

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

115. 10/31/07 - Now with cool trend lines

The second chart is the same as the first, but without All Others and with trend lines added for the Big Three. I used a fifth-power polynomial. (Because I liked the result, that's why!)

The Republican side is more interesting. The "tabular" link below shows Huckabee passing McCain for fourth place. He's close behind Romney and Thompson and could soon be #2, behind Giuliani.







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

116. 11/1/07 - Clinton up, ObEd down

Two points in all three cases. The trend lines are interesting, in the second chart. Whether they mean anyting is open to question, but they're interesting anyway.







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[dugggy]

117. Obama & Edwards dropping, Hillary gaining....intereresting

but not in the least surprising. The Clinton machine is
well honed and well financed.

[DavidDvorkin]

118. 11/2/07 - Clinton Steady, Obama Up, Edwards Down

Tiny changes. Nothing happening.







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

119. Kick

Because I post this every day, and yet other people keep posting the latest daily Rasmussen numbers as though this thread didn't exist and so I'm going to stamp my foot and wag my finger finger as though I were president.

[racaulk]

120. LOL

Foot stamping and finger wagging aside, I appreciate that you are tabulating this data and have posted it in a way that can continuously keep us updated during the primaries. I have this thread bookmarked.

Thank you!

:hi:

[DavidDvorkin]

121. Petulant kick

And foot stamp.

[ClarkUSA]

122. RCP national trendline (10/17-11/1): Edwards down, Obama up, Clinton down

On 10/12 Clinton was at 48.2% and Obama at 22.6%, a 25.6% difference.
This week, Clinton 43.7% vs. Obama 22.1%. Clinton has been trending
down for the last two weeks, Obama has experienced a slight uptick,
not that national polls really matter at this point, especially with Clinton
having such a large lead.

What I'd really like to see is a trendline of polling for Iowa likely caucus
goers' preferences for the past few months.

[DavidDvorkin]

124. Yes, I agree

The national polls seem to be the only ones that publish lots of data, and actually that really means Rasmussen. For the primary states, we get occasional snapshots, often a month apart, which makes it hard to draw any conclusions.

Not that people don't, of course!

[Adelante]

123. "All Others" is doing great nt

[DavidDvorkin]

126. 11/3/07 - Clinton and Edwards Steady, Obama Up

Still tiny changes and nothing actually happening.

I think this is the first time Ras has published any numbers on a weekend. I hope they're going to keep doing this.







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

127. 11/4/07-11/5/07 - Clinton sagging, Obama stalled, Edwards rising

Small changes, but I kinda like the trends.







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[Vektor]

128. Hillary - July 30th.

Looks like a heartbeat on an EKG strip.



But with the S-T segment elevation that would indicate an inferolateral wall heart attack.



One of the most dangerous and ominous sorts of infarctions.

[DavidDvorkin]

129. That peak really is strange

As I think I said in an earlier post, it wouldn't be remarkable if these numbers were the daily raw data. However, it's four-day rolling averages, which means there was a blip that lasted for a few days and then went away.

Like a heart problem or a subatomic particle revealing its existence. The not-so-elusive clinton!

[Vektor]

130. Interesting huh?

I wonder who they were polling, in order to have a weird, random jump like that.

[calteacherguy]

131. There is a clear and present trend beginning 10/22/07.

And I like it.

[DavidDvorkin]

132. Yep

Me, too.

This could be an interesting week.

[DavidDvorkin]

133. Just changed the trend graph

For the heck of it and because I like the way it looks. I extended the trend lines for a week:

[DavidDvorkin]

134. 11/6/07 - Clinton and Obama falling, Edwards rising

The trend is still encouraging, especially now that I've extended it for a week. (I don't think a polynomial fit to polling data means anything, since there's no underlying physical process for the polynomial to fit, but I like the way those lines go, anyway.)







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

135. 11/7/07 - Clinton falls, Obama stalls, Edwards climbs

Lookit the trend.







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

136. 11/8/07 - Clinton & Obama up, Edwards down

The trends still look pleasing. And in fact, all three of them are staying within the narrow ranges they've been in all along.







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

137. 11/9/07 - Clinton up, Obama down, Edwards steady

So the three are still noodling around in the same ranges.







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

138. 11/10/07-11/12/07 - Slight changes, Edwards trending up

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[rinsd]

139. As always thank you for taking the time to put these figures in graphs (nt)

[CyberPieHole]

140. Clinton's campaign is said to be "imploding"...

I guess someone forgot to tell that to Rasmussen.:evilgrin:

[DavidDvorkin]

141. Her campaign is stalling

But they're all stalled.

Even Edwards' recent rise, much as it heartens me since I'm an Edwards supporter, will probably turn out to be a brief bump, like the rises and dips in all three have been all along. Over the long term, they're not really changing.

Of course, as we all know, everything changes this week. Real movement begins! Unless it doesn't.

[DavidDvorkin]

142. 11/13/07 - Clinton down, Obama flat, Edwards up

According to the trendlines, Edwards will pass Obama for the #2 position some time this weekend. It must be true, because I saw it on a graph.

Go, Johnny, go!







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

143. 11/14/07 - Clinton up, Obama still flat, Edwards ouch

Ouch, ouch, ouch.







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

144. 11/15/07 - Clinton down, Obama and Edwards up

They're still staying within those narrow ranges.







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

145. 11/16/07 - Clinton and Edwards unchanged, Obama up

Still within the same ranges, but Obama's movement will be significant, if it keeps up. On the other hand, no one's movements ever seems to keep up, in this poll. On the third hand, I thought this was the week when Big Things were expected to happen. On the fourth hand, just wait till after Thanksgiving, wow, will there be movement then!







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[smalll]

146. DavidD - let me also say thanks for all your hard work with this. PLEASE keep it up!

Or if you want, start a new thread if you fear this one is getting too long and unwieldly.

[DavidDvorkin]

147. I've been wondering if I ought to start a new thread

Or perhaps a thread for a week.

Any opinions?

[DavidDvorkin]

148. 11/17-19/07 - Narrow movements over the weekend, no real change

No big happenings yet.

I'll toot my own horn, or at least graphical representation's horn. People post the latest Rasmussen daily numbers on DU and seem to read significance into the daily movements. But when you look at the graph of the numbers, you can see that, over the long term, nothing is happening.

Good lord, are we going to have to wait till after Iowa to see big movements in the national polls?







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

149. 11/20/07 - Clinton and Edwards up, Obama noticably down

I changed the meaningless fifth-order polynomial trend lines to probably equally meaningful logarithmic ones. These aren't so influenced by recent ups and downs, so I hoped they'd show the long-term trend. They show Clinton rising, Obama declining, and Edwards declining very slightly.







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

150. 11/21/07 - Clinton and Obama down, Edwards steady

Obama's drop is a serious one, at least over the short term.

Let's try third-order polynomial trend lines! Not because they show what I want to see, but more because they show what I think I'm seeing when I look at the graph of the Rasmussen data.

I wish Ras would publish the actual daily numbers, so we could see if the jumps and dips are just due to big outliers or if they reflect something more.







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

151. 11/27/07 - Clinton and Obama holding, Edwards down 1

This must be the week when everyone starts really moving! Come on, guys!







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[hayu_lol]

152. David, thanks much for this effort...

I notice on almost all the graphs that something happened to Obama about the 1st of Oct. Was that when he got involved with the religious side of his life? He has essentially falling ever since according to the graph(s).

Makes it very easy to visualize what is going on.

[DavidDvorkin]

153. He's flat right now

All three of them are, essentially, but I wonder if that's due to people not thinking about it during the Thanskgiving week. If Obama and Clinton both start dropping again now, that will be significant.

Thanks. I started doing the graph for myself because I couldn't visualize anything from the table of numbers. Now I'm glad I did.

[LeftCoast]

156. David, thanks for posting this.

Can you give me any details on these numbers though? I'm assuming they're national numbers, but are they from Zogby's online poll or is this from his more traditional poll? Oh, and what's our MOE?

Thanks again!

[DavidDvorkin]

157. This is the Rasmussen daily poll

I don't remember the MOE or sample size, but I think that info is given at the discussion link that's in the post. That's a link to the Rasmussen site.

The numbers represent a four-day rolling average. Rasmussen doesn't post the raw numbers, just the averages.

[Alamom]

154. Thanks .nm

[tammywammy]

155. Off topic

But that's a great pic in your sig line.

[DavidDvorkin]

158. Rasmussen daily for 11/28/07 - Clinton down 1, Obama up 1, Edwards unchanged

From which I deduce ... um ... Yawn. What was I saying?







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

161. Rasmussen daily for 11/29/07 - Clinton sliding, Obama leaping, Edwards unchanged

Clinton's slide is continuing; it looks real. Obama is a very jaggedy guy with a weird chart.







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

162. Rasmussen daily for 11/30/07 - Clinton still sliding, Obama still leaping, Edwards still unchanged

The Clinton and Obama curves are doing the same thing they did in early October, so as always, we'll have to wait for another week or so of numbers before we can tell if this is a long-term thing.







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

163. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/1/07 - Clinton down 1, Obama unchanged, Edwards up 1

Fooled me - they published on Saturday. Let's hope they do it tomorrow, as well.

Okay, so this is the week Clinton collapses, Obama slides, and Edwards surges into the lead!







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

164. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/2/07 - Clinton and Edwards up 1, Obama down 3

Clinton is flattening and may have arrested her slide, Obama's rise has reversed, and Edwards continues to rise.







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

165. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/3/07 - All three unchanged

Rather unusual.







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

166. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/4/07 - Clinton's slide continues, Obama down 1, Edwards up 2

If this goes on ...







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

167. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/5/07 - Clintons down 1, Obama up 1, Edwards down 1

So we're back to the tiny changes. Need more data! More data!

The trendlines indicate that the top three Dems will converge at 25% in a week or so. If this goes on, that is.

On the Republican side, Rasmussen shows Huckabee in the lead. Ras also says that Huckabee now leads Clinton in Arkansas.







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

168. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/6/07 - Clinton and Edwards down 1, Obama up 2

Clinton's slide is slow and steady and undeniable. Obama and Edwards still don't show trends. Obama is the most volatile of the three, so I don't think his supporters should react too strongly to sudden changes in his numbers.

The differences chart shows a real tightening. I should add trend lines to that one.







Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

169. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/7/07 - Clinton and Edwards up 1, Obama down 1

Clinton rebounds! Edwards surges! Obama collapses!

Or: No real change. I think that's my choice.








(Pretend that the 10 and 20 lines are actually 0. Does anyone know how to make Excel label different parts of the axis differently?)

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

170. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/8/07 - Clinton up 2, Obama unchanged, Edwards down 1

Long run, Obama and Edwards stuck, Clinton still strikingly down but no longer falling. Jeez.








(Pretend that the 10 and 20 lines are actually 0. Does anyone know how to make Excel label different parts of the axis differently?)

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

171. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/9/07 - Clinton and Obama up 2, Edwards down 2

Clinton's slide seems to have stopped.








(Pretend that the 10 and 20 lines are actually 0. Does anyone know how to make Excel label different parts of the axis differently?)

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

172. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/9/07 - Clinton and Obama up 2, Edwards down 2

Clinton's slide seems to have stopped.








(Pretend that the 10 and 20 lines are actually 0. Does anyone know how to make Excel label different parts of the axis differently?)

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

173. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/10/07 - Clinton unchanged, Obama up 1, Edwards down 2

Sigh.








(Pretend that the 10 and 20 lines are actually 0. Does anyone know how to make Excel label different parts of the axis differently?)

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

174. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/11/07 - Clinton up 1, Obama unchanged, Edwards down 1

Ouch.








(Pretend that the 10 and 20 lines are actually 0. Does anyone know how to make Excel label different parts of the axis differently?)

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

175. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/12/07 - Clinton down 3, Obama stalled, Edwards up 3

Clinton resumes slide! Obama surge squelched! Edwards leaping!

Very short term, anyway.








(Pretend that the 10 and 20 lines are actually 0. Does anyone know how to make Excel label different parts of the axis differently?)

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

176. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/13/07 - Clinton up 1, Obama and Edwards unchanged

Even this late in the game, they're not going anywhere.








(Pretend that the 10 and 20 lines are actually 0. Does anyone know how to make Excel label different parts of the axis differently?)

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

177. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/14/07 - Clinton and Edwards up 1, Obama down 1

(Pretend that the 10 and 20 lines are actually 0. Does anyone know how to make Excel label different parts of the axis differently?)

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

178. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/15/07 - Clinton down 1, Obama unchanged, Edwards up 1

I shortened the period covered by the graphs. They now go back to the beginning of September.








(Pretend that the 10 and 20 lines are actually 0. Does anyone know how to make Excel label different parts of the axis differently?)

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

179. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/16/07 - Clinton up 3, Obama unchanged, Edwards down 2

(Pretend that the 10 and 20 lines are actually 0. Does anyone know how to make Excel label different parts of the axis differently?)

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

180. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/17/07 - All three unchanged

That's quite unusual.








(Pretend that the 10 and 20 lines are actually 0. Does anyone know how to make Excel label different parts of the axis differently?)

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[suston96]

181. Trend lines are wrong.

Draw a trend line for the last 10 days and see what you get.

Hillary is trending up. Obama is trending - uh, flat.

The last ten days.

[DavidDvorkin]

183. What kind of trend line you prefer and what range it covers

is a very subjective thing. I may play around with both aspects in the future.

[suston96]

182. Is that graph up there the most recent?

The one I just saw has Hillary moving up and Obama moving, uh flat.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/democratic_presidential_nomination-191.html

Come on. Copy that one and post it here so the folks can see what's happening as of Dec. 13.

[DavidDvorkin]

184. It's the most recent Rasmussen daily numbers

I update it daily.

[DavidDvorkin]

185. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/18/07 - Clinton unchanged, Obama down 3, Edwards up 1

I changed the trend graph. It now goes back only 10 days, and the trend lines are linear. Less nifty looking but probably more meaningful.








(Pretend that the 10 and 20 lines are actually 0. Does anyone know how to make Excel label different parts of the axis differently?)

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

186. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/19/07 - Clinton up 2, Obama unchanged, Edwards up 1

Surging, not surging, unsurging, resurging! Or whatever you prefer.








(Pretend that the 10 and 20 lines are actually 0. Does anyone know how to make Excel label different parts of the axis differently?)

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

187. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/20/07 - Clinton down 3, Obama up 3, Edwards up 2

Go, John!

All Others are declining. Makes me wonder if their support is shifting to the top three. Of course, it's all really little bumps and dips.








(Pretend that the 10 and 20 lines are actually 0. Does anyone know how to make Excel label different parts of the axis differently?)

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

188. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/21/07 - Clinton up 1, Obama down 3, Edwards down 2

The more things change ...








(Pretend that the 10 and 20 lines are actually 0. Does anyone know how to make Excel label different parts of the axis differently?)

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

189. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/27/07 - Clinton down 1, Obama unchanged, Edwards up 1

I thought the few days that Rasmussen skipped would produce something interesting, but the Big Three are still pretty much where they were.








(Pretend that the 10 and 20 lines are actually 0. Does anyone know how to make Excel label different parts of the axis differently?)

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

190. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/28/07 - Clinton up 1, Obama and Edwards down 1

Still no real change. Are we going to have to wait till after Iowa to see movement?








(Pretend that the 10 and 20 lines are actually 0. Does anyone know how to make Excel label different parts of the axis differently?)

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

191. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/29/07 - Clinton up 3, Obama up 1, Edwards down 1

One could almost think that the attacks and counterattacks on DU are having no effect on these numbers at all!

(I finally thought of enclosing these in a page on my Web site. Why didn't I think of that before? Duh. The URL is http://www.dvorkin.com/rastrack.html If you like these graphs, please pass that URL around. Thanks.)








(Pretend that the 10 and 20 lines are actually 0. Does anyone know how to make Excel label different parts of the axis differently?)

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

192. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/30/07 - Clinton and Obama down 1, Edwards up 2

(These graphs are all contained on one Web page at http://www.dvorkin.com/rastrack.html)








(Pretend that the 10 and 20 lines are actually 0. Does anyone know how to make Excel label different parts of the axis differently?)

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

193. Rasmussen daily graph for 12/31/07 - All three unchanged

Did anyone expect that?

(These graphs are all contained on one Web page at http://www.dvorkin.com/rastrack.html)








(Pretend that the 10 and 20 lines are actually 0. Does anyone know how to make Excel label different parts of the axis differently?)

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[DavidDvorkin]

194. Rasmussen daily graph for 1/1/08 - All three still unchanged

Very odd.

(These graphs are all contained on one Web page at http://www.dvorkin.com/rastrack.html)








(Pretend that the 10 and 20 lines are actually 0. Does anyone know how to make Excel label different parts of the axis differently?)

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion

[ChiciB1]

195. Okay... Stupid"s Here. Is Edwards Green?? He's Doing Worse Than Everyone??

Am I reading this wrong?

[DavidDvorkin]

196. I think national polls still represent name recognition and press coverage

If Edwards wins Iowa, all of that will change, and that should be represented in this poll.

However, I'm an Edwards supporter, so take that into account.

[ChiciB1]

197. Okay, Thanks! n/t

[DavidDvorkin]

198. Rasmussen daily graph for 1/3/08 - Clinton down 1, Obama and Edwards up 1

(These graphs are all contained on one Web page at http://www.dvorkin.com/rastrack.html)








(Pretend that the 10 and 20 lines are actually 0. Does anyone know how to make Excel label different parts of the axis differently?)

Rasmussen links:
Data in tabular form
Discussion