Media manipulating likely voter data to support GOP?

[Politics_Guy25]

Something is up.

Review this link:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/11/01/politics/main652662.shtml

In 2004, Bush led in the CBS poll by 3 points among LV voters. Among RV, it changed by just a point or two.

Review CNN/USA Today/Gallup's final Kerry versus Bush poll here:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/polls/usatodaypolls.htm

Kerry led by 2 among RVs. Trailed by 2 among Likely voters before Gallup allocated it to make it a tie.

That's a swing of 4 points. A bit noteworthy but not HUGE.

Another example here from a LAT/Bloomberg poll in 2008 of President Obama versus Mccain:
http://www.latimes.com/media/acrobat/2008-10/43084942.pdf

Likely voters 49-40/RV 48-39.

There are MANY other instances that I could find of the RV/LV disparity not being 15-20 points.

A 15/20 swing from LV/RV is unprecedented.

Take a look at Gallup's daily presidential tracking poll of ALL national adults of President Obama's approval ratings versus Rasmussen's President Obama approval ratings among likely voters. Even there, even now, in this environment, the numbers are ALMOST always within the statistical margin of error of each other. Rasmussen today is 46/Gallup is 44. Why is this large LV to RV swing not showing up in the approval tracking?

I am sorry but it is ABSURD to believe that Senator Boxer is up by 16 among all RVs but just by 5 among LVs. It is absurb to believe that Sestak is up by 6 among registered votes and down by 4 among likely voters. A 10 point swing?

The media could be giving the GOP candidates 10-11 extra points that they don't deserve in their LV screens this year and if they are, my question is why if it is not to further their pro-GOP narrative? My more important question is why is 2010 the first election ever in the history of the US to have such a wide RV/LV discrepancy? It didn't exist in 1996, 2000, 2004 or 2008.

Even 1994, Gallup had the GOP up by 7, they won by 4 points-48-44. So even in a revolutonary year for them, they underperformed their final polling.

I could buy these polls if RV/LVs matched at least somewhat but they don't.

Also, OFA didn't exist back in 1994. Do you really think OFA is going to let all of these RV's stay home on election day? Umm...no.

This is something significant to take note of that I thought of after reviewing the CNN polls today annd it does lead wide open the door for a Dewey defeats Truman scenario to occur once again.

[BlueIdaho]

1. Never trust the M$M.

They are sock puppets that follow the orders of the filthy rich and their corporate cash.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

2. The Reason There Is A Bigger Disparity In Likely Voters

The reason there is a bigger disparity in likely voters to registered voters in mid terms as opposed to general elections is because you have a lot more "casual" voters in general elections. I think in general elections about 60% of registered voters vote. In mid terms it drops to 40% or so.

[Imajika]

3. This is correct...

Far fewer people actually turn out in midterms, so the Likely Voter screen is more stringent.

[wisteria]

4. This isn't a usual mid-term election. n/t

[MadMaddie]

5. Yea I have never trusted the polls.

They definitely are trying to make the news. They are worthless.