Actually, that paper is a comparison of Gallup/Ras to the majors and Kos, which is silly since it does not reflect the accuracy of any of the polls which then displays how biased one way or another a poll is.
The 538 article I posted DOES this.
Actually, the paper compares Rasmussen and Gallup as standards (since they'd typically been the most accurate)... to compare with the news networks, who all lean left... and they showed the lean... then described Rasmussen and Gallup as far right compared to Daily Kos... (why my own inference from that data is that Daily Kos is the most bias of those measured in their stats)...
This was not a measure of accuracy to the result, it was a measure of bias in comparison with each other... Which was the topic at hand... not accuracy to the result, but bias in favor of political favoritism...
Your article does measure the accuracy of the polling agencies... during just the 2010 election alone... and it's conducted by a polling site, that is affiliated with the New York Times... So it's no shocker that they wouldn't have anything written bad about the NY Times in their article, which celebrated the
1 time they were more accurate than Rassmussen since Rasmussen was founded in 2003... However, Rasmussen proved to be highly accurate in the 2008 election, that the very same NY Times poll ranked them 3rd most accurate, and 2004 that NY Times ranked them most accurate... Additionally Rasmussen Research, his prior agency, was ranked the most accurate in 2000 as well... Rasmussen is also the first poll to give Chris Christie and Scott Brown the edge over the otherwise favored opponents...
Rassmussen historically is known as the most accurate of all the polling agencies... Yet, in 2010, despite being on the forefront of predicting the Republican swing due to Tea Party influence... they were inaccurate in some remote locations, like Hawaii... and thus Dems have targeted them...
I responded to a post saying i needed to prove what I said, and I produced 5-6 separate sources... including sources which were academic in nature, not involved in the media/polling business so as to make sure there was no outside motivation, and/or ones that including admission by the owner of the polling site of his own political leanings...
You've produced a heavily flawed source... which is skewed in its result... In essense the source is skewing its own data heavily against a competitve polling agency, in attempt to label them as biased (dismissing other contradictory evidence)... That in my mind just further proves their own bias... So I use my 5-6 sources... and the 1 you provided to help bolster my case...
Again... Though, I know you struggle with this problem persistently... How about addressing the relevant point of the discussion?
That being current poll averages, and how they would be skewed in Romney's favor if the undecideds are awarded along the persistent historical trend of going 80% to 20% in favor of the challenger?
Ive seen many polls with a 5 point margin, and 10% undecideds... if they're awarded those at 8% to 2%... that would overcome the margin of separation, prompting a Romney lead...
Hence, by making the undecideds pick between the options, Rasmussen might be more accurate in predicting this election...
Currently the Real Clear Politics polling average is at 1.2% margin in favor of Obama... that same poll had been up closer to 4-5 points like a week or so back... it's closing, and there are still undecideds out there...
That's not a positive forecast for Obama...