Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (52652)	10/22/2008 6:19:07 PM
From: DizzyG	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224704

I liked this comment from that very same blog, Kenneth... When I saw the new AP poll with McCain only down 1 I said to myself "I bet Nate is scrambling to write a post to discredit that poll and others that show the race closer than 5 pts." Sure enough, an hour later, here is the post! Nate, why don't you just swap in an Obama-Biden logo for the current 538 logo? fivethirtyeight.com You have posted polling data from virtually ever pollster on the planet, Kenneth. And the only time that you do it is when your boy is in the lead. In fact, I don't EVER recall a time that you posted a poll that showed McCain in the lead. I hate to break it to you, Kenneth, but you are nothing but a DNC parrot. LOL! Diz-

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (52652)	10/22/2008 8:19:05 PM
From: SGJ	1 Recommendation Respond to of 224704

Polls, Hah! Thats all you got? The Sad History of General Election Polls, and How They Have Repeatedly Failed to Predict the Outcomes of Presidential Elections By Nithin Coca, published Feb 02, 2008 I'm sure you've noticed all the political campaign touting general election polls. Unfortunately, these polls have a terrible history of actually predicting who will in the fall. So what is Barack Obama leads everyone in Zogby, woop-dee-do! Does John Edwards leads in Rassmussen, oh my lord! Clinton leads in ARG? Yowsie! I'm going to explore how the polls have failed repeatedly, and show you the real margin of error. So next time you see a poll, read it with caution! Here are some of the worst disasters of General Election polling from the last 24 years of Presidential elections. After this January's debacle in New Hampshire, can we just argue on the issues and the REASONS why to support a candidate, and ignore faulty polls? 1976 Late July - Gallup Jimmy Carter 62% Gerald Ford 30% Final Results Carter 50.1% Ford 48.0% Average MOE - 14.95% This sort of shift would make it a blowout for either side of the aisle. 1980 (this one's for those of you who say - "polls shift over time") Nov 1980, Gallup Pre-Election Poll Carter 44% Reagan 41% Final Results Reagan 50.7% Carter 41.0% Average MOE - 5.85% = the margin of error in every GE poll this year. This really embarrassed the pollsters, so of course, they went ahead and did it again. 1988 5/17 - NYT/CBS Michael Dukakis 49% George Bush 39% Final Results Bush 53.4% Dukakis 45.6% Average MOE - 7.9% A shift like what occurred in 1988 would make any Democrat the winner or the loser by a healthy margin. 1992 June 1992 Time/CNN Ross Perot 37% George Bush 24% Bill Clinton 24% Final Results Clinton 43.0% Bush 37.4% Perot 18.9% Average MOE - 20.1%. Imagine if Bloomberg's runs, I foresee similar dynamics. 2000 Sept 2000 Newsweek Al Gore 49% George W. Bush 39% Final Results Bush 47.9% Gore 48.4% Average MOE - 4.8% So all the undecided went for Bush, eh? Polls are worthless in close races. Hmmm, sounds familiar, doesn't it? In conclusion, the only poll that matters is the one on election day.