Guest MikeSC Posted October 28, 2004 Report Posted October 28, 2004 Odd, since Bush's avg. lead in Iowa is 3.4%. -=Mike
bob_barron Posted October 28, 2004 Report Posted October 28, 2004 From Zogby- FL: Bush +2 | OH: Kerry +1 | PA: Kerry +3| WI: Kerry +4 | MN: Kerry +3 | MI: TIE | NV: Bush +7 | NM: Bush +3 | CO: Kerry +4 | IA: TIE They seem to be the only poll that has Kerry winning Colorado and Wisconsin which is interesitng. Given those numbers Bush still wins though. LA Times has- LA Times: FL: Bush 51, Kerry 43 OH: Kerry 50, Bush 44 PA: Bush 48, Kerry 48.
teke184 Posted October 28, 2004 Report Posted October 28, 2004 LA Times has- LA Times: FL: Bush 51, Kerry 43 OH: Kerry 50, Bush 44 PA: Bush 48, Kerry 48. Kerry at 50% in Ohio but tied with Bush in Pennsylvania? Riiiiiiiight.
bob_barron Posted October 28, 2004 Report Posted October 28, 2004 The 8 point lead in Florida is also sketchy
Guest MikeSC Posted October 28, 2004 Report Posted October 28, 2004 Stick with RCP's averages, which feature far less dramatic movement than individual posts. Hell, according to Susan Estrich, CBS is going to run with a poll that has Kerry up by 6 in FL, a poll even the NY Times refused to use (odd, since the Times has no problem running anti-Bush stories and that margin is double the margin ANY poll has in Kerry's favor) With the RCP average, Bush is leading FL, OH, HI, WI, IA, MO, NM, NV, CO, WV, and AR in the battleground state column. -=Mike
bob_barron Posted October 28, 2004 Report Posted October 28, 2004 He's also winning Minnesota although that might change with the Zogby poll.
Dr. Tyler; Captain America Posted October 28, 2004 Report Posted October 28, 2004 Stick with RCP's averages, which feature far less dramatic movement than individual posts. You've obviously never taken statistics. Averages are relatively useless since they almost inevitably contain outliers; statistics experts use standard deviation to account for this, but since few people understand the effect of standard deviation on an outcome of the average, RCP obviously doesn't see the need to use it. It's really no excuse; they go poll fishing for Strategic Vision and other Republican commissioned polls, but they fail to mention that the actual average of mainstream polls -- and yes, that's even considering Gallup's usual shenanegans -- is far closer than their "averages" show. In sum, averages are useless in this business. But feel free to continue using it as gospel.
bob_barron Posted October 28, 2004 Report Posted October 28, 2004 I got a D in stats so I have idea what Tyler just said. But they don't use SV in their averages. They do list them though.
Dr. Tyler; Captain America Posted October 28, 2004 Report Posted October 28, 2004 Out of curiosity, does it say they don't use SV and other Republican commissioned polls on their site? If so, where? I know they used a Rocky Mountain/SV poll for Colorado at one point, but they might not use it for nationals; where does the site talk about that?
bob_barron Posted October 28, 2004 Report Posted October 28, 2004 When the race was getting down to the wire (September?) they said they will still post SV results but won't factor them in the averages.
Dr. Tyler; Captain America Posted October 28, 2004 Report Posted October 28, 2004 It'd probably make me a little bit more comfortable about their averages if they stated their methodology. Maybe they do, but I haven't really searched through the site very thoroughly. I just pop in every once in a while and see how much they have Bush up by.
Guest MikeSC Posted October 28, 2004 Report Posted October 28, 2004 Out of curiosity, does it say they don't use SV and other Republican commissioned polls on their site? If so, where? I know they used a Rocky Mountain/SV poll for Colorado at one point, but they might not use it for nationals; where does the site talk about that? They list every poll they use, and several weeks ago, I posted their explanation for every poll they use or do not use. And, Strategic Vision has definitely not been a pro-Bush poll. When you have individual polls with 4-5 point swings in a week, you have polls that are so volatile as to be of no use. -=Mike
Dr. Tyler; Captain America Posted October 28, 2004 Report Posted October 28, 2004 And, Strategic Vision has definitely not been a pro-Bush poll. Hahahaha, and CBS doesn't have a liberal bias, either. When you have individual polls with 4-5 point swings in a week, you have polls that are so volatile as to be of no use. Regardless, averages are useless as well. So, call polling useless, but don't pretend that averages are somehow more accurate than everything else.
Rob E Dangerously Posted October 28, 2004 Report Posted October 28, 2004 As for polls, It's all in the sampling
Dr. Tyler; Captain America Posted October 28, 2004 Report Posted October 28, 2004 Indeed it is. A pollster with an agenda can easily manufacture a poll (*cough* Hawaii) that makes a state look far closer than it actually is by just altering the sampling.
Guest MikeSC Posted October 28, 2004 Report Posted October 28, 2004 And, Strategic Vision has definitely not been a pro-Bush poll. Hahahaha, and CBS doesn't have a liberal bias, either. I'd actually provide numbers, but RCP has removed their poll from the averages for the nation and from individual battleground states. Now, that SurveyUSA poll they use is a little baffling, as if you look at the documentation, it is borderline cheerleading for Kerry. When you have individual polls with 4-5 point swings in a week, you have polls that are so volatile as to be of no use. Regardless, averages are useless as well. So, call polling useless, but don't pretend that averages are somehow more accurate than everything else. Then polling is useless. No argument here. Nobody believes their reality, but they completely drive elections in a major way. Indeed it is. A pollster with an agenda can easily manufacture a poll (*cough* Hawaii) that makes a state look far closer than it actually is by just altering the sampling. If you don't mind me asking, what would be the benefit of SMS Reearch and Honolulu Advertiser both rigging their polls on Bush's behalf? -=Mike
Rob E Dangerously Posted October 28, 2004 Report Posted October 28, 2004 Indeed it is. A pollster with an agenda can easily manufacture a poll (*cough* Hawaii) that makes a state look far closer than it actually is by just altering the sampling. If you don't mind me asking, what would be the benefit of SMS Reearch and Honolulu Advertiser both rigging their polls on Bush's behalf? Hawaii's lonely and they want Bush or Kerry to visit ermm.. nah.. it's "shoddy work".. poll the largest and most Republican island, leave out the more Democratic islands. Get a draw.
Dr. Tyler; Captain America Posted October 28, 2004 Report Posted October 28, 2004 I don't know if it was intentionally rigged, but they certainly missampled it.
teke184 Posted October 28, 2004 Report Posted October 28, 2004 Indeed it is. A pollster with an agenda can easily manufacture a poll (*cough* Hawaii) that makes a state look far closer than it actually is by just altering the sampling. If you don't mind me asking, what would be the benefit of SMS Reearch and Honolulu Advertiser both rigging their polls on Bush's behalf? Hawaii's lonely and they want Bush or Kerry to visit ermm.. nah.. it's "shoddy work".. poll the largest and most Republican island, leave out the more Democratic islands. Get a draw. Considering the most Republican island is also the one that has 70% of the state's population, I'd say it's a somewhat fair sample.
Guest MikeSC Posted October 28, 2004 Report Posted October 28, 2004 Indeed it is. A pollster with an agenda can easily manufacture a poll (*cough* Hawaii) that makes a state look far closer than it actually is by just altering the sampling. If you don't mind me asking, what would be the benefit of SMS Reearch and Honolulu Advertiser both rigging their polls on Bush's behalf? Hawaii's lonely and they want Bush or Kerry to visit ermm.. nah.. it's "shoddy work".. poll the largest and most Republican island, leave out the more Democratic islands. Get a draw. Considering the most Republican island is also the one that has 70% of the state's population, I'd say it's a somewhat fair sample. Well, I guess it'd be as fair as polling New York State and ignoring NYC. -=Mike
Rob E Dangerously Posted October 28, 2004 Report Posted October 28, 2004 Useless information of the night: Hawaii, Percent of total vote, 1960-2000 1960: Honolulu county - 73% Hawaii county - 13% Maui county - 9% Kauai county - 6% 1964: Honolulu county - 75% Hawaii county - 12% Maui county - 8% Kauai county - 5% 1968: Honolulu county - 77% Hawaii county - 11% Maui county - 7% Kauai county - 5% 1972: Honolulu county - 78% Hawaii county - 11% Maui county - 7% Kauai county - 5% 1976: Honolulu county - 76% Hawaii county - 11% Maui county - 8% Kauai county - 5% 1980: Honolulu county - 74% Hawaii county - 12% Maui county - 9% Kauai county - 6% 1984: Honolulu county - 75% Hawaii county - 12% Maui county - 8% Kauai county - 6% 1988: Honolulu county - 74% Hawaii county - 12% Maui county - 9% Kauai county - 6% 1992: Honolulu county - 71% Hawaii county - 14% Maui county - 10% Kauai county - 5% 1996: Honolulu county - 71% Hawaii county - 14% Maui county - 10% Kauai county - 6% 2000: Honolulu county - 70% Hawaii county - 14% Maui county - 11% Kauai county - 6% 1960 was the only time that a Democratic presidential candidate had his highest percentage in Honolulu county In 9 straight Presidential elections (1968 though 2000), The Republican Presidential Candidate's best showing was in Honolulu county.
CBright7831 Posted October 29, 2004 Author Report Posted October 29, 2004 Electoral Vote Predictor 2004: Kerry 260 Bush 254
Kahran Ramsus Posted October 29, 2004 Report Posted October 29, 2004 Michigan's now a tie? When did that happen?
Styles Posted October 29, 2004 Report Posted October 29, 2004 The latest map is deeply disturbing. Why is Ohio turning blue?
bob_barron Posted October 29, 2004 Report Posted October 29, 2004 This is what Zogby has- Zogby: FL: Bush +1 | OH: Kerry +3 | PA: TIE | WI: Kerry +3 | MN: Bush +1 | MI: Bush +2| NV: Bush +5 | NM: Bush +6 | CO: Kerry +1 | IA: Kerry +1 Iowa and Colorado seem to have been solid Bush. Ditto Wisconsin. But Michigan and Minnesota have also been for Kerry so who knows.
bob_barron Posted October 29, 2004 Report Posted October 29, 2004 The latest map is deeply disturbing. Why is Ohio turning blue? Kerry seems to be leading the most recent polls in Ohio- that's why. I still think that site is pretty sketchy. RCP has it 232-207
Guest MikeSC Posted October 29, 2004 Report Posted October 29, 2004 This is what Zogby has- Zogby: FL: Bush +1 | OH: Kerry +3 | PA: TIE | WI: Kerry +3 | MN: Bush +1 | MI: Bush +2| NV: Bush +5 | NM: Bush +6 | CO: Kerry +1 | IA: Kerry +1 Iowa and Colorado seem to have been solid Bush. Ditto Wisconsin. But Michigan and Minnesota have also been for Kerry so who knows. Well, MN is going to be big-time for Kerry, since ACT already has a plan to commit voter fraud. In MN, you can register on the day of the election simply with a resident vouching under oath that you are a resident of the precinct. ACT is planning on vouching for A LOT of people. I almost hope Kerry wins, simply to watch the shitstorm he'll deal with as the right wing will NOT be pleasant to him (good luck abandoning Israel, Senator). But I love my country too much to see Jimmy Carter V 2.0 in the White House. -=Mike
teke184 Posted October 29, 2004 Report Posted October 29, 2004 Even with massive voter fraud, Kerry would still probably be in trouble because current early-voting exit polls are showing Bush getting 15% more support than Kerry. Considering that Kerry's current numbers are showing that he has to carry the 10+ states he's expected to get plus Pennsylvania, Ohio and/or Florida, and some combination of Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, etc., I'd say his chances are getting slimmer by the day. BTW, Electoral-Votes is a BIT skewed considering that they go with Zogby's polling info over everyone else, except when it would harm them. Didn't Zogby actually have Bush up in Ohio?
Guest MikeSC Posted October 29, 2004 Report Posted October 29, 2004 Even with massive voter fraud, Kerry would still probably be in trouble because current early-voting exit polls are showing Bush getting 15% more support than Kerry. Considering that Kerry's current numbers are showing that he has to carry the 10+ states he's expected to get plus Pennsylvania, Ohio and/or Florida, and some combination of Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, etc., I'd say his chances are getting slimmer by the day. BTW, Electoral-Votes is a BIT skewed considering that they go with Zogby's polling info over everyone else, except when it would harm them. Didn't Zogby actually have Bush up in Ohio? Even funnier, Daschle has called Zogby a joke because he has him losing in SD. When Zogby has a Dem losing now, it's REAL bad. -=Mike
teke184 Posted October 29, 2004 Report Posted October 29, 2004 Even with massive voter fraud, Kerry would still probably be in trouble because current early-voting exit polls are showing Bush getting 15% more support than Kerry. Considering that Kerry's current numbers are showing that he has to carry the 10+ states he's expected to get plus Pennsylvania, Ohio and/or Florida, and some combination of Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, etc., I'd say his chances are getting slimmer by the day. BTW, Electoral-Votes is a BIT skewed considering that they go with Zogby's polling info over everyone else, except when it would harm them. Didn't Zogby actually have Bush up in Ohio? Even funnier, Daschle has called Zogby a joke because he has him losing in SD. When Zogby has a Dem losing now, it's REAL bad. -=Mike Apparently Zogby doesn't account for the dead rising to vote Democrat or absentee ballot fraud, both of which were accused in the South Dakota race for the Senate two years ago that Thune lost by about 600 votes. The funny thing is that if the Dems hadn't (supposedly) fucked Thune two years ago, Daschle would probably be getting re-elected by a safe margin.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now