Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"The latest one from Pew poll is a shining example of why our side gets so frustrated with polls. Every time a Pew poll comes out, the numbers appear out of whack. Of course if you are a number-cruncher and look to the cross-tabs, the results are clearly flawed. Pew, to its credit, tells us its history since 1988. Basically in 1988 they did a good job, calling the race almost perfectly, possibly even overestimating Bush support by 0.4% (keep in mind they round so 50-42 could be 7.6%). But since then, their results have been downhill.
Starting in 1992, EVERY Pew poll appears to lean to one direction — always towards the Democrat, and by an average of more than 5 percentage points. Worse this is a reflection of the “final” poll which even the Democratic firm, Public Policy Polling, usually gets right."
A 270-270 tie? Interesting. So when is Congress going to increase the size of the House to 437?
House, 435 + Senate, 100 + 3 Electors for DC = 538 votes in the Electoral College. A 270-270 tie isn't possible. 270 is the threshold to win. The writer of the linked article is a bit confused.
"The latest one from Pew poll is a shining example of why our side gets so frustrated with polls. Every time a Pew poll comes out, the numbers appear out of whack. Of course if you are a number-cruncher and look to the cross-tabs, the results are clearly flawed. Pew, to its credit, tells us its history since 1988. Basically in 1988 they did a good job, calling the race almost perfectly, possibly even overestimating Bush support by 0.4% (keep in mind they round so 50-42 could be 7.6%). But since then, their results have been downhill.
Starting in 1992, EVERY Pew poll appears to lean to one direction — always towards the Democrat, and by an average of more than 5 percentage points. Worse this is a reflection of the “final” poll which even the Democratic firm, Public Policy Polling, usually gets right."
I'm convinced!
Huh.
1992. Who won that year?
1996. Who won that year?
2000. Who won (the popular vote) that year? (remember, these polls predict the popular vote winner, not the Electora College winner?
2004. Finally, Pew gets one wrong!
2008. Who won that year?
Pew -- getting it wrong 1 time in 5 since 1992!
But more revealing is the mid-year Pew polling, because that's where we are right now. It is July 2012.
Pew poll, July 2008: Obama +5 (Obama went on to win +7, Pew's July poll gave McCain two more % than he actually got)
Pew poll, July 2004: Kerry +2 (Kerry lost -3, so Pew in July of that year overstated him +5)
Pew poll, July 2000: Bush +1 (Gore won +1 in the popular vote, which is what these polls measure, so Pew's mid-year poll gave Bush +2 over what he ended up getting)
Pew poll, July 1996: Clinton +10 (Clinton would win by +9, so Pew gave him one extra %)
Pew poll, June 1996 [they didn't poll in July that year]: Bush +5 (Clinton won +6, so Pew gave Bush a whopping +11 over how he actually finished)
1996, 2000 and 2008 were all good, predictive polls, right within the margin of error. The only ones really off were 2004 and 1992, and the worst of all massively overstated the Republican's performance.
Thanks for the laugh! Jim Geraghty whining about alleged bias to the left, and he links to stats proving a house bias to the right by Pew! (he was probably hoping people like you and Iwouldn't delve into the stats - I bet you complied with his hope, didn't you?).
Anyway, Shorebaby, I want to THANK YOU for linking to those stats which show that the average of Pew's July polls OVERESTIMATE the eventual Republican general election performance...
1992. Who won that year?
1996. Who won that year?
2000. Who won (the popular vote) that year? (remember, these polls predict the popular vote winner, not the Electora College winner?
2004. Finally, Pew gets one wrong!
2008. Who won that year?
Pew -- getting it wrong 1 time in 5 since 1992!
But more revealing is the mid-year Pew polling, because that's where we are right now. It is July 2012.
Pew poll, July 2008: Obama +5 (Obama went on to win +7, Pew's July poll gave McCain two more % than he actually got)
Pew poll, July 2004: Kerry +2 (Kerry lost -3, so Pew in July of that year overstated him +5)
Pew poll, July 2000: Bush +1 (Gore won +1 in the popular vote, which is what these polls measure, so Pew's mid-year poll gave Bush +2 over what he ended up getting)
Pew poll, July 1996: Clinton +10 (Clinton would win by +9, so Pew gave him one extra %)
Pew poll, June 1996 [they didn't poll in July that year]: Bush +5 (Clinton won +6, so Pew gave Bush a whopping +11 over how he actually finished)
1996, 2000 and 2008 were all good, predictive polls, right within the margin of error. The only ones really off were 2004 and 1992, and the worst of all massively overstated the Republican's performance.
Thanks for the laugh! Jim Geraghty whining about alleged bias to the left, and he links to stats proving a house bias to the right by Pew! (he was probably hoping people like you and Iwouldn't delve into the stats - I bet you complied with his hope, didn't you?).
Lol, do you think Dems will out number Republicans by 9% on election day? Well than the Pew results are for you!
From the link.
"October 1988 — Bush 50 Dukakis 42; Actual Result Bush +7.6 (Call this one spot on.)
Late October 1992 — Clinton 44 Bush 34; Actual Result :Clinton +5.5 (Skew against Republican candidate +5.5)
November 1996 — Clinton +51 Dole 32; Actual Result Clinton +8.5 (Skew against Republican candidate +10.5)
November 2000 — Gore 45; Bush 41 (Skew against Republican Candidate +3.5)
November 2004 — Kerry 46; Bush 45 (Skew against Republican Candidate +3.4)
November 2008 — Obama 50 McCain 39 (Skew against Republican + 3.8)
After being wrong in the same direction so consistently, wouldn’t you think that Pew might attempt to adjust their sampling techniques to adjust their techniques to avoid under-sampling Republican voters?* Keep in mind the polls I have highlighted are the last polls in the race. *I find it interesting that not one of their poll statisticians came out and said, ‘Boss, these results look whacked out because the electorate is going to be more than 24 percent Republican, and self-identified Democrats aren’t going to outpace Republicans by 9 percentage points.’* The Democrats couldn’t even reach that margin in 2008 . . . and you wonder why so many people think Obama is going to win.* Didn’t Einstein once say the definition of insanity was “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”.* So I ask are the people at Pew insane or just biased?"
"The latest one from Pew poll is a shining example of why our side gets so frustrated with polls. Every time a Pew poll comes out, the numbers appear out of whack. Of course if you are a number-cruncher and look to the cross-tabs, the results are clearly flawed. Pew, to its credit, tells us its history since 1988. Basically in 1988 they did a good job, calling the race almost perfectly, possibly even overestimating Bush support by 0.4% (keep in mind they round so 50-42 could be 7.6%). But since then, their results have been downhill.
Starting in 1992, EVERY Pew poll appears to lean to one direction — always towards the Democrat, and by an average of more than 5 percentage points. Worse this is a reflection of the “final” poll which even the Democratic firm, Public Policy Polling, usually gets right."
Location: Georgia, on the Florida line, right above Tallahassee
10,471 posts, read 15,830,626 times
Reputation: 6438
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby
Huh? Is this your learned way of disputing the data I provided? Well done.
I might've misunderstood. I thought you were saying Karl Rove was using bad data (polls) to make it appear that Obama was crushing Romney. Did I get that wrong or right ?
I might've misunderstood. I thought you were saying Karl Rove was using bad data (polls) to make it appear that Obama was crushing Romney. Did I get that wrong or right ?
Rove is using the data available. And as the Pew data shows Dems are over represented so their data is skewed. This over representation is not limited to Pew. Garbage in, garbage out.
Are you kidding, the events of the last few days have all but sealed the deal for Romney. Let's recap. The Bain attacks are backfiring on Obama. Politifact and CNN and the Washington Post have declared Obama a liar. His donations are drying up. He hasn't secured his base. Coupled with the dismal economy, huge debt and a corrupt AG. Things are grim for Obama.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
