Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
2,500,000 members. Thank you!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-11-2011, 09:17 PM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,325 posts, read 44,758,430 times
Reputation: 7118

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by meson View Post
Then learn how to read them.....
Well, I don't think it's me who's having the problem, since I've had to school here on more than one occasion.

Anything else I can explain for you about the polls? We've already covered the "less than" 100% of other pollsters VS Rasmussen, we've covered what a trend looks like, we've covered how pollsters skew their party affiliation to get the answer they want/need.

Look at Gallup and Rasmussen - presidential approval - now THAT is a trend.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-11-2011, 10:31 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
38,597 posts, read 26,198,089 times
Reputation: 12623
Quote:
Originally Posted by meson View Post
Yesterday's numbers are old?

Not everyone polls every day like Rasmussen does. If you watch the Rasmussen numbers over time, and whether or not you believe they are wrongly weighted, they do make following trends very easy. This one is clear.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2011, 10:34 PM
 
Location: NC
9,984 posts, read 10,344,425 times
Reputation: 3086
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
You're quoting from the NYT?



Rasmussen was one of the more accurate pollsters.

Read it and weep.

http://www.fordham.edu/images/academ...20election.pdf



You guys ALWAYS bring up that ONE poll, as if that reflects the accuracy of the pollster as a whole.
Reading is fundamental 2010=/=2008. I also bring up that poll because it is the most inaccurate poll in the history of professional polling.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2011, 10:40 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
38,597 posts, read 26,198,089 times
Reputation: 12623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255 View Post
Averaging all of the polls is always better than relying on one pollster (in 08 averaging all of the polls was within .3 of the final result)


That may be true were we interested in a single event, but this is a trend over time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2011, 10:48 PM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
22,090 posts, read 19,285,669 times
Reputation: 5251
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
I hate to break it to you, but Gallup just came out with a poll - obama barely beats an unnamed GOP contender.
The problem for the Republicans is the unnamed GOP contender does better than any of the named ones.....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2011, 10:50 PM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
22,090 posts, read 19,285,669 times
Reputation: 5251
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
That may be true were we interested in a single event, but this is a trend over time.
And even in a trend overtime its still best to look at the average of the polls rather than one specific pollster.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2011, 11:01 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
38,597 posts, read 26,198,089 times
Reputation: 12623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomstudent View Post
Rasmussen was one of the worse in 2010. They were off by 40% in one race. Their polls skewed Republican by about 4% over actual results, the second worst of any polling firm.

Rasmussen Polls Were Biased and Inaccurate; Quinnipiac, SurveyUSA Performed Strongly - NYTimes.com


Did you bother to read your own link?


"The analysis covers all polls issued by firms in the final three weeks of the campaign, even if a company surveyed a particular state multiple times. In our view, this provides for a more comprehensive analysis than focusing solely on a firm’s final poll in each state, since polling has a tendency to converge in the final days of the campaign, perhaps because some firms fear that their results are an outlier and adjust them accordingly."


What possible relevance does a poll taken three weeks out have to do with anything?

Was an election held three weeks out to measure the polls?

Only the last one before the election can be measured so it's the only one that matters.

Obviously the NYT is manipulating numbers (unless you believe three weeks was selected for a reason other than cherry-picking numbers) to present a false picture while accusing Rasmussen of doing the same.

What the NYT did is speculation at best with no objective, verifiable proof of anything.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2011, 11:08 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
38,597 posts, read 26,198,089 times
Reputation: 12623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255 View Post
And even in a trend overtime its still best to look at the average of the polls rather than one specific pollster.


True enough, provided we are looking only at new polls and not mixing old polls with new.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2011, 11:14 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
38,597 posts, read 26,198,089 times
Reputation: 12623
Quote:
Originally Posted by Randomstudent View Post
Reading is fundamental 2010=/=2008. I also bring up that poll because it is the most inaccurate poll in the history of professional polling.

Read your own link!


They are claiming polls three weeks out were out of whack based on election results three weeks later.


What kind of BS analysis is that?


If the numbers didn't change over time, we wouldn't need new polls!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-11-2011, 11:39 PM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
22,090 posts, read 19,285,669 times
Reputation: 5251
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey View Post
True enough, provided we are looking only at new polls and not mixing old polls with new.
True to a point. When looking at the average of polls, I wouldn't exactly put a couple polls now in with some polls from a month ago, nor would I say using the average method is all that good when you are taking into consideration polls before and after a major news story. However, I don't see an issue with going back the past week or two and taking the average of that point.

Going back and looking at the last five or six polls and taking the average method (even if its going back to two weeks) are bound to have a better chance of being accurate than just a single poll from a day or two ago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:05 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top