Are democrats intentionally trying to lose the 2016 election?

[Redfish]

A childs view of statistical sampling

Nowhere is an absolute 5% given for all samples. In fact, the percentage drops significantly as your sample size increases.

Are you actually that statistically ignorant to believe that a sample of the US population needs to be over 15 million to be "statistically relevant" ?

no

wrong, are you claiming that 5% is needed for a population of 20 but not for a population of 300 million? since 5% of 20 is 1, does that give you a valid sample? of course not, the bigger the sample the more accurate the result.

yes, the math says that a 5% sample is the minimum for a statistically relevant result. the % does not go down as the population goes up.

The final poll average, for the presidential election, is almost always accurate to within a few percentage points.

That average is composed of a sample of about 10,000 likely voters. What percent of the actual number of voters is that?

It sure as hell isn't 5%

the pollsters have been pretty good with their guesses recently. the question is whether that is due to accurate polling or is due to people being influenced by "polling results".

its a game, why is that so hard for you to grasp?

 

[007]

So you can't name anyone with a chance of beating Hillary Clinton if she's the nominee. Not even someone out of the Republican establishment.

Okay.

Hitlery won't even run, moron. She doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell of ever being president.

Rand Paul and Ted Cruz would be the top two republicans at this point in time, and either would wax the floor with any democrap on the planet.
After obama and the dem majority we've had for the last six years, and how bad they've FUCKED THE DOG, people are SICK of democrats. It goes back and forth, always does, probably always will. Dems will lose in '14 and the White House in '16, guaranteed.

God.....I LOVE Republicans

Good, because you're going to see a lot of them.

 

[candycorn]

I guess imitation really is the most sincere form of flattery

Its sort of indicative of the entire poltical landscape is it not? The GOP in 2013 should change slogan to "We love Mexicans too." Some may actually believe it.

 

[007]

I guess imitation really is the most sincere form of flattery

Its sort of indicative of the entire poltical landscape is it not? The GOP in 2013 should change slogan to "We love Mexicans too." Some may actually believe it.

They don't have to. Democrats are cutting their own throat trying to crucify Zimmerman who is Hispanic. All the GOP has to do is sit back and watch the show.

 

[Redfish]

I guess imitation really is the most sincere form of flattery

Its sort of indicative of the entire poltical landscape is it not? The GOP in 2013 should change slogan to "We love Mexicans too." Some may actually believe it.

well candyass, I guess the dem solgan should be: keep them down in the plantation on welfare and continue to buy their votes with free shit.

 

[Redfish]

I guess imitation really is the most sincere form of flattery

Its sort of indicative of the entire poltical landscape is it not? The GOP in 2013 should change slogan to "We love Mexicans too." Some may actually believe it.

They don't have to. Democrats are cutting their own throat trying to crucify Zimmerman who is Hispanic. All the GOP has to do is sit back and watch the show.

right, obama and holder are really looking bad on the zimmerman thing. as is the media. Zimmerman will win his suit against NBC.

 

[expatriate]

LOL, as I said, if you choose to buy into the fraud, go right ahead. The math is the truth and it cannot be changed.

a rolling tiny sample does not change the need for a 5% sample

A childs view of statistical sampling

Nowhere is an absolute 5% given for all samples. In fact, the percentage drops significantly as your sample size increases.

Are you actually that statistically ignorant to believe that a sample of the US population needs to be over 15 million to be "statistically relevant" ?

no

wrong, are you claiming that 5% is needed for a population of 20 but not for a population of 300 million? since 5% of 20 is 1, does that give you a valid sample? of course not, the bigger the sample the more accurate the result.

yes, the math says that a 5% sample is the minimum for a statistically relevant result. the % does not go down as the population goes up.

clearly, you read the Classics Illustrated version of Probability and Statistics. Did you need it to get your GED, perhaps? I'm curious... are you aware of the concept of MOE? Do you even know what it stands for?

 

[007]

Its sort of indicative of the entire poltical landscape is it not? The GOP in 2013 should change slogan to "We love Mexicans too." Some may actually believe it.

They don't have to. Democrats are cutting their own throat trying to crucify Zimmerman who is Hispanic. All the GOP has to do is sit back and watch the show.

right, obama and holder are really looking bad on the zimmerman thing. as is the media. Zimmerman will win his suit against NBC.

And don't think the Hispanics aren't taking notice who's against one of their own, and for nothing more than a RACIST agenda. It's a win for the GOP, and they don't have to do a thing. The dems are doing it to themselves. Sometimes they just can't hide their racism. Hispanics are getting schooled on democrats right now.

 

[expatriate]

redfish's ignorance of polling techniques is absolutely staggering.

and you said you would bet that Hillary is not the nominee in '16. How much would you be willing to wager?

sorry, but its your ignorance that is staggering, but not surprising since you support the party of slavery and oppression.

how about $5000? send me your check and I will hold it until the election, then if you win I wll send it back to you with one from me for $5000.

I am not fool enough to send you a check for that amount of money three years in advance, but I am certainly willing to bet that amount and will gladly and easily pay up if I lose. Are you honorable enough to make such a wager and pay me if YOU lose?

 

[expatriate]

They don't have to. Democrats are cutting their own throat trying to crucify Zimmerman who is Hispanic. All the GOP has to do is sit back and watch the show.

right, obama and holder are really looking bad on the zimmerman thing. as is the media. Zimmerman will win his suit against NBC.

And don't think the Hispanics aren't taking notice who's against one of their own, and for nothing more than a RACIST agenda. It's a win for the GOP, and they don't have to do a thing. The dems are doing it to themselves. Sometimes they just can't hide their racism. Hispanics are getting schooled on democrats right now.

wishful thinking. Hispanics will be in the democrat's camp come election day, without a doubt. The democratic position on immigration reform when compared to the republicans guarantees it.

 

[rightwinger]

Hitlery won't even run, moron. She doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell of ever being president.

Rand Paul and Ted Cruz would be the top two republicans at this point in time, and either would wax the floor with any democrap on the planet.
After obama and the dem majority we've had for the last six years, and how bad they've FUCKED THE DOG, people are SICK of democrats. It goes back and forth, always does, probably always will. Dems will lose in '14 and the White House in '16, guaranteed.

God.....I LOVE Republicans

Good, because you're going to see a lot of them.

Maybe as FoxNews commentators

 

[whitehall]

They already lost. They are trying to put a happy face on it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I don't know. who predicted that obama would win three years before the election?

So you can't name anyone with a chance of beating Hillary Clinton if she's the nominee. Not even someone out of the Republican establishment.

Okay.

OK, if hillybilly does not run (and she very well may not) who will the dem candidate be? who do you lefties have besides the old, dried up, shrill hag?

If I had a fail proof crystal ball, I would tell you who both parties would run, but I don't.

in truth, I think the GOP has more options than the dems at this point.

hell, there might even be a viable third party by 2016----from the left or the right.

Okay, again. Now you're claiming the GOP has more options, but you can't name a single one.

 

[NYcarbineer]

no

wrong, are you claiming that 5% is needed for a population of 20 but not for a population of 300 million? since 5% of 20 is 1, does that give you a valid sample? of course not, the bigger the sample the more accurate the result.

yes, the math says that a 5% sample is the minimum for a statistically relevant result. the % does not go down as the population goes up.

The final poll average, for the presidential election, is almost always accurate to within a few percentage points.

That average is composed of a sample of about 10,000 likely voters. What percent of the actual number of voters is that?

It sure as hell isn't 5%

the pollsters have been pretty good with their guesses recently. the question is whether that is due to accurate polling or is due to people being influenced by "polling results".

its a game, why is that so hard for you to grasp?

Running away from your original stupidity I see. Typical.

 

[expatriate]

They don't have to. Democrats are cutting their own throat trying to crucify Zimmerman who is Hispanic. All the GOP has to do is sit back and watch the show.

right, obama and holder are really looking bad on the zimmerman thing. as is the media. Zimmerman will win his suit against NBC.

And don't think the Hispanics aren't taking notice who's against one of their own, and for nothing more than a RACIST agenda. It's a win for the GOP, and they don't have to do a thing. The dems are doing it to themselves. Sometimes they just can't hide their racism. Hispanics are getting schooled on democrats right now.

La Raza says it's not ignoring Trayvon Martin case - CNN.com

Looks like La Raza certainly is NOT coming down on democrats for this case... where do you learn your politics, in a liquor store?

 

[Redfish]

redfish's ignorance of polling techniques is absolutely staggering.

and you said you would bet that Hillary is not the nominee in '16. How much would you be willing to wager?

sorry, but its your ignorance that is staggering, but not surprising since you support the party of slavery and oppression.

how about $5000? send me your check and I will hold it until the election, then if you win I wll send it back to you with one from me for $5000.

I am not fool enough to send you a check for that amount of money three years in advance, but I am certainly willing to bet that amount and will gladly and easily pay up if I lose. Are you honorable enough to make such a wager and pay me if YOU lose?

I already made the offer. But since you are a liberal, I don't trust you to pay when you lose. I would only engage in such a bet with you if the stakes were held by an unbiased party. So send me your check and I will give it to my banker to hold. He may buy a 3 year CD with it, I am sure you would be glad to share the interest with me, right?

 

[Vandalshandle]

Rand Paul is going to be our next president?

Bubba, is that you? How many times have I told you to stop clowning around on the internet during working hours? If I have to come down there to the mail room, you are gong to be in a world of trouble...

 

[expatriate]

sorry, but its your ignorance that is staggering, but not surprising since you support the party of slavery and oppression.

how about $5000? send me your check and I will hold it until the election, then if you win I wll send it back to you with one from me for $5000.

I am not fool enough to send you a check for that amount of money three years in advance, but I am certainly willing to bet that amount and will gladly and easily pay up if I lose. Are you honorable enough to make such a wager and pay me if YOU lose?

I already made the offer. But since you are a liberal, I don't trust you to pay when you lose. I would only engage in such a bet with you if the stakes were held by an unbiased party. So send me your check and I will give it to my banker to hold. He may buy a 3 year CD with it, I am sure you would be glad to share the interest with me, right?

so.... you're NOT honorable enough to make such a wager and pay me if you lose. why didn't you just say so instead of tapdance like that?

and a three year CD? why in the world would I want to put any of my money in a low yield instrument like that?

 

[Wyatt earp]

redfish's ignorance of polling techniques is absolutely staggering.

and you said you would bet that Hillary is not the nominee in '16. How much would you be willing to wager?

sorry, but its your ignorance that is staggering, but not surprising since you support the party of slavery and oppression.

how about $5000? send me your check and I will hold it until the election, then if you win I wll send it back to you with one from me for $5000.

I am not fool enough to send you a check for that amount of money three years in advance, but I am certainly willing to bet that amount and will gladly and easily pay up if I lose. Are you honorable enough to make such a wager and pay me if YOU lose?

Ok I about I be the middle man, you both send me a check for $5,000 and I will hold it for ya all I promise...

 

[candycorn]

I guess imitation really is the most sincere form of flattery

Its sort of indicative of the entire poltical landscape is it not? The GOP in 2013 should change slogan to "We love Mexicans too." Some may actually believe it.

well candyass, I guess the dem solgan should be: keep them down in the plantation on welfare and continue to buy their votes with free shit.

Sorry, much to your chagirn there Massa' we's got rid of dem Plantations...now you's gots to pick your own cotton.