Poll Reading 101

[BluePhantom]

YOU cited Rasmussen as one of the most accurate pollsters in your original post. YOU provided absolutely no evidence to support that. I refuted that with evidence.

maybe you ought to go back and re-read the thread. I did several times.

You claimed that pollsters used RV numbers to inflate Obama's standing vs. McCain in the 2008 election. You offered NO substantiation for your claim. I refuted that with evidence.

Same question as above.

No I said pollsters use RV until shortly before the election because it is easier, it requires fewer resources, it's cheaper to perform, and it's not necessary to be deadly accurate when the election is several months away because the landscape will change dramatically. I said liberal organizations and some in the media use RV polls to create the illusion of more support for the Democratic candidate in order to create a bandwagon effect. You don't even know what the **** is being argued.

Now I have given you more lip service than you deserve as it is. Go back to your studying and let the adults talk.

Name the liberal pollsters who used RV's to skew the results in Obama's favor.

NONE!!! I never said any did you ignorant ******* moron. Even in the ******* post you quote I said "pollsters use RV until shortly before the election because it is easier, it requires fewer resources, it's cheaper to perform, and it's not necessary to be deadly accurate when the election is several months away because the landscape will change dramatically...liberal organizations and some in the media use RV polls to create the illusion of more support for the Democratic candidate..."

Two sentences.....there were only two sentences there that you had to digest and you fucked even that much up. I mean this is getting to the point of absolute comedy.

 

[BluePhantom]

You rate Quinnipiac as deadly accurate after pointing out their use of RV's not LV's in some polls.

How is that possible? According to you the RV users are tools of the Democrats.

Re-read Rule #1 genius...you know what. I have had it. Four days of arguing over a statistically irrelevant issue. I said your time was up and I am still sitting here wasting my time. Welcome to "ignore"....it's the only way to save my sanity and your last shred of dignity.

 

[BluePhantom]

Great article this morning on RCP which relates to this topic.

Highlights and link below:

"Every election brings a raft of complaints about polls. I don't expect this one to be any different -- Republicans will bemoan the overabundance of Democrats in the samples, while Democrats will claim that the polls under-sample minorities."



"So it was jarring to see the criticism taken to a higher level when Obama campaign strategist David Axelrod accused a recent Gallup poll of having “serious methodological problems.” He then directed anyone interested to this column from National Journal’s Ron Brownstein to explain why:

“The Gallup track, which is conducted among registered voters, has a sample that looks much more like the electorate in 2010 than the voting population that is likely to turn out in 2012: only 22 percent of the Gallup survey was non-white, according to figures the organization provided to Emory University political scientist Alan Abramowitz. That was close to the non-white share of the vote in 2010 (23 percent), but in 2008, minorities comprised 26 percent of all voters, according to exit polls; the Obama campaign, and other analysts, project the minority share of the vote will increase to 28 percent in 2012. In its survey, Pew, for instance, puts the non-white share at 25 percent.”



"More importantly, what we’re seeing right now is probably a function of the fact that pollsters are largely employing registered-voter screens, or no screens at all. Polls of adults and registered voters have tended to be more heavily Democratic than the actual electorate (Nate Silver estimated that in 2010 the difference was around six points), although this gap can disappear in a year like 2008, when enthusiasm is high on the Democratic side and low on the Republican side. (This year is currently looking a lot more like 2004 than 2008 in that regard.) I suspect these oversized Democratic samples will shrink once we get to the fall and likely-voter screens become ubiquitous."



"The objections regarding the minority-vote share, and whether pollsters should aim for a sample that is somewhere over 25 percent minority, require a more in-depth discussion. There are two salient points involved:

1) The minority share of the electorate will probably stay flat, or even decrease, in 2012.
2) Even if Gallup is undercounting minorities, its numbers might not be incorrect."



"If these are the categories that Gallup is undercounting, then the difference for Obama is only about one point. Of course even then there are variations between the Latino, Asian, and other communities and their voting habits to consider. But the bottom line is that this undercount, if it is occurring, probably isn’t resulting in a radical shift in Obama’s vote share.

At the end of the day, no one poll is the “correct” poll. The Gallup sample is certainly not unreasonable, and may even prove to be correct. "​

RealClearPolitics - Are Poll Sampling Complaints Legit?

 

[NYcarbineer]

You rate Quinnipiac as deadly accurate after pointing out their use of RV's not LV's in some polls.

How is that possible? According to you the RV users are tools of the Democrats.

Re-read Rule #1 genius...you know what. I have had it. Four days of arguing over a statistically irrelevant issue. I said your time was up and I am still sitting here wasting my time. Welcome to "ignore"....it's the only way to save my sanity and your last shred of dignity.

You made unsubstantiated claims and then threw a tantrum when they were challenged with actual evidence to the contrary.

There is no 'statistically irrelevant' issue here. You made a fool of yourself making claims you couldn't back up.

You made a fool of yourself posing as some sort of self styled 'expert' on polling, who, upon challenge, could not with any substance defend anything you were claiming.

 

[NYcarbineer]

maybe you ought to go back and re-read the thread. I did several times.




No I said pollsters use RV until shortly before the election because it is easier, it requires fewer resources, it's cheaper to perform, and it's not necessary to be deadly accurate when the election is several months away because the landscape will change dramatically. I said liberal organizations and some in the media use RV polls to create the illusion of more support for the Democratic candidate in order to create a bandwagon effect. You don't even know what the **** is being argued.

Now I have given you more lip service than you deserve as it is. Go back to your studying and let the adults talk.

Name the liberal pollsters who used RV's to skew the results in Obama's favor.

NONE!!! I never said any did you ignorant ******* moron. Even in the ******* post you quote I said "pollsters use RV until shortly before the election because it is easier, it requires fewer resources, it's cheaper to perform, and it's not necessary to be deadly accurate when the election is several months away because the landscape will change dramatically...liberal organizations and some in the media use RV polls to create the illusion of more support for the Democratic candidate..."

Two sentences.....there were only two sentences there that you had to digest and you fucked even that much up. I mean this is getting to the point of absolute comedy.

Where's the evidence to support your original claims in the OP. Still waiting.

 

[Dr.House]

Another day....

More Epic Carb Fail...

And he's too ******* stupid to realize it...

 

[NYcarbineer]

[You rate Quinnipiac as deadly accurate after pointing out their use of RV's not LV's in some polls.

How is that possible? According to you the RV users are tools of the Democrats.

Again. No response. Nothing to defend his claims.

 

[BluePhantom]

Another day....

More Epic Carb Fail...

And he's too ******* stupid to realize it...

I have him on ignore so I am spared his hackery and ignorance.

 

[nodoginnafight]

liberal organizations and some in the media[/I][/B] use RV polls to create the illusion of more support for the Democratic candidate..."

Name the liberal pollsters who used RV's to skew the results in Obama's favor.

NONE!!! I never said any did you ignorant ******* moron.

Hmmmmm

 

[Dr.House]

Another day....

More Epic Carb Fail...

And he's too ******* stupid to realize it...

I have him on ignore so I am spared his hackery and ignorance.

You're missing nothing.... Just more failure....

 

[BluePhantom]

liberal organizations and some in the media[/I][/B] use RV polls to create the illusion of more support for the Democratic candidate..."

Name the liberal pollsters who used RV's to skew the results in Obama's favor.

NONE!!! I never said any did you ignorant ******* moron.

Hmmmmm

yeah that's right dip shit. there is a difference between liberal organizations (such as SEIU), the media, and a polling agency. No polling respectable agency intentionally goes out to skew results...I would not even accuse PPP, who is funded by the DNC, of doing that intentionally. Read posts #143 and #135, genius.

What is it with these liberals anyhow? Good Lord. Reminds me of a song.

".....and they're all made out of ticky tack and they all think just the same...."

 

[BluePhantom]

Another day....

More Epic Carb Fail...

And he's too ******* stupid to realize it...

I have him on ignore so I am spared his hackery and ignorance.

You're missing nothing.... Just more failure....

God forbid he spent some time the last day or two actually thinking about things, huh?

 

[nodoginnafight]

Carb - there is a reason that Nate Silver and his old 538.com are making HUGE money and are sought out by news organizations everywhere and why someone else is peddling their crap on message boards.

 

[Dr.House]

I have him on ignore so I am spared his hackery and ignorance.

You're missing nothing.... Just more failure....

God forbid he spent some time the last day or two actually thinking about things, huh?

Thinking isn't one of carb's strengths...

 

[NYcarbineer]

Carb - there is a reason that Nate Silver and his old 538.com are making HUGE money and are sought out by news organizations everywhere and why someone else is peddling their crap on message boards.

Really? And that can't be said about Rasmussen and his relationship with the right?

Are you daft? What is wrong with you people?

 

[NYcarbineer]

I have him on ignore so I am spared his hackery and ignorance.

You're missing nothing.... Just more failure....

God forbid he spent some time the last day or two actually thinking about things, huh?

You put me on ignore because I shot down all the crap you posted and you didn't have a cogent answer for any of it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

liberal organizations and some in the media[/I][/B] use RV polls to create the illusion of more support for the Democratic candidate..."

Name the liberal pollsters who used RV's to skew the results in Obama's favor.

NONE!!! I never said any did you ignorant ******* moron.

Hmmmmm

Hmmmm is right.

This is from OP's RULES:

Rule #4. Know the Polling Agencies Affiliations and History

...Also keep in mind that some firms are affiliated with a given party. Public Polling Policy (PPP), for example, is funded and affiliated exclusively with the DNC. Magellan Strategies, the RNC. Usually, on RealClearPolitics, thoss agencies are noted (D) or (R) for Democratic affiliated firms or Republican affiliated firms respectively. It's wise to keep in mind who is paying their bills when you consider the validity of their data. That's not to say these firms should be completely disregarded...just that it should be kept in mind.

Right, BP never made any insinuations about the political affiliations of pollsters skewing their polls...



I'd put me on ignore too if I was getting this beaten up.

Notice that the most partisan biased pollster, Rasmussen, somehow manages to escape indictment in the above list of bad examples...

I wonder why that was? Eh?

 

[Dr.House]

You're missing nothing.... Just more failure....

God forbid he spent some time the last day or two actually thinking about things, huh?

You put me on ignore because I shot down all the crap you posted and you didn't have a cogent answer for any of it.

He put you on ignore because you refused to debate... His answers to your lame attempts were accurate and detailed... You retorted with word games and babbling bullshit...

Your opinions are just that - opinions... You provided nothing on the topic, as usual...

You refuted NOTHING and look like an ass...

Listen, it is obvious that you are clueless about polling and you should avoid the topic altogether... Stick to what you know - fluffing 0bama...