Posted on 09/20/2008 8:14:45 AM PDT by ajwharton
Excellent analysis of some of the polls that we are seeing...
So, put it all together, and in the past week Obama has stayed steady or lost support in every party identification group, yet Gallup says his overall support went up four points. And McCain stayed steady or went up in every party identification group, yet we are supposed to accept the claim that his overall support went down by four points? Anyone have an answer for how that is even possible?
Well, actually I do. There is one, and only one, possible way that such a thing can happen mathematically. And that way, is that Gallup made major changes to the political affiliation weighting from the last week to now. Gallup has significantly increased the proportional weight of Democrat response and reduced the weight of Republican response. Bear in mind that this assumes that people change the foundation of their political opinion like a showgirl changes costumes, which has no scientific basis or historical support whatsoever. As I said earlier, the Gallup Organization is very much a professional polling agency, who tries their level best to gauge the national mood. That, after all, is why I chose to use their poll for my examination. I could do the same thing with any other of the major published polls, and I can tell you straight-up that I would find the same practice going on everywhere. But just because something is popular, does not validate it as a scientific method. Rather than report the rising and falling levels of support for Obama and McCain with constant party identification weighting, the Gallup and other polls are shifting the party weights over time, which pretty explains how the 'bounce' happens for each convention. When the Democrats held their convention, the polls increased the weight of Democrats and lowered the Republican response, and when the Republicans had their convention, the polls gave the Republicans more weight. That's why Palin made such an immediate difference in the polls; the Liberals were not all that impressed with her, but the Republicans were happy and with a bigger share of the weight their response was magnified. I can't prove it, since the Gallup people do not invite me into their strategy meetings, but I think somewhere they are weighting the party ID by the mood as they see it. The problem there, is that such weighting is still very subjective, and what's more it fails to consider that someone may consider themselves a member of one party with respect to the House and Senate races, but something else entirely when it comes to voting for the President. The state of Oklahoma, for example, is a very Democratic place, but it's pretty solid for McCain, just as it was for Bush. So weighting a presidential poll for party identification on the basis of how they think someone will vote for Congress, is going to miss the mark.
These pollsters are all liberals, and will try to make their candidate look like he is doing better than reality. They stop the shenanigans shortly before the election day and report it straight, because their final pre-election poll is the one they actually get graded on.
Im sure it happens????
Come on guys.
Don’t you know it’s hard to read across 12 feet of copy?
Paragraphs are great for reading.
These polls will all report a huge surge for McCain in the week or two before the election, because that is when they stop doctoring their polls to show the Democrat ahead.
Don’t you know it’s hard to read across 12 feet of copy?
Paragraphs are great for reading.
What I copied was a gigundo paragraph. It did look like a wall of words when I posted it, tho...
I don’t understand all this “weighing” to me it just does not make sense.
Why not call up 3000 people and just ask “who are you voting for” regardless of party....
You will get a random sample this way....that’s it...not hard
Does anyone remember what the polls were prior to Reagan’s major victory? I think I remember the polls being about dead even. Hmmmmm?
For some reason, I need to take a nap because my head hurts. After graduation from college, meteorology major, my first job was at Goddard to collect tons of data from ground stations and “cook” them. I used to get a lot of headache back then and still gets it whenever someone talks about statistics. I believe everything you just said.
At the end of the past campaigns, the polls were accurate, with some a little better than others. Today, no one is applying the traditional turnout of 38%D - 35%R. They all must have a reason. The polls show BHO up about 2-3 points.
I think it happens all the time. Just look how often the MSM seems to find “life-long” Republicans who are voting for Obama. Then when you do a little Googling, you find that the “life-long” Republican is actually a Democrat volunteer or operative.
And not too coincidentally, the electronic markets mirror the 2-3 pt BHO lead the polls show.
I am curious to find out, but dont know how....
During these calls, what percentage of republican callers need to be removed from the sample??????
“I don’t understand all this “weighing” to me it just does not make sense.”
Agreed. Anyone that plays with numbers can make them mean anything. Polls are a waste of time.
What happens if Democrats are all a bunch of jobless bums who have nothing to do all day but sit around and answer pollsters, while Republicans work 16 hour days and shout obscenities at any pollster who gets through on the phone? You have to make sure that your sample of people answering the poll is truly representive of the voting population.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.