Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

zogby - Kerry 47 Bush 44
Zogby / Reuters ^ | 10/11/2004 | Zogby / Reuters

Posted on 10/11/2004 6:33:29 AM PDT by big time major leaguer

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-71 last
To: KwasiOwusu
Since the second debate, Bush's numbers have been solidly up in all reputable polls. Zogby should stop making figures up from what he dreamed about last night and start conducting proper pols or he can go join his pal Bin Laden in the Afghan caves and continue to practice his snake charming tricks."

That about covers it

61 posted on 10/11/2004 7:54:21 AM PDT by ALWAYSWELDING
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: big time major leaguer

in 2000 his "accuracy" was within 3 points of other polls. There was an article on his site that showed how supposedly his poll was more accurate than others.. but when you examined it, it was within 3 points of all the other polls.

This poll that is being shown right now has an 8 point difference. Someone mentioned being wrong in 2002.. i would like more information on that.

I do find it hard to believe that sKerry is up by 3 in any poll.


62 posted on 10/11/2004 7:56:21 AM PDT by BoBToMatoE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KwasiOwusu

Which reputable polls? Rasmussen and ABC news/Washington post?


63 posted on 10/11/2004 7:58:47 AM PDT by neutrality
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: sinbad17

I also did not recieve any email notification or anything about the poll.


64 posted on 10/11/2004 8:02:54 AM PDT by BoBToMatoE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: LS
I believe this particular poll was via telephone, but I fully agree with your assessment of Zogby's interactive polls, where the self-selection of the participants makes them totally invalid.

However, there is a ironic point to this newest zogby poll. He finds that bush now leads among young voters. Wouldn't be ironic if all these campus rock band tours actually turn people off to the democrats? Wouldn't it be ironic if the campus crowd now feels deceived by the draft rumors the dems floated and there's a backlash? Wouldn't it be just the sweetest thing in the world if the campus GOTV efforts by the dems turn out more bush votes than kerry?

65 posted on 10/11/2004 9:11:08 AM PDT by drangundsturm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Thane_Banquo

yes, in 2002 and now he used the 2000 turnout model to weight his results.

In 2000 republican turnout was depressed due to the last minute dui scandal.

In 2002 he was wrong in 29% of the races he called - nearly twice the rate (of 15%) of other polling companies.


66 posted on 10/11/2004 9:35:12 AM PDT by flashbunny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sooth2222

So, Zogby underestimated Bush support in 2000 by a full 2%? Enough said, I guess.

-T


67 posted on 10/11/2004 10:03:34 AM PDT by timbuck2 ("The true danger is when liberty is nibbled away, for expedients, and by parts." -Edmund Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: timbuck2

When is the next round of the "major" pollsters coming out. Seems like after the first debate, AP, Newsweek, Time, Gallup all rushed out with polls showing Kerry "surging". Saw very few majors over the weekend. Tracking polls, with the exception Zogby look positive.


68 posted on 10/11/2004 10:18:30 AM PDT by gswilder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: kesg
Every poll has a degree of uncertainty built in.

That stated uncertainty is based upon sampling error. Modelling error is not reflected in the stated uncertainty.

Samples are subject to variations due to randomness, and are therefore mathematically predictable. Multiple polls with only random errors will refine the reults and can be combined to increase accuracy.

Modelling error is due to wrong assumptions, and are just wrong. Doing more polls with modelling errors do not increase accuracy. A well-done poll with a modelling error is measuring something other than what is intended.

69 posted on 10/11/2004 1:25:49 PM PDT by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: merry10
i mean rather than looking at the national polls on average.

Yes, since the election is a state-by-state election, it is better to measure state-by-state results, weighted in accordance with the electoral college, than national numbers which are only generally correlative.

70 posted on 10/11/2004 1:28:00 PM PDT by lepton ("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: big time major leaguer

I don't think this is accurate.


71 posted on 10/11/2004 1:35:59 PM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-71 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson