Posted on 01/14/2008 7:23:18 AM PST by jdm
When looking at polls, readers should always review the sampling to determine their predictive value. After some of the strange polling in the 2004 and 2006 elections, most people have become more educated on how to spot poor polling efforts, even when presented by major media outlets like the New York Times and CBS News. One would also think that the survey debacle in New Hampshire would make news organizations like CBS and the Gray Lady a little more circumspect than before.
One would be incorrect:
Republican voters have sharply altered their views of the party’s presidential candidates following the early contests in Iowa and New Hampshire, with Senator John McCain, once widely written off, now viewed more favorably than any of his major competitors, according to the latest nationwide New York Times/CBS News Poll. ...
On the Democratic side, Senator Barack Obama’s victory in Iowa has improved his standing within the party on a critical measure: his electability. The percentage of Democrats who say he would be the strongest candidate against the Republicans has more than doubled in a month, to 35 percent from 14 percent in December.
And how did the NYT and CBS partnership determine these trends? They surveyed a grand total of 504 likely Democratic primary voters nationwide. That at least might pass the smell test, although it makes for suspect predictive value. For the Republicans, they managed only 282 likely primary voters, one of the worst efforts since the Los Angeles Times couldn't find 180 registered Republicans for its polling late last month -- and predicted that Romney had overcome Huckabee's Iowa surge.
On the basis of this sample, in which every respondent accounts for better than 0.3% of the electorate, both CBS and the Paper of Record record a huge surge in support for John McCain. It's certainly possible that this surge has materialized, but it could also be that their sample inadvertently oversampled McCain supporters. Less than 300 likely Republican voters nationwide simply doesn't have any predictive value as a sample; it's worse than the LA Times' effort, which only focused on Iowa.
It appears that pollsters took no lessons from their debacle among Democrats in New Hampshire. Are they looking for even more embarrassment? Why bother to publish such an anemically-sampled poll?
UPDATE: Here's the CBS version of the poll internals. Go to the last page to see the sampling.
These publications are not interested in reporting trends, they are interested in creating them.
You imagine that they are capable of embarrasment? I think not.
They merely want to gin up their headlines to seel a few copies of their rag. Any other questions?
NYT, CBS and al Qaeda partnership.
The Contract ‘Against’ America.
Every time I see or hear McCaniac talk it causes me to regurgitate his many divisive words during Shamnesty.
The people who make up these polls are biased and hold to that old saying “you can fool the American voter almost 100 percent of the time because Bill Clinton did it twice”.
Now we are being fooled again with McCaniac who on a good day looks like warmed over 60’s hippie death.
Fred Thompson for the smart voter.
Fred 08
I am sure I am not the only one that has been searching the internet every day for up to date polls on Michigan and South Carolina.
Total Respondents 1178
Total Registered Voters 995
Democratic Primary Voters 508
Republican Primary Voters 283
Democratic Primary Voters 438
Republican Primary Voters 270
I agree.
On Poll Results and the End of Conservatism
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1951282/posts
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.