it's not about being right for me, it's about folks here being truthful about the polls and about past polls when they reference them
i have seen polls cherry picked from 1980, 1996, 2000, and 2004 to prove a point and yet cherry picked poll ignores a dozen or so other polls from referenced time slot that defies the poster's assertion.
it's just intellectually dishonest...something the Dems do
my view is that some of the polls are propaganda, some are not.
i believe we were ahead a month ago after the convention and Palin but are not now
i think the polls showed a direction away from Mccain...unfairly but there
i think there is a tightening that has been going on a week now but it's not where i would like it
i have seen talk here that Dems are oversampled this year versus in the past but have seen no concise proof given how many pollsters don't grant archived internals...
further, I don't think pollsters like to be wrong....at least the professional ones...George Gallup said in 1948 that his industry might never recover and some didn't
the fact that some polls are wacky or that some are very volatile does not negate the trends I just mentioned and all that will stop that is record GOP turnout.
I already know that black turnout here in Nashville is record level from folks I know working early voting and I doubt this is peculiar to Nashville
we shall see but I will stick to my premise that ignoring the polling aggregate and simply saying they are all wrong or in cahoots is indeed pollyanna
if the polling aggregate was within 1-2 points I'd agree but it's not unfortunately
you can't deny that folks here cheer when polls are in their favor and dismiss them when they aren't
i recall just two years ago folks said those polls were lies too
the tipping point for me came about a month ago watching Sean and Scott Rassmussen and I could tell from Sean's poor poker face that our edge had turned south.
i saw the same worry on Rove’s face just last Thursday..
i hope they and I are wrong about the polls veracity or that our side really turns out Tuesday...that could happen if folks get scared enough
if so it will be the biggest upset since 48...one for the record books
if someone had told me 10 years ago that a black radical socialist could get elected POTUS I'd never believed it
if someone had told me one day I woulda thought a Hillary presidency was preferable to what we may be facing now...again I'd a never believed that
it's like TM said to me today....perfect so I'm appropriating it..:
Demography is Destiny...is it ever.
"I dreamt of fire and the Hindenburg blew up, therefore I predicted the Hindenburg disaster" and "I oversampled Dems like never before and then Obama won, therefore my polls are valid" are the same animal, and I'm not going to pretend that they aren't just because my guy loses.
it's not about being right for me, it's about folks here being truthful about the polls and about past polls when they reference them
I appreciate the accusation of lying. Of course, you have no evidence that I'm lying and there is no motive for me to lie (since I'm asking everyone to turn out like crazy) so your pointless accusation appears to mean you're a jackass of some sort.
i have seen polls cherry picked from 1980, 1996, 2000, and 2004 to prove a point and yet cherry picked poll ignores a dozen or so other polls from referenced time slot that defies the poster's assertion.
What I did was compare mainstream "reputable" major polls to the results of the last three election cycles. Cherry pick? Not me.
i have seen talk here that Dems are oversampled this year versus in the past but have seen no concise proof given how many pollsters don't grant archived internals...
The problem is that they don't match turnout in past elections. On this very thread there's a turnout analysis of VA voters in 200 and 2006 that shows the pollsters are assuming a massive growth in Virginia Dem turnout. Then there's the national polls which in some cases have a 40 or 41% Dem sample...We all know there hasn't been a 40% turnout Dem or GOP in the last three presidential cycles (or a seven point gap between Dem and GOP turnout in a Presidential cycle), so we hardly need to look at archived internals to know that's a load of crap.
Lastly, in poll after poll the oversample of Dems matches or exceeds the lead Obama has over McCain. One doesn't need to look at archived internals to know that doesn't bode well for The One. Does it mean they couldn't be right? No, but it sure doesn't seem like pollyannaism to be skeptical of something that's so silly on its face.
further, I don't think pollsters like to be wrong....at least the professional ones...George Gallup said in 1948 that his industry might never recover and some didn't
Well then, it's a good thing they haven't been wrong any time since 1948...except in 1994 (and all the other times they've been wrong). Do you think they liked being wrong then? Do you think they were wrong on purpose, or just had bad assumptions about the way people were going to vote? Again, do you really believe these people (ALL of them) didn't catch on to the fact that Americans were going to swap out Congress for the first time in 40 years, but they couldn't possibly be missing some stuff about Obama?
we shall see but I will stick to my premise that ignoring the polling aggregate and simply saying they are all wrong or in cahoots is indeed pollyanna
Yeah, sure, I'm asking everyone to turn out like mad but I'm a pollyanna. I say we could lose this thing and I'm a polllyanna. If you met a real pollyanna your brain would probably freeze up.
you can't deny that folks here cheer when polls are in their favor and dismiss them when they aren't
What's that got to do with anything? Either I'm right or I'm wrong, because I'm pointing to specific data, not saying "I don't like it, therefore it's wrong."
i recall just two years ago folks said those polls were lies too
Those internals made sense. These don't. Dems weren't oversampled then. They are now. The GOP was ready to throw guys out then. They aren't ready to have Emperor Obama now.
the tipping point for me came about a month ago watching Sean and Scott Rassmussen and I could tell from Sean's poor poker face that our edge had turned south. i saw the same worry on Rove’s face just last Thursday..
Good grief...you're criticizing people for having a biased view of the polls and you're bringing facial expressions from a TV show as evidence for your premise? Gee, do you have some empirical data from the Magic Eight Ball, too?
OK...let's talk numbers, and maybe you can answer the question this time: Do you really believe that McCain is losing men by 25% or more compared to Bob Dole and G.W. Bush?