[winner3000]

(Democrats, meanwhile, claim to support sampling for its scientific precision.)

Yes, sampling is much more precise than 100% actual count of the population. /sarcasm off.

(“Anyone who doesn’t believe in sampling doesn’t believe in any numbers” the government uses, he says.)

Duh! WHy should we believe any number from the government, especially the ones that affect politicians’ hold on power? Aren’t the GDP numbers, that have even less reason to be manipulated, almost always adjusted after the fact? How about all the predictions of cost for major government program that are then compared to actual numbers, which show under-estimating sometimes by a factor of 10?

[TexasFreeper2009]

If my personal experience is any indicator I think the census people are going to be stunned by a huge jump in the birth rate and new family size of white families in recent years.

I am 41 and almost every white couple I know or meet is having 4 or 5 kids.

[workerbee]

The liberals’ solution? Statistical sampling, in which census workers would study closely the populations of selected sample areas and use the resulting numbers to correct fix the numbers obtained by direct enumeration.

There we go.

[TBP]

Statistical sampling = rigging the numbers in favor of Democrats.

[KarlInOhio]

Prewitt offers a colorful challenge to those who say sampling doesn’t get the job done. “Next time you go to do a blood test, have the doctor take it all out,” he says.

But if the doctor is well known for just scratching at a scab or chasing down his cat to get the blood sample instead of your vein, then you must question his dedication to sampling.

Then he gets serious. “Anyone who doesn’t believe in sampling doesn’t believe in any numbers” the government uses, he says. He notes that the federal government uses statistical data all the time for developing policy in areas such as labor and crime.

No, numbers are OK. I don't believe in the numbers generators.

If we were dealing with honest people then sampling could be used, especially with a measurement as coarse as distributing 435 representatives proportionately to the states. But those doing the counting and distributing are notorious crooks (both sides) and would be more than eager to cheat to retain power. Just look at how a Republican was put in charge of the Commerce Dept. to appear bipartisan, but the the Administration tried to take actual control of the Census (probably the most important and only Constitutional power of Commerce) from him and run it directly from the White House. Why would any honest President do that rather than try to keep it as non-partisan as possible?