Posted on 10/02/2004 3:56:52 PM PDT by jwalsh07
Poll Date...Pubbies....Dems....Indies....Men....Women
.
.
9/11/04........391........300......270......481....522
10/2/04........345........364......278......481....532
On 9/11/04 Newsweek published a poll showing Bush up 49-43. On 10/2/04 Newsweek published a poll showing Kerry up 47-45.
Here's a test, you tell me why.
Agree. There are not many other pieces of data out there yet to draw a firm conclusion, but one that is worrying me is Tradesports.
Right before the debate, W hit 69.9 and Kerry dipped below 30. Currently, it has W at 60.0 and F'n at 39.0. That is a big swing in just two days.
well then newsweek neds a better scale for weighting, if they go by voter turn out models and year 200 census and self identification history, when they arent even consistant on that, I cant say they are wrong in this poll, some people polled may have changed there self identification but it is an awful huge swing of 11 points and party affiliation see this latest poll. I say Bush is up by 4-5%.
The Newsweek poll says 61% think Kerry won the debate. What a bunch of mush-heads. Didn't they really listen to Kerry's positions? The "global test" before the US can act to protect ourselves, for instance?
and bad grammar
I don't believe that is correct. As I remember, most polls had Bush up 6 - 8% over the past month, Newsweek/Princeton went from a Bush lead of 6%, to a big lead of 11%, and now BEHIND by 2%, all in this past month. Thats reliable? No way. Source:
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/10-02-2004/0002263797&EDATE=
They are also REGISTERED VOTERS in latest Newsweek.
so who is passing this interesting fact along to drudge so he can take down his big letters proclaiming Newsweek can make a poll say anything they want?
"Figures don't lie, but liars figure.... or
There's lies, damn lies, and statistics"
Righto! I'll tell you the best little book I have read in a long time is a 1954 book called "How To Lie With Statistics." It rocks and many of it's examples will stick with you forever (very helpful when arguing with a lib)
I'm too lazy to write examples but go to Amazon and check out some of the reviews.
Notice that such an old book, republished in 1993, is currently ranked at 1,091. Now that is staying power when one considers the thousands of in-print books available on Amazon
Oh what the hay - here's some reviews, comments:
"There is terror in numbers," writes Darrell Huff in How to Lie with Statistics. And nowhere does this terror translate to blind acceptance of authority more than in the slippery world of averages, correlations, graphs, and trends. Huff sought to break through "the daze that follows the collision of statistics with the human mind" with this slim volume, first published in 1954. The book remains relevant as a wake-up call for people unaccustomed to examining the endless flow of numbers pouring from Wall Street, Madison Avenue, and everywhere else someone has an axe to grind, a point to prove, or a product to sell. "The secret language of statistics, so appealing in a fact-minded culture, is employed to sensationalize, inflate, confuse, and oversimplify," warns Huff.
Although many of the examples used in the book are charmingly dated, the cautions are timeless. Statistics are rife with opportunities for misuse, from "gee-whiz graphs" that add nonexistent drama to trends, to "results" detached from their method and meaning, to statistics' ultimate bugaboo--faulty cause-and-effect reasoning. Huff's tone is tolerant and amused, but no-nonsense. Like a lecturing father, he expects you to learn something useful from the book, and start applying it every day. Never be a sucker again, he cries!
Even if you can't find a source of demonstrable bias, allow yourself some degree of skepticism about the results as long as there is a possibility of bias somewhere. There always is.
Read How to Lie with Statistics. Whether you encounter statistics at work, at school, or in advertising, you'll remember its simple lessons. Don't be terrorized by numbers, Huff implores. "The fact is that, despite its mathematical base, statistics is as much an art as it is a science." --Therese Littleton
From Book News, Inc.
A 1954 classic that continues to dispel false beliefs and inform the statistically naive. Huff's direct and witty style exposes how advertisers, government and the media mislead their audiences through the misuse of statistics. Huff then explains how the reader can see through the smoke and mirrors to get to the real meaning--if any--of what is presented. Annotation copyright Book News, Inc. Portland, Or."
Or....
"Defend yourself from the number-tossers, July 4, 2004
Reviewer: Dan (Boulder CO) - See all my reviews
How to Lie with Statistics, by Darrel Huff, should be required reading for everyone. The cachet of numbers are used all the time in modern society. Usually to end arguments--after all, who can argue with "facts"? Huff shows how the same set of numbers can be tweaked to show three different outcomes, depending on where you start and what you use. The fundamental lesson I learned from this book is that mathematical calculation involves a whole set of conditions, and any number derived from such a calculation is meaningless without understanding those conditions.
He also mentions that colleagues have told him that the flurry of meaningless statistics is due to incompetence--he dispatches this argument with a simple query: "Why, then, do the numbers almost always favor the person quoting them?" Huff also provides five questions (not unlike the five d's of dodgeball) for readers to ask, when confronted with a statistic:
1. Who says so?
2. How does he know?
3. What's missing?
4. Did somebody change the subject?
5. Does it make sense?
All this is wrapped up in a book with simple examples (no math beyond arithmetic, really) and quaint 1950s prose. In addition humor runs from the beginning (the dedication is "To my wife with good reason") to the end (on page 135, Huff says "Almost anybody can claim to be first in something if he is not too particular what it is"). This book is well worth a couple hours of your time."
I dunno much about this market bu I knlw a little about markets in general and this looks like taking profit off the table. :-}
Pretty dang sharp analysis Ray.
Sharp indeed!
Goodbye
Poetic? :-}
Quack, quack.
I didn't hear you!
I'm gonna leave that high hanging curve hanging.
Don't leave! I don't know how to run a thread. If I post a reply and nobody replies what do I do? Is it o.k. to reply to myself?
Only until the hair on your knuckles gets out of control. :-}
My guess is he didn't get anything at all. I also think the debates are, generally speaking, far more hazardous for Kerry than for Bush.
Sure, Kerry knows how to debate. What he doesn't "know" is how to be personable, human. The man is a walking abstraction.
By the time the last debate is over, I think that he'll wish he hadn't had so many opportunities to flaunt his rhetorical skill.
Chimpy will own Mr. Flip-Flop. Count on it.
All poll weigh the sample of men the same, slightly less than women. It means nothing.
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.