Posted on 01/15/2024 6:21:20 PM PST by Red Badger
Science...
I think DeSantis, Haley, and Ramaswamy are tied for last.
It’s not now, it’s why.
I thought Meatball said he was going to win no problem
Bahahahahahahaha
CBS reporting DeSantis campaign is kvetching over the early call for Trump. They think “media is in the tank for Trump.”
That’s what they reported. I didn’t imagine it!
“Needs to stay in until SC”:
Reminds me of Gramnesty. When he lost a couple of primaries, he said “Wait’ll I get him in S. Carolina. I’ll beat his brains out.” He didn’t.
“Again, how do you call anything with 4 or 5% in?”
If you are serious, then think about it his way:
Imagine that there is some group voters answering you questions. If you were to talk to every voter you would get a count of answers (which might not exactly match an election for various reasons). If you were to randomly talk to half of those voters you would get a count that is very likely almost exactly the same as the answer you would get from talking to all voters. If you were to randomly talk to a quarter of the voters you would get an answer that is probably a little less accurate, but probably not to far from the complete group.
As you talk to a smaller and smaller percentage of the voters the chances of your result matching the complete interviews continues to fall.
The thing is that the chances or a random selection coming fairly close are much higher than most people would guess. mathematically those chances can be determined and the results of the small sample survey can be expressed by saying something like “there is a 95% chance that somewhere between 64.5 and 60.3 percent of the voters likely support Trump.” That means that the result can be expected to be wrong 1 out of 20 time, but 19 out of 20 times the complete set of voters can be expected to be between 64.5 and 60.3.
Politics makes people say stupid things.................
Mathematically, a sample size of about 2100 (I forget the exact number) is large enough to get an accurate poll no matter how large the underlying data set is. So if 2,100 votes are in (as long as it is reflective of the underlying sample, of course), you will have a good idea of the final outcome.
Also, they can compare the votes tallied to the pre-election polls and see how close they are to each other, and perform various statistical analyses on that information.
Meatball the Trump trasher gets to fight it out with Nimroda
Good one.
Chris Christy: Heavy precincts. Darn it all. I should have stayed in. Instead of sitting here ordering four fried chickens and a Coke.
Thanks to all who made the difficult attempt to explain this convoluted way of voting and results to me.😟😁
If I made a 10 gallon batch of chicken noodle soup, how much soup would you need to sample to determine what kind of soup I made?
I suspect way less that 64 ounces (1/2 gallon). True?
Politics seem to MAKE a lot of people stupid.
Make that a Diet Coke
The logic you are presenting is sound but has some underlying assumptions.
One of them is that if people are lying to you they are doing so in a random manner.
Trump’s large victory has MSM in a panic.
Good advice but I still doubt Mrs.Murphy (Aretha Franklin) would give him any respect.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVLZy5UwKUs
That is the Dem new plan! Get democrats to switch to Republican to vote for tricky Nikki.
In New Hampshire the dem party sending out emails to switch and vote for Nikki. And the lame stream media is gushing over Nikki s “surge in the polls”,
Anything the dems touch is ruined.
Ah, man. If you’d included Dry toast I’d have made the connection! Thanks
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.