unfrigginreal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-16-04 11:35 AM
Original message |
Haha - Check out partisan breakdown of latest Newsweek poll |
|
354 Republicans (plus or minus 6) 317 Democrats (plus or minus 6) 284 Independents (plus or minus 6) http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/041016/nysa012_1.html---------- Tells me that Kerry probably has a lead.
|
Proud2BAmurkin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-16-04 11:36 AM
Response to Original message |
Doosh
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-16-04 11:37 AM
Response to Original message |
2. why do they always oversample repugs??? |
|
Edited on Sat Oct-16-04 11:37 AM by Doosh
I mean, isn't the current electorate like 36% Dem, 32% repug 32% indy/other?
|
dolstein
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-16-04 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
5. Why do you assume the electorate is 36% dem? |
|
Perhaps it was in 2000. But how can you assume that there has been NO CHANGE in the partisan balance during the past four years?
|
unfrigginreal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-16-04 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
|
That's the same argument the pollsters used for Bush's lead in the 2000 polls. It's still bullshit.
|
DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-16-04 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
11. I Don't Have A Link But Pew Said Party ID Is Where It Was In 2000 |
|
They said there was a spike in Republican ID after 9-11 but it's abated....
|
Jackpine Radical
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-16-04 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
21. Why do you assume that the % OF Pugs has increased. |
|
Maybe it's now 28% Pugs, 40% Dems.
Anyway, I think the oversampling of Pugs is due to the assumption that they're more likely to vote. Given the anger and animation among Dems this year, I believe that this is, to put it mildly, not a safe assumption.
|
Philostopher
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-16-04 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
8. Maybe that's who responds. |
|
They may do a certain number of calls, and that's the measure of the responses they get. They're under time pressure, after all, to get these things done and tabulated -- maybe more people who identify as Republicans are willing to respond to the phone polling.
|
janx
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-16-04 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
12. That could be, but then they should plaster the results of the poll |
|
with that information instead of including it in fine print somewhere.
The media want this race to appear close so that people will keep watching their commercials, I'm convinced.
|
Philostopher
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-16-04 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #12 |
17. I agree they should be more up-front about it. |
|
I think the whole 'caller ID/cell phone' argument begs the question if any phone poll can really be considered accurate anymore, and some of the pollsters will admit this when pressed on the question, but they never remind people about that on the polls themselves, either. Polls are useful as tracking instruments, but there's been an enormous demographic shift in the past few years because of technological changes that they can't account for. I also think you're right that it's a revenue issue -- I doubt media pollsters will ever show a dramatic lead in a presidential election again because if people think it's all over too soon, they'll stop paying attention to the media.
|
DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-16-04 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
|
The first 1,000 people who meet their criterion of registered voters are included...
They weight for race, gender, region, et cetera but not party...
|
Philostopher
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-16-04 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #13 |
|
it doesn't account for the demographic shifts caused by new technologies like cell phones and caller I.D. They do the best they can to get the most random sample possible, but lots of people don't answer their phones if the Caller ID says 'out of area' or doesn't identify the caller (we're two of them), and nobody has a comprehensive list of cell phone numbers to use.
|
featherman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-16-04 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
Dems are still the majority party in this country, a fact many seem to have forgotten. GOP has NEVER exceeded 35% of the proportional vote.
|
spanone
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-16-04 11:38 AM
Response to Original message |
3. I wipe my ass with newsweek. |
|
It's not even good for that.
|
BootinUp
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-16-04 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
BootinUp
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-16-04 12:00 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
19. maybe good for a campfire still |
|
as long as you don't pay for it. :)
|
Wickerman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-16-04 11:38 AM
Response to Original message |
4. Doesn't make much sense, huh? |
|
Not representative of the US public.
37% R 33% Dem 30% Indie
Not from everything I read.
|
lancdem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-16-04 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
|
Kerry leads Bush by 11 among independents in this poll.
|
jefferson_dem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-16-04 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #16 |
20. There's the RUB! With that advantage, no way Kerry will lose the REAL |
K8-EEE
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-16-04 11:40 AM
Response to Original message |
6. Kerry. In. A. Landslide. |
|
If they say we're tied, it can ONLY mean Kerry in a LANDSLIDE!
|
DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-16-04 11:43 AM
Response to Original message |
9. That Poll Reveals Them As Rank Fucking Idiots.... |
|
I'll bet my home and car if Kerry is "really" winning men by three or four percent on election day and winning indys 51-40 percent there's no way he's going to lose...
Why do pollsters do this shit...
Garbage in ...Garbage out....
|
w4rma
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-16-04 11:47 AM
Response to Original message |
14. Bah, ignore all polls they are a waste of time. (nt) |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 19th 2024, 09:02 AM
Response to Original message |