Quick comment about polls and DU

[rpannier]

How come people are so willing to post polls and comment lovingly about how accurate they are when they are favorable to their candidate

But when they are the harbinger of doom (look bad) for their candidate then they are highly suspect and agenda driven.

It can be the same polling company in two different states:

State A the polling is in their candidates favor. Response:

This looks bad for the other candidate. The other candidate is finished

State B (same polling company) polling is NOT in their candidates favor:

This company is a right-wing rag that is trying to destroy my candidates campaign. They are obviously doing a terrible job...

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. The same reason that some TV talking head or editorial writer

is a biased RW tool when they criticize your candidate, but a straight-talking, unbiased observer when they criticize the other one.

People want to see only through the prism of their own bias.

[rug]

2. It's the difference between wedding vows and a divorce complaint.

[IDemo]

3. My question about polls

And I'm sure this has been addressed here before: How accurate are polls that rely strictly on voters with standard telephone service and a listing in the white pages? Particularly with the huge turnout of the 18 to 25 age group this campaign season, many of whom have cell phones but no copper-connected ones, I have to believe a large segment of potential voters is being left out.

And my take on this is that most of those younger voters are going with Obama, so I tend to add a few points in his favor. Forget all about the Keith number! :-)

[MethuenProgressive]

4. You should make this a poll so we could DU it.

:hi: