Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Social > Politics and News

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2014
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-11-2012, 12:37 PM   #26
RabidMongoose
Lifer
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,061
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by buckshot24 View Post
I was hoping that this post didn't really exist.
It does. But you as an apparent conservative may have a different reality than the rest of the world. Minorities exist. You will need to interact with them. 90% of Romney's constituency was white non-hispanic. Apparently even their pollsters reflected that same constituency.
RabidMongoose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 12:42 PM   #27
jackstar7
Diamond Member
 
jackstar7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,228
Default

What motivates someone to defend a pollster (any of them)?
jackstar7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 12:46 PM   #28
Athena
Golden Member
 
Athena's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,484
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by buckshot24 View Post
The only poll I was basing anything on was their party affiliation poll which was pretty accurate going back 10 years in predicting voter turnout.
As I understand it, Rassmussen has been off in the past three elections.

I really think that anyone who is interested in this stuff should go back and read Nate Silver's columns -- at least going back to the spring. Unlike the talking heads on TV, he did a thorough job of explaining his conclusions.

Mathematics is not a "belief system". One can understand mathematics and still believe in God -- anyone here ever read anything by Bertrand Russell?
__________________
Athena

"An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it."
Athena is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 01:24 PM   #29
randomrogue
Diamond Member
 
randomrogue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 5,462
Default

It's tough to scientifically identify why the Republicans are "in their own bubble world" but that's precisely the reason that their polls were wrong. Rather than use science they used "feelings" to identify voter turnout and groups. There was never any basis in reality for what they thought was going to happen. They should have stuck to reality and not made up numbers. Even after they lost they still struggle with the real numbers.
randomrogue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 02:37 PM   #30
shira
Diamond Member
 
shira's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 8,044
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by randomrogue View Post
It's tough to scientifically identify why the Republicans are "in their own bubble world" but that's precisely the reason that their polls were wrong. Rather than use science they used "feelings" to identify voter turnout and groups. There was never any basis in reality for what they thought was going to happen. They should have stuck to reality and not made up numbers. Even after they lost they still struggle with the real numbers.
The right uses the same approach to climate change. When confronted by an overwhelming consensus of scientific data that demonstrates that greenhouse gases released as a consequence of human activity are a significant factor in the observed increase in global temperatures, the right cherry-picks the conclusions of the tiny minority of climatologists that disagree.

Just as they ignored the consensus polling data showing that Obama would be an easy winner, the right "know" their right-wing positions are correct because they can always find "fringe data" to reinforce their beliefs.
shira is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 04:29 PM   #31
techs
Lifer
 
techs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 28,430
Default

Is it that people don't understand that pollsters ask questions and study previous patterns to determine turnout? They don't only rely on the the last election. The question of how many and which people are actually going to vote is nearly as important to pollsters as the polling on who people say they are supporting.

The fact that its being treated as simply as, "they relied on the turnout" from 2008 is absurd."
Not only do they apply statistical models and questions from 2008 but they have a whole new set of polling data from 2012 that they use to compare and determine how well their predictions worked in 2008.

What I saw was that once the polls continued to show a persistent Democratic advantage the Republicans pushed for some of the polls to use different data. And like a self fulfilling prophecy the Republicans took their biased polls and convinced themselves they were the correct polls.
__________________
Imagine a really good sig is here.
techs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 05:07 PM   #32
Jhhnn
Lifer
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Denver Co
Posts: 22,320
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by randomrogue View Post
It's tough to scientifically identify why the Republicans are "in their own bubble world" but that's precisely the reason that their polls were wrong. Rather than use science they used "feelings" to identify voter turnout and groups. There was never any basis in reality for what they thought was going to happen. They should have stuck to reality and not made up numbers. Even after they lost they still struggle with the real numbers.
It's not tough to identify why. Sam Wang references a known phenomenon, "motivated reasoning"-

http://election.princeton.edu/2012/1...bug/#more-8830

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motivated_reasoning

I just call it living in denial, believing what you want to believe. Our own resident righties exemplify that on a daily basis.

Last edited by Jhhnn; 11-11-2012 at 05:09 PM.
Jhhnn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 05:15 PM   #33
piasabird
Lifer
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,165
Default

Maybe a lot of voting machines were rigged?
__________________
Asus Memo Pad 7 HD. Quad Core Tablet.
piasabird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 05:18 PM   #34
Charles Kozierok
Elite Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6,762
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by randomrogue View Post
It's tough to scientifically identify why the Republicans are "in their own bubble world" but that's precisely the reason that their polls were wrong.
Epistemic closure.
__________________
"Of those who say nothing, few are silent." -- Thomas Neill
Charles Kozierok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 11:07 PM   #35
buckshot24
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,823
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RabidMongoose View Post
It does. But you as an apparent conservative may have a different reality than the rest of the world. Minorities exist. You will need to interact with them. 90% of Romney's constituency was white non-hispanic. Apparently even their pollsters reflected that same constituency.
They used 2008 as a model of minority turnout which ended up being wrong. Definitely isn't any kind of conspiracy involved.

I'm perfectly fine with minorities, I love minorities, my daughter is a minority!
buckshot24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 11:14 PM   #36
buckshot24
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,823
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Athena View Post
As I understand it, Rassmussen has been off in the past three elections.

I really think that anyone who is interested in this stuff should go back and read Nate Silver's columns -- at least going back to the spring. Unlike the talking heads on TV, he did a thorough job of explaining his conclusions.

Mathematics is not a "belief system". One can understand mathematics and still believe in God -- anyone here ever read anything by Bertrand Russell?
I know all about Silver's treatment on Rasmussen and the prior election (2010 basically).

The poll I have been talking about is the party affiliation poll they run. Up until last tuesday it had pretty good accuracy in predicting turnout. It was horribly off this year.

Oh and I'm not defending Rasmussen. He was off this year on his national poll and his partisan affiliation poll. All I was saying is that they underestimated turnout among young voters and minorities by basing it on percentages of turnout in 2008.
buckshot24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 11:20 PM   #37
lothar
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 6,494
Default

This is the only poll that mattered.
All others are irrelevant.
lothar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2012, 11:45 PM   #38
RabidMongoose
Lifer
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,061
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by buckshot24 View Post
They used 2008 as a model of minority turnout which ended up being wrong. Definitely isn't any kind of conspiracy involved.

I'm perfectly fine with minorities, I love minorities, my daughter is a minority!
They used racist models.
RabidMongoose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 01:02 AM   #39
sactoking
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 5,251
Default

Not presidential, but we had a Congressional race here that pitted out outgoing State Senate Majority Leader against a Republican candidate from a well-known family. The district was gerrymandered to be pretty heavily D, but the D candidate was somewhat disliked as he is just a jerk, so when the polls had the R up a few points it was only a mild surprise. As the election season went on the R candidate increased his lead in the polls 'til pretty much every poll had him up by 6-8%.

On Tuesday the D candidate won by 8%; that was a 14-16% swing from every poll.
sactoking is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 01:44 PM   #40
Athena
Golden Member
 
Athena's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,484
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by buckshot24 View Post
All I was saying is that they underestimated turnout among young voters and minorities by basing it on percentages of turnout in 2008.
And many would say that the decision to base the entire campaign on an expectation of lower than 2008 minority turnout, was in fact based on racist assumptions. Those assumptions should have at least been cross-checked with 2010 census data. They didn't do that because... well, they didn't think the minority vote mattered enough to warrant a closer look.

Then again, perhaps looking at the data was what mobilized all the voter suppression efforts in the so-called swing states.

On average, Romney campaign staffers were paid twice what Obama's were and I think we can all agree that Obama had demonstrably better talent. The people who developed the differing turnout models all went to the same schools and had access to the very same data. For some reason, the Romney folks just didn't see what the Obama team did.

Obviously, it's not all about racism, some of it is just hubris. Some of us suspect though, that the Republicans' two-decade long policy of thumbing their noses at black voters had something to do with that blind spot.
__________________
Athena

"An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it."

Last edited by Athena; 11-12-2012 at 03:13 PM.
Athena is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 02:56 PM   #41
Charles Kozierok
Elite Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6,762
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by buckshot24 View Post
They used 2008 as a model of minority turnout which ended up being wrong. Definitely isn't any kind of conspiracy involved.
Remember when you tried to mock me by saying I thought I was smarter than Gallup and Rasmussen?
__________________
"Of those who say nothing, few are silent." -- Thomas Neill
Charles Kozierok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 05:18 PM   #42
Fern
Elite Member
Super Moderator
 
Fern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Great Smoky Mountains
Posts: 24,011
Default

Seems premature to come to any firm conclusion about the polls' accuracy. They haven't even counted all the votes yet. And I'm guessing we don't have firm data on turnout yet either (D's versus R's).

http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news...n-to-tell?lite

Fern
__________________
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy.
Fern is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 05:19 PM   #43
RabidMongoose
Lifer
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,061
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fern View Post
Seems premature to come to any firm conclusion about the polls' accuracy. They haven't even counted all the votes yet. And I'm guessing we don't have firm data on turnout yet either (D's versus R's).

http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news...n-to-tell?lite

Fern
Yeah, it's definitely too early. Maybe Romney did get more votes.
RabidMongoose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 05:30 PM   #44
zinfamous
No Lifer
 
zinfamous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 62,666
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by buckshot24 View Post
I was reading Rasmussen's take on why he was off and it was turnout of the young and minority voters. He was off by a few percentage points on both which underestimated Democratic turnout. As long as you get your demographics right it shouldn't matter how you contact them.
can't you only make such estimates by contacting these people? that is the exact reason for broadening the method of contact, which, again, seems to be why such polling has trended towards inaccuracy.
__________________
PAB: My dad blew a tranny. I've been asked to see if I can get one replaced free.
brianmanahan: zinfamous is such a fool
he's known as AT:OT's tool
mentally he's such a klutz
his head is made of 50 butts
zinfamous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 06:29 PM   #45
buckshot24
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,823
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RabidMongoose View Post
They used racist models.
Quit throwing around "racist" for every fucking thing.
buckshot24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 06:32 PM   #46
buckshot24
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,823
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Athena View Post
And many would say that the decision to base the entire campaign on an expectation of lower than 2008 minority turnout, was in fact based on racist assumptions. Those assumptions should have at least been cross-checked with 2010 census data. They didn't do that because... well, they didn't think the minority vote mattered enough to warrant a closer look.

Then again, perhaps looking at the data was what mobilized all the voter suppression efforts in the so-called swing states.

On average, Romney campaign staffers were paid twice what Obama's were and I think we can all agree that Obama had demonstrably better talent. The people who developed the differing turnout models all went to the same schools and had access to the very same data. For some reason, the Romney folks just didn't see what the Obama team did.

Obviously, it's not all about racism, some of it is just hubris. Some of us suspect though, that the Republicans' two-decade long policy of thumbing their noses at black voters had something to do with that blind spot.
We're talking about the polling outfits, not the campaigns.
buckshot24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 07:00 PM   #47
RabidMongoose
Lifer
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 11,061
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by buckshot24 View Post
Quit throwing around "racist" for every fucking thing.
The models were racist because they took GOP ideals of the non-existence of minorities and actually applied them to polling. It's so racist.

The GOP's electorate is 90% white non-hispanic. Their models reflect this, too.
RabidMongoose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 07:32 PM   #48
buckshot24
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 2,823
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RabidMongoose View Post
The models were racist because they took GOP ideals of the non-existence of minorities and actually applied them to polling. It's so racist.
Now I know you're trolling. Ok, thanks for making it clear.
buckshot24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2012, 07:47 PM   #49
Athena
Golden Member
 
Athena's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 1,484
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by buckshot24 View Post
We're talking about the polling outfits, not the campaigns.
Well in that case, it turns out that all the polls overstated support for Romney (I'm sure that we'll read all sorts of explanations for that in the months to come) but in aggregate they still predicted an Obama win. That's the point that most people here are talking about...why/how the campaign's model came up with different forecasts than the statisticians using the very same data.

The Romney campaign took data that was already skewed in his favor and adjusted it because, in their minds, it wasn't favorable enough.
__________________
Athena

"An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it."
Athena is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.