cBS poll the left is trying to tout

[JustAnAverageGuy]

Originally posted by: Painman
Singling out one poll isn't of much use. One must look at the general trend in numerous polls.

Damn traitorous liberal co-conspirators, all 15 of those polling organizations.

/thread

Regardless of the method, the result was the same.

 

[ShadesOfGrey]

Originally posted by: JustAnAverageGuy

Originally posted by: Painman
Singling out one poll isn't of much use. One must look at the general trend in numerous polls.

Damn traitorous liberal co-conspirators, all 15 of those polling organizations.

/thread

Regardless of the method, the result was the same.

Read the Op. It wasn't about the individual results - it's about the methods and sample. Next time try to pay attention.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey

Originally posted by: Todd33
Let be real here, he/she/it made this thread to preempt someone that would post the results, without screaming bias and attacking the messenger. This thread is baseless. There is no proof, there is nothing bad typical poll number obtained in typical poll methods, which includes not using party ID to normalize, which is typical. this is the typical "liberal media" echo that has been going on for 30 years in an attempt at discrediting journalism. Repugs hate a free and open press, they want Baghdad Bob style press.

There was no preemption. It was already out and people were trying to use it. They bought it without even looking at it critically to see it's accuracy.
The only thing baseless are your claims and attacks on me and this thread. The poll sample is flawed, which is obvious to anyone who looks at the raw data.

:roll: "hate free and open press"? Nice try. I would love to see an open and free press, but we don't seem to have that. We have Fox on the right, and CNN, MSNBC, and the "big 3" on the left. Why don't we have a source that doesn't inject a bias? Why is that? Why do we as news consumers put up with this activist journalism? Why do you attack me for calling out this bad journalism instead of joining the critique to make "news" - News again?

How is it flawed?

 

[ShadesOfGrey]

Originally posted by: Tab


How is it flawed?

It's only been stated a dozen times or so in this thread. You should try reading.

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
Read the Op. It wasn't about the individual results - it's about the methods and sample. Next time try to pay attention.

Their method seem to be quite accurate. I don't see the problem.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey

Originally posted by: Todd33
Let be real here, he/she/it made this thread to preempt someone that would post the results, without screaming bias and attacking the messenger. This thread is baseless. There is no proof, there is nothing bad typical poll number obtained in typical poll methods, which includes not using party ID to normalize, which is typical. this is the typical "liberal media" echo that has been going on for 30 years in an attempt at discrediting journalism. Repugs hate a free and open press, they want Baghdad Bob style press.

There was no preemption. It was already out and people were trying to use it. They bought it without even looking at it critically to see it's accuracy.
The only thing baseless are your claims and attacks on me and this thread. The poll sample is flawed, which is obvious to anyone who looks at the raw data.

:roll: "hate free and open press"? Nice try. I would love to see an open and free press, but we don't seem to have that. We have Fox on the right, and CNN, MSNBC, and the "big 3" on the left. Why don't we have a source that doesn't inject a bias? Why is that? Why do we as news consumers put up with this activist journalism? Why do you attack me for calling out this bad journalism instead of joining the critique to make "news" - News again?

How is it flawed?

The results are "wrong" not that the other 13 polls disagree but the results don't match what the OP feels is right.

 

[ShadesOfGrey]

Originally posted by: JustAnAverageGuy

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
Read the Op. It wasn't about the individual results - it's about the methods and sample. Next time try to pay attention.

Their method seem to be quite accurate. I don't see the problem.

The method is fine for a general poll but doesn't factor party affiliation and thus they used an overly small sample of Republicans.

So since their sample is so flawed, their methodology needs work.

It's not that difficult to understand, unless you you have leftist blinders on.

 

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey

Originally posted by: homercles337
You still havent shown how or IF they intentionally skewed results. Are you still upset at CBS for proving that DumbYa used his daddies influence to avoid the draft and join the NG even though he recently said that he never did?

Whether it was intentional or whether it was incompetence - it doesn't change the fact that cBS has serious problems when it comes to credibility. Edward Murrow would not be pleased at the current state of affairs in his old house. If the media is supposed to be where people can go for truth, this certainly doesn't help that image.

Again, i ask, "Are you still upset at CBS for proving that DumbYa used his daddies influence to avoid the draft and join the NG even though he recently said that he never did?"

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
The method is fine for a general poll but doesn't factor party affiliation and thus they used an overly small sample of Republicans.

So since their sample is so flawed, their methodology needs work.

It's not that difficult to understand, unless you you have leftist blinders on.

I'm just saying that if you compare to the other polls today, they all point to pretty much the same number.

I've read the thread and you STILL have yet to prove they CBS has an agenda at hand here. Their results correspond to the other polls. Bush's approval ratings are in the mid 30s.

<bad analogy>You can do 2*3, 3*2, or you can even do 2+2+2, the result is still the same. </bad analogy>

 

[ShadesOfGrey]

Originally posted by: JustAnAverageGuy

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
The method is fine for a general poll but doesn't factor party affiliation and thus they used an overly small sample of Republicans.

So since their sample is so flawed, their methodology needs work.

It's not that difficult to understand, unless you you have leftist blinders on.

I'm just saying that if you compare to the other polls today, they all point to pretty much the same number.

I've read the thread and you STILL have yet to prove they CBS has an agenda at hand here. Their results correspond to the other polls. Bush's approval ratings are in the mid 30s.

<bad analogy>You can do 2*3, 3*2, or you can even do 2+2+2, the result is still the same. </bad analogy>

Again, it has nothing to do with the results. Just because you claim the results are similar does not change the fact that the sample is bad. Again, the point of this thread was that the sample was bad, not that Bush's popularity numbers are or aren't low. Other poll's results have ZERO bearing on this poll's bad sample.

It seems you people are just being defensive because you like the results. I don't care about them because IMO it's meaningless anyway, but a bad sample is a bad sample regardless of whether you like the results or not. Try thinking for once instead of just lapping up what the MSM feeds you.



homercles337 - This has nothing to do with Rathergate. This stands on it's own as bad journalism by cBS.

 

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey

Originally posted by: Todd33
Let be real here, he/she/it made this thread to preempt someone that would post the results, without screaming bias and attacking the messenger. This thread is baseless. There is no proof, there is nothing bad typical poll number obtained in typical poll methods, which includes not using party ID to normalize, which is typical. this is the typical "liberal media" echo that has been going on for 30 years in an attempt at discrediting journalism. Repugs hate a free and open press, they want Baghdad Bob style press.

There was no preemption. It was already out and people were trying to use it. They bought it without even looking at it critically to see it's accuracy.
The only thing baseless are your claims and attacks on me and this thread. The poll sample is flawed, which is obvious to anyone who looks at the raw data.

No. The only thing baseless in here is your claim. Provide proof or STFU! Where are your alternate analyses? Oh, wait, you know NOTHING about statistics so nevermind.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey

Originally posted by: JustAnAverageGuy

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
The method is fine for a general poll but doesn't factor party affiliation and thus they used an overly small sample of Republicans.

So since their sample is so flawed, their methodology needs work.

It's not that difficult to understand, unless you you have leftist blinders on.

I'm just saying that if you compare to the other polls today, they all point to pretty much the same number.

I've read the thread and you STILL have yet to prove they CBS has an agenda at hand here. Their results correspond to the other polls. Bush's approval ratings are in the mid 30s.

<bad analogy>You can do 2*3, 3*2, or you can even do 2+2+2, the result is still the same. </bad analogy>

Again, it has nothing to do with the results. Just because you claim the results are similar does not change the fact that the sample is bad. Again, the point of this thread was that the sample was bad, not that Bush's popularity numbers are or aren't low. Other poll's results have ZERO bearing on this poll's bad sample.

It seems you people are just being defensive because you like the results. I don't care about them because IMO it's meaningless anyway, but a bad sample is a bad sample regardless of whether you like the results or not. Try thinking for once instead of just lapping up what the MSM feeds you.



homercles337 - This has nothing to do with Rathergate. This stands on it's own as bad journalism by cBS.

What is up with not capitilizing the 'c' in CBS? You keep claiming the sample is bad but with no proof. The fact that the poll results match other poll is not irrelivent it implies very strongly that the sample is correct and your just a hack.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: smack Down
What is up with not capitilizing the 'c' in CBS? You keep claiming the sample is bad but with no proof. The fact that the poll results match other poll is not irrelivent it implies very strongly that the sample is correct and your just a hack.

You that naive?

cBS, get it now?

 

[ShadesOfGrey]

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey

Originally posted by: Todd33
Let be real here, he/she/it made this thread to preempt someone that would post the results, without screaming bias and attacking the messenger. This thread is baseless. There is no proof, there is nothing bad typical poll number obtained in typical poll methods, which includes not using party ID to normalize, which is typical. this is the typical "liberal media" echo that has been going on for 30 years in an attempt at discrediting journalism. Repugs hate a free and open press, they want Baghdad Bob style press.

There was no preemption. It was already out and people were trying to use it. They bought it without even looking at it critically to see it's accuracy.
The only thing baseless are your claims and attacks on me and this thread. The poll sample is flawed, which is obvious to anyone who looks at the raw data.

No. The only thing baseless in here is your claim. Provide proof or STFU! Where are your alternate analyses? Oh, wait, you know NOTHING about statistics so nevermind.

Hardly. I have shown you the numbers. If you can't tell they are flawed then there is no help for you. It doesn't take a statistician to know the numbers are flawed.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey

Originally posted by: Todd33
Let be real here, he/she/it made this thread to preempt someone that would post the results, without screaming bias and attacking the messenger. This thread is baseless. There is no proof, there is nothing bad typical poll number obtained in typical poll methods, which includes not using party ID to normalize, which is typical. this is the typical "liberal media" echo that has been going on for 30 years in an attempt at discrediting journalism. Repugs hate a free and open press, they want Baghdad Bob style press.

There was no preemption. It was already out and people were trying to use it. They bought it without even looking at it critically to see it's accuracy.
The only thing baseless are your claims and attacks on me and this thread. The poll sample is flawed, which is obvious to anyone who looks at the raw data.

No. The only thing baseless in here is your claim. Provide proof or STFU! Where are your alternate analyses? Oh, wait, you know NOTHING about statistics so nevermind.

Hardly. I have shown you the numbers. If you can't tell they are flawed then there is no help for you. It doesn't take a statistician to know the numbers are flawed.

It might not take a statistician to know the numbers are flawed but I would like one to prove they are flawed.

 

[ShadesOfGrey]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey

Originally posted by: JustAnAverageGuy

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
The method is fine for a general poll but doesn't factor party affiliation and thus they used an overly small sample of Republicans.

So since their sample is so flawed, their methodology needs work.

It's not that difficult to understand, unless you you have leftist blinders on.

I'm just saying that if you compare to the other polls today, they all point to pretty much the same number.

I've read the thread and you STILL have yet to prove they CBS has an agenda at hand here. Their results correspond to the other polls. Bush's approval ratings are in the mid 30s.

<bad analogy>You can do 2*3, 3*2, or you can even do 2+2+2, the result is still the same. </bad analogy>

Again, it has nothing to do with the results. Just because you claim the results are similar does not change the fact that the sample is bad. Again, the point of this thread was that the sample was bad, not that Bush's popularity numbers are or aren't low. Other poll's results have ZERO bearing on this poll's bad sample.

It seems you people are just being defensive because you like the results. I don't care about them because IMO it's meaningless anyway, but a bad sample is a bad sample regardless of whether you like the results or not. Try thinking for once instead of just lapping up what the MSM feeds you.



homercles337 - This has nothing to do with Rathergate. This stands on it's own as bad journalism by cBS.

What is up with not capitilizing the 'c' in CBS? You keep claiming the sample is bad but with no proof. The fact that the poll results match other poll is not irrelivent it implies very strongly that the sample is correct and your just a hack.

:roll: Again, just because the results match what you want or some other poll does not mean the sample is OK. Take a look at the numbers. You really believe a 24% Republican weighted sample is OK? If so, YOU are the hack.

 

[ShadesOfGrey]

Originally posted by: smack Down

It might not take a statistician to know the numbers are flawed but I would like one to prove they are flawed.

You want the statistician, you find one that says the numbers are good because it's quite obvious to this normally educated professional that the numbers don't stack up. I do numbers for a living, just not stats. If I sent my boss a report on our customers surveys and undersampled one area of business we work in, my boss would make me redo the report. It's no different than this case. cBS is using a 24% sample when they should be using a 30+ percentage.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey

Originally posted by: JustAnAverageGuy

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
The method is fine for a general poll but doesn't factor party affiliation and thus they used an overly small sample of Republicans.

So since their sample is so flawed, their methodology needs work.

It's not that difficult to understand, unless you you have leftist blinders on.

I'm just saying that if you compare to the other polls today, they all point to pretty much the same number.

I've read the thread and you STILL have yet to prove they CBS has an agenda at hand here. Their results correspond to the other polls. Bush's approval ratings are in the mid 30s.

<bad analogy>You can do 2*3, 3*2, or you can even do 2+2+2, the result is still the same. </bad analogy>

Again, it has nothing to do with the results. Just because you claim the results are similar does not change the fact that the sample is bad. Again, the point of this thread was that the sample was bad, not that Bush's popularity numbers are or aren't low. Other poll's results have ZERO bearing on this poll's bad sample.

It seems you people are just being defensive because you like the results. I don't care about them because IMO it's meaningless anyway, but a bad sample is a bad sample regardless of whether you like the results or not. Try thinking for once instead of just lapping up what the MSM feeds you.



homercles337 - This has nothing to do with Rathergate. This stands on it's own as bad journalism by cBS.

What is up with not capitilizing the 'c' in CBS? You keep claiming the sample is bad but with no proof. The fact that the poll results match other poll is not irrelivent it implies very strongly that the sample is correct and your just a hack.

:roll: Again, just because the results match what you want or some other poll does not mean the sample is OK. Take a look at the numbers. You really believe a 24% Republican weighted sample is OK? If so, YOU are the hack.

Until you present a poll taken in the last 30 days that show a different precent of republicans I wll continue to believe the poll is as valid as any other poll. IE with in the margin of error 95% of the time. All the evidence points to the poll being valid.

 

[ShadesOfGrey]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey

Originally posted by: JustAnAverageGuy

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
The method is fine for a general poll but doesn't factor party affiliation and thus they used an overly small sample of Republicans.

So since their sample is so flawed, their methodology needs work.

It's not that difficult to understand, unless you you have leftist blinders on.

I'm just saying that if you compare to the other polls today, they all point to pretty much the same number.

I've read the thread and you STILL have yet to prove they CBS has an agenda at hand here. Their results correspond to the other polls. Bush's approval ratings are in the mid 30s.

<bad analogy>You can do 2*3, 3*2, or you can even do 2+2+2, the result is still the same. </bad analogy>

Again, it has nothing to do with the results. Just because you claim the results are similar does not change the fact that the sample is bad. Again, the point of this thread was that the sample was bad, not that Bush's popularity numbers are or aren't low. Other poll's results have ZERO bearing on this poll's bad sample.

It seems you people are just being defensive because you like the results. I don't care about them because IMO it's meaningless anyway, but a bad sample is a bad sample regardless of whether you like the results or not. Try thinking for once instead of just lapping up what the MSM feeds you.



homercles337 - This has nothing to do with Rathergate. This stands on it's own as bad journalism by cBS.

What is up with not capitilizing the 'c' in CBS? You keep claiming the sample is bad but with no proof. The fact that the poll results match other poll is not irrelivent it implies very strongly that the sample is correct and your just a hack.

:roll: Again, just because the results match what you want or some other poll does not mean the sample is OK. Take a look at the numbers. You really believe a 24% Republican weighted sample is OK? If so, YOU are the hack.

Until you present a poll taken in the last 30 days that show a different precent of republicans I wll continue to believe the poll is as valid as any other poll. IE with in the margin of error 95% of the time. All the evidence points to the poll being valid.

I've already shown you that Zogby uses party affiliation weighting. So are you done will recycling your excuses yet? I'm sick of having to repeat what has already been stated in this thread. If you have any more questions, try reading the thread first so you don't look like a fool anymore.

 

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
Just because you claim the results are similar does not change the fact that the sample is bad.

You have yet to provide evidence of ANYTHING you claim! Youre just as bad as Zendari or Pabster, in fact given your tactics i bet you are one of them. Mods can check IPs, but i cant. Either put up or STFU! Do you have proof of a sampling bias and subsequent biased weights, which willl bias stats even further against your agenda? If not, STFU!

 

[ShadesOfGrey]

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
Just because you claim the results are similar does not change the fact that the sample is bad.

You have yet to provide evidence of ANYTHING you claim! Youre just as bad as Zendari or Pabster, in fact given your tactics i bet you are one of them. Mods can check IPs, but i cant. Either put up or STFU! Do you have proof of a sampling bias and subsequent biased weights, which willl bias stats even further against your agenda? If not, STFU!

Hello, it's all in the OP. The sample of Republicans was 28% which is lower than the average. Then due to their other weighing, the result was a 24% sample of Republicans. THAT is a bad sample because it under samples Republicans. Can you not read? The numbers are right there in plain sight.

So no matter how many times you try to claim there is no evidence, it doesn't change the fact that I have presented it. It also doesn't change the fact that you and others continue to refuse to accept them. No wonder you people on the left can't win - you don't listen and you refuse to accept reality when it is presented to you.

 

[homercles337]

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
So no matter how many times you try to claim there is no evidence, it doesn't change the fact that I have presented it. It also doesn't change the fact that you and others continue to refuse to accept them. No wonder you people on the left can't win - you don't listen and you refuse to accept reality when it is presented to you.

Ummm, never presented. Do your own analysis and present the results. Then we can talk, otherwise youre just a retard in my opinion.

[edit] SoG, you have no knowledge of statistics, that is obvious. However, you have also not presented any evidence that your knucklebrained perspecctives are accurate. [/edit]

 

[ShadesOfGrey]

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
So no matter how many times you try to claim there is no evidence, it doesn't change the fact that I have presented it. It also doesn't change the fact that you and others continue to refuse to accept them. No wonder you people on the left can't win - you don't listen and you refuse to accept reality when it is presented to you.

Ummm, never presented. Do your own analysis and present the results. Then we can talk, otherwise youre just a retard in my opinion.

:laugh: You have to be purposly being stupid, right? I mean I've only presented the case a dozen times in this thread. Have you not read the thread or my posts?

Nevermind, you obviously aren't willing to even read so you are a waste of time. Maybe if you read the thread and have a specific question that I haven't already answered, I might just respond to you again but if not, then consider me done with your continuous ignornace.

 

[smack Down]

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
Just because you claim the results are similar does not change the fact that the sample is bad.

You have yet to provide evidence of ANYTHING you claim! Youre just as bad as Zendari or Pabster, in fact given your tactics i bet you are one of them. Mods can check IPs, but i cant. Either put up or STFU! Do you have proof of a sampling bias and subsequent biased weights, which willl bias stats even further against your agenda? If not, STFU!

Hello, it's all in the OP. The sample of Republicans was 28% which is lower than the average. Then due to their other weighing, the result was a 24% sample of Republicans. THAT is a bad sample because it under samples Republicans. Can you not read? The numbers are right there in plain sight.

So no matter how many times you try to claim there is no evidence, it doesn't change the fact that I have presented it. It also doesn't change the fact that you and others continue to refuse to accept them. No wonder you people on the left can't win - you don't listen and you refuse to accept reality when it is presented to you.

Where not the one saying a poll is wrong because it doesn't fell like. All you have shown is the results of the poll which CBS has on there webpage that is hardly evidence that CBS is faking the poll.

 

[ShadesOfGrey]

Originally posted by: smack Down

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey

Originally posted by: homercles337

Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
Just because you claim the results are similar does not change the fact that the sample is bad.

You have yet to provide evidence of ANYTHING you claim! Youre just as bad as Zendari or Pabster, in fact given your tactics i bet you are one of them. Mods can check IPs, but i cant. Either put up or STFU! Do you have proof of a sampling bias and subsequent biased weights, which willl bias stats even further against your agenda? If not, STFU!

Hello, it's all in the OP. The sample of Republicans was 28% which is lower than the average. Then due to their other weighing, the result was a 24% sample of Republicans. THAT is a bad sample because it under samples Republicans. Can you not read? The numbers are right there in plain sight.

So no matter how many times you try to claim there is no evidence, it doesn't change the fact that I have presented it. It also doesn't change the fact that you and others continue to refuse to accept them. No wonder you people on the left can't win - you don't listen and you refuse to accept reality when it is presented to you.

Where not the one saying a poll is wrong because it doesn't fell like. All you have shown is the results of the poll which CBS has on there webpage that is hardly evidence that CBS is faking the poll.

It's obvious you haven't even read the OP. So just like homercles337 before you: "you obviously aren't willing to even read so you are a waste of time. Maybe if you read the thread and have a specific question that I haven't already answered, I might just respond to you again but if not, then consider me done with your continuous ignornace."