• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

polls are stupid.

J

jhu

Lifer
so there is are multiple polls out saying how gwb is in the lead. well, polls aren't always right. look at truman vs. what's-his-name. or even gore vs. bush back in the day.
 
Pollsters have learned a lot about the science of sampling the population since Truman's days, so I don't thing stupid is a very good description. The big flaw with polls is the observer effect, which can skew the results. And failure to get a sample that is big enough and random enough.
 
I just love the word "scientific" when polls are taken. The results are subject to manipulation and the objective goals can be rigged from the start. I have been polled before and have flip-flopped, (OOPS!), I mean- changed my mind.
 
it's really the only way to get the info, though.

calling every individual american every time an institution is curious about the national mood would be pretty ineffective.
 
This thread needs a poll😉

There are serious difficulties involved in interpreting poll data, but the reality is you do have more information after conducting the poll than you had before doing so. The 'put your money where your mouth is' reality of real elections solves most of the problems with random polls (except of course non-participation) and when several polling 'errors' systematically err in the same way, you get different results on election day than in the lead-up, but it doesn't make polls stupid.
 
Polls are stupid, and you don't have a poll in the thread? Where is your sense of sarcasm and irony, jhu?!
 
If it wasn't for polls, half of the news stations would be out of business. After all, what else would they talk about?

Whatever happened to real reporting where the reporter would search for a good story?


 
well, the margin of error should only be +/-3 . anything more than that an the poll is pretty useless.
ive recently heard the same info youve posted as well as there are some suspect methods that are perhaps in use...
but nothing that really means anything. i think no one really cares about polls.
however, i bet that if people manufactured a poll with * in the lead, more and more americans would start to lean toward that person.
 
I find it entertaining that the only time Rabid Bush Haters think polls are worthless is when the poll shows Bush ahead. As soon as Kerry gets ahead or within 2 (standard deviation found on most polls) then the polls accurately show the pulse of the nation.

I've always stated that I can create a poll in which I ask questions in a manner that will show that the majority of those polled think the world is flat. It all depends on questions asked and who you ask.
 
Originally posted by: jhu
so there is are multiple polls out saying how gwb is in the lead. well, polls aren't always right. look at truman vs. what's-his-name. or even gore vs. bush back in the day.
Click to expand...

dewey v truman they stopped taking polls in september.
 
Originally posted by: TheGameIs21
I find it entertaining that the only time Rabid Bush Haters think polls are worthless is when the poll shows Bush ahead. As soon as Kerry gets ahead or within 2 (standard deviation found on most polls) then the polls accurately show the pulse of the nation.

I've always stated that I can create a poll in which I ask questions in a manner that will show that the majority of those polled think the world is flat. It all depends on questions asked and who you ask.
Click to expand...

i was under the impression 3 was the standard deviation.
i figure it doesnt matter all that much...the 1 point discrection between your post and mine, but i would like to know if im wrong on what i thought, considering i use it to "judge" most polls i see.
 
Originally posted by: jhu
so there is are multiple polls out saying how gwb is in the lead. well, polls aren't always right. look at truman vs. what's-his-name. or even gore vs. bush back in the day.
Click to expand...
There's a margin of error and things can always change at the last minute. However, all else equal, if you were to force me to bet my own money on a candidate, it would definitely be put on Bush.

Now, if you were to raise an argument such as "Pollsters don't call overseas servicemen who always send in absentee votes for XXX" or "Pollsters don't call cell phones and young people who vote for XXX use cell phones as their primary means of communication" or "Old people who vote for XXX are most likely to be at home when pollsters call," then this would be a worthwhile thread....

Otherwise, you're just arguing against the margin of error....and that's like arguing that the team that loses game 1 has a better shot at winning the best-of-7 series
 
Originally posted by: b0mbrman
Originally posted by: jhu
so there is are multiple polls out saying how gwb is in the lead. well, polls aren't always right. look at truman vs. what's-his-name. or even gore vs. bush back in the day.
Click to expand...
There's a margin of error and things can always change at the last minute. However, all else equal, if you were to force me to bet my own money on a candidate, it would definitely be put on Bush.
Click to expand...

i pretty much would too.
but i dont know. the polls and the news all suggest bush would win but everywhere i look i see kerry stuff. every person i talk to its all about kerry.
(although, as ive stated before, im pretty sure bush will win this election)
 
Originally posted by: PatboyX
Originally posted by: TheGameIs21
I find it entertaining that the only time Rabid Bush Haters think polls are worthless is when the poll shows Bush ahead. As soon as Kerry gets ahead or within 2 (standard deviation found on most polls) then the polls accurately show the pulse of the nation.

I've always stated that I can create a poll in which I ask questions in a manner that will show that the majority of those polled think the world is flat. It all depends on questions asked and who you ask.
Click to expand...

i was under the impression 3 was the standard deviation.
i figure it doesnt matter all that much...the 1 point discrection between your post and mine, but i would like to know if im wrong on what i thought, considering i use it to "judge" most polls i see.
Click to expand...

I could be wrong... I just keep seeing =/- 2.
 
Just because Bush is holding a big lead in many of the polls doesnt mean they are false. If all the polls give you the same result, it means they are fairly accurate
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top