Navy Pride
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2005
- Messages
- 39,883
- Reaction score
- 3,070
- Location
- Pacific NW
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Your comments please:
Navy Pride said:I voted no........My reasons are:
1. It depends where you poll, for example if you had a poll as to the Presidents approval rating and you polled in Seattle Wash. his approval rating would be about 10%.........If you had the same poll outside the gate at the Naval Submarine base bangor his approval rating would be about 80%....
Navy Pride said:2. It is impossible to poll 1000 people when we have 300,000,000 people in this country and get and accurate approval rating.......
Navy Pride said:Nothing proved how inaccurate polling is more then when the exit polls in the 2004 presidential elections had Kerry winning in a landslide.........
Kandahar said:Generally polls specify the group being polled. If the polling company polled exclusively in Seattle and claimed that the poll represented the entire nation, they'd be wrong. If they polled exclusively in Seattle and claimed that the poll represented Seattle, they'd most likely be correct.
That doesn't mean that polls don't work, it just means that people have different opinions in different parts of the country.
Some basic statistics/probability would indicate that you are wrong about that.
Umm...Please cite an exit poll that showed that. The exit polls matched the actual election results very well in 2004, both state-by-state and nationwide.
Generally polls specify the group being polled. If the polling company polled exclusively in Seattle and claimed that the poll represented the entire nation, they'd be wrong. If they polled exclusively in Seattle and claimed that the poll represented Seattle, they'd most likely be correct.
Navy Pride said:Nothing proved how inaccurate polling is more then when the exit polls in the 2004 presidential elections had Kerry winning in a landslide.........
Navy Pride said:Agreed that is eactly why you can't take a poll of 1000 people that says President Bush has a low approval rating and claim it reflects the feelings of 300,000,000 Americans....
Kandahar said:Taking 1,000 people from Seattle and claiming they represent all of America, is not the same thing as taking 1,000 random people across the nation and claiming they represent all of America. The first would be misleading, the latter is statistically accurate.
Navy Pride said:I don't care if you divide the 1000 by 50 and take 20 from each state there is no way in hell you can know how the rest of the people in that state would vote........
Its just a wild guess at best..........
Kandahar said:No it isn't. A basic understanding of statistics will show exactly how pollsters come up with the margin of error and what it means. They don't just pull that number out of a hat...
If polls were "just a wild guess at best," you'd expect to see election results differing wildly from the final polls (as you claimed earlier in this thread). But we in fact see just the opposite: election results tend to be very similar to the poll results.
Navy Pride said:Then how do you explain when they are so far off?
Navy Pride said:Then how do you explain when they are so far off?
Kandahar said:It's very rare that poll results differ significantly from election results. When they do, it is generally only in statewide contests where A) there was only one company polling, and B) the methodology was flawed or unscientific.
Perhaps if you cited some examples of these many polls that are "so far off" from the election results? The 2004 presidential polls were very close to the actual result; I know of none that predicted the "Kerry landslide" you claim.
Kelzie said:They were off by 2%. All reputable polls have a margin of error. The error in the exit polls was well within that margin.
Navy Pride said:Then you must not remember the exit polling early on election day that had the Kerry people celebrating a certain victory....
I was watching the election returns and all the pundits said Kerry was on the way to a huge victory...
Navy Pride said:Is that so.......The experts might disagree with you on that one..
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/vote2004/2004-11-03-polls-burn-pundits_x.htm
Predictions burn pollsters, pundits — again
By Mark Memmott, USA TODAY
The polling industry is on the defensive for its surveys of voters on Election Day, which some TV pundits relied on Tuesday to overstate support for Sen. John Kerry.
Kandahar said:Hmm, I'm going to call bullshit on this, as it is simply not true. Here are all of the major polls leading up to the 2004 election:
http://www.pollingreport.com/2004.htm
Kandahar said:Of the ten polls listed in that article, seven of them showed Bush leading just prior to the election. One showed Bush and Kerry tied, and two showed Kerry ahead by 1% or 2%. None of them show the Kerry landslide you claim.
Navy Pride said:I don't care if you divide the 1000 by 50 and take 20 from each state there is no way in hell you can know how the rest of the people in that state would vote........
Its just a wild guess at best..........
Navy Pride said:I will say this one more time........Prior to the elections (I am not saying the day before) the liberal media was full of glee because the president's approval rating was in the mid forties and no president had ever been re elected with and approval rating of below 50%............
So much for polls on approval ratings.........