You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #31: MY lack of substantive response? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
OnTheOtherHand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-03-09 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #30
31. MY lack of substantive response?
Gee, it seems to me that if your argument blows itself up at point #2, there's really no need to point out the holes in the rest. But if you want to claim lots of stuff at the wall and claim that some of it stuck, hey, say what you will.

On the topic of 2006, maybe you need to go slug it out with Skinner:
This analysis is an embarrassment.

To those of you who keep demanding to see the problem, here it is:

The problem is not in the mathematics (although I have not checked the math, so it's possible that there are errors there, too). The problem is in the assumptions he used before he even started.

TIA assumes that the "generic poll" should match the recorded votes. This is, quite simply, WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG.

Does everyone here know what the "generic poll" is? The generic poll (usually referred to as the "generic congressional ballot") asks respondents which political party they support in the upcoming congressional election -- but it does not provide any names of any candidates. The generic congressional ballot is not -- and was never intended to be -- an accurate prediction of how people will vote. The point of the generic congressional ballot is to get a general sense of the mood of the voters.

Think, people. THINK....

Bottom line:

You can do the best, most accurate, most awesome mathematics in the history of the world, but if you start with completely false assumptions, your "analysis" is going to be worthless.

ON EDIT: If you want to see how the outcome compares to the pre-election polls, you need to look at the pre-election polls that list candidates by name from each and every congressional district. Someone mentione up-thread that this is precisely what folks like Charlie Cook and Stu Rothenberg did before the election, and their predictions were quite accurate.

Pretty smart guy, Skinner. I'd have worded some of this differently, but the bottom line is that the evidence from both generic and contest-specific polls supports his view and not yours.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
  -To Believe the NY 2004 recorded vote, you must also believe... WillE  Aug-31-09 12:38 PM   #0 
  - Zogby IS a lousy pollster.  Nicholas D Wolfwood   Aug-31-09 12:40 PM   #1 
  - No, he's not. nt  Captain Hilts   Sep-01-09 11:34 AM   #6 
     - He had a 5.4% error rate in 2008.  Nicholas D Wolfwood   Sep-01-09 12:02 PM   #7 
        - for Zogby Interactive polls, yes  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-01-09 12:40 PM   #9 
           - The OP is more or less positing that Zogby's beyond reproach.  Nicholas D Wolfwood   Sep-01-09 12:56 PM   #11 
              - I take your point, but actually, the OP is pretty selective  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-01-09 01:22 PM   #12 
                 - Zogby matched True vote in 2000; Rasmussen (GOP) was way off  WillE   Sep-01-09 07:38 PM   #16 
                    - LOL -- you and your "True Vote" n/t  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-01-09 08:12 PM   #18 
  - A 2004 NY True Vote Analysis  WillE   Aug-31-09 02:10 PM   #2 
  - well to buy Ohio 2004 you have believe that W won despite:  Botany   Aug-31-09 05:55 PM   #3 
  - Amen and Amen!  Stevepol   Aug-31-09 06:49 PM   #4 
  - "As all of America goes to a paper trail, paper ballots, and early voting...".  Peace Patriot   Aug-31-09 08:29 PM   #5 
  - Spot on. n/t  Wilms   Sep-01-09 08:54 PM   #19 
  - In 08 the pukes cheated and lost anyway  Cobalt-60   Sep-03-09 04:22 AM   #26 
  - Paper ballots. Hand counted, w/ plenty of observers, AT THE PRECINCT.  kath   Sep-01-09 12:13 PM   #8 
  - ruh roh: "uniform 7% increase in...late NY PAPER BALLOT vote share"?  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-01-09 12:47 PM   #10 
  - NY 2000-2008: Election Day Lever vs. Late paper ballot vs. Exit poll (update)  WillE   Sep-01-09 07:20 PM   #15 
     - are you withdrawing your argument, or not?  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-01-09 08:08 PM   #17 
        - True... but the NY exit polls AND late vote shares consistently favor the Dems  WillE   Sep-01-09 10:15 PM   #21 
           - that's no answer at all  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-02-09 05:16 AM   #22 
              - I know you are at your computer, monitoring ER.  WillE   Sep-02-09 01:05 PM   #23 
                 - are you joking?  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-02-09 04:39 PM   #24 
                    - Still no answer? This is not a joke. Just a simple question.  WillE   Sep-02-09 09:58 PM   #25 
                       - your attention seems to be wandering  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-03-09 06:10 AM   #27 
                          - You have still not answered the question. The 2006 exits ARE available.  WillE   Sep-03-09 09:44 AM   #28 
                             - your evasive maneuvers continue  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-03-09 11:26 AM   #29 
                                - Your lack of substantive response is a tell.  WillE   Sep-03-09 02:06 PM   #30 
                                   - MY lack of substantive response?  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-03-09 02:52 PM   #31 
                                      - You really have no shame, do you?  WillE   Sep-03-09 03:25 PM   #32 
                                         - you really have no response, do you?  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-03-09 03:51 PM   #33 
  - I believe your post has a lot of merit, but why are you bringing this up now?n/t  wisteria   Sep-01-09 01:55 PM   #13 
  - See this....  WillE   Sep-01-09 02:51 PM   #14 
  - Kicking it  Ellipsis   Sep-01-09 10:09 PM   #20 
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC