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 #67: I actually have not only read your paper... [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-03-05 07:07 PM
Response to Reply #17
67. I actually have not only read your paper...
I printed it out, and critiqued/annotated it.

Taking EVERYTHING into consideration (the total "environment" in which this paper exists), I am leaning toward the concept of "red herring", rather than "straw man".

A red herring is defined as:

"Something that draws attention away from the central issue."
http://www.answers.com/topic/red-herring

"...an irrelevant or immaterial... issue."
http://www.legal-definitions.com/Q%20R/red-herring.htm

<word origin:>
"...drag a red herring across the trail to mislead the dogs.
http://www.wordorigins.org/wordorr.htm

------------
Whether it is your intention or not, support/promotion of the rBr "guess" fuels the Bush regime's attempt to create doubt that the exit poll discrepancy points to fraud - as, historically, it does.

Further, contrary to your statement from the post above: "I am not supporting the rBr."; the following statement from page 21 of your paper indicates otherwise:
"The pattern instead is consistent with the E-M hypothesis of reluctant Bush responders..."
http://www.geocities.com/lizzielid/WPEpaper.pdf

I think THAT is about the clearest declarative statement I've heard from you so far. ;)

And Febble, you can mince words all you want about the testability of rBr. The fact of the matter is you can only infer the validity of this hypothesis - you can NEVER verify it. Read below for more on this:

Experiments vs. Surveys
EXPERIMENTS
Collection of data from observations sampled from a population that are either treated or controlled by the experimenter. <Inducing the rr to reveal who they actually voted for would've been the best application of this idea - unfortunately, the time has past forevermore for this to be done.>
SURVEYS
Examination of a system already in operation <the data you are working with from E-M> in which the investigator does not have the opportunity to assign individuals to different conditions. <This ALL that can be done now, using inferential statistics.>
-----------
Experiments vs. Surveys
Both are valid forms of analysis, but each
varies in approach and each has their
respective pitfalls and caveats.
- Surveys not as clear-cut as experiments.
- Experiments always preferred when possible.
- Surveys are useful for establishing patterns.
- Experiments must be used to verify patterns.

From:
"The Scientific Method & Basic Statistical Procedures"
http://www.plantbio.ohiou.edu/epb/instruct/quantmet/lec...

Since you can not EVER verify the rBr (since that time has past, and can never be recovered), the very idea is rendered moot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

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