Comments on: Why can’t they give a meaningful poll? http://blog.lj4a.com/2008/02/08/why-cant-they-give-a-meaningful-poll/ My personal blog to promote those ideals that our country was founded on. Thu, 28 Aug 2008 06:05:57 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1 By: Daniel Z. http://blog.lj4a.com/2008/02/08/why-cant-they-give-a-meaningful-poll/#comment-742 Daniel Z. Sat, 09 Feb 2008 00:30:57 +0000 http://blog.lj4a.com/2008/02/08/why-cant-they-give-a-meaningful-poll/#comment-742 You know, I was going to acknowledge that doing 50 polls is more expensive. Of course, i can buy a $50 fridge and a $2500 fridge, which one is more likely to give me better results? The answer? The one you paid 50 times more for. The other thing to consider is that certain polls do not really concern me. I think I can guess which party will take MS and which party will take CA. Tell me who does better in PA, OH, and FL (the swing states). Perhaps add some of the other close ones from 2004 as well. That way, you could make some logical assumptions about some states while giving meaningful results about other ones. And for the third party candidates, they would probably fit under "other" (unless a certain, well funded, ind. candidate enters the race). Anyway, if I could know that if Obama vs McCain would lead to Obama taking Louisiana (because of Republican apathy for McCain and extreme turnout from minorities for Obama) then I would absolutely cast my vote for Obama tomorrow. Polls telling me that Obama beats McCain straight up in the popular vote that don't say he gets enough electoral votes to win do not help me make my decision. You know, I was going to acknowledge that doing 50 polls is more expensive. Of course, i can buy a $50 fridge and a $2500 fridge, which one is more likely to give me better results? The answer? The one you paid 50 times more for.

The other thing to consider is that certain polls do not really concern me. I think I can guess which party will take MS and which party will take CA. Tell me who does better in PA, OH, and FL (the swing states). Perhaps add some of the other close ones from 2004 as well. That way, you could make some logical assumptions about some states while giving meaningful results about other ones.

And for the third party candidates, they would probably fit under “other” (unless a certain, well funded, ind. candidate enters the race).

Anyway, if I could know that if Obama vs McCain would lead to Obama taking Louisiana (because of Republican apathy for McCain and extreme turnout from minorities for Obama) then I would absolutely cast my vote for Obama tomorrow. Polls telling me that Obama beats McCain straight up in the popular vote that don’t say he gets enough electoral votes to win do not help me make my decision.

]]> By: oyster http://blog.lj4a.com/2008/02/08/why-cant-they-give-a-meaningful-poll/#comment-741 oyster Sat, 09 Feb 2008 00:03:37 +0000 http://blog.lj4a.com/2008/02/08/why-cant-they-give-a-meaningful-poll/#comment-741 Doing fifty polls is much more expensive than doing one poll. Plus, there are undecideds and states falling within the margin of error probably shouldn't be designated one way or the other-- it's a statistical tie. Also, third party nominees aren't yet known, adding another small variable. Doing fifty polls is much more expensive than doing one poll. Plus, there are undecideds and states falling within the margin of error probably shouldn’t be designated one way or the other– it’s a statistical tie. Also, third party nominees aren’t yet known, adding another small variable.

]]>