Ok, party politics aside, at this point in the race with less than 28 days to go, what is the poll gap marker that tells you a candidate cant win that state?

 

That's pretty poorly worded, so let me elaborate. If McCain is +5 in a state, is that a toss up? An uphill battle? Locked down for McCain? What if it's +3 or +10?

 

We have said for a while to wait until we are closer to the election to see what states will really do on Nov 4th. Well, we are int he crunch.

 

I set the number as +6 for a "lock" and +3 to +5 a uphill battle. Less than +3 is toss up.

Just remember, whatever the polls say, add as much as 2 or 4% to McCain. The fear factor is still there for people to run from Obama, although its mitigated somewhat by the Palin effect.

 

Just remember, whatever the polls say, add as much as 2 or 4% to McCain. The fear factor is still there for people to run from Obama, although its mitigated somewhat by the Palin effect.

I would argue partially the opposite. These voter registration drive in places like VA, NC, and IN could boost Obama by 1-3% because pollsters don't know how to factor in new voters.

Just remember, whatever the polls say, add as much as 2 or 4% to McCain. The fear factor is still there for people to run from Obama, although its mitigated somewhat by the Palin effect.

Do you counter balance the fear factor effect to the unpolled cell phone only users who tend to favor Obama?

Do you counter balance the fear factor effect to the unpolled cell phone only users who tend to favor Obama?

apparently many of the polls are starting to work cell phones into their polls. Not that it's as exact as land line, they are being used.

apparently many of the polls are starting to work cell phones into their polls. Not that it's as exact as land line, they are being used.

 

From everything I've been reading cell phone only users are still severely underrepresented in the polls.

I would argue partially the opposite. These voter registration drive in places like VA, NC, and IN could boost Obama by 1-3% because pollsters don't know how to factor in new voters.

 

That's the other X factor, as I've mentioned before. But keep 2 things in mind on that. One, the polls reflect the registered voters or likely voters - so that is factored in. Two, the boost from Obama's ground game will have a declining margin over poll numbers as you approach the election.

 

Do you counter balance the fear factor effect to the unpolled cell phone only users who tend to favor Obama?

My understanding is that some of them, at least, now include those. But that is still a good point.

 

From everything I've been reading cell phone only users are still severely underrepresented in the polls.

no doubt. that's why I added that part at the end of my post. I agree they are under represented.

Just for funsies: http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/narcis...tobecomeleaders

 

Sorry, my browser won't let me hotlink.

This video should be posted as many times on this message board as humanly possible, and should be viewed by EVERYONE.

 

Non-partisan, I promise. Just watch. SFW, as long as you're allowed to laugh loudly.

 

This video should be posted as many times on this message board as humanly possible, and should be viewed by EVERYONE.

 

Non-partisan, I promise. Just watch. SFW, as long as you're allowed to laugh loudly.

 

I was waiting for someone to post this. Probably deserves to go in the Diamond forum too.

I was waiting for someone to post this. Probably deserves to go in the Diamond forum too.

Already there. And in PHT. It'd be in my Sig if I could get the HTML on option for it.

Largest Lead in the Campaign:

I was waiting for someone to post this. Probably deserves to go in the Diamond forum too.

Same here, I was also wishing I could share. When he gets to the punch line, I laughed and I laughed.

Curious...for all the McCain supporters who cited Obama's big spending as a concern, do you feel better now that McCain is proposing a $300 billion buyout of bad mortgages?

I tend to trust SurveyUSA.

My only concern is they have polls in other states that are off by as large as 10 points compated to other reputable polls. SUSA's VA poll is in the vacinity of other VA polls and this PA poll is a little larger than most, but most have Obama at least +6.

 

I like pollster.com - it seems to count a lot of them and use an average.

Ok, party politics aside, at this point in the race with less than 28 days to go, what is the poll gap marker that tells you a candidate cant win that state?

 

That's pretty poorly worded, so let me elaborate. If McCain is +5 in a state, is that a toss up? An uphill battle? Locked down for McCain? What if it's +3 or +10?

 

We have said for a while to wait until we are closer to the election to see what states will really do on Nov 4th. Well, we are int he crunch.

 

I set the number as +6 for a "lock" and +3 to +5 a uphill battle. Less than +3 is toss up.

Well, here's the thing. I think that the actual number that would be considered a "toss-up" is going to vary state to state. The (political) population of Virginia is much different than, say Minnesota. To get all nerdy on you guys, I think you need to be VERY conservative in calling one of the real grid-locked states (say OH and VA) because I imagine there is just a ton of variation relative to "safe" states. Honestly, I don't see the variation changing that much now until the election.

 

I think that's probably why a meta-polling site like 358 is the most accurate, you're comparing multiple samples (and importantly, their variances). The mere fact of how unstable these polls in general are, suggest to me that there is not a lot of predictability in how the election will turn out.

 

But, admittedly, I'm using my knowledge about means and variances here more than the actual polling numbers.

I would argue partially the opposite. These voter registration drive in places like VA, NC, and IN could boost Obama by 1-3% because pollsters don't know how to factor in new voters.

i agree, i think we'll see the same phenomenon we saw in the primary where, on election night, obama blew everyone else out of the water because of NEW voter turnout.

 

honestly at this point it looks pretty impossible for mccain. i'm predicting a landslide - it's not going to be close.

i agree, i think we'll see the same phenomenon we saw in the primary where, on election night, obama blew everyone else out of the water because of NEW voter turnout.

 

honestly at this point it looks pretty impossible for mccain. i'm predicting a landslide - it's not going to be close.

538.com has Obama at 90.5% for winning it. And you can always refer to my May 16th prediction of a landslide for s***s and giggles.

There are two things to keep in mind. 1) Republicans generally don't trust pollsters, so they either decline to answer, or just don't get polled at all. 2) Many people will tell a pollster that they are voting for Obama because it is the 'cool' thing to do, or they want to avoid being called a racist, or a host of other reasons, and when they actually vote, will vote McCain. Remember all the exit polls that had Kerry winning by huge amounts, and then it turned out he didn't win at all? People screwing with pollsters. Go ahead, cream your jeans with each new poll, but nothing is over until its over. He may yet win, but your suffering from premature electuation. It wasn't over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor, and nothing is over until we (the voters, not pollsters) decide it is! Aaaaaagggghhhh!

The Bradley Effect is a load of horse s***, in my opinion.

There are two things to keep in mind. 1) Republicans generally don't trust pollsters, so they either decline to answer, or just don't get polled at all. 2) Many people will tell a pollster that they are voting for Obama because it is the 'cool' thing to do, or they want to avoid being called a racist, or a host of other reasons, and when they actually vote, will vote McCain. Remember all the exit polls that had Kerry winning by huge amounts, and then it turned out he didn't win at all? People screwing with pollsters. Go ahead, cream your jeans with each new poll, but nothing is over until its over. He may yet win, but your suffering from premature electuation. It wasn't over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor, and nothing is over until we (the voters, not pollsters) decide it is! Aaaaaagggghhhh!

RCP accurately predicted 49 of 50 states in 2004 using aggregated polling data. Are you suggesting that Republicans in 2008 are significantly less cooperative with pollsters in 2008 than they were in 2004?

 

Really, if you want to make a "don't trust the polls" case, then you would be better off saying that the polls are still close by historical standards and we don't know what will happen in the world in the next month.

 

 

I think the "people lie to pollsters"thing is a load of crap. People either answer the questions honestly, or hang up. A persons time is too valuable to sit around and waste their time messing with a pollster.

Edited October 8, 200817 yr by Athomeboy_2000

The Bradley Effect is a load of horse s***, in my opinion.

 

Agreed. Obama typically did BETTER than he was polling in the primaries.

I love how people just took this one example, from twenty years ago, that was a theory, and have projected it to the current political race.

The Bradley Effect is a load of horse s***, in my opinion.

There is no basis for it.