Oversampling Repubs in the Polling? (article)

other two polls.

I learned a LONG time ago, not to trust the polls.

In 2004, people began demanding they provide details about the sample they use. They need to do that again, and then they should be monitored for any other distortionary tactics.

That way, Diebold will flip fewer votes.

If they think it's closer than it really is...Good!

All they have to do is vote for them electronically.

"Remarkable turnout! It must be because Palin is so energizing! She brought out the HUGE extremist fundamentalist Christian base" you know the drill.

had one gal just take a guilty to having manipulated the polls in bush favor in 2004.

of course they are skewed

they need to continue to do it so they can steal

Because they oversampled Republicans?

They did not expect him to win as big as he did, that is why they had to do the midnight corrections.

IIRC they punted in their final prediction put out a 49-49 tie.

Their numbers however suggested that if the undecideds were allocated more evenly, as many here suggested, that their poll would show Bush winning 50-49, just like the actual results.

So if anything, Gallup was "biased" toward Kerry by not being bold.

I forgot all about the conspiracy non-sense.

Sorry.

You'll get it eventually.

Some consumers of the polls (including the Gallup Poll) have questioned poll results because party identification and other characteristics do not match the 2000 exit poll data. There are very good reasons why they may not match the exit poll data.

First, some treat the exit poll as a census. It is not a census, it is a survey based on sampling of voting precincts. There is a reason it is called an "exit poll" and not an "exit census." That's because it is a poll, and as such is subject to sampling variation and other polling errors just as any other poll would be. In fact, because exit polling relies on quota sampling (hand selection of survey spots according to population size and other factors), it has a higher degree of potential error than do the random samples on which telephone surveys are based. Thus, there is no basis on which to believe the exit poll numbers are in any way more accurate than any other number you get from a poll. They are all estimates. The one advantage of the exit poll is that they know everyone they interview is a voter, while pre-election polls rely on models to determine who is likely to vote and who is not. However, that does not mean their estimates are necessarily better, and they are definitely not error-free estimates of the electorate as many treat them. In fact, when multiple exit polls existed in the past, they very routinely differed in their estimates of the vote as well as their estimates of the demographic characteristics of the electorate. Even today the Los Angeles Times exit poll differs from the larger exit poll used by the networks.

Second, the exit poll measure of political party ID is fundamentally different from ours. We know that survey results can differ depending on how the data are collected. Our questions are read and responses obtained verbally over the phone. Their responses are obtained in self-administered questionnaires that present the questions in a visual format. Most survey research experts would be extremely cautious in comparing data obtained by a telephone interview versus that obtained in a self-administered paper-and-pencil questionnaire. That is in addition to question wording differences in the party ID question that can also have an effect on the results.

Third, a lot has changed since 2000. In the post-9/11 environment, terrorism has become one of the chief problems for government to deal with. The Republican Party has a large perceptual advantage on the terrorism issue. To assume that everything is as it was four years ago is a very risky assumption. While it is possible that in the end things could change once again so that partisanship looks much like it did in 2000, that is by no means certain or even likely.
http://www.gallup.com/election2004/BLOG/

It's very serious business holding on to your stolen loot. Very high stakes here.

~

Give a disproportional voice to the trailing party and then who notices if a few million votes go missing? They'll just say the polls showed steady tracking toward their candidate so of course their guy pulled out a win at the last second. But isn't it funny how they always cite the polls going into election day as totally reliable but exit polling as flawed? :grr:

Exit polls are a much more random sample, but somehow they need "adjusting" to the unverified machine counted vote tallies.

It's cute but we're on to them. And we don't give a damn when they call us names.

:kick:

Democrats are registering untold numbers of voters, and when pollsters ask who's a Repub nearly everyone says "Not Me." So where the hell are they getting these neck-and-neck numbers? Does Gallup keep phoning people until they have 500 Repubs to match the 500 people who right away said they were Dems? I've been wondering about this for ages because it just does not add up.

Hekate

or actually they killed it

They change their party weighting monthly, and Rasmussen had it wrong in August while Gallup had it right in August. It's the other way around for September. You could almost look at a graph month-by-month and see the change on the first day of each month.

:crazy: