If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Raw Story)   Fox News senior political analyst Brit Hume is 'puzzled' by these strange polls from battleground states showing a persistent lead for Obama. How could this have happened?   (rawstory.com) divider line 348
    More: Obvious, Brit Hume, Fox News, obama, swing states, political analyst  
•       •       •

5732 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 Nov 2012 at 6:05 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



348 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-04 07:00:34 PM
And there's this striking discrepancy between national polls - which tend to be done, by and large, by older, more-seasoned polling firms - and state polls - a number of which are done by less-established firms.

This is an amusing ad-hominem attack (excuse?). The explosion of state polls the past 20 years or so have shown that they, on average, are a better predictor than national polls. The proof is in the pudding, Britt. What is puzzling is your refusal to acknowledge reality.
 
2012-11-04 07:00:41 PM

soporific: If Romney had the balls to go on the Daily Show, then he'd be a contender. But he didn't so he isn't.


Actually, former Governor Romney hasn't answered any questions from the press for over three weeks. Maybe he could show his tax returns?
 
2012-11-04 07:00:52 PM

randomjsa: I'd also like to hear about how if this trend continues, and it will, what you think is going to happen in 2014 and 2016.


I doubt Obama is going to win re-election in either of those years.
 
2012-11-04 07:02:07 PM

randomjsa: I'm not puzzled at all.

As stated, if the media and the entertainment industry hadn't been covering for this president for the last four years, he wouldn't even be running for office and the Democrats would be trying to figure out a way to tell you they have some great ideas if you'll just elect this other guy.

I do have another question however.

I would like a liberal to explain how Bush during his first term went from barely winning to getting more support while Obama did such a bang up job as president that he's losing multiple states outright and dropping 5-10% in other states that he is winning. I'd also like to hear about how if this trend continues, and it will, what you think is going to happen in 2014 and 2016.


What's your end game? Are you playing the Long Troll? Don't trolls thrive on instant reaction? I commend you for sticking with this 5-year troll project of yours. See you in 2014. 2 more years! 2 more years!
 
2012-11-04 07:02:11 PM

themadtupper: Zasteva: AkaDad: If you unskew the polls by harmonizing the statistical quirks, Obama is farked.

Sounds interesting...

What are the statistical quirks, and how do you harmonize them?

1. 30% of Obama supporters vote for Romney
2. 1 in 7 polls have not yet been unskewed
3. Silent majority

Book it; done


I heart Fark memes.
 
2012-11-04 07:02:29 PM
CNN is just running with the "Polls are a dead heat!" line. Maybe Fox should go with that.
 
2012-11-04 07:02:38 PM

soporific: ItchyMcDoogle: I tell you how it happened! Romney hiding out from the national media, even Fox News, beacuse hes to chickensheat to take a stand on anything or answer any hard questions.
The guy turned into a invisble man. If it was not for the rallies Id have thought he dropped out. Such a strange strategy.

If Romney had the balls to go on the Daily Show, then he'd be a contender. But he didn't so he isn't.


Not Just the Daily Show ( which is has been a political media heavyweight ) but Letterman, ( Can understand because letterman has been calling him a coward for not coming on his show ) or even softball Leno

The most puzzling is Fox News which is a 24/7 Romney campaign channel. Going on O'Reilly would have generated news outside of the network. O'Reilly would have fed him softballs disguised as hardball questions. Even going on Hannity would have gotten some buzz or a Limbaugh radio interview.

Im sure the campaign strategist that came up with the media blackout plan has to be sweating bullets right now. But they are ready to blame Christie if he loses..Typical
 
2012-11-04 07:03:29 PM

theknuckler_33: The proof is in the pudding


for all intensive purposes, this is true
 
2012-11-04 07:03:38 PM

AkaDad: I heart Fark memes.


I work in Fark memes.

So I am really getting a kick out of most of these replies.

Some of you guys are very good at making it sound like you know what you are talking about.

But trust me.... You don't.

I think you just want to make yourself sound smart, when in reality you dont know what you are talking about.

This is how bad info gets passed around.

If you dont know about the topic....Dont make yourself sound like you do.

Cuz some Farkers belive anything they hear.
 
2012-11-04 07:04:16 PM

themadtupper: Book it; done


You missed the "you guys are going to be sooooo pissed"
 
2012-11-04 07:05:06 PM

DamnYankees: Cuz some Farkers belive anything they hear here.


Sorry. Pet peeve.
 
2012-11-04 07:05:40 PM

DeltaPunch: wotthefark: DeltaPunch: thomps: DamnYankees: Also, the national polls don't really show a tie. Per Nate Silver:

Simple average of national polls released Thursday: Obama +0.9. Friday: Obama +1.2. Saturday: Obama +1.3. Today (so far): Obama +1.4

it's puzzling to me that romney can be ahead in all of the national polls, which are done by more seasoned polling firms, but is behind in the simple average of national polls.

Um, Nate Silver has Obama ahead in the popular vote 50.6% to 48.3%. Considering the margin of error is typically 2-3 points, there's plenty of room for lots of polls to show Romney ahead. But it's just not true that he leads in all or most of them, otherwise Nate Silver wouldn't be showing Obama ahead.


"MARGIN OF ERROR DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY"

[t0.gstatic.com image 256x197]

Can you explain it to me, then? Not being snarky... I study physics, so I deal with errors and statistical significance all the time... I'm curious how one interprets the MoE from a poll.


538 (and other poll aggregators) are looking at several hundred polls. the margin of error on any given one of those might be 2-3 points, but the assumption is that if all of them show an advantage to one candidate of a few points, then it is fairly unlikely that all of them are statistical outliers.
 
2012-11-04 07:06:17 PM

A Dark Evil Omen: DamnYankees: Cuz some Farkers belive anything they hear here.

Sorry. Pet peeve peave.

 
2012-11-04 07:07:06 PM
its true, every polling company is so sick of making money that they are skewing the vote for Obama.
 
2012-11-04 07:07:34 PM
bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com
 
2012-11-04 07:10:21 PM

Jackson Herring: theknuckler_33: The proof is in the pudding putting

for all intensive intrusive purposes, this is true


FTFY
 
2012-11-04 07:11:31 PM

randomjsa: if the media and the entertainment industry hadn't been covering for this president for the last four years


Get it though your thick skull... not 'reporting' the right-wing nonsense you hear on AM radio is not 'covering' for the president. It's not reporting whack-job conspiracy theories and abject nonsense. Limbaugh, Hannity, and Levin are pushing your ridiculously partisan buttons and you are buying it hook, line, and sinker. How many 'libs are stoopid' books have you bought?
 
2012-11-04 07:12:55 PM

Jackson Herring: theknuckler_33: The proof is in the pudding

for all intensive purposes, this is true


Dude... pudding? PUDDING? That was BEGGING for fat dog!!!!
 
2012-11-04 07:14:27 PM

themadtupper: Jackson Herring: theknuckler_33: The proof is in the pudding putting

for all intensive intrusive purposes, this is true

FTFY


intents and purposes

/pushes glasses up
 
2012-11-04 07:18:14 PM

socratesthekidd: themadtupper: Jackson Herring: theknuckler_33: The proof is in the pudding putting

for all intensive intrusive purposes, this is true

FTFY

intents and purposes porpoises


FTFY
/pet peeve
 
2012-11-04 07:19:17 PM

bulldg4life: guilt by association: I caught a glimpse of CNN the other day at the gym and Virginia was light red (i.e. "leaning Romney") on their map.

You should've seen liberal NBC and their commie tripe this morning.

David Gregory asked the following questions to some random Obama campaign guy
1) The economy is still in trouble *plays clip of Romney pointing out unemployment*. What is Obama going to do?
2) Is Obama willing to work with Congress? He has been quite partisan during his first term.
3) Is the Obama administration hiding something about how they screwed up security in Libya causing the death of an ambassador?


There is no bigger dickweed in the country than David Gregory. That guy is literally worse than a wet fart.
 
2012-11-04 07:19:46 PM

themadtupper: Jackson Herring: theknuckler_33: The proof is in the pudding putting

for all intensive intrusive purposes, this is true

FTFY


I'm pretty sure it's "all in tents and porpoises".
 
2012-11-04 07:20:14 PM
img534.imageshack.us

Puzzled!
 
2012-11-04 07:21:17 PM

Jackson Herring: theknuckler_33: The proof is in the pudding

for all intensive purposes, this is true


Hah, my neck store neighbor says that.
 
2012-11-04 07:21:49 PM

socratesthekidd: themadtupper: Jackson Herring: theknuckler_33: The proof is in the pudding putting

for all intensive intrusive purposes, this is true

FTFY

intents and purposes

/pushes pashas glasses up


FTFY
i1107.photobucket.com
 
2012-11-04 07:22:05 PM

theknuckler_33: socratesthekidd: themadtupper: Jackson Herring: theknuckler_33: The proof is in the pudding putting

for all intensive intrusive purposes, this is true

FTFY

intents and purposes porpoises

FTFY
/pet peeve


God damn you, sir. God damn you to hell.
 
2012-11-04 07:22:34 PM

randomjsa: I would like a liberal to explain how Bush during his first term went from barely winning to getting more support while Obama did such a bang up job as president that he's losing multiple states outright and dropping 5-10% in other states that he is winning. I'd also like to hear about how if this trend continues, and it will, what you think is going to happen in 2014 and 2016.


How did Bush go from being unpopular to popular in his first term? It must have had something to do with an event that happened between September 10, 2001, and September 12, 2001. Somewhere in that time period, I think, is when Bush suddenly got a lot more popular and received a lot more support from the American people. I know it's got to be somewhere in that range of dates, but I just can't put my finger on it.

It's almost as if that same kind of event didn't happen during Obama's first term. But I still can't put my finger on it.

And if that kind of event keeps not happening, then I don't know what we'll see in 2014 and 2016. I'm not sure how America will feel about that kind of thing not happening for a very long time.
 
2012-11-04 07:23:17 PM

Gyrony: DeltaPunch: Maybe you libs should look a little more closely at the 3 options listed in TFA:

1) The polls are all wrong
2) Romney's ground game will turn out enough votes to make up the difference
3) Obama will win

As you can clearly see, 2 of these 3 options result in a Romney victory, which naturally means Romney has 66% chance of winning. Therefore, even if the polls were skewed 16% towards Obama -- unlikely, despite the lamestream media bias -- Romney can still safely win above 50%. It's just basic subtraction here, folks. AND, if the polls aren't biased at all, then it won't just be a Romney victory but a land-slide man-date for conservatives. You libs are gonna be sooo pissed.

In Ohio, 122 Obama local HQs compared to 40 for Romney.
There's your ground game... what were you saying again?


"Over statement of the regulars", my boy. Are you REALLY going to count basement Black Panther meeting halls as local HQs.

You must be new at this.
 
2012-11-04 07:24:53 PM

theorellior: Jackson Herring: theknuckler_33: The proof is in the pudding

for all intensive purposes, this is true

Hah, my neck store neighbor says that.


I can honestly say that I have never seen this one before.
 
2012-11-04 07:25:52 PM

qorkfiend: theknuckler_33: socratesthekidd: themadtupper: Jackson Herring: theknuckler_33: The proof is in the pudding putting

for all intensive intrusive purposes, this is true

FTFY

intents and purposes porpoises

FTFY
/pet peeve

God damn you, sir. God damn you to hell.


If there were a god or hell, I'd be offended. As it is, I offer a discreet internet terrorist fist jab.
 
2012-11-04 07:26:33 PM

theknuckler_33: randomjsa: if the media and the entertainment industry hadn't been covering for this president for the last four years

Get it though your thick skull... not 'reporting' the right-wing nonsense you hear on AM radio is not 'covering' for the president. It's not reporting whack-job conspiracy theories and abject nonsense. Limbaugh, Hannity, and Levin are pushing your ridiculously partisan buttons and you are buying it hook, line, and sinker. How many 'libs are stoopid' books have you bought?


Modern Conservatism is a Con game played against the base.
 
2012-11-04 07:27:00 PM

soporific: How did Bush go from being unpopular to popular in his first term? It must have had something to do with an event that happened between September 10, 2001, and September 12, 2001. Somewhere in that time period, I think, is when Bush suddenly got a lot more popular and received a lot more support from the American people. I know it's got to be somewhere in that range of dates, but I just can't put my finger on it.


America does love Nickelback.
 
2012-11-04 07:27:27 PM

soporific: an event that happened between September 10, 2001, and September 12, 2001


BOOM the Feast of Paphnutius of Thebes

farking September 11
 
2012-11-04 07:28:26 PM

wotthefark: [img.ibtimes.com image 614x405]

Has anyone shown him this poll?


I want to know who is thinking Mitt would win in a fight with one of those scary angry black men?
 
2012-11-04 07:28:30 PM
i165.photobucket.com
 
2012-11-04 07:29:20 PM

randomjsa: I'm not puzzled at all.

As stated, if the media and the entertainment industry hadn't been covering for this president for the last four years, he wouldn't even be running for office and the Democrats would be trying to figure out a way to tell you they have some great ideas if you'll just elect this other guy.

I do have another question however.

I would like a liberal to explain how Bush during his first term went from barely winning to getting more support while Obama did such a bang up job as president that he's losing multiple states outright and dropping 5-10% in other states that he is winning. I'd also like to hear about how if this trend continues, and it will, what you think is going to happen in 2014 and 2016.


To be fair, the GOP did have the worst primary field in recent history.

Huntsman is the only one who had a chance in the general, but Obama appointed him as ambassador so OMG TREASKN.
 
2012-11-04 07:30:24 PM

DamnYankees: America does love Nickelback.


I know this is blasphemous, but I like a few of their songs.

/*puts on riot gear*
 
2012-11-04 07:31:09 PM
Oh Brit, if you're puzzled now, you're going to be going Full Scanner in about 51 hours or so.
 
2012-11-04 07:31:17 PM
A Senior Political Analyst puzzled by how the EV works?

i293.photobucket.com

/Oblig.
 
2012-11-04 07:31:48 PM

Nezorf: I think all laws that effect voting must be delayed by 20 years. It is disingenuous to change election laws so close to the election.

And if nothing that your law was designed to protect against happens in that 20 years, well, your party is banned from ...

oh never mind
people in power will do anything to keep their power

the evil they will perpetrate to prevent citizens from voting is repugnant.
 
2012-11-04 07:33:28 PM

AkaDad: DamnYankees: America does love Nickelback.

I know this is blasphemous, but I like a few of their songs.

/*puts on riot gear*


I still like "Rockstar".

/Dives into foxhole.
//*kicks Fox out* 
 
2012-11-04 07:34:02 PM
Are you trying to say that they used affirmative action in these polls? Just asking questions, Brit, you insufferable twit.
 
2012-11-04 07:34:16 PM

soporific: It must have had something to do with an event that happened between September 10, 2001, and September 12, 2001.


no no no...thats just happened to happen. it would have happened regardless. like russia collapsing under reagan...oh wait, I mean reagan caused russia to collapse and it wouldn't have happend without st. ron.

wait, what were we talking about?
 
2012-11-04 07:34:48 PM

PUBLICPOLICYPOLLING
Barack Obama leads Mitt Romney 52-47 on our final Ohio poll. Up 60-39 with early voters 12 minutes ago


Last PPP poll had Obama up 5 as well.
 
2012-11-04 07:39:30 PM

DamnYankees: DeltaPunch: As you can clearly see, 2 of these 3 options result in a Romney victory

While you say this in jest, I do find it amusing that people who say the polls are wrong seemingly always say this meaning Romney will win. Why can't the polls all be wrong in favor of Obama? Seems more plausible to me, since polls are likely not picking up as many Latino voters or cell-phone only voters. What's the methodological justification for the polls all being wrong in Romney's favor?


The same justification they use for the existence of a sky wizard creator and his zombie son.
 
2012-11-04 07:40:25 PM

DamnYankees: PUBLICPOLICYPOLLING
Barack Obama leads Mitt Romney 52-47 on our final Ohio poll. Up 60-39 with early voters 12 minutes ago

Last PPP poll had Obama up 5 as well.


PPP leans Dem, so the president is up three or so there, and probably up about 15-18 points with early voters.

In other words, this is super-awesome.

I saw Nate Silver today talking about how Romney can win with PA if he drops OH, so he should spend resources and time there over the next two days. However, if PA is going red, OH has long since gone red.

Not to mention that even if Romney did win PA, the President could just win OH and VA to counteract it - two places where the president leads by anywhere from 1-5 points.
 
2012-11-04 07:40:53 PM

themadtupper: DeltaPunch: wotthefark: DeltaPunch: thomps: DamnYankees: Also, the national polls don't really show a tie. Per Nate Silver:

Simple average of national polls released Thursday: Obama +0.9. Friday: Obama +1.2. Saturday: Obama +1.3. Today (so far): Obama +1.4

it's puzzling to me that romney can be ahead in all of the national polls, which are done by more seasoned polling firms, but is behind in the simple average of national polls.

Um, Nate Silver has Obama ahead in the popular vote 50.6% to 48.3%. Considering the margin of error is typically 2-3 points, there's plenty of room for lots of polls to show Romney ahead. But it's just not true that he leads in all or most of them, otherwise Nate Silver wouldn't be showing Obama ahead.


"MARGIN OF ERROR DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY"

[t0.gstatic.com image 256x197]

Can you explain it to me, then? Not being snarky... I study physics, so I deal with errors and statistical significance all the time... I'm curious how one interprets the MoE from a poll.

538 (and other poll aggregators) are looking at several hundred polls. the margin of error on any given one of those might be 2-3 points, but the assumption is that if all of them show an advantage to one candidate of a few points, then it is fairly unlikely that all of them are statistical outliers.


DamnYankees: DeltaPunch: Can you explain it to me, then? Not being snarky... I study physics, so I deal with errors and statistical significance all the time... I'm curious how one interprets the MoE from a poll.

DeltaPunch: wotthefark: DeltaPunch: thomps: DamnYankees: Also, the national polls don't really show a tie. Per Nate Silver:

Simple average of national polls released Thursday: Obama +0.9. Friday: Obama +1.2. Saturday: Obama +1.3. Today (so far): Obama +1.4

it's puzzling to me that romney can be ahead in all of the national polls, which are done by more seasoned polling firms, but is behind in the simple average of national polls.

Um, Nate Silver has Obama ahead in the popular vote 50.6% to 48.3%. Considering the margin of error is typically 2-3 points, there's plenty of room for lots of polls to show Romney ahead. But it's just not true that he leads in all or most of them, otherwise Nate Silver wouldn't be showing Obama ahead.


"MARGIN OF ERROR DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY"

[t0.gstatic.com image 256x197]

Can you explain it to me, then? Not being snarky... I study physics, so I deal with errors and statistical significance all the time... I'm curious how one interprets the MoE from a poll.

You had it right.


No he doesn't. A voter preference survey question will always have at least three categories. There may also be categories for candidates for third parties and perhaps an "other" category as well. we need the confidence interval
for this difference to tell if the lead is statistically significant. Using twice the MOE does not show plenty of room for polls to show Romney ahead. This is because the standard error is going to differ on polls depending on the n.

The margin of error for a poll is not a simple guide to the margin of error for differences either within the poll or across independent polls. The multiple uses of the phrase "margin of error" compounds the confusion. Most "lay people" and journalists don't read the footnotes.

538 is taking a number of different polls and aggregating them. If there is a margin of error it is different within the poll as there is aggregate between all polls. 538 then becomes a poll of the polls. This then sets aside the usual MOE as the n is greater due to the fact there is a larger number of polls being aggregated. So when something falls within the MOE it doesn't mean the outcome will show the opposite if it double the MOE. It's created with a binary construct where you have two outcomes. But the polls give the answer of 3 outcomes - R, D or undecided.

Silver's model weights the polls so it's more likely that the MOE has less effect so you can't just double and say there is plenty of room for the opposite to be true. It doesn't work that way.
 
2012-11-04 07:42:22 PM

DamnYankees: Up 60-39 with early voters 12 minutes ago


If that number is even close to accurate then Romney is farked given photos like this.
 
2012-11-04 07:44:07 PM
The Freeper threads on the polls are quite amusing.
 
2012-11-04 07:44:55 PM

Raharu: randomjsa:
[imageshack.us image 411x294]


WHARGARBLE#$%@#$GeaegargjkwHFKLW FWHELIRF HRFWJKF FW;Lh u I'm not puzzled at all.

As stated, if the media and the entertainment industry hadn't been covering for this president for the last four years, he wouldn't even be running for office and the Democrats would be trying to figure out a way to tell you they have some great ideas if you'll just elect this other guy.

I do have another question however.

I would like a liberal to explain how Bush during his first term went from barely winning to getting more support while Obama did such a bang up job as president that he's losing multiple states outright and dropping 5-10% in other states that he is winning. I'd also like to hear about how if this trend continues, and it will, what you think is going to happen in 2014 and 2016.DERRRRRRRRRRRP R@#$R%@ GJfofvjajfioj asdfbhasklh



i1107.photobucket.com
To be, or not to be: that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them? To die: to sleep;
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to, 'tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep;
To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub;
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause: there's the STATISTICALS:

1. 30% of Obama supporters vote for Romney
2. 1 in 7 polls have not yet been unskewed
3. Silent majority

You're gonna be so pissed
 
Displayed 50 of 348 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report