+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: 'Friendly' Political Ranting (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: Hillary winning at 39% .... (/showthread.php?tid=46874)
Re: Hillary winning at 39% .... - OWC Jamie - 01-09-2008
[quote lafinfil]Being an open primary a lot of analyst speculated that many independents seeing that Obama appeared
to have it won, decided to vote for McCain because of their dislike of Romney.
Familiarity often breeds contempt.
I've never understood why analysts feel a candidates' "home state" is a given.
Re: Hillary winning at 39% .... - freeradical - 01-09-2008
These open primaries are indeed an opportunity for mischief making.
Re: Hillary winning at 39% .... - lafinfil - 01-09-2008
I don't consider an open primary a bad thing at all, but then again I am an independent.
My state gets no say in the presidential primaries but on a state & local level I can decide
which races have the most impact on me and which candidate / race to choose to vote in.
I do believe that a lot of NH folks were genuinely undecided up to the last minute.
One interview I heard last night was with a guy that said he was wrestling between two candidates
even when he was in the voting booth. This year is a lot different than others for sure.
Re: Hillary winning at 39% .... - (vikm) - 01-09-2008
[quote PeterB](vikm), it DOES happen.
I think I pretty much acknowledged that it can in fact happen.
Re: Hillary winning at 39% .... - OWC Jamie - 01-10-2008
I can't say how the telephone "polls" are done, but I've done the door-to-door polls.
Specific demographics are targetted to yield specific results. They are a joke.
Anyone who believs they are 'random' and represent anything more than the results the buyer has paid for needs to get out and get on the front line with the poll takers.
Re: Hillary winning at 39% .... - decocritter - 01-10-2008
Thanks for the honesty billb...that is what I expected of polls.
Re: Hillary winning at 39% .... - lafinfil - 01-10-2008
[quote billb]I can't say how the telephone "polls" are done, but I've done the door-to-door polls.
Specific demographics are targetted to yield specific results. They are a joke.
Anyone who believs they are 'random' and represent anything more than the results the buyer has paid for needs to get out and get on the front line with the poll takers.
I can understand this in context of a push poll but it doesn't make sense in the case of the NH primary.
There were approximately 9 polls being taken at the same time (up till Sunday night)
There were polls taken by each campaign as well as the media and a few independent polls
all of which predicted a similar outcome (Obama win) or a much closer race between he and Clinton.
Even the pundits and professional analysts are scratching their heads over the final outcome.
Best anyone can come up with was there was a huge last minute sway on Monday
that no one can really explain. One poll, sure - but nine ?
Re: Hillary winning at 39% .... - OWC Jamie - 01-10-2008
Where and when for the nine.
Heck, just do a poll at a Mall.
Keep the results from 9-noon, noon to 4 , 4 to 10 seperate.
You'll have three seperate and different results to pick from. Which results are your buyers looking for.
Do you want slightly different results in the AM ? Target just the cane users (or avoid them, or use the 4 to 10 results)
I'm not saying the primary polls were / are a joke, just that they are so damned easy to manipulate that as a reader/ viewer they don't have much value. Yet they seem to have so much weight with analysis.
(course if I were making analysis I'd pick poll results that supported my conclusion, too. :-) )
Re: Hillary winning at 39% .... - lafinfil - 01-10-2008
>
> Where and when for the nine.
>
The reference was to a discussion I saw heard today (News Hour)
They referenced that there were nine different overnight polls Sunday that all pointed the same direction.
No polls on Monday night (no need as the vote was Tuesday)
I'm not saying that polls can't be directed and when they are discussed they are usually qualified
as to who took it and how. Just saying that this one caught everyone off guard.
Re: Hillary winning at 39% .... - x-uri - 01-10-2008
Somebody is suggesting that it was the order of the names on the ballot that skewed the vote to Senator Clinton.
http://www.abcnews.go.com/PollingUnit/Decision2008/story?id=4107883&page=1
Here is a paper that claims that this is a real effect (although they did not see anything approaching a 3% swing).
http://econrsss.anu.edu.au/~aleigh/pdf/BallotOrder.pdf (PDF link)