Latest Gallup poll, take 2

Let it go, Ausser.
It's called "fantasy" in literary circles. The author requires you only to accept one unbelievable on faith in order to enjoy the rest of the ride as completely logical.

Enjoy the ride. ;)
Rich
 
Look, guys....

The rules were explicit, were they not? This thread (by Rich's request, don't think I haven't noticed) pertains *STRICTLY* to the results of the poll, not it's veracity.

Since Rich has been so kind as to demonstrate his opinion on the acceptability of such discussions on this forum, start another thread. I will be more than happy to discuss it there.

I have already had one thread on this subject locked down for this exact same behavior. Let's stick to the subject. Pretty-please?
 
As regards this specific poll.

Results that show "National Adults" v. "Registered Voters" v. "Regular Voters" are meaningless. If they aren't gonna vote, their opinion on a matter skews any supposed benefit of the questions results.

The Question: How important will each of the following issues be to your vote for Congress this year — will it be — extremely important, very important, moderately important, or not that important?

Of the results, only 2 columns are provided. Extremely important and a merged column, Extremely/Very important. Again, the results are highly skewed to show a clear bias. As such, the results cannot be taken with any meaningful benefit.

I can go on and dissect the entire poll, but on the whole, the results are at best ambiguous and not meaningful in any real world context.

There. That's may opinion of this poll. You may agree or disagree. Thanks for the ride. Now I'm off this train.
 
GS-
Nobody is looking to "derail". But as with the other thread, you demand that everyone accept your premise...that this poll is meaningful and valid. I only asked a question regarding the other thread because of your insistence that it must be valid unless we could prove it invalid.

My high-dollar grad school courses in statistics argue that Anti has already demonstrated the lack of validity...and he hasn't even gotten started. BluesMan previously questioned the validity and it upset you.

I note in the hunting forum a Member asked which brand of 9mm ammo for Brown Bear....that's right...9mm for an enraged, 2500 lb, attacking Griz. At least he had the compassion not to demand that everyone in the thread accept the validity of 9mm ammunition for Brown Bear from the git.

Fantasy, GS...it may be yours. It doesn't have to be ours. ;) Carry on.
Rich
 
Rich,
This is very simple:
Are you or are you the one who said (and I quote)
Could someone tell me what this has to do with "Round table discussions range from the Bill of Rights, to concealed carry, to general political issues."
I mean, it just seems to me that if a debate on the veracity of polls is within the realm, why not a discussion of the best color for "power neckties"? Favorite SUV's of politicians? Stuff like that.
Click to expand...

Did we or did we not lock that thread with the intention of starting it over without all this mucking about in discussions about 'veracity'?

Have I or have I not started this thread over *in accordance with Dave's wishes* in the hope of discussing the original topic of the thread?

So why on earth would you come in here and derail it *yourself* after complaining about the exact same behavior?

Was I or was I not explicit in the instructions in the opening thread in order to avoid having to lock it like the last one?

I don't care either way, although I'd prefer to discuss the topic posted. If you don't care about the 'veracity' thing then please quit pretending that you do.

Back to you in hopes of a straight answer....
 
Look, simple question here: Discussions about veracity: Acceptable on this forum, yes or no? If yes, I will counter Antipitas' argument and keep trying to get the thread back on track. If no, then stop bringing it up.
 
"At this point, it certainly looks like a significant tilt to the Democrats, but it's still early," says James Campbell, a political scientist at the University of Buffalo and author of The Presidential Pulse of Congressional Elections. He says the Democratic advantage could narrow over the next four months if voters see the election more as a choice between two candidates and less as a referendum on the president.
Click to expand...

It would be unfortunate if a major push was made to elect Democratic candidates in order to "spite" Bush.

The issues that affect my daily life guide my voting decisions, not which political party is currently held in the general public discontent.
 
redhawk,
Thankyouthankyouthankyou :D I'd kiss you....but, you know...:o

Something worth noting: The voters don't seem to care whether a candidate supports or opposes Bush. You're not alone.
 
GoSlash27 said:
This thread is intended to discuss the *results* of this poll, not it's accuracy.
Click to expand...
Which is exactly what I attempted to do. Discuss the results. I found them meaningless.

What you fail to perceive is that the results of the poll rest upon the veracity of the poll. You simply cannot expect a rational discussion of the results of a poll, if others find the results to be meaningless because the poll exhibits a bias towards a certain result. It doesn't matter where or what the bias may be. The results are meaningless.

What exactly is there to discuss?
 
Was I or was I not explicit in the instructions in the opening thread
Click to expand...
Mea Culpa...I'd no idea we were taking "instructions" from you. ;)

Once again, I only pointed out in the last thread that it had little to do with politics; but I never stated it was "derailed". You bring up a poll and demand that we accept its premise. Others refute that premise...that's not "derailing"; it's demonstrating that the thread probably has no place on this Forum. Why? Because its premise is fantasy.

Now, TheBluesMan has every right to be more charitable than I. And so he was by offering to allow you to restart. I'm simply honoring his generosity, but I'm sorry if that fails to include taking "instructions" from you. OK?

The poll demonstrates zero, zip, nada; its premise is flawed; its methodolgy junk science. And all of that is central to the discussion you are trying to "instruct" us in. There...I've said it and I'm glad! :D
Rich
 
Rich,
Alrighty then. Just so's we're all clear. If you are willing to engage in it then you must have no objection.

Antipitas,
Results that show "National Adults" v. "Registered Voters" v. "Regular Voters" are meaningless. If they aren't gonna vote, their opinion on a matter skews any supposed benefit of the questions results.
Click to expand...
They were very clear on who was addressed with each question. Ignore the results from "eligible voters" if you like. That's what I do (although they tended to diverge very minimally from the same responses from "likely voters").
Of the results, only 2 columns are provided. Extremely important and a merged column, Extremely/Very important.
Click to expand...
Which is not a problem. Anybody with a 2nd grade education in math should still be able to decipher it.

Any other concerns? Anything *specifically* to make you think that the opinions of likely voters are substantially different (i.e. outside the margin of error) from what's posted?
If yes, let's hear it. If no, then let's get on with it.
 
How important will each of the following issues be to your vote for Congress this year — will it be — extremely important, very important, moderately important, or not that important?

The situation in Iraq: 55% said extremely important. 34% said very important. The remaining 11% very between moderately or not at all. Depending upon the numbers in the remaining 11%, that +-5% margin comes into play and invalidates the result. And by the way, any poll that has such a wide spread as 5% should never be taken seriously. But let's roll on, shall we?

Because the poll does not differentiate between the expected answers and the answers it does give, the average person will look at the result and think: Gee, 89% percent of Americans think Iraq is important. They won't think 89% +-5% think Iraq is important. They won't even think about the 6% to 16% percent (given the margin of error) that are expressing a divergent opinion. Nor will they really see that the 55% percent is even included within the 89%. People look at figures as they are given and think nothing beyond that point.

How is Iraq, important? The poll doesn't say. So we are left with the individual reader who puts his/her own spin on what that importance means!

Let's now drop down to the last question in that group. Same-sex marriage. 24% say it extremely important, while 21% say it's only very important. Contrast that with the 55% who don't think it important at all. But where in this 55% does the moderate stand? We don't know, as the pollsters don't tell us. Same goes for the not important at all people... who could conceivably be the largest single group.

How important is same-sex marriage? Again, we are left with our own devices in how to determine what the pollsters meant.

This is just 2 parts of an eleven part question, and I haven't even touched another question yet.

So just how do I rationally discuss the results of this poll with you, when important pieces of the picture have intentionally been left out? Add to this, that these are not problems for you, but they are for me.

After going back and forth on this issue, at the end of the day, you will say these results are somehow meaningful, while I will disagree. So what have we accomplished? In a word: Nothing.
 
Antipitas,
Actually, I think we're accomplishing quite a lot. :)

The situation in Iraq: 55% said extremely important. 34% said very important. The remaining 11% very between moderately or not at all. Depending upon the numbers in the remaining 11%, that +-5% margin comes into play and invalidates the result.
Click to expand...

I'm with you right up to the "invalidates the result" part.
89% find it "very important" or "extremely important", plus or minus 5%. Somewhere between a supermajority and a supermajority. How is this "invalid"? Are you implying that this result might actually be a bare majority? A plurality? A minority?

They won't think 89% +-5% think Iraq is important.
Click to expand...
Then we won't make that mistake. somewhere between 84% and 94% of American likely voters think the situation in Iraq is important. That's a lot any which way you cut it.

How is Iraq, important? The poll doesn't say. So we are left with the individual reader who puts his/her own spin on what that importance means!
Click to expand...
It would be impossible to quantify the results of asking such an open-ended question.
I'm not asking to 'spin' the results. Just take them for what they say.

24% say it extremely important, while 21% say it's only very important. Contrast that with the 55% who don't think it important at all. But where in this 55% does the moderate stand? We don't know, as the pollsters don't tell us. Same goes for the not important at all people... who could conceivably be the largest single group.
Click to expand...
They could be. The results don't say and I'm not inclined to speculate.
Would you say that it's accurate to conclude that 45% of American likely voters aren't concerned about the whole "same sex marriage" thing? You know....plus or minus 5%?

So just how do I rationally discuss the results of this poll with you, when important pieces of the picture have intentionally been left out?
Click to expand...
Simple: Discuss the reasonable conclusions that can be drawn from it.

But don't try to dump the whole thing as "wrong" or "misleading" because of these minor concerns. The conclusion that the poll is *meaningless* is false. Raise the issues and we'll be more than happy to accomodate them. You don't want to discuss the results, that's fine. Door's thataway.
 
As if we needed a poll to determine that Americans think the war in Iraq with affect the elections. Meanwhile, polls are finicky beasts to tame according to what I was taught in college and grad school.

Let's take the phase:

"The situation in Iraq"

Even the wording in a poll can influence how people respond to it. For example, the poll could have worded "The situation in Iraq" as "The war in Iraq", "Iraq", "The folly in Iraq", "The liberation of Iraq", etc. Why use the word situation? What meaning does it impart to the question that the word war, for instance, would not have and what does that tell us about the mindset of the pollster(s). Situation is usually used when talking about a problem that won't go away - as in sticky situation or bad situation.

In conclusion, discussing the import of poll results without first determining if they are even reasonably accurate is a fool's game.

John

P.S. - "If no, then stop bringing it up." If I want somebody to give me advice on how to run my life I'll call my 81-year-old mother.
 
GoSlash27, you do not need the results of a poll to recognize the truth of the old adage that "all politics are local."

Voters may dislike the actions of Congress and the condition of the country, but they send their own Congressmen back because "their guy" brings home the bacon.
 
johnbt,
Let's take the phase:
"The situation in Iraq"
Click to expand...

Can you think of a more impartial word than 'situation'? I'm all ears.
And just how much do you think the word skewed the results? More than 10%?

As you keep pointing out, polls are imperfect. That does not mean that they're useless. Unless you have something specific that indicates that the results of this poll do not reflect the opinions of the American public, you have no case here.
The tendency to ignore all polls is just as self-delusional as the tendency to believe intentionally bogus polls.
You want to stick your head in the sand and pretend that public opinion is impossible to gauge or irrelavant to the coming elections that's your affair. But please stop ruining the discussion for the rest of us, at least until you can come in here with some sort of proof that the results of this poll are incorrect.

In conclusion, discussing the import of poll results without first determining if they are even reasonably accurate is a fool's game.
Click to expand...

And automatically rejecting all polls without first determining if they are reasonably accurate is a fool's game.
I have no reason to doubt the results as valid. Do you?

P.S. - "If no, then stop bringing it up." If I want somebody to give me advice on how to run my life I'll call my 81-year-old mother.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what brought this on. That comment wasn't directed to you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top