Below is a portion of today's discussion from the Votemaster. Whoever this guy is he has taking on and suceeded in a real public service task of explaining not just the "what" of the US Presidential election polling but also the "how" and "why". You will recall we are up on How and Why in these parts these days:
Below are some new national polls from Ohio UniversityI don't think I have ever not voted. My gut instinct says not voting would be a form of civic rudeness or perhaps rubeness.
Pollster Dates Kerry Bush Ohio University Oct. 3-13 50 44 Ohio University Oct. 3-13 50 45 Ohio University Oct. 3-13 47 48 Look strange? To understand the numbers better you have to understand the polling process. The first poll came from calling households at random and asking if the respondent was 18 or over and a resident of the United States. This filter resulted in telephone interviews with 1022 people. Among this group Kerry has a lead substantially outside the poll's 3% margin of error. After asking about who the respondent planned to vote for, the interviewer asked: "Are you registered to vote at your current residence?" It turns out 15% were not. Once they were removed from the data, we get line 2, the registered voters, where Kerry is still ahead outside the margin of error. Next question was: "Are you certain or almost certain to vote?" Counting only the people who said yes, we get line 3 in the table, what are often called "likely voters." In short, in the adult resident population at large, Kerry is way ahead, but among likely voters it is a statistical tie. For this reason, each party will mount a massive Get-Out-The-Vote drive on election day to turn out their base. In an election as close as this one, the winner will probably be determined by which party does a better job.
Comments
Hans - October 16, 2004 10:43 AM
It always amazes me how few people vote when it is the one opportunity to have your say (however small) in how your society is governed. It is the one opportunity where your expression of opinion is counted. Guaranteed, in a democracy.
As to the site cited, it is interesting to see the shady world of polling explained. Most pollsters are instinctively secretive and demand high levels of secrecy from anyone they draw into their cloistered world. I believe that is because polling is charlatanry of the highest order. Even more than economics. It is the creation of information and information is power. If people actually saw how that information was created, well, what's that story about the emperor and his clothes?
Alan - October 16, 2004 10:48 AM
My own good brother, the yellow journalist, worked on a paper that announced in the last of John Buchanan's campaigns in Nova Scotia that he and the Tories were ahead with just days to go. They were not as it turned out but enough of the classic Maritime "vote for a winner" morons switched that the plundering hordes were back in again for another four years.
Alan - October 16, 2004 10:52 AM
By the way, the Votemaster noted this today:<blockquote class="smalltext">the server was attacked again yesterday, but seems to have survived better than last time. I have been talking to some of the best network security professionals in the country, and without getting into the details, I have been paying a lot of attention to their advice. I got a lot of mail this week from Republicans who have deplored the attacks on my servers and said that Republicans believe as strongly in free speech as they do in free markets. Thank you.</blockquote>