Popeye_Card wrote:You know, Palin really JoeyBombed this whole discussion. This thread only had like 300 posts before she was picked.
I don't get this. There's no way a VP pick deserves this much attention. The VP has basically no responsibilities unless the President assigns them to something. I guess you could argue that McCain is sending a signal about how he'll govern with the pick, but I see no reason to believe that.
I think it's because she has very far right social stances, which is what really fueled the fire (abortion and all that). Then getting to compare her lack of experience to Obama's (which is of course comparing apples to oranges), and then it degrades into what mud-slinging is acceptable, and which isn't.
Dems are registering voters in record numbers all over
the country and the polls are a dead heat.
This doesn't make any sense.
So who's being polled? And who isn't?
I have never, ever been polled. Anyone else?
However, there is no one right answer as to whether to weight by party ID is the superior choice. A couple of pollsters, notably Rasmussen, do weight their samples by party ID. These pollsters tend to get more stable results from week to week. However, more stable does not necessarily mean more accurate over the long run, as these pollsters may miss real changes in party ID that occur over time.
Rasmussen, which targets its party ID figures based on a rolling, three-month sample of interviews with thousands and thousands of voters, has what I consider to be a eminently reasonable approach. Even so, the true party ID composition of the electorate is difficult and perhaps impossible to ascertain. You can take a survey of party ID, but it is still a survey, and therefore itself may be subject to issues like poor methodology and response bias.
Dems are registering voters in record numbers all over
the country and the polls are a dead heat.
This doesn't make any sense.
So who's being polled? And who isn't?
I have never, ever been polled. Anyone else?
I'm not sure what to make of polls anymore. I don't think they can call cell phones, and I'm not sure that they can call anyone on the national Do Not Call list. So who does that leave?
I'm also unsure what to make of people registering as Democrat this year, because of the whole Operation Chaos. (insert eye roll)
planet pujolsian wrote:
doc, if you're not for either side, are you voting?
I doubt it....I just don't care who wins, really.
That's pretty much how I feel too. I've got a feeling both canidates are just lying through their teeth and once they get in office they do their own thing anyway.
Right now I have no idea who I will vote for, but I will vote. By then, we will have heard the debates and instead of reading gossip, maybe we will actually have a clearer idea of what their ideas are, and more important the plan for implementing their ideas.
tothebeach08 wrote:Right now I have no idea who I will vote for, but I will vote. By then, we will have heard the debates and instead of reading gossip, maybe we will actually have a clearer idea of what their ideas are, and more important the plan for implementing their ideas.
pop_haines wrote:Dems are registering voters in record numbers all over
the country and the polls are a dead heat.
This doesn't make any sense.
So who's being polled? And who isn't?
I have never, ever been polled. Anyone else?
I have a cell phone, so I cannot be polled. Most polls are conducted by selecting several representative telephone exchanges and doing random digit dialing. This particular poll filters on "likely voters", so many new registrants may be excluded.
What's interesting to me is that the votes are lining up pretty much the same way they did in 2000 and 2004. Given all that has happened in that period (especially 2000-2004), you would think there would be great opportunities for people to change their mind, but we seem to be in the same place.
