Reply With QuoteSite Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
Polling forms opinion, it does not report opinion. See: Santorum "surge".
Your neighbors like XXXXX, you don't want to be left out of the fun, do ya?
"Let it not be said that we did nothing."-Ron Paul
"We have set them on the hobby-horse of an idea about the absorption of individuality by the symbolic unit of COLLECTIVISM. They have never yet and they never will have the sense to reflect that this hobby-horse is a manifest violation of the most important law of nature, which has established from the very creation of the world one unit unlike another and precisely for the purpose of instituting individuality."- A Quote From Some Old Book
Read the article...
Am I missing something? What's the evidence that the polls were manipulated?
1)The people polled were pre-screened.Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0
2) Only 48 percent of the people polled answered the poll.
3) The people were polled online and if they didn't have a internet they were provided one.
How is that not manipulated?
It's not random sampling. It's a panel of people that the pollster already knows their general leanings on issues. Besides, it's AP. That's enough right there to know it's horse$#@!.
"Let it not be said that we did nothing."-Ron Paul
"We have set them on the hobby-horse of an idea about the absorption of individuality by the symbolic unit of COLLECTIVISM. They have never yet and they never will have the sense to reflect that this hobby-horse is a manifest violation of the most important law of nature, which has established from the very creation of the world one unit unlike another and precisely for the purpose of instituting individuality."- A Quote From Some Old Book
This poll points out why polls are horse$#@!. Of course are horse$#@! but this vindicates fully that they are and tells how.
To be clear: I have no doubt that some polls are manipulated, my point is just that this particular article does not provide any evidence of manipulation of this particular poll.
I don't see that in the article at all, except perhaps demographic screening. It says they were drawn from the "KnowledgePanel," which isn't clearly defined, but sounds like a large pool of people with known demographics (the idea being to get demographically representatives samples). The article's a bit vague, but there is certainly no smoking gun evidencing manipulation.
Some people decline to participate in polls when asked - nothing strange there.2) Only 48 percent of the people polled answered the poll.
So what?3) The people were polled online and if they didn't have a internet they were provided one.
Last edited by r3volution 3.0; 05-03-2015 at 05:21 PM.
It casts doubt on their own poll.
^^^Well, I don't see how.
I have doubt. I don't see why you don't.
Common sense!
Common sense!
Common sense!
The media is beyond shame.
#NashvilleStrong
“I’m a doctor. That’s a baby.”~~~Dr. Manny Sethi
The steps that are outlined in the article would make the poll MORE scientific than if it were a random sampling without screening and weighting for various demographic factors. "Random" samples are not necessarily representative unless these variables are accounted for, and every credible polling company takes these kinds of steps to increase the accuracy of the polls. Nothing to see here.
Hofstadter's Law: It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's Law. -Douglas Hofstadter
Life, Liberty, Logic
You gave no explanation for your argument and calling something scientific doesn't make it so. You never explained the steps. You've explained nothing.
Last edited by dude58677; 05-03-2015 at 07:59 PM.
I didn't mean to argue or explain anything, I was simply informing you of a fact.
I am not saying that polls cannot be manipulated, but the kinds of steps outlined in that article can be found in the polling methods of nearly every credible polling agency.
Hofstadter's Law: It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's Law. -Douglas Hofstadter
Life, Liberty, Logic
What makes these polling companies credible? Why are these methodologies reliable?
Last edited by dude58677; 05-03-2015 at 08:17 PM.
I can't tell you whether any particular polling company is honest, but the methodologies described are reliable. They are used for professional opinion polling for more than just politics. Businesses pay big bucks for accurate polling for market research, and you won't see any business pay for a poll that doesn't at least control for demographic variables to get a representative sample of the intended population. Calling random numbers from a phone book does not make for a reliable poll. Having a sound polling methodology is what makes a poll scientific in the first place.
Hofstadter's Law: It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's Law. -Douglas Hofstadter
Life, Liberty, Logic
So polling was supposed to be random now it isn't? What was accounted for? Where's the falsifiability? If the phone book isn't reliable then what is the method that is reliable?
Last edited by dude58677; 05-03-2015 at 09:01 PM.
The poll is not accurate if the demographics of your random sample is not representative of the demographics of the population. The way that you account for this is through weighting, or careful selection criteria for participants, or both. Don't listen to me though, listen to the money. There is a reason why people pay professional polling agencies which ALL use these methods to get the most accurate polls possible.
Hofstadter's Law: It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's Law. -Douglas Hofstadter
Life, Liberty, Logic
Is it really a "fake" poll (and are they "admitting" it accidentally) if they describe their methodology?
It is if it is poor. I tell people I run a 40 yard dash in 4.2 seconds and then I later tell them that it was because I sprinting down a steep hill.
Did you tell them on purpose or by accident?
Paying people to get results you want and to use the methodology you want eso for political ideology is just not real science no matter how many ways you twist it.
If you can point to anything in that article that indicates unsound methodology, I am all ears. And by the way the content of the yahoo article was already IN the original poll release, as the polling methodologies typically are:
http://ap-gfkpoll.com/main/wp-conten...cs_Clinton.pdf
Hofstadter's Law: It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's Law. -Douglas Hofstadter
Life, Liberty, Logic
I told them I didn't run a 40 in 4.2 seconds because it wasn't on flat land so I accidently told them I didn't run a 40 yard dash.
I told them I didn't run a 40 in 4.2 seconds because it wasn't on flat surface, so yes I confessed to lying even though I didn't present it that way.
Last edited by dude58677; 05-03-2015 at 09:20 PM.
Fine, have it your way. Not my fault you don't understand what scientific polling methodology is.
Hofstadter's Law: It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's Law. -Douglas Hofstadter
Life, Liberty, Logic
Typical of pseudoscience. Don't attack me for not proving your case.
http://www.redstate.com/2014/11/12/ive-given-polls/
Last edited by dude58677; 05-03-2015 at 09:45 PM.
Posting Permissions
Connect With Us