I see that many participants in political conversations quote polls
supporting the assertion that their chosen candidate is more popular than
their candidate's rival.

Do polls influence voting? Personally, I don't care whether other people
agree with me or not regarding my candidates of choice; I care more about
the issues. Do other people assign such significance to the majority
opinion-of-the-moment that they'll change their vote just to be on the side
of the majority, regardless of how they actually feel about the candidates'
stands on the issues?

Bob

Bob Terwilliger wrote:

> I see that many participants in political conversations quote polls
> supporting the assertion that their chosen candidate is more popular than
> their candidate's rival.
>
> Do polls influence voting? Personally, I don't care whether other people
> agree with me or not regarding my candidates of choice; I care more about
> the issues. Do other people assign such significance to the majority
> opinion-of-the-moment that they'll change their vote just to be on the
side
> of the majority, regardless of how they actually feel about the
candidates'
> stands on the issues?


I pay no attention to polls nor do I give any truck to "editorial"
endorsements...


--
Best
Greg

Check one:

[ ] Polls matter
[ ] Polls don't matter.

Blinky the Shark wrote:

>
> Check one:
>
> [ ] Polls matter
> [ ] Polls don't matter.
[X] MCINL
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

"Bob Terwilliger" > wrote in message
...
>I see that many participants in political conversations quote polls
> supporting the assertion that their chosen candidate is more popular than
> their candidate's rival.
>
> Do polls influence voting? Personally, I don't care whether other people
> agree with me or not regarding my candidates of choice; I care more about
> the issues. Do other people assign such significance to the majority
> opinion-of-the-moment that they'll change their vote just to be on the
> side
> of the majority, regardless of how they actually feel about the
> candidates'
> stands on the issues?
>
> Bob

I don't give a damn what poll say. I think though, some people will not vote
if the polls are lopsided since they feel their vote won't matter.

"Bob Terwilliger" > wrote in message
...
>I see that many participants in political conversations quote polls
> supporting the assertion that their chosen candidate is more popular than
> their candidate's rival.
>
> Do polls influence voting? Personally, I don't care whether other people
> agree with me or not regarding my candidates of choice; I care more about
> the issues. Do other people assign such significance to the majority
> opinion-of-the-moment that they'll change their vote just to be on the
> side
> of the majority, regardless of how they actually feel about the
> candidates'
> stands on the issues?
>
**** off, grandpa.

the cybersheep baah'd:

>> I see that many participants in political conversations quote polls
>> supporting the assertion that their chosen candidate is more popular than
>> their candidate's rival.
>>
>> Do polls influence voting? Personally, I don't care whether other people
>> agree with me or not regarding my candidates of choice; I care more about
>> the issues. Do other people assign such significance to the majority
>> opinion-of-the-moment that they'll change their vote just to be on the
>> side of the majority, regardless of how they actually feel about the
>> candidates' stands on the issues?
>>
> **** off, grandpa.


So you *do* follow like a sheep. Predictable and funny! (By "funny" I don't
mean funny as in "odd." I mean funny as in, "I'm laughing at the anile
49-year-old buffoon.")

Now get your stank ass back on the street and EARN, ho!

Bob

"Bob Terwilliger" wrote:
> I see that many participants in political conversations quote polls
> supporting the assertion that their chosen candidate is more popular than
> their candidate's rival.
>
> Do polls influence voting? Personally, I don't care whether other people
> agree with me or not regarding my candidates of choice; I care more about
> the issues. Do other people assign such significance to the majority
> opinion-of-the-moment that they'll change their vote just to be on the side
> of the majority, regardless of how they actually feel about the candidates'
> stands on the issues?

How can I pay attention to the presidential polls, I've never been
polled... I believe they're made up of skewed data and plain old
fashioned lies. And people don't tell the truth on polls anyway, not
even on the RFC polls.

I believe that people vote for their leaders *entirely* according to
their personal economic position... this is a capitalistic society
after all... poor trash vote against the haves, the haves vote against
the poor trash... there are no other real issues (not even race),
whatever else folks bring into the mix is nothing more than decoy
issues to hide from the truth: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. . . .

Anyone thinks wealthy black folks are gonna vote for Obama is nutz...
anyone thinks when that curtain closes Oprah will vote for Obama is a
certifiable psycho. If Obama wasn't running even he wouldn't vote for
Obama.

That's my story and I ain't changing it.

Janet Baraclough > wrote in
:

> The message >
> from "Bob Terwilliger" > contains these
> words:
>
>> I see that many participants in political conversations quote polls
>> supporting the assertion that their chosen candidate is more popular
>> than their candidate's rival.
>
>> Do polls influence voting? Personally, I don't care whether other
>> people agree with me or not regarding my candidates of choice; I care
>> more about the issues. Do other people assign such significance to
>> the majority opinion-of-the-moment that they'll change their vote
>> just to be on the side of the majority, regardless of how they
>> actually feel about the candidates' stands on the issues?
>
> I think they do influence the way voting goes, but indirectly.
> Campaign organisers use poll results as a yardstick, and change and
> pace electoral publicity accordingly. For instance if polls suggest
> that party X is not addressing the issues that attract voters, they
> may adjust their policies or the spin put on news..or bring in a new
> candidate. And those changes do influence how people vote.
>
> Janet.
>

Polls mean somebody phoning you and getting you to answer survey
questions...

So when a company gets a list of people that are actually willing to
answer the questions...they continue to use the same people over and over
again.

Myself I never answer surveys trufully..I like to **** with their minds as
they get paid bigtime for my answers and I get squat from the
experience...other than my supper getting cold.

That's the problem with politicans...they think they are important and
everybody cares about how they position themselves. Hell they don't have a
clue about the real important stuff and have to have advisors to handle
it.

--

The beet goes on -Alan

hahabogus wrote:

>
> So when a company gets a list of people that are actually willing to
> answer the questions...they continue to use the same people over and over
> again.

I don't do polls. When pollsters call I hang up. When pollsters approach
me in public I ask for payment. They are getting paid to ask me
questions so I figure they should pay me for my time too. They won't, so
I don't do them. Newspaper poll respondents are those who read that
particular journal and feel strongly enough about the topic to answer.
FOX news polls don't get many answers except to the right wing dullars
who believe their stuff is actually news, and left wing rags don't get
many responses from the right.



> That's the problem with politicans...they think they are important and
> everybody cares about how they position themselves. Hell they don't have a
> clue about the real important stuff and have to have advisors to handle
> it.

True enough. They pretend to listen to their supporters and
constituents, but the party is the back room guys who call the shots.

Gregory Morrow wrote:

>
> Bob Terwilliger wrote:
>
> > I see that many participants in political conversations quote polls
> > supporting the assertion that their chosen candidate is more
> > popular than their candidate's rival.
> >
> > Do polls influence voting? Personally, I don't care whether other
> > people agree with me or not regarding my candidates of choice; I
> > care more about the issues. Do other people assign such
> > significance to the majority opinion-of-the-moment that they'll
> > change their vote just to be on the
> side
> > of the majority, regardless of how they actually feel about the
> candidates'
> > stands on the issues?
>
>
> I pay no attention to polls nor do I give any truck to "editorial"
> endorsements...

I do pay attention to those endorsements; editorials are among my
favorite forms of humor (usually unintended.)

--
--
Dan Goodman
"I have always depended on the kindness of stranglers."
Tennessee Williams, A Streetcar Named Expire
Journal http://dsgood.livejournal.com
Futures http://clerkfuturist.wordpress.com
Mirror Journal http://dsgood.insanejournal.com
Mirror 2 http://dsgood.wordpress.com
Links http://del.icio.us/dsgood

"Bob Terwilliger" > wrote in message
...
>I see that many participants in political conversations quote polls
> supporting the assertion that their chosen candidate is more popular than
> their candidate's rival.
>
> Do polls influence voting? Personally, I don't care whether other people
> agree with me or not regarding my candidates of choice; I care more about
> the issues. Do other people assign such significance to the majority
> opinion-of-the-moment that they'll change their vote just to be on the
> side
> of the majority, regardless of how they actually feel about the
> candidates'
> stands on the issues?
>
> Bob


Whenever one looks at polls and their results ALWAYS remember the following:

"Figures don't lie but liars figure."

Any poll can be constructed to elicit and expected answer.

It's like the lawyer asking "Please answer yes or no do you still beat your
wife?"

Dimitri

AKA take the results with a grain of salt.

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 13:23:44 +0100, Janet Baraclough wrote:

> The message >
> from "Bob Terwilliger" > contains these words:
>
>> I see that many participants in political conversations quote polls
>> supporting the assertion that their chosen candidate is more popular than
>> their candidate's rival.
>
>> Do polls influence voting? Personally, I don't care whether other people
>> agree with me or not regarding my candidates of choice; I care more about
>> the issues. Do other people assign such significance to the majority
>> opinion-of-the-moment that they'll change their vote just to be on the side
>> of the majority, regardless of how they actually feel about the candidates'
>> stands on the issues?
>
> I think they do influence the way voting goes, but indirectly.
> Campaign organisers use poll results as a yardstick, and change and
> pace electoral publicity accordingly. For instance if polls suggest
> that party X is not addressing the issues that attract voters, they may
> adjust their policies or the spin put on news..or bring in a new
> candidate. And those changes do influence how people vote.
>
> Janet.

but the polls you are speaking of are mostly internal, and not generally
made public. i think bob is referring to the horse-race type polls.

your pal,
blake

On Sep 24, 10:27�am, hahabogus > wrote:
> Janet Baraclough > wrote :
>
>
>
>
>
> > The message >
> > from "Bob Terwilliger" > contains these
> > words:
>
> >> I see that many participants in political conversations quote polls
> >> supporting the assertion that their chosen candidate is more popular
> >> than their candidate's rival.
>
> >> Do polls influence voting? Personally, I don't care whether other
> >> people agree with me or not regarding my candidates of choice; I care
> >> more about the issues. Do other people assign such significance to
> >> the majority opinion-of-the-moment that they'll change their vote
> >> just to be on the side of the majority, regardless of how they
> >> actually feel about the candidates' stands on the issues?
>
> > � � I think they do influence the way voting goes, but indirectly.
> > Campaign organisers use poll results �as a yardstick, and change and
> > pace electoral publicity accordingly. For instance if �polls suggest
> > that party X �is not addressing the issues that attract voters, they
> > may adjust their policies or the spin put on news..or bring in a new
> > candidate. �And those changes do influence how people vote.
>
> > � � Janet.
>
> Polls mean somebody phoning you and getting you to answer survey
> questions...
>
> So when a company gets a list of people that are actually willing to
> answer the questions...they continue to use the same people over and over
> again.
>
> Myself I never answer surveys trufully..I like to **** with their minds as
> they get paid bigtime for my answers and I get squat from the
> experience...other than my supper getting cold.
>
>
>
> That's the problem with politicans...they think they
> are important and everybody cares about how they
> position themselves. Hell they don't have a clue about
> the real important stuff and have to have advisors to
> handle it.

Couldn't have described Bubba better myself.

Sheldon wrote:
> On Sep 24, 10:27�am, hahabogus > wrote:

>> That's the problem with politicans...they think they
>> are important and everybody cares about how they
>> position themselves. Hell they don't have a clue about
>> the real important stuff and have to have advisors to
>> handle it.
>
> Couldn't have described Bubba better myself.

Or any random Hollywood celebrity.

nancy

On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 21:50:05 -0700, Bob Terwilliger wrote:

> I see that many participants in political conversations quote polls
> supporting the assertion that their chosen candidate is more popular than
> their candidate's rival.
>
> Do polls influence voting? Personally, I don't care whether other people
> agree with me or not regarding my candidates of choice; I care more about
> the issues. Do other people assign such significance to the majority
> opinion-of-the-moment that they'll change their vote just to be on the side
> of the majority, regardless of how they actually feel about the candidates'
> stands on the issues?
>
> Bob

i don't pay much attention to them this far out from the election, at any
rate, both because they don't mean much at this point and because i don't
want to feel like i'm watching a redskins game - 'yay, we're winning!'
'oh, shit, we're losing, but we can pull it out!'

but one thing i would bear in mind about *this* election: polls based on
'likely voters' generally mean voters who have voted in the last or the
last two elections. obama's people have registered a boatload of new
voters, and new democratic registrations *greatly* outnumber new
republicans.

your pal,
blake

ChattyCathy wrote:

> Blinky the Shark wrote:
>
>>
>> Check one:
>>
>> [ ] Polls matter
>> [ ] Polls don't matter.
> [X] MCINL

Heh!

--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Need a new news feed? http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html

"Bob Terwilliger" > wrote in message
...
>I see that many participants in political conversations quote polls
> supporting the assertion that their chosen candidate is more popular than
> their candidate's rival.
>
> Do polls influence voting? Personally, I don't care whether other people
> agree with me or not regarding my candidates of choice; I care more about
> the issues. Do other people assign such significance to the majority
> opinion-of-the-moment that they'll change their vote just to be on the
> side
> of the majority, regardless of how they actually feel about the
> candidates'
> stands on the issues?
>

Polls matter because they do influence people. Some things to remember:

1) elections are won state by state. National polls in an election is
irrelevant.
2) polls are seldom scientific and use small sample sets
3) polls are driven by special interests more often than not

OK let's look at a reasonable poll result as of today:

Obama - 48%
McCain - 45%

OK, what about the other 8%? That depends on what the question was. They
asked "who will you vote for" or "who would you vote for" Different
questions. Now assuming the former what was the other choice(s)? If it was
"don't know" then you cannot draw much from that. But what if they asked
"most likely Obama" and "most likely McCain"? That changes everything. You
do not know what those numbers are and they don't tell you. If all 8% said
"Obama" well that changes the poll completely doesn't it?

OK, now also consider when they asked that question, what time of day was
it? You can get the numbers you want by choosing when you call. If it is
during normal work hours you get a whole different demographic than if you
call after the dinner hour. Plus the pollsters cannot call cell phones. A
great many people, primarily young, only have cell phones. So the sampling
is skewed against that demographic.

There are crap polls, Gallup for example, and there are more scientific
polls, such as Zogby.

In short, you can mostly ignore national polls. Look at the state polls
only.

Paul

On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 21:50:05 -0700, "Bob Terwilliger"
> wrote:

>I see that many participants in political conversations quote polls
>supporting the assertion that their chosen candidate is more popular than
>their candidate's rival.
>
>Do polls influence voting? Personally, I don't care whether other people
>agree with me or not regarding my candidates of choice; I care more about
>the issues. Do other people assign such significance to the majority
>opinion-of-the-moment that they'll change their vote just to be on the side
>of the majority, regardless of how they actually feel about the candidates'
>stands on the issues?
>
>Bob

There are several problems with all polls ...

(1) Not all people answer truthfully. Some will tell the pollster
what is the politically correct answer to the question regardless of
how they feel.

(2) The answer to the question is often pre-determined by how the
question is worded and the order in which it is asked.

(3) In a nationwide poll there are NEVER enough people polled. No
matter how the pollsters tell you they can compensate for that... they
really can't.

(4) Statistics (and polls) if tortured long enough will tell you
anything you want.

Ron Kelley

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 05:53:28 -0400, "Edwin Pawlowski" >
wrote:

>
>"Bob Terwilliger" > wrote in message
...
>>I see that many participants in political conversations quote polls
>> supporting the assertion that their chosen candidate is more popular than
>> their candidate's rival.
>>
>> Do polls influence voting? Personally, I don't care whether other people
>> agree with me or not regarding my candidates of choice; I care more about
>> the issues. Do other people assign such significance to the majority
>> opinion-of-the-moment that they'll change their vote just to be on the
>> side
>> of the majority, regardless of how they actually feel about the
>> candidates'
>> stands on the issues?
>>
>> Bob
>
>I don't give a damn what poll say. I think though, some people will not vote
>if the polls are lopsided since they feel their vote won't matter.

So what? It's not an official referendum. Weak people love to play
victim. I don't need to listen to whining or whining by proxy.

Even in the "real thing", those who think their vote won't count are
those whose voice is most needed to affect change. Disenfranchised
voters would be amazed at what happens if they actually went out and
cast their ballots.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 08:04:02 -0400, "cybercat" >
wrote:

>
>"Bob Terwilliger" > wrote in message
...
>>I see that many participants in political conversations quote polls
>> supporting the assertion that their chosen candidate is more popular than
>> their candidate's rival.
>>
>> Do polls influence voting? Personally, I don't care whether other people
>> agree with me or not regarding my candidates of choice; I care more about
>> the issues. Do other people assign such significance to the majority
>> opinion-of-the-moment that they'll change their vote just to be on the
>> side
>> of the majority, regardless of how they actually feel about the
>> candidates'
>> stands on the issues?
>>
>**** off, grandpa.
>

Don't say that.

Losers never win. If they don't have the spine to vote their mind in
rfc an rfc poll (which means *nothing*), they're real losers.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 14:27:18 GMT, hahabogus > wrote:

>Myself I never answer surveys trufully..I like to **** with their minds as
>they get paid bigtime for my answers and I get squat from the
>experience...other than my supper getting cold.

They don't get paid big time Alan. How did you get that idea?
They're just like any other boiler room phone team. Nobody cares what
you say, they just report it.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

"Paul M. Cook" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Bob Terwilliger" > wrote in message
> ...
>>I see that many participants in political conversations quote polls
>> supporting the assertion that their chosen candidate is more popular than
>> their candidate's rival.
>>
>> Do polls influence voting? Personally, I don't care whether other people
>> agree with me or not regarding my candidates of choice; I care more about
>> the issues. Do other people assign such significance to the majority
>> opinion-of-the-moment that they'll change their vote just to be on the
>> side
>> of the majority, regardless of how they actually feel about the
>> candidates'
>> stands on the issues?
>>
>
> Polls matter because they do influence people. Some things to remember:
>
> 1) elections are won state by state. National polls in an election is
> irrelevant.
> 2) polls are seldom scientific and use small sample sets
> 3) polls are driven by special interests more often than not
>
> OK let's look at a reasonable poll result as of today:
>
> Obama - 48%
> McCain - 45%
>
> OK, what about the other 8%? That depends on what the question was. They
> asked "who will you vote for" or "who would you vote for" Different
> questions. Now assuming the former what was the other choice(s)? If it
> was "don't know" then you cannot draw much from that. But what if they
> asked "most likely Obama" and "most likely McCain"? That changes
> everything. You do not know what those numbers are and they don't tell
> you. If all 8% said "Obama" well that changes the poll completely doesn't
> it?
>
> OK, now also consider when they asked that question, what time of day was
> it? You can get the numbers you want by choosing when you call. If it is
> during normal work hours you get a whole different demographic than if you
> call after the dinner hour. Plus the pollsters cannot call cell phones.
> A great many people, primarily young, only have cell phones. So the
> sampling is skewed against that demographic.
>
> There are crap polls, Gallup for example, and there are more scientific
> polls, such as Zogby.
>
> In short, you can mostly ignore national polls. Look at the state polls
> only.
>
> Paul
>

How about the poll that asked, "Does Paul M. Cook know how to add?"

-sw

> How about the poll that asked, "Does Paul M. Cook know how to add?"
>
> -sw

Hey "beaner" I thought you claimed you weren't Wertz? I knew only Wertz
would choose that for a nickname.

Should have been 47 for Obama. My bad.

Paul

> How about the poll that asked, "Does Paul M. Cook know how to add?"


Let's all pray Wertz never learns how to multiply.

Paul

"Paul M. Cook" > wrote in message
...
>> How about the poll that asked, "Does Paul M. Cook know how to add?"
>
>
> Let's all pray Wertz never learns how to multiply.
>
hahahaha!

"Paul M. Cook" > wrote in message
...
>> How about the poll that asked, "Does Paul M. Cook know how to add?"
>>
>> -sw
>
> Hey "beaner" I thought you claimed you weren't Wertz? I knew only Wertz
> would choose that for a nickname.
>
> Should have been 47 for Obama. My bad.
>
> Paul
>
>

Google is your friend, Glasshopper...

Here, let me quote for you:

Paco > wrote:

> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Paco > wrote:
>>
>>> -sw (am I supposed to sign this in every group?)
>>
>> I've only released that to public domain in AFF-F.
>>
>> -sw
>
> Sorry. I shall cease immediately.
>
> -sw

Actually, I don't mind here. There's a couple fools here who think
I use many multiple identities, so carry on.

-Paco

But, you believe what you want to believe. And, please do continue to
exhibit your superior command of the English language and your outstanding
mathematical skills.

-sw

sf wrote in :

> On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 14:27:18 GMT, hahabogus > wrote:
>
>>Myself I never answer surveys trufully..I like to **** with their
>>minds as they get paid bigtime for my answers and I get squat from the
>>experience...other than my supper getting cold.
>
> They don't get paid big time Alan. How did you get that idea?
> They're just like any other boiler room phone team. Nobody cares what
> you say, they just report it.
>
>

ok i admit the guy/girl on the phone get little...but I bet the boss makes
out gang busters buy selling the poll.

--

The beet goes on -Alan

"cybercat" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote in message
> ...
>>> How about the poll that asked, "Does Paul M. Cook know how to add?"
>>
>>
>> Let's all pray Wertz never learns how to multiply.
>>
> hahahaha!
>

MYOB, ho. Wertz is one of the few in this group who has little animosity
towards you. If you were half as smart as you tell us you are, you would
understand that I'm not "-sw". No wonder your father regrets buying his
condoms at "The Dollar Store". Now, go back to trying to figure out your 15
bean soup. And get your ass back out on the street; that Steel Reserve
ain't free, ya know.

"Paco" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote in message
> ...
>>> How about the poll that asked, "Does Paul M. Cook know how to add?"
>>>
>>> -sw
>>
>> Hey "beaner" I thought you claimed you weren't Wertz? I knew only Wertz
>> would choose that for a nickname.
>>
>> Should have been 47 for Obama. My bad.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>
> Google is your friend, Glasshopper...
>
> Here, let me quote for you:
>
> Paco > wrote:
>
>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Paco > wrote:
>>>
>>>> -sw (am I supposed to sign this in every group?)
>>>
>>> I've only released that to public domain in AFF-F.
>>>
>>> -sw
>>
>> Sorry. I shall cease immediately.
>>
>> -sw
>
> Actually, I don't mind here. There's a couple fools here who think
> I use many multiple identities, so carry on.

Can't imagine why they'd say that.

> -Paco
>
> But, you believe what you want to believe. And, please do continue to
> exhibit your superior command of the English language and your outstanding
> mathematical skills.
>

Si, no problemo, beaner.

Pablo

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 13:43:32 -0700, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>
> OK, now also consider when they asked that question, what time of day was
> it? You can get the numbers you want by choosing when you call. If it is
> during normal work hours you get a whole different demographic than if you
> call after the dinner hour. Plus the pollsters cannot call cell phones. A
> great many people, primarily young, only have cell phones. So the sampling
> is skewed against that demographic.
>

as i understand it, some polls *are* now using cell numbers. but, it's
likely that the 'normalizing' algorithms are pretty new and hence untested
against actual voting results.

even beyond that, the whole thing seems pretty dicey to me. keeps a lot of
people in jobs, though.

your pal,
blake

"Paul M. Cook" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Paco" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>> How about the poll that asked, "Does Paul M. Cook know how to add?"
>>>>
>>>> -sw
>>>
>>> Hey "beaner" I thought you claimed you weren't Wertz? I knew only Wertz
>>> would choose that for a nickname.
>>>
>>> Should have been 47 for Obama. My bad.
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Google is your friend, Glasshopper...
>>
>> Here, let me quote for you:
>>
>> Paco > wrote:
>>
>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> Paco > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> -sw (am I supposed to sign this in every group?)
>>>>
>>>> I've only released that to public domain in AFF-F.
>>>>
>>>> -sw
>>>
>>> Sorry. I shall cease immediately.
>>>
>>> -sw
>>
>> Actually, I don't mind here. There's a couple fools here who think
>> I use many multiple identities, so carry on.
>
> Can't imagine why they'd say that.
>
>> -Paco
>>
>> But, you believe what you want to believe. And, please do continue to
>> exhibit your superior command of the English language and your
>> outstanding mathematical skills.
>>
>
> Si, no problemo, beaner.
>
> Pablo
>

Gracias, racista boludo.

"Paco" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Paco" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>> How about the poll that asked, "Does Paul M. Cook know how to add?"
>>>>>
>>>>> -sw
>>>>
>>>> Hey "beaner" I thought you claimed you weren't Wertz? I knew only
>>>> Wertz would choose that for a nickname.
>>>>
>>>> Should have been 47 for Obama. My bad.
>>>>
>>>> Paul
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Google is your friend, Glasshopper...
>>>
>>> Here, let me quote for you:
>>>
>>> Paco > wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>> Paco > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> -sw (am I supposed to sign this in every group?)
>>>>>
>>>>> I've only released that to public domain in AFF-F.
>>>>>
>>>>> -sw
>>>>
>>>> Sorry. I shall cease immediately.
>>>>
>>>> -sw
>>>
>>> Actually, I don't mind here. There's a couple fools here who think
>>> I use many multiple identities, so carry on.
>>
>> Can't imagine why they'd say that.
>>
>>> -Paco
>>>
>>> But, you believe what you want to believe. And, please do continue to
>>> exhibit your superior command of the English language and your
>>> outstanding mathematical skills.
>>>
>>
>> Si, no problemo, beaner.
>>
>> Pablo
>>
>
> Gracias, racista boludo.


You picked Paco, poco. Next time maybe find out hat the name means first.

Paul

In article >,
"Bob Terwilliger" > wrote:

> I see that many participants in political conversations quote polls
> supporting the assertion that their chosen candidate is more popular than
> their candidate's rival.
>
> Do polls influence voting? Personally, I don't care whether other people
> agree with me or not regarding my candidates of choice; I care more about
> the issues. Do other people assign such significance to the majority
> opinion-of-the-moment that they'll change their vote just to be on the side
> of the majority, regardless of how they actually feel about the candidates'
> stands on the issues?

Polls influence voting indirectly. It depends on the sampling method and
the questions being asked. Any politician who's running for office and
who's down in the polls is certainly going to take stock of his or her
campaign and make changes to at least try to get better polling results.
In the sense that polls are a mirror into the sole of the electorate,
they sure do matter to politicians. Few politicians who are doing poorly
in pools get reelected.

There's also the unique case of presidential elections, like what we are
having now in the United States. Polls are not as important as they are
for other elected offices because the popular vote is not directly tied
to the selection of our president; that choice is made by the Electoral
College.

In article >,
"Paul M. Cook" > wrote:

> "Bob Terwilliger" > wrote in message
> ...
> >I see that many participants in political conversations quote polls
> > supporting the assertion that their chosen candidate is more popular than
> > their candidate's rival.
> >
> > Do polls influence voting? Personally, I don't care whether other people
> > agree with me or not regarding my candidates of choice; I care more about
> > the issues. Do other people assign such significance to the majority
> > opinion-of-the-moment that they'll change their vote just to be on the
> > side
> > of the majority, regardless of how they actually feel about the
> > candidates'
> > stands on the issues?
> >
>
> Polls matter because they do influence people. Some things to remember:
>
> 1) elections are won state by state. National polls in an election is
> irrelevant.
> 2) polls are seldom scientific and use small sample sets
> 3) polls are driven by special interests more often than not
>
> OK let's look at a reasonable poll result as of today:
>
> Obama - 48%
> McCain - 45%
>
> OK, what about the other 8%? That depends on what the question was. They
> asked "who will you vote for" or "who would you vote for" Different
> questions. Now assuming the former what was the other choice(s)? If it was
> "don't know" then you cannot draw much from that. But what if they asked
> "most likely Obama" and "most likely McCain"? That changes everything. You
> do not know what those numbers are and they don't tell you. If all 8% said
> "Obama" well that changes the poll completely doesn't it?
>
> OK, now also consider when they asked that question, what time of day was
> it? You can get the numbers you want by choosing when you call. If it is
> during normal work hours you get a whole different demographic than if you
> call after the dinner hour. Plus the pollsters cannot call cell phones. A
> great many people, primarily young, only have cell phones. So the sampling
> is skewed against that demographic.
>
> There are crap polls, Gallup for example, and there are more scientific
> polls, such as Zogby.

The trouble with Zogby's polls are the sampling is not done properly.
Most people who do Zogby's polls are self-selected, which throws out
random sampling. Without random sampling, its hard to make good
predictions on political polls. If I remember correctly, Zogby has a
poor record of predicting who wins presidential campaigns. Just because
a poll is "scientific" does not necessarily mean it is a good predictor
of future outcome.

Stan Horwitz wrote:
> The trouble with Zogby's polls are the sampling is not done properly.
> Most people who do Zogby's polls are self-selected, which throws out
> random sampling. Without random sampling, its hard to make good
> predictions on political polls. If I remember correctly, Zogby has a
> poor record of predicting who wins presidential campaigns. Just because
> a poll is "scientific" does not necessarily mean it is a good predictor
> of future outcome.
>

These are the polls I see. Good? Bad? C'mon, help me here. :-)


http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/

Becca

Becca wrote:
> Stan Horwitz wrote:
>> The trouble with Zogby's polls are the sampling is not done properly.
>> Most people who do Zogby's polls are self-selected, which throws out
>> random sampling. Without random sampling, its hard to make good
>> predictions on political polls. If I remember correctly, Zogby has a
>> poor record of predicting who wins presidential campaigns. Just
>> because a poll is "scientific" does not necessarily mean it is a good
>> predictor of future outcome.
>>
>
> These are the polls I see. Good? Bad? C'mon, help me here. :-)
>
> http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/
>
> Becca
Makes as much sense as other polls do. I have pollsters calling me
constantly and I just hang up on them. A number of my friends do the
same. My politics are mine and that's the end of it. Polls are just
statistics and statistics can be manipulated.

You also have to remember what Mark Twain, aka Samuel Clemens, had to
say: "There's lies, there's damned lies, and then, there's statistics."

George Shirley wrote:
> Becca wrote:
>> Stan Horwitz wrote:
>>> The trouble with Zogby's polls are the sampling is not done
>>> properly. Most people who do Zogby's polls are self-selected, which
>>> throws out random sampling. Without random sampling, its hard to
>>> make good predictions on political polls. If I remember correctly,
>>> Zogby has a poor record of predicting who wins presidential
>>> campaigns. Just because a poll is "scientific" does not necessarily
>>> mean it is a good predictor of future outcome.
>>>
>>
>> These are the polls I see. Good? Bad? C'mon, help me here. :-)
>> http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/
>>
>> Becca
> Makes as much sense as other polls do. I have pollsters calling me
> constantly and I just hang up on them. A number of my friends do the
> same. My politics are mine and that's the end of it. Polls are just
> statistics and statistics can be manipulated.
>
> You also have to remember what Mark Twain, aka Samuel Clemens, had to
> say: "There's lies, there's damned lies, and then, there's statistics."

Pollsters have never called me. I am not sure if that is good or bad. lol

Becca

Becca wrote:
> George Shirley wrote:
>> Becca wrote:
>>> Stan Horwitz wrote:
>>>> The trouble with Zogby's polls are the sampling is not done
>>>> properly. Most people who do Zogby's polls are self-selected, which
>>>> throws out random sampling. Without random sampling, its hard to
>>>> make good predictions on political polls. If I remember correctly,
>>>> Zogby has a poor record of predicting who wins presidential
>>>> campaigns. Just because a poll is "scientific" does not necessarily
>>>> mean it is a good predictor of future outcome.
>>>>
>>>
>>> These are the polls I see. Good? Bad? C'mon, help me here. :-)
>>> http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/
>>>
>>> Becca
>> Makes as much sense as other polls do. I have pollsters calling me
>> constantly and I just hang up on them. A number of my friends do the
>> same. My politics are mine and that's the end of it. Polls are just
>> statistics and statistics can be manipulated.
>>
>> You also have to remember what Mark Twain, aka Samuel Clemens, had to
>> say: "There's lies, there's damned lies, and then, there's statistics."
>
> Pollsters have never called me. I am not sure if that is good or bad. lol
>
> Becca
You may not be in the right age range yet. I'm in my very late sixties,
a registered Republican, a locally known fiscal conservative, and a
gadfly in the ear of local politicians.

"Paul M. Cook" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Paco" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> "Paco" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> "Paul M. Cook" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>>> How about the poll that asked, "Does Paul M. Cook know how to add?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -sw
>>>>>
>>>>> Hey "beaner" I thought you claimed you weren't Wertz? I knew only
>>>>> Wertz would choose that for a nickname.
>>>>>
>>>>> Should have been 47 for Obama. My bad.
>>>>>
>>>>> Paul
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Google is your friend, Glasshopper...
>>>>
>>>> Here, let me quote for you:
>>>>
>>>> Paco > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> Paco > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -sw (am I supposed to sign this in every group?)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've only released that to public domain in AFF-F.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -sw
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry. I shall cease immediately.
>>>>>
>>>>> -sw
>>>>
>>>> Actually, I don't mind here. There's a couple fools here who think
>>>> I use many multiple identities, so carry on.
>>>
>>> Can't imagine why they'd say that.
>>>
>>>> -Paco
>>>>
>>>> But, you believe what you want to believe. And, please do continue to
>>>> exhibit your superior command of the English language and your
>>>> outstanding mathematical skills.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Si, no problemo, beaner.
>>>
>>> Pablo
>>>
>>
>> Gracias, racista boludo.
>
>
> You picked Paco, poco. Next time maybe find out what the name means first.

^
> Paul
>

Hit a nerve there, did I, Pablo?

"The boy's name Paco \p(a)-co\ is of Spanish origin. Variant of Francis
(Latin) "from France". A diminutive of Francisco. Fashion designer Paco
Rabanne.

Paco has 1 variant form: Pacorro.

For more information, see also the relate name Paquito.

Paco is a very rare male first name and a common surname (source: 1990 U.S.
Census)."

Ref.: http://www.thinkbabynames.com/meaning/1/Paco

Anything else, racista? I fixed your spelling error above; you're welcome.
And, I'm not Steve Wertz.