RealClearPolitics - HorseRaceBlog - A Note on the Polls: "So, we have made three observations: (a) relative to 2004, the standard deviation for Obama and McCain's polls are high, indicating more disagreement among pollsters at a similar point in this cycle; (b) the shape of the distribution of each candidate's poll position is not what we might expect; (c) multiple polls are separated from the RCP average by statistically significant differences.
Combined, these considerations suggest that this variation cannot be chalked up to typical statistical 'noise.' Instead, it is more likely that pollsters are disagreeing with each other in their sampling methodologies. In other words, different pollsters have different 'visions' of what the electorate will look like on November 4th, and these visions are affecting their results."
------------
Detailed explanation of the strange inconsistency in polling this year. I wonder who has the best sampling methods. This reminds me of 1992, when Perot was the wild card. The predictions of his support were all over the place because nobody knew how to predict who would actually turn out and pull the lever for him. He did much better than most of the polls predicted. The guy who had it right on the money was Frank Luntz. He had worked for Perot early on and had a handle on who supported him and how intense they were. What's the lesson for 2008? I don't know and nobody is really sure at this point.
No comments:
Post a Comment