|
Post by vilepagan on Nov 7, 2019 9:45:35 GMT -8
Which ones are still good?
|
|
davidsf
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 5,252
|
Post by davidsf on Nov 7, 2019 10:14:31 GMT -8
As recently as the 1990's, polls were almost exclusively conducted by nonpartisan mathematicians with expertise in statistical analysis, quantitative methods and sampling theory. Now they have political agendas, and almost all of them have become propaganda arms for the particular political ideology that the majority of the poll's "leaders" prefer. Whereas they used to be an indicator of public preference, they are now a weapon for swaying and manipulating that same public. They have become no different from the nation's many "news" outlets. Exactly right. They no longer care about statistics that show truly representative numbers. No more Magic Town
|
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,762
|
Post by MDDad on Nov 7, 2019 10:40:52 GMT -8
Which ones are still good? Honest to God, I really don't know if any of them are still good. In my MBA program, I took two quantitative methods classes that both involved poll design. The amount of work required to design a poll that eliminates bias and virtually guarantee fairness is enormous, and we were dealing with much more benign subjects than presidential preferences, such as whether someone preferred chocolate chip, oatmeal raisin or coconut macaroon cookies. I've been a pollee (is that a word?) for the USC-Dornsife Poll for four or five years now, and the fact that they repeatedly poll the same people every week or two is in itself a violation of random theory that polls are supposed to follow. And these overnight polls that generate new preference numbers almost every day can't possibly be following the guidelines for fairness and bias-controls that are required. Knowing that polls have become weaponized for political purposes, seeing how often they are wrong, and observing the speed with which they are cranked out, I don't follow or pay attention to any of them. I've been there and done that, and you can't bake a cake in two minutes.
|
|
davidsf
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 5,252
|
Post by davidsf on Nov 7, 2019 10:55:06 GMT -8
Which ones are still good? Honest to God, I really don't know if any of them are still good. In my MBA program, I took two quantitative methods classes that both involved poll design. The amount of work required to design a poll that eliminates bias and virtually guarantee fairness is enormous, and we were dealing with much more benign subjects than presidential preferences, such as whether someone preferred chocolate chip, oatmeal raisin or coconut macaroon cookies. I've been a pollee (is that a word?) for the USC-Dornsife Poll for four or five years now, and the fact that they repeatedly poll the same people every week or two is in itself a violation of random theory that polls are supposed to follow. And these overnight polls that generate new preference numbers almost every day can't possibly be following the guidelines for fairness and bias-controls that are required. Knowing that polls have become weaponized for political purposes, seeing how often they are wrong, and observing the speed with which they are cranked out, I don't follow or pay attention to any of them. I've been there and done that, and you can't bake a cake in two minutes. The class I took for my MBA showed me how to look at polls for how they gathered and processed the data. Probably what has convinced me very few, possibly none, do it accurately.
|
|
Luca
Master Statesman
Posts: 1,296
|
Post by Luca on Nov 7, 2019 11:21:08 GMT -8
I remember in either high school or college reading "The Trial" by Franz Kafka. The protagonist was Josef K, "a man arrested and prosecuted by a remote, inaccessible authority, with the nature of his crime revealed neither to him nor to the reader."
The book was hauntingly bizarre in that he is going through all these ominous interrogations and accusations but he never knows exactly what he is being accused of. Undoubtedly, there is some deeply symbolic and profound sociological message intended in all this, though being a mere science major I never grasped it. But I did feel for Josef K.
I feel a little bit like that again with all the sound and fury regarding impeachment of a president. You find yourself wondering:
"Exactly what are you claiming that he said?" "Exactly who is making the accusations?" "Is there going to be any cross examination of the accusers?" "What law is supposed to have been violated?" "Was the purported crime actually consummated?" "Are we going to hear from any defense witnesses?" "Is there going to be some legal protocol followed with this rambling affair/press conference, or is it going to be all ad lib?"
I cannot bring myself to take all this frantic speechifyin' and selective leaking very seriously until some sort of legitimate forum is established to reveal what the hell really did happen. The longer the theatrics continue in the current vein, the more frivolous it becomes…………………………………Luca
|
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,762
|
Post by MDDad on Nov 7, 2019 11:39:09 GMT -8
The class I took for my MBA showed me how to look at polls for how they gathered and processed the data. Probably what has convinced me very few, possibly none, do it accurately. Another thing I forgot to mention: All these polls seem to tack on the same disclaimer at the end, something like "margin of error is +/- 3%". Since one of the main factors in error margin is sample size, it seems impossible that an overnight poll could have the same margin of error as a monthly poll, particularly if the random selection process is not the same, and if the same samples are polled repeatedly. And second, they don't tell us at what confidence level the error margin applies. Is it 50%, 75%, 95%, 99%? Mathematically, it should be much smaller for lower confidence levels and much larger for higher ones. But without that information, the statement is meaningless.
|
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Nov 7, 2019 21:53:35 GMT -8
- This is like saying it's an abuse of power for a boss to fire an employee whom they think is doing a crappy job. (Like the Comey firing) - Under Article 2 of the Constitution full executive authority is vested in the President, so removing Obama holdover Marie Yovanovitch--who was working against Trump--was perfectly within his authority. - Dude, ambassador are literally 'political appointees.' No wonder this genius was the first candidate jettisoned from the Democrats' 2020 clown car....
|
|
Luca
Master Statesman
Posts: 1,296
|
Post by Luca on Nov 7, 2019 22:22:29 GMT -8
In case you missed this little tid bit: [a href=" Pelosi Diverts $2.4 Billion From Social Security To Cover Impeachment Costs"] Pelosi Diverts $2.4 Billion From Social Security To Cover Impeachment CostsWhat? Where’d you hear this? Why would hearings cost $2,400,000,000?
|
|
Credo
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,242
|
Post by Credo on Nov 8, 2019 0:23:05 GMT -8
In case you missed this little tid bit: [a href=" Pelosi Diverts $2.4 Billion From Social Security To Cover Impeachment Costs"] Pelosi Diverts $2.4 Billion From Social Security To Cover Impeachment CostsI'm sorry, but this can't possibly be true. I think it came from a satire site. (and no, I don't mean CNN....)
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Nov 8, 2019 3:58:08 GMT -8
Well, it's obvious to you and me and probably everyone else here, but Dave isn't that bright. He'll believe anything as long as it allegedly makes the left, liberals, or Democrats look bad.
|
|
|
Post by vilepagan on Nov 8, 2019 4:04:50 GMT -8
Of course it did...this one as a matter of fact: potatriotsunite.com/impeachbill/Here's the whole "story": Freedom isn’t free, the saying goes. And neither is the opposite of freedom, which for today’s purpose, is the impeachment of President Donald Trump. Counting legal fees for a slew of legal teams, experts, time, maintenance, and constant deliveries of Chardonnay, you and I, Mr. and Mrs. Taxpayer, are looking at about 2 and a half billion dollars. Hope your boss can give you a raise.
Speaker of the House Pelosi isn’t too keen on having that number creep out into the public eye, so yesterday, as evidenced by the filing of re-appropriation form 77-A in the Congressional Budget office, she quickly moved the amount from the Department of Social Security to cover the cost. Are you retired? Well get ready to pay, bitch.
Independent journalist Jay Garrick sped to Pelosi’s office and got a brief statement:
“Well most of Trump’s voters and supporters are retired seniors. I think it’s fitting that we ask them to help pay to fix the mistake they made. They’ll just have to do without cable for a year or two. Okay? Now excuse me, I have to meet up with my liquor boy.”
The price tag for this little dog and pony show seems awfully steep, especially with only a little more than half of Americans approving it. Let’s hope that at the very least, we get a T-shirt.Yeah, that was believable.
|
|
davidsf
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 5,252
|
Post by davidsf on Nov 8, 2019 6:08:57 GMT -8
In case you missed this little tid bit: [a href=" Pelosi Diverts $2.4 Billion From Social Security To Cover Impeachment Costs"] Pelosi Diverts $2.4 Billion From Social Security To Cover Impeachment CostsI'm sorry, but this can't possibly be true. I think it came from a satire site. (and no, I don't mean CNN....) You’re right... i deleted mine.
|
|
Bick
Administrator
Posts: 6,857
|
Post by Bick on Nov 8, 2019 8:01:19 GMT -8
I'm sorry, but this can't possibly be true. I think it came from a satire site. (and no, I don't mean CNN....) You’re right...
i deleted mine.So Dave, is this what simply admitting an error without the need to deflect looks like? And you don't need a safe space?
|
|
davidsf
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 5,252
|
Post by davidsf on Nov 8, 2019 8:12:55 GMT -8
You’re right...
i deleted mine. So Dave, is this what simply admitting an error without the need to deflect looks like? And you don't need a safe space? I have worked on our church board for years to get us to a place where we know how to disagree. ”arguing” is not the knock-down/drag-out” someone has to lose so someone else can win that we have made it into. part of knowing how to disagree is, when someone proves you wrong, own it, fix it (if possible), and move on. so, yes.
|
|
davidsf
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 5,252
|
Post by davidsf on Nov 8, 2019 8:18:47 GMT -8
|
|