New Battleground Poll Released
 

I like this one because it is done jointly by a Republican and a Democrat, and because I like the Tarrance Group.

Most interesting number to me is that nearly 50% of those surveyed believe strongly that the country is off on the "wrong track." This is, IMO, the most important indicator of how an election is going to go for an incumbent. Lots of other interesting things too, but I'll see what people are most interested in before commenting further.

http://www.tarrance.com/pdf/9701Q.pdf

For analyses, see:

http://www.tarrance.com/pdf/04DemocraticAnalysis.pdf
http://www.tarrance.com/pdf/GOPAnalysis.pdf

And if you want user-friendly charts, try this:

http://www.tarrance.com/pdf/9701BGCharts.pdf

Re: New Battleground Poll Released
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Roguish Lawyer
Most interesting number to me is that nearly 50% of those surveyed believe strongly that the country is off on the "wrong track." [QUOTE/]

I thought I read another poll stating that that same 50% also watch Jerry Springer.

I like the 1% who are "likely" to vote, but have never heard of the Republican Party.

TR

Along this line, would it be a good idea to run a poll to see
how many people in this group have ever been involved
in an election poll? (excluding this one).

Statistically, if you have 100 people in a room, there is a
99% chance two people have the same birth day (notice
I didn't say birth date). However, I am willing to
bet few or none of the members on this board have ever
been called to answer a poll.

There are 400+ members on this board.

I will donate $50 to SOWF if more than 10 people
on this board have ever been called in a nationally
organised poll.

That's what I think of polls.

I've never been called or approached for a politically based poll.

Pshaw! Like anybody would ask me what I think.

I have been polled before. I also have designed and overseen polls.

The birthday statistic does not apply in this situation. That probability is factorial based, and the variable is independent (one persons birthday has no effect on the other persons birthday). The poll is a matter of taking a very small representative subset of a very large population. The variable is dependant (if NDD is selected for the poll, the probability of the Team Sergeant being selected for the poll goes down by 1).

WTH is Double Optimism? gimme some of that.

Its no good - 40% of the respondents are between 45 and 64. Of course they're going to be more concerned about health care, their investments and losing their jobs.

38% of the voters in 2000 were between 45-64 years old

http://www.census.gov/population/www...g/p20-542.html

I fall into that age group (just barely but there you have it) however I am more worried about the BGs and the GWOT...won't have to worry about all the other if we get some clown in office like sKerry.

I've never been called for a political poll btw.

Never been polled here, wife doesn't even want to know what i think...

No poll here

They have called me a few times, I always hang up on them.

The poll is of people who are likely to vote. So it's actually very good. People who don't vote don't count.

This is why social security is so f'd up.

Never been polled. Have voted in every election that I have been eligible to vote in.

I've never been called for a political poll.

Negative, not people who are likely to vote, the group that voted most in the last election. I haven't even looked and wouldn't know where to, but I would be willing to bet that when the country is at war, the younger voters are much more likely to vote. Like the age group that thinks they are most likely to be drafted. The 40-50s will too, because its their kids going. If I was 18-26, I would I have vested interest in voting.

Of course I would vote for the candidate most likely to give me a free plane ride and a rifle to go where I could kill some terrorists, but that's just me.

Be interesting to see what the military vote does this time and if the libs count it.

Looks like POTUS' team needs to get on that economy message. Everything I have seen points to a much improved between now and October, little signs of inflation though.

Spoke with a young man (boy) yesterday in regards to this very subject here at the FD. He is not a firefighter, rather a little punk bastard who I would surely stop a mud hole into and walk out dry given half the chance, but the son of a firefighter. He and his friends have organized a group at Furman University who are against the war and want Pres. Bush out of office solely because we are at war. From what I he said there are about 1,000 of them who are plainning on voting for "the French looking Presidential Candidate-Senator from Mass. From what I have gathered they seem to believe we had 9.11 coming and should just "take it on the cheek" and go on with life. He went further to say the FU group is one of the smaller ones throughout the US with this viewpoint and ideology. duh.

I believe there will be more men (used loosely) in the draft age voting this year for the reason(s) stated.

Back to your previously scheduled polling topic.

Same here for both

Just to chime in as to why I find polls increasingly false.
Polls by phone are going to be distorted for at least
the following reasons:

1) caller ID - increasing over the last 8 years
2) Mobile phones - worked on development of auto-dialer switches and mobile exchanges are typically not allowed to
be called because of billing structures
3) more people are removing land lines and going to wireless
only.

Technology alone is changing the sample base.

Polls are perhaps useful for those with an agenda. The problem with polls and statistics is that they can be spun and twisted to fit one's own agenda. The same statistics can be used by opposite sides. I think way back to the debating club when in H.S. We had basically the same stats and had to prepare an argument for both sides of a proposition since we didn't know which side we would take until just before the debate. That sounds a lot like politics doesn't it. It doesn't matter who is right, just who wins.

BTW: I thought FU was Furman University for College Kids!<BG>

BTW again: According to Pulque I'm in my last year and nobody has asked my opinion yet. (sigh).

You are spot-on QRQ30.

He is just another punk who's heart pumps Kool-aid. Next time he sticks his head in my office and wants to discuss our military I will send him your way since you are only a few minutes down the interstate from me. I am sure you could either open his eyes to the truth or close them for him.

Well then Crip, it's time to inform BJU that Furman is marching for islam. LOL, that would interesting to watch.

Interesting indeed.

NO WAY! I'm here to hear your opinion.

You are absolutely right about the problems with polls and statistics. But statistics are used for so many things that its good to learn how to be critical of them. We use alot of statistics when searching for a cure for aging. :D

ps I dont fall into that 45-64 either.

BJU VS FU**
 

Now, that WOULD be an interesting cross town rivalry!

]hijack[

BJU has an armory full of M-16A1's and M-14's for their security. We used to call them BoJo 5-0.

During the 70's there was apparently a time when they were worried about a revolution against Christianity or something to that affect. I dont remember the specifics. I know they still have the weapons though, or did as late as Feb 2001.

]hijack ended[

No, you're missing something. The phone lists they use to do these polls are generated using registration records that indicate voting history. I don't know whether there is an indication in here of how they picked their list, but it is very likely that you had to have voted in several past general elections to be eligible for a phone call in the first place.

This thing with younger voters is way overblown. Yes, they turn out sometimes, but they are too irresponsible to vote for the most part. The reality is that older voters are the important ones, and young voters matter very little. Most of the time, anyway.

Anyone want to bet? Has to be something good. State the precise bet you want to make, including which prior election will be used to compare turnout.

how would you tell if they were voting "for the reasons stated"?

maybe just a bet on whether or not there are more men of draft age voting as compared to 2000?

RL, I smell a set up here, wouldn't bet against you. Greenhat, Thanks for mentioning you have voted in every election you could have. Me too. Back to RL, Does what PARTY we register with have anything to do with whether we are polled or not?

Depends on the poll. During primary season, for example, it is common to poll only the party whose nomination your candidate is seeking. In those polls, the list pull is going to be different not only in that you are polling only one party, but you are also going to target people who vote in primaries rather than general elections.

For polls like this, they probably do not select based on registration. They take a random sample which is large enough to generate a representative group.

You wouldn't. You'd just look at turnout for a demographic. I'll bet it won't be higher than in the past.

I don't see either candidate appealing to young voters, so although some young voters may turn out due to concerns for their own skin, and others may turn out out of patriotism, most still won't bother.