Romney Looks Like the Next Pres

Serious news.... Obama is leading NYT poll.

I have news for you... your shit polls are adjusting their sample sizes. And they still have a ways to go. But now the numbers are coming back even.

You may also note that in the CBS/NYT poll Romney had very big leads over Obama with independent voters.


Quote from AK Forty Seven:

New Fox News poll ,Obama +4
More...
 
Quote from CaptainObvious:

What the poll shows is that for all the running around with their hair on fire, the Obama administration and their advocates in the media are just spinning their wheels on the Bain issue. Nobody cares about Romney's career at Bain, or the fact that Romney is a rich guy. We already knew that stuff. Where da' jobs Mr. President, where da' jobs? Obama has failed the working class and all minorities. The very people he's supposed to represent.
More...

Even if 60 said they aren't influenced ,that still leaves 40 Cap
 
Quote from jem:

Serious news.... Obama is leading NYT poll.

I have news for you... your shit polls are adjusting their sample sizes. And they still have a ways to go. But now the numbers are coming back even.

You may also note that in the CBS/NYT poll Romney had very big leads over Obama with independent voters.
More...

Shit polls ? Go back and check the accuracy of Rasmussen polls jem
 
Quote from jem:



I have news for you... your shit polls are adjusting their sample sizes. And they still have a ways to go. But now the numbers are coming back even.
More...
Of course the "numbers are coming back" on "shit polls", so that's not to be trusted either.

Anyway, allow me to assist you. You mean the polls are "adjusting" their sample composition, not size, right? I don't know what the hell you studied as an undergrad but it damn sure didn't include statistics.
 
Quote from Ricter:

Of course the "numbers are coming back" on "shit polls", so that's not to be trusted either.

Anyway, allow me to assist you. You mean the polls are "adjusting" their sample composition, not size, right? I don't know what the hell you studied as an undergrad but it damn sure didn't include statistics.
More...

Frustrated leftist book - page 4...

When you have been shown to be wrong, distract others with the nomenclature argument -- leftist love that stuff, it makes them feel superior and helps them forget they are wrong.
 
Quote from jem:

Frustrated leftist book - page 4...

When you have been shown to be wrong, go with the nomenclature argument.
More...
Point is, you don't understand enough about statistics to be critiquing polling techniques.
 
Quote from Ricter:

Point is, you don't understand enough about statistics to be critiquing polling techniques.
More...


So I was right about the samples distorting the results... but that was luck.

I have news for you Ricter... you can have a deep understanding of stats without remembering the textbook names.

I took out a stats professor here on ET - over a long discussion about (generals - battles - luck ) and the null hypothesis... in the end he was proven to be wrong and admitted it.
 
Quote from jem:

So I was right about the samples distorting the results... but that was luck.
More...
No, you're probably still wrong about the validity of the samples, but for reasons you do not understand. If you've been lucky, it's bad luck.
 
Quote from AK Forty Seven:

Even if 60 said they aren't influenced ,that still leaves 40 Cap
More...

Trust me, Romney isn't losing any votes over this, and Obama isn't gaining any. The undecided vote at this point is looking for something huge to move them in one direction or the other. We won't see that until October. Some deep dark secret, or one of these political androids has a major malfunction in a debate. Until then, it's just sniper fire hoping to get lucky.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top