Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Electoral College forcast.

  1. Sep 26, 2004 #1

    GENIERE

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 27, 2004 #2
    Which bias are you attributing to which site?
     
  4. Sep 27, 2004 #3

    GENIERE

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    I report, you decide.
     
  5. Sep 27, 2004 #4
    Thats how the media should be
     
  6. Sep 27, 2004 #5
    What? They both show Bush winning by about the same margin, how could you consider either biased? If you're saying one source is biased liberally and one conservatively, part of your "report" should be telling which is biased which, and supporting your claim with facts.
     
  7. Sep 27, 2004 #6

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I tend to agree. Certainly, it is possible to bias a survey (typically, its in the wording of the question or the sampling technique), but when both have the same result (within each's margin for error), the biases - especially if expected to be opposites - can be concluded to be relatively low.
     
  8. Sep 27, 2004 #7
    So that's it pretty much it. When Russ agrees with me that something isn't so, it takes someone pretty far out there to contest it is.
     
  9. Sep 27, 2004 #8

    Gokul43201

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    ta daaaaaah ! :biggrin:
     
  10. Sep 27, 2004 #9

    GENIERE

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Duh! Usually when I come across a new political site I make an effort to determine its bias, or lack thereof. This blogger, in his bio, states:

    http://www.electionprojection.com/elections2004.html

    “…As you would probably guess by now, my politics are conservative…”


    Whereas this blogger states in FAQs”

    http://www.electoral-vote.com/

    “…I am a Kerry supporter. I am open about that…”

    I attribute the difference in results to represent the blogger’s , perhaps unintended, bias.

    ...
     
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2004
  11. Sep 27, 2004 #10

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    In my experience, being open about your bias is the biggest indicator of objectivity. Everyone has one so trying to hide it is a good indication that it effects your objectivity. Both of these guys have done a good job.
    But thats just it - statistically, there is no difference in their results.
     
  12. Sep 27, 2004 #11
    There's a difference between wanting one candidate to win and purposely biasing your facts. There are lots of different polls out there, if the guy who supports Kerry really were biased, he'd have no reason not to go scrounge around for random polls with Kerry ahead and paste them all together to make it seem like Kerry will undoubtedly win, but he hasn't. I know that I've seen many polls differing greatly on national and state-wide numbers, and if anyone put a concerted effort into it, they could go around and find random polls that would show their guy winning in a landslide.

    Just chill out and wait a bit, Iraq is turbulent, the debates (which are more like mutual press conferences) are coming up, there're always going to be "October Surprises", just wait a while before you go proclaiming Bush the winner. I think a telling sign that the race is close is that not even official Bush representatives on TV are willing to say anything like "Kerry's through", they all caution people that it will be a close race.
     
  13. Sep 27, 2004 #12

    GENIERE

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Statiscally borderline, but I'll cede all points posters have made or might make relevant to bias 'cause I'm not interested! I listed two sites, trying to be open minded. I should have known better. I expected no replies; I simply passed on links to two sites I found interesting.

    Jeeesh!

    ...
     
  14. Sep 28, 2004 #13

    Gza

    User Avatar

    just don't try to attribute bias where non exist geniere
     
  15. Sep 28, 2004 #14

    kat

    User Avatar

    GENIERE- I'm on to you man....reverse phsycology...good one.
     
  16. Sep 28, 2004 #15

    BobG

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    I don't think the posted results of either is biased. The electoral_vote.com definitely isn't. There's virtually no screening of polls. All are accepted. Whether that's a good thing or not is open to debate.

    Regardless, the wild swings between different polls and even occasionally within a given poll with nothing to correlate the swings to makes me wonder about the credibility of any individual poll. That's why I like electoral_vote.com. You can look at the graphs for the individual states and draw your own conclusions about the accuracy of the current standings.
     
  17. Sep 29, 2004 #16

    GENIERE

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    IMO it would be a good time to look at these sites and get a base line to campare results after the debate.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Electoral College forcast.
  1. Electoral College (Replies: 38)

Loading...