Comments on FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right: Zogby Interactive Data Dump

酒店經紀人, 菲梵酒店經紀, 酒店經紀, 禮服酒店上班, 酒店小姐兼職, 便服酒店經紀, ...

2009-09-11T08:36:39.173-04:00

酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,

艾葳酒店經紀公司提供專業的酒店經紀, 酒店上班小姐,八大行業,酒店兼職,傳播妹,或者想要到打工兼差、...

2009-09-11T01:59:36.187-04:00

艾葳酒店經紀公司提供專業的酒店經紀, 酒店上班小姐,八大行業,酒店兼職,傳播妹,或者想要到打工兼差、打工,兼差,或者八大行業,酒店兼職,想去酒店上班, 日式酒店,制服酒店,ktv酒店,禮服店,整天穿得水水漂漂的,還是想去制服店當上班小姐,水水們如果想要擁有打工工作、晚上兼差工作、兼差打工、假日兼職、兼職工作、酒店兼差、兼差、打工兼差、日領工作、晚上兼差工作、酒店工作、酒店上班、酒店打工、兼職、兼差、兼差工作、酒店上班等,想了解酒店相關工作和特種行業內容,想兼職工作日領、假日兼職、兼差打工、或晚班兼職想擁有快速賺錢又有保障的工作嗎???又可以現領請找專業又有保障的艾葳酒店經紀公司!

艾葳酒店經紀是合法的公司工作環境高雅時尚，無業績壓力，無脫秀無喝酒壓力，高層次會員制客源，工作輕鬆，可日領、現領。
一般的酒店經紀只會在水水們第一次上班和領薪水時出現而已，對水水們的上班安全一點保障都沒有！艾葳酒店經紀公司的水水們上班時全程媽咪作陪，不需擔心！只提供最優質的酒店上班,酒店上班,酒店打工環境、上班條件給水水們。心動嗎!? 趕快來填寫你的酒店上班履歷表

水水們妳有缺現領、有兼職、缺錢卡奴的煩腦嗎?想到日本留學缺錢嗎?妳是傳播妹??想要擁有高時薪又輕鬆的夜間兼職工作,打工機會和,假日打工,假日兼職賺錢的機會嗎??想實現夢想卻又缺錢沒錢嗎!??
艾葳酒店台北酒店經紀招兵買馬!!徵專業的酒店打工,想要去酒店的水水,想要短期日領,酒店日領,禮服酒店,制服店,酒店經紀,ktv酒店,便服店,酒店工作,禮服店,酒店小姐,酒店經紀人,
等相關服務幫您快速的實現您的夢想~!!

^^ nice blog!! ^@^徵信, 徵信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社...

2009-03-11T06:11:00.001-04:00

^^ nice blog!! thanks a lot! ^^徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社, 徵信...

2009-03-11T06:11:00.000-04:00

情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,...

2009-02-14T01:46:00.000-05:00

徵信社, 感情挽回, 挽回感情, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 捉姦, 徵信公司, ...

2009-02-09T01:54:00.000-05:00

I'd love to believe the Zogby polls are correct......

2008-07-11T14:42:00.000-04:00

I'd love to believe the Zogby polls are correct... But they are hard to believe. That's for sure.

My apologies if what I'm saying has already been s...

2008-07-10T00:35:00.000-04:00

My apologies if what I'm saying has already been said in one of the comments or on a previous post. There are a lot of comments, but I read most of them.

I was wondering if it could be considered more of a problem, for lack of a better word, if polls by a particular group tended to favor a particular candidate by a certain amount, rather than just being consistently off by that amount, but not tending to favor either candidate.

The NC poll doesn't really surprise me. I live her...

2008-07-09T23:27:00.000-04:00

The NC poll doesn't really surprise me. I live here, and I see Obama Signs and Stickers probably a 4:1 over McCain. If Obama can keep huge margins in the Urban areas of NC. He may very well win NC by 2-6%.

To include these polls is bad for the credibility ...

2008-07-09T20:15:00.000-04:00

To include these polls is bad for the credibility of the site. Regardless of how they compare to other polls, it is a self-selected sample taken from a population that is online.

I would expect well-informed voters to be very pro-Obama.

Jim,Can I disagree with you without you turning ar...

2008-07-09T20:11:00.000-04:00

Jim,

Can I disagree with you without you turning around and painting me as "embodiment of a major problem in the our country." That's ridiculous, and if anything, it speaks more to who you are than to who I am.

Stick to the facts. I think you are confusing the fact that polls are obviously tools for prediction, but they aren't predictive into themselves until you negate the effect of time. Unlike baseball teams and players, this country is so evenly divided into red and blue that 537 votes and a bunch of messed up ballots threw an entire election to the popular vote loser in 2000. We probably wouldn't even remember Florida if Nader wasn't running, or if a few days before the election news of Bush's drunk driving arrest didn't surface. Polls can't predict that stuff. What do you think would happen if Ron Paul endorsed Barr? What if Obama chose Hillary as a running mate, or maybe Colin Powell? My money's on Bayh, but polls can't predict such things.

If the election was tomorrow, Intrade would be probably be trading Obama contracts at 90, but being that it is 4 months out, they are trading at 65. The difference is due to the inherent uncertainty about what is going to happen between now and November 4th.

Nate's massaging of today's numbers in a way that he claims is an attempt to predict the actual state by state outcomes on November 4th has no better of a confidence interval than those that know Obama would win if the election was today, but give a 35% chance of it not happening 4 months out.

Peter KentFirst, I'm going to be generous (a very ...

2008-07-09T18:54:00.000-04:00

Peter Kent

First, I'm going to be generous (a very american trait) and ignore your "un-american" comment. I will assume you weren't referring to me directly.

The unemployment rate is only one way of measuring the health of an economy. The sub-prime mortgage crisis and its aftermath have severely restricted the flow of credit, the lifeblood of our economy, and the consequent drop in home prices has had a significant negative impact on consumer spending and confidence. Inflation in fuel and food markets is having an outsized impact on lower income americans and high oil prices are also starting to drive up the prices of other products made with petroleum or that have to be shipped long distances. Peripheral but still connected to the economy is the soaring costs of health care and higher education. Basically, Americans are getting pinched from every direction. I stand by my assertion that the economy is in shambles. It's not a disaster but there are quite a few large problems inhibiting growth and eating into the income of your average american.

However, if the economy is not in as bad shape as I think it is, my point still stands. In essence I was disagreeing with this quote of yours.

As the potential, if not the actuality, of victory in Iraq becomes manifest to the people, they will shift their mood from one of pessimistic quagmire to let's get 'er done. If that happens, Obama will have an uphill slog to cobble together an electoral majority: he will have lost the raison d’être for his candidacy.

This will not happen. Politically McCain has little to gain from Iraq no matter which way it goes because the economy is perceived as being in bad shape. Thus, everyones attention will shift from Iraq to who they think will do a better job with the economy and every poll gives Obama the owerwhelming advantage on that issue.

If there wasn't a feeling that the economy is in bad shape then I think a turn in public opinion on the war would benefit McCain alot, but with the economy as issue #1 unless Iraq falls into utter chaos or the Iraqis throw Bush a ticker tape parade, a change in Iraq will have little effect on the outcome in November.

And you do know that dialectic basically means logical argument right?

After reading through the comments, a couple of po...

2008-07-09T18:53:00.000-04:00

After reading through the comments, a couple of points come to mind.

Zogby's results cannot be defended based on the fact that they are "close to" other polls. If, in fact, they confirm the results of other polls, they add no new informaton.

On the other hand, if they suggest different results, there is simply no way to know whether the sample bias inherent in a volunteer sample is the source of the difference or not.

Either way, the results are not "informative" in any sense. The fact that they represent a straw poll of over 46,000 voters is worthless unless the sample is chosen randomly from the appropriate population.

All the inclusion of Zogby's internet-based results does is to introduce a source of error into the model. If the results are close to the average of other polls, the error is minor. If they are not, the error is both potentially greater and cannot be estimated using statistical techniques.

I'm sure Nate would not consider introducing a straw poll of fans' views of a player value into a measure of that player's performance, even if he gave it minimal weight. The Zogby results have no more place in this context.

Ross said... This poll shares a fatal polling flaw...

2008-07-09T18:42:00.000-04:00

Ross said...
This poll shares a fatal polling flaw that led to the famous "dewey defeats truman" headline debacle of the 50's. In that case, the paper relied on polling data from telephone surveys which showed dewey up over truman to print their headline in advance. The reason that those telephone polls didn't reflect what actually happened on the ground in the elections was that in the 1950's, there were still not telephones in every American home..."

Sorry, Ross, not quite. The Dewey/Truman polling debacle didn't stem from bad samples, it stemmed from failing to poll in the weeks leading up to the election. Since "everyone knew" that Dewey would win, the media stopped supporting the then young polling efforts of folks like Roper and Gallup. In fact, the last few national polls suggested a surge for Truman three to four weeks ahead of the election but no one believed it.

I suspect you're confusing the facts with the story of the 1936 Literary Digest "poll" that sent out 10 million "ballots" to respondents drawn from auto registration and telephone subscriber lists in 1936. Based on the 2.3 million (!) responses they received, the magazine predicted Landon would beat FDR 57% to 43%.

That debacle led to the death of the Literary Digest.

Unfortunately, Zogby's internet polling operation is the modern day equivalent of the Literary Digest.

Brambster:(A little lengthy obviously, so this is ...

2008-07-09T18:07:00.000-04:00

Brambster:

(A little lengthy obviously, so this is in response to two Brambster posts ago, but still applies)

A) You must've started reading very recently then, because he's been writing the entire time that he's "attempting to project the result of the election." Again. This is the entire premise of the site. How did you get here without seeing that (look at the top of your browser)?

B) He included the "Projection" line, because he made the (admitted) mistake of assuming that the election will not tighten as election day nears. Well, it turns out that historically, elections almost always get closer as we approach the finish line (only noticably so, though, when the gap is large). To compensate for this, he included in his model a regression that accounts for this tightening in the race. Read the post where it happened. The details are all very clear as to why he did it and you have misrepresented his purpose and intention by your description.

C) I stand by the fact that historically and mathematically, you absolutely can predict the outcome of a race 4 months out. Obviously, the farther from election day you are, the less accurate your prediction will be. What about 1 day before the election. Can you predict things about the outcome of the race then? What about 1 week? 1 month? Where's the cutoff line? What methodology did you use to calculate it? Or are you just guessing based on what your gut feels? I'll take Nate's math over your gut 100% of the time.

D) The polls aren't predicting the future. Read the methodology and you'll understand how the polls today can be used to imply things about the results on election day. If Nate was just telling us what the "polling results, then mixing in all sorts of other stuff," then how would he come up with McCain having a ~1/3 chance to win? If he was just using polls today to predict the outcome of the election and nothing else, that number would be very close to zero. The fact that McCain has such large odds to win stands as pretty strong evidence that Nate's system agrees with you that there's a lot of "News/coverage, debates, ads and all sort of other stuff (that) can't be predicted by polls" still left between now and the election.

E) You appear to be the embodiment of a major problem in our country (and possibly world) right now. When you don't understand something and it doesn't align with things as you perceive them to be, you attack it and try to undermine it. Well, most people who are drawn to a site like this will prefer understanding and learning. If you don't find yourself desiring these things, that's fine, but please do some research around the site and come back with some claims that are at least educated about what you're attacking. It is clear to me you do not understand Nate's methodology and I've read only a handful of words you've typed. Lemme guess... you call the local sports talk radio show and complain when your manager doesn't have Adam Dunn bunt the runner over with a man on 1st and no outs down a run in the 9th inning, right? If you refuse to believe evidence and logic, what do you base decisions on?

ModelerI didn't say that polls were "meaningless" ...

2008-07-09T18:02:00.000-04:00

Modeler

I didn't say that polls were "meaningless" in predicting the outcome of an election. Nate certainly understands that they become more and more accurate to the actual result the closer to the election that you get for instance, but that doesn't mean that you can refine the results with some historical measures and use today's data to accurately predict the exact results in 4 months.

I used weather as an example because it very closely resembles what he claims to be trying. We all know the averages 4 months out, but knowing those averages as well as the weather today will not get us any closer to the weather 4 months from now than the averages predict, and the 95% degree of confidence interval is quite wide.

Regarding including Zogby Interactive polls, I can't recall anyone that I respected in the media or blogs ever giving any credibility to their results. If you look at the map that they drew up, while the red and blue states are typical, and the tossups are a bit overstepping of reality (AZ, SC, and AR), they put states as Red with 3 and 4 point margins while placing states as tossup that were 5 point margins or higher. There's no science to their map either, it's just opinion and it doesn't agree with their own skewed numbers.

I think Nate should old-school his methodology a bit more. Even if he gets it mostly or even all right in the end, the poll averages themselves pretty much get it right without such external factors.

A bit late to the party, but I'm inclined to agree...

2008-07-09T17:52:00.000-04:00

A bit late to the party, but I'm inclined to agree with many of the others here: Zogby telephone polls are fine to include in the analysis (yeah, they're mediocre, but not actively bad), but the Zogby Interactive polls should be ignored.

I suspect the results will be more accurate without ZI in the mix, though it's possible that the noisy nature of them will have little effect on the ultimate results - though it seems likely that ZI overrepresents support of third party candidates like Barr, Nader, and Paul.

.

Brambster,I think you'll find this post and discus...

2008-07-09T17:49:00.000-04:00

Brambster,

I think you'll find this post and discussion interesting. The evidence suggests that polls aren't entirely meaningless at this point.

Modeler & Jim,I have seen Nate write twice recentl...

2008-07-09T17:20:00.000-04:00

Modeler & Jim,

I have seen Nate write twice recently that he was attempting to project the result of the election. The first time that I saw this was when he introduced the "Projection" line to the Super Tracker which moderates the point-in time lead. I think that this did a lot to bring his overall projections inline with all other poll trackers, but in reality he was only balancing out his Super Tracker method which was giving too much weight to Obama post Hillary.

Right now I think the map is dead-on with the exception of Nevada which is notoriously hard to poll and I believe that Obama is stronger there than the pink color suggests. If you look at Intrade prices, this is also much in line with that.

What is happening is Nate is taking polling results, then mixing in all sorts of other stuff, and then essentially he is coming back to the same numbers established by the poll results. These other things may have reason behind them, but they surely aren't any more accurate than an actual poll is.

I stand by my point that you can no better predict the outcome of a race 4 month out than you can predict the weather regardless of how sound your methods are. News/coverage, debates, ads and all sort of other stuff can't be predicted by polls in advance. Polls can't predict the future going out 4 months, and this can't be fixed by way of mixing in other measures.

Y'all got me on the McCain ad! Still I reject the...

2008-07-09T16:54:00.000-04:00

Y'all got me on the McCain ad! Still I reject the hyperbole being associated with the present economy.

I must say I am impressed with how "numerate" many of you are and I confess I don't have the time to really analyze what is being said with regard to quantitiave matters in depth. That said, I do know what the unemployment rate is and have a farily good idea of what economists traditionally define as a recession and how this present condition compares to past ones.

Many of you are very smart, some of you are very snide. I am very stubborn - - especially when I know I am right!

modeler: I think 538 found this formula by empiric...

2008-07-09T16:47:00.000-04:00

modeler: I think 538 found this formula by empirical measures.
Currently I am working on an own model, which will be ready in some weeks. The poll weighting part will be roughly the same, but the variance/simulation part not.

What a pathetic set of polls. Weigh these polls .0000001 if you could. And also take some of my advice and weight the PPP from Ohio low like .25 too, the poll that has Obama up 11. Considering 50% of those polled were Dems, 30% were Republicans, and the others were Independents.... Obama MAY be up 2-3 points in Ohio, not 11.

@MVRed. Too bad that Nate uses FORMULAS to determine the weight of the polls, not any biased intention.

Zogby Interactive IS bad, but to get such a high PIE that their polls get a weight of .00000001 they probably have to predict a 100% vote share for candidate 1 when candidate 2 actually gets 100%. And that in every election.

And PPP has actually a good tracking record and the most transparent methodology I have ever seen. If you want to manipulate and reweight the polls even further as this site is doing with the "trend-adjustment", then it really is not objective anymore. Some of SUSAs VP matchups had really unrealistic Party ID´s too. Or they showed McCain getting 25% of the Black vote. But if every poll was reweighted by such standards, well, you could do that at rushlimbaugh.com or Huffington Post. Not on a -mostly- unbiased website, please.

This poll shares a fatal polling flaw that led to ...

2008-07-09T16:30:00.000-04:00

This poll shares a fatal polling flaw that led to the famous "dewey defeats truman" headline debacle of the 50's. In that case, the paper relied on polling data from telephone surveys which showed dewey up over truman to print their headline in advance. The reason that those telephone polls didn't reflect what actually happened on the ground in the elections was that in the 1950's, there were still not telephones in every American home. The ones that did have them were more likeley then not to be of a higher socio-economic class, which tended then to vote republican. Therefore, the people who were called for polling were a biased sampling from the beginning and the results were slanted.

I think these internet surveys are the same way today. While I agree that cell phones are making polling difficult, assuming that internet polling is any more reliable is probably not correct. I would guess that there were simply more mid to upper class dems answering the online polling then there were middle to upper class republicans.

Maybe ass republicans are always alleging, the internet/media really are dominated by liberals.

Sure, Zogby interactive is almost useless. The ke...

2008-07-09T16:22:00.000-04:00

Sure, Zogby interactive is almost useless. The key word here, however, is "almost". The people accusing Nate of bias by including them are, in fact, the people who are biased. Nate doesn't arbitrarily weight anything, people, it is based on how well the polsters have done in past elections. Not including these at all would be to set the weight to zero, which is unsupported by past data.

Pete Kent wrote:it is a gross overstatement to say...

2008-07-09T16:01:00.000-04:00

Pete Kent wrote:
it is a gross overstatement to say that the current economy is in "shambles". It is that sort of shameless political posturing that has contributed to the downturn by depressing consumer confidence. Its anti-American as well as deceptive.

Modeler replied:
John McCain's new ad:
[John McCain] believes our world is dangerous, our economy in shambles.

Oh, SNAP!

Brambster @ 1:18 PM"YOU CAN'T ACCURATELY PREDICT T...

2008-07-09T15:29:00.000-04:00

Brambster @ 1:18 PM

"YOU CAN'T ACCURATELY PREDICT THE FUTURE, YOU CAN ONLY MEASURE THE PRESENT."

What made you click on a link to a website that ***PROJECTS*** elections? "FiveThirtyEight.com: Electoral Projections Done Right"

If you don't believe in dragons, don't click on a dragon web page and tell the person running it he's an idiot for doing so. A lot of people think today tells you something about tomorrow (for instance, if McCain's up by 25 points in every national poll today, would it not be insane to say that Obama might be leading tomorrow?). If you are not one of those people, then this site will probably continue to be as unsatisfying to you as your comments are to it.