Comments on FiveThirtyEight: Politics Done Right: Party Identification in Ohio

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, ...

2009-10-09T04:39:44.594-04:00

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、...

2009-09-09T02:10:28.271-04:00

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~!!

a片,成人網站,美女交友,美女視訊,a片,成人網站,美女交友,美女視訊,a片,成人網站,美女交友,美...

2009-03-23T05:03:00.000-04:00

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,...

2009-02-10T22:59:00.000-05:00

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

2009-02-09T05:38:00.000-05:00

Party affiliation was 49% dem in april, and 52% in...

2008-05-25T00:07:00.000-04:00

Party affiliation was 49% dem in april, and 52% in the recent one, GOP was 32 in april and 28 in the recent one, and independent was 175 in april, 18% now, so really the pool of voters doesn't seem to be the reason for the change, I think its because of the shift in the race, and the fact that Hillary isn't on the most recent poll

Its right there on the surveyUSA page, just go int...

2008-05-24T23:59:00.000-04:00

Its right there on the surveyUSA page, just go into election tracking polls and you'll see all their polls for the last few months

Thanks most recent anon, this is a much better com...

2008-05-24T09:22:00.000-04:00

Thanks most recent anon, this is a much better comparison. What's the link? In particular I wonder what was their previous party ID.

I disagree anon, I compared the poll done now with...

2008-05-24T03:15:00.000-04:00

I disagree anon, I compared the poll done now with the poll they did back in April and the size of the 18-34 year olds in April was 28% now its 31%, a 3% difference, and probably more likely if Obama is the nominee than if Hillary is the nominee (there are a huge number of first time voters here at case supporting Obama), so its not a result of oversampling, its a result of the fact that in April Obama only won 56 to 40 in that age group and lost all the other age groups by large margins.

Now he wins 18-34 by 59 to 33 and wins in the 35-49 and the 50-64 age groups, he still loses the seniors but he wins the other age groups.

The anon 3 posts up hit the nail on the head. The...

2008-05-24T00:50:00.000-04:00

The anon 3 posts up hit the nail on the head. They oversampled 18-30 year olds which skewed the party ID. It's a shame polbano chose to just focus on the weighting for party identification and not the internal demographics that are weighted.

Every poll has a 95% chance of being within its ma...

2008-05-23T23:31:00.000-04:00

Every poll has a 95% chance of being within its margin of error of the true result. That means for every 20 polls, 1 can be expected to be outside its margin of error. That one is called an "out"-lier. They are not a myth. Call a spade a spade. This poll is an outlier unless confirmed by others.

I want to see more polls that absent Clinton from ...

2008-05-23T22:24:00.000-04:00

I want to see more polls that absent Clinton from the mix before saying whether SUSA is right or wrong, all the older polls have Hillary in it and I do believe she is skewing Obama's vote

In Ohio, your voter identification (D/R/I) is base...

2008-05-23T21:52:00.000-04:00

In Ohio, your voter identification (D/R/I) is based on which ballot you requested during the primary election. According to the Ohio Secretary of State's office, 3,603,523 people voted in the March 4, 2008 primary. 2,386,945 (66.24%) requested Democratic party ballots while 1,136,668 (31.54%) requested Republican party ballots. The remaining 79,910 (2.22%) requested issues only ballots. There were a total of 7,826,480 registered voters at the time of the election in Ohio (voter turnout was 46.04%, which was less than that for the 2006 general election, 4,185,597 voted out of 7,860,052 registered voters, or 56.04%). Since John McCain had the nomination virtually wrapped up, there was a lot more attention on the Democratic side, and therefore a lot of people switched parties, including a few elected officials.

Still, I find it curious that there was such a lopsided voter ID towards the Democrats in this poll. Nationally, Democrats and Democratic leaning independants have been self-identifying at about 10% above Republicans. I wonder if SUSA pushed them harder than in other polls. Looking at the other crosstabs, it looks like they may have skewed a bit younger deomographically, and it also seemed to favor Cleveland (did that include Youngstown, too?) over the southeast part of the state, but the racial, gender, pro-life/pro-choice, liberal/conservative/moderate, and church attendance breakdowns seems right.

What I could quickly Google on Ohio registered vot...

2008-05-23T18:26:00.000-04:00

What I could quickly Google on Ohio registered voters age is
http://projectvote.org/fileadmin/ProjectVote/Publications/Ohio_Votes/OH-figure2.pdf
which has 18% ages 18-30 in 2006; SUSA had 31% ages 18-34. So you would think this group is oversampled from say 25% to 31%, fairly substantially.

The bulk of Obama's advantage comes from his 59-33 advantage with these cohorts (remarkable that this group has the least undecideds). I guess there are very few self-declared Republicans in this group. The Obama-McCain numbers however appear to be raw, not adjusted for age (does SUSA believe in a youth vote surge in Ohio?). If you adjust for age and implicitly adjust the voter ID accordingly you end up perhaps with +7 Obama on perhaps a 50/30 voter ID which with 44/34 the national norm and Ohio probably slightly more Democratic than the national average is not so far fetched, just on the Obama side of the polling error.

44/34 to me looks quite bad for the republicans an...

2008-05-23T17:57:00.000-04:00

44/34 to me looks quite bad for the republicans anyhow. I suspect the exact number won't become clear for some time. Given the results in the 3 special elections in strongly republican districts in IL, LA, and MS my expectation is that the complete and utter destruction of the republican party is a very real possibility this fall.

Refering to the above comment, 52/28 is most assur...

2008-05-23T16:13:00.000-04:00

Refering to the above comment, 52/28 is most assuredly not the national trend. If that were so, there would be no competition in this election, and republicans would be utterly destroyed. The actual ID from the polls I have seen show around 44/34 or so.

"A party ID lead of 24, and only a 9 point Obama l...

2008-05-23T15:56:00.000-04:00

"A party ID lead of 24, and only a 9 point Obama lead?!? I would say the poll sucks for Obama"

Not necessarily. I'd say this is good news (how can a 9 point lead in Ohio be bad news!). I suspect the democrats who aren't voting for Obama are the democrats in the Appalachian part of the state. This demographic is very similar to WV which has many voters who say the are democrats and would vote for Clinton but not Obama. Perhaps what this poll shows is that Obama is able to win without them.

As for the party identification trends, these numbers seem consistent with what I have seen in various national polls. It is going to be good to be a democrat in November!

For McCain to get 39, it suggests he got the suppo...

2008-05-23T15:42:00.000-04:00

For McCain to get 39, it suggests he got the support of every Republican (28), and most of the independents, and some of the Dems. At the least, Obama got less than all the Dems polled. The poll is crap

A party ID lead of 24, and only a 9 point Obama le...

2008-05-23T15:12:00.000-04:00

A party ID lead of 24, and only a 9 point Obama lead?!? I would say the poll sucks for Obama

Tilthouse: I agree with you. At minimum they need...

2008-05-23T15:10:00.000-04:00

Tilthouse: I agree with you. At minimum they need to rotate the order to minimize order effects (and also test for such effects). Alternatively, but at great cost in sampling error or need for larger samples, they could/should have used a split ballot format so that random subsets of the respondents received different candidate lists to evaluate.

Let me add that I had no issue with the headline m...

2008-05-23T15:02:00.000-04:00

Let me add that I had no issue with the headline matchups in the SUSA polls. The baseline Obama/McCain question was the first question asked according to their charts (assuming the charts are ordered the same as the survey's question).

I do have a problem with the rest of the survey asking 16 different matchups. See previous thread.

What I was trying to say in the previous thread ha...

2008-05-23T15:00:00.000-04:00

What I was trying to say in the previous thread had more to do with tinkering with the self reported party ID - which is not really demographic, per se, the way gender, income, and race are - after the fact. I really have no strong opinion about pollsters themselves adjusting it as they feel they have reason to.

I'll repeat that I expect lots of arguments over what the massive turnout for the Democratic primaries portends. I do strongly wish that more pollsters would publish their turnout assumptions (overall and among key subgroups like AAs, new voters, etc), and even discuss what changing those assumptions does to the overall result. I've seen this a few times this year in the primaries and it's very cool.

The campaign work hard for registered new voters a...

2008-05-23T14:52:00.000-04:00

The campaign work hard for registered new voters actually in OHIO and the poll look good for him or in one toss-up.

Clinton drop out and Obama rebound in te poll.

Obama will win Ohio.

I agree with Anonymous at 13:28 in the sense that ...

2008-05-23T14:42:00.000-04:00

I agree with Anonymous at 13:28 in the sense that if McCain winning independents by 10%, 14% of Democrats, getting over 80% of Republicans, and even getting an unheard of 17% of the black vote isn't enough to get within 9 points of Obama, this election is over before it started.

But I disagree with everyone else on this thread as to the accuracy of the poll. I understand your argument about party identification Poblano, but there is a serious flaw in any poll that has such striking differences between internals and results. I don't even think it has any value for regression purposes, but do with it what you will.

Rasmussen's New Hampshire poll, on the other hand, is very interesting. It looks like NH may stay blue after all.

I think a point that is missing from Blumenthal's ...

2008-05-23T14:39:00.000-04:00

I think a point that is missing from Blumenthal's otherwise very useful analysis, is that the aggregate "stability" of the Party ID distribution in a given state is affected by several things in addition to the stability of ID at the individual level.

Yes, stability at the individual level (say if you were to poll the same individuals over time) can be affected by random or short-term factors (the latest scandal, the performance of the president, mistaken responses, nonresponse, etc.). This stability may also be affected by the wording of the question. The standard ANES version ("Generally speaking do you consider yourself to be a Dem, a Repub . . .") has been shown to generate more stable party ID responses than the standard Gallup version, "As of today, you think of yourself as a Dem, a Repub . . . .?) (see the hairy debate in the APSR involving Abramson, Erikson and others about 15 years ago)

So the wording of the question does matter, and may affect how susceptible the responses are to so-called "short term factors" (Gallup more susceptible than the American National Election Study--ANES). And yes, question order or question context can also affect the responses, as Blumenthal notes.

But change in the aggregate party id distribution is also affected by sampling, and thus sampling error, as well as by nonresponse, including whether, say, Republicans are more mobilized to participate in the survey (or to answer the party id and vote intention questions) than are Democrats. And as I mentioned on the Daily Polls thread, we observed something like this in our surveys in our state (well, it was Michigan) in 2004.

So I believe one cannot rule out the need for some adjustment by party ID in the aggregate responses, and thus in the vote choices reported by the respondents as a whole.

The question remains, however, what standard to use if one were to make such an aggregate adjustment. I think we had a reasonable basis for doing this in MI in 2004 because we were doing statewide surveys multiple times per year (and had done so for many years).

But if party id in the aggregate really is perhaps shifting away from GOP toward independent or even Dem, what baseline ought to be used? If 2008 is truly shaping up as a realigning election (or "critical election" as V.O. Key first described his theory), it may be that the very act of voting in effect is the triggering action, and that party ID change will follow the "committed action" (if you apply some sort of response consistency or cognitive dissonance model).

All this is a long-winded way to say that I agree with Poblano's decision: we as end-users of the data can't make party ID adjustments to what the pollsters report. We can, of course, apply overall reliability adjustments to weight the results by different survey organizations. And we can also try to understand whether different pollsters appear to be biased in one party's direction. But we ultimately must hope to have plural surveys, and generate a measure of central tendency from the multiple surveys, rather than adjust the pollsters' reported data.