How reflective of the final result are American Polls?

[Lobsang]

Not so long ago I became aware of the proposition that UK political polls were meaningless. And that their reflection of the final result (of an election) was randomly right or wrong 50% of the time.


Assuming that's correct (loosely) is the same true of American polls? Does the lead of monkey-man over Kerry indicate that monkey-man is that much more likely to be re-elected?

[Lobsang]

P.S. I have nothing against idiots. In many respects I am one. It's just that every bone in my body is against one of them being President of the Ufuckingnited States of America.


The man has made it clear he's a biggot. An idiot. And og knows what else.

[ParentalAdvisory]

Yes, American polls suck too.


The man has made it clear he's a biggot.

Cite?

[astorian]

American polls may "suck," but they're still quite accurate, for the most part.

[Shagnasty]

They are extremely accurate for the portion of the population that has their mind firmly made up. It is the few percent of undecided voters sitting on the fence that can swing the final result one way or the other. During our upcoming presidential election, it will really only be a small percentage of people in just a few states that determine the outcome because it is very close and we have a winner-take-all electoral college for the most part. That is why the polls cannot predict a clear winner.

[Lobsang]

Yes, American polls suck too.



Cite?

Sorry, as you know I am too drunk to cite. But doesn't his disaproval of Gay marriages pretty much scream 'biggot'?

[ParentalAdvisory]

Yes. :smack:

[Laughing Lagomorph]

To enlarge on Shagnasty's reasoned response I point you in the direction of www.electoral-vote.com, one of many sites that is attempting to predict the Electoral Vote outcome which is the one that really matters. The national polls can be very misleading IMHO...we don't choose the President on that basis.

[Evil Captor]

Polls can be off even when they are conducted honestly. (Read some stuff about push polling (http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Push_poll) to see what happens when they're conducted dishonestly.) Both sides have used it, but Karl Rove is the acknowledged master of the technique.

[friedo]

Sorry, as you know I am too drunk to cite. But doesn't his disaproval of Gay marriages pretty much scream 'biggot'?

His disaproval of gay marriages is wrong and stupid, but that does not mean he is a bigot. He has repeatedly stated that he doesn't give a shit about what kind of relationships people want to have. Just no marriage if it's not a dude and a chick. A pointless dichotamy, to be sure, but I'd hardly call it bigotry.

[elfkin477]

The only real way to answer the question is after the fact when you can compare the polls to the end results. Does anyone have links to polls from 2000?

[Lobsang]

His disaproval of gay marriages is wrong and stupid, but that does not mean he is a bigot. He has repeatedly stated that he doesn't give a shit about what kind of relationships people want to have. Just no marriage if it's not a dude and a chick. A pointless dichotamy, to be sure, but I'd hardly call it bigotry.


To me it (protecting the 'sanctity of marriage') seems like a feeble excuse to stop gay people affirming their partnership. And also support of a religious biggotry of gay people. So directly or indirectly it's biggotry.


He's bound to say he doesn't care about what relationships people want to have. He's lying.


And even if you can argue that he's never 'shown' he's a biggot. I'll always suspect he is one.

[Already in Use]

Eh, I don't put my trust in polls. Howard Dean was a nobody in the Democratic primaries, and the next thing we knew, he was the frontrunner. Kerry was nearly out of the primary, and then Dean lets out one disturbing strangulated yelp and Kerry has the clear lead again. The Kerry/Bush balance has tipped a few times so far, and my guess is that it may tip a few more before the election. I'm not discounting either possibility before Nov. 2 is over.

[Wile E]

I don't clearly remember the 2000 poll results, I think they were usually neck in neck or Gore was slightly in the lead (he did win the popular vote after all). So they might have been pretty close to the final results.

But I really wonder about who conducts these polls and where they conduct them. If one goes to a gun show and takes a poll they are going to get a much different result than a poll taken at an environmental rally. I've seen polls where they ask people which candidate they think will handle which issue better and in most of the jobs and economics polls Kerry is the leader, in the war and terrorism issues Bush is the leader.