As a scientist, I deal with objective measurements and evaluating significance of data every day. It strikes me that there is almost a necessary slanting of objective data in politics. This leads to a lot of IMHO dumb arguments and conclusions which are demonstratably wrong. The new liberal meme being pushed is that conservatives actively seek to slant this data and “distort the truth” when it doesn’t support their political agenda. As a left-leaning person, I do agree with this, but I am also worried my political bias blinds me to when those on the left do it. So here’s a thread.
I’ll start this thread with what I think is a good example: polling data. There is an endless discussion of the minutiae of polling and poll results, with breathless emphasis put on each new release. It is almost all absolute crap. There is a reason a pollster sets a margin of error – anything within that MOE is statistically insignificant. So if Bush/Kerry is 47/49 with a 4% MOE one day and 49/47 the next, it doesn’t mean that Bush is gaining ground or Kerry is losing it. It means that the poll is within the MOE and this is the only conclusion to be drawn. Invariably, this is not how it is presented – slight poll shifts within the MOE are headline news. A practical consequence of this is the flawed conclusions reached by the media in the 2000 election: they made flawed conclusions based on polls within the MOE and they were wrong.
This has happened elsewhere, but I have limited knowledge of these. I start this thread to raise these points, not because I can effectively argue them but because I want them discussed and I want to change how we evaluate data in this country. Here are some things that I would like to see discussed here.
-
Economy: Jobs are seen as a lagging indicator, other metrics are used at other times. The R side of the debate claims the economy is recovering, the D side says it is still slumping. What are the standard metrics and what do these show? How correlative are the standard economic metrics with actual economic performance, as measured in GDP? Are some of these metrics politically biased, even ones from OMB and other bipartisan organizations?
-
Global warming: There is a legitimate global warming debate, and the R and D sides of the aisle break onto each side. Most pro-warming scientists believe that global warming due to manmade input is incontrivertible. Does the other side have an effective counter, or are they selectively ignoring data?
-
Other environmental policy: Mercury/arsenic/pollution levels also get this treatment. Gregg Easterbrook, a relatively liberal pundit with whom I often disagree, argues that air has gotten significantly cleaner under Bush, a fact that the liberal side of the debate tends to ignore while focusing on rollbacks of environmental protection. What’s the objective measurement of air, water, soil pollution and how has it been affected by changes in policies under this administration?
-
Terrorism: There is some evidence that the world has gotten more dangerous as measured by terrorist attacks, since the invasion of Iraq. What is the poop here? Is there an objective measurement to world and/or American security? Is there any metric to measure our policies in such a short time space?
-
Defense policy: We should really have objective review of how our weapon systems work and devote resources accordingly (this obviously doesn’t apply to research and development). For instance, it seems that limiting Army air forces to non-fixed wing aircraft is a Very Bad Thing, given how often helicopters were lost early in the Iraq campaign. Close fixed-wing air support should be available without inter-agency cooperation. Helicopters should be improved or scaled back. National Missile Defense seems to be a huge waste of money at the current level of development.
I know this is quite wide-ranging, but I think that we can focus this down to the acquisition and evaluation of objective evidence for each of these. Feel free to bring up other topics that you wish to discuss. I kindly ask from all participants to keep it as objective as possible.