Reply With Quote
Every poll that shows the race tied or within a dead heat has really fishy internals. Fox had the race at +9 for Obama, then +3. Well, they changed their weights dramatically without any reason. The Zogby thing is a joke.
Where'd you get this one from?
Every poll that shows the race tied or within a dead heat has really fishy internals. Fox had the race at +9 for Obama, then +3. Well, they changed their weights dramatically without any reason. The Zogby thing is a joke.
Most Accurate Pollster of Election 2004
Final Certified Results Reveal TIPP as the Most Accurate Pollster of Election 2004
An analysis of the presidential election's final certified results shows that TIPP's daily tracking polls proved to be the most accurate in terms of predicting the winner and his margin of victory.
Among the four national daily tracking polls, TIPP came closest to projecting Bush's actual margin of victory (2.1% projected vs. 2.5% actual).
TIPP also outperformed a field of 11 other national, non-tracking pre-election polls, coming within just four-tenths of a percentage point to predicting Bush’s actual margin of victory (2.1% projected vs. 2.5% actual).
TIPP predicted the winner of the election in several pre-election venues, including CNBC’s Kudlow and Cramer and in the pages of Investor’s Business Daily.
"We developed strong tracking metrics and voter models that allowed us to accurately predict the election's outcome,” said Raghavan Mayur, president of TIPP. "These metrics enabled us to minimize error and capture trends as they developed. We had our finger on the pulse of America throughout all of its palpitations."
I'm sorry what were you saying stick?
Wrong and unlike you, I provide links, from independent sources:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m..._/ai_n16464563
Ramussen:
Rasmussen was dubbed the most accurate pollster for the 2004 election when he correctly projected - within tenths of a point - the actual vote totals received by both President George W. Bush and challenger John Kerry. Rasmussen also correctly called the results in all 24 states polled over the campaign's final weekend including the pivotal outcome in Ohio. All Rasmussen polls are conducted via telephone using an automated system which offers exceptional stability and reliability for tracking trends.
Survey USA:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...s_/ai_n6337180
SurveyUSA is Most Accurate Statewide Pollster in 2004, Analysis of 104 Polling Firms Reveals
Business Wire, Nov 8, 2004 E-mail Print Link VERONA, N.J. -- SurveyUSA was the most accurate statewide election pollster in the 2004 General Election, according to a SurveyUSA analysis published today of 445 final pre-election polls conducted by 104 separate polling organizations.
SurveyUSA's average error, in the 58 statewide contests it polled, was 3.0 percentage points, a lower average error than any of the 16 other polling firms who polled on more than 5 statewide contests this 2004 General Election (according to the scientific measure "Mosteller 5.")
SurveyUSA was within the margin of sampling error for 57 of 58 final pre-election polls.
Related Results
Trust, E-innovation and Leadership in Change
Foreign Banks in United States Since World War II: A Useful Fringe
Building Your Brand With Brand Line Extensions
The Impact of the Structure of Debt on Target Gains
Project Management Standard Program "A number of statewide election pollsters had strong performances in 2004," says Jay H. Leve, Editor of SurveyUSA. "We are pleased to be one of them."
Because there is more than one way to measure the accuracy of an election poll, and not all measures produce the same result, SurveyUSA has posted to its website an interactive tool, that permits interested parties to sort the data from each of the 104 polling firms using the criteria of their choosing. Students of polling can create their own custom analyses of the data.
The interactive tool is posted to SurveyUSA's home page, here: www.surveyusa.com.
By the way...I'm glad you brought up TIPP...
http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.js...25&nav=Explore
Most Accurate Poll in 2004: Obama's lead down to 1.1%
John McCain has cut into Barack Obama's lead for a second day and is now just 1.1 points behind. The spread was 3.7 Wednesday and 6.0 Tuesday. The Republican is making headway with middle- and working- class voters, and has surged 10 points in two days among those earning between $30,000 and $75,000. He has also gone from an 11-point deficit to a 9-point lead among Catholics.
PS: Just so we know how things are going heading into the final weekend:
Let's see what the most accurate pollster of 2000 has to say:
ZOGBY SATURDAY: Republican John McCain has pulled back within the margin of error… McCain outpolled Obama 48% to 47% in Friday, one day, polling. He is beginning to cut into Obama’s lead among independents, is now leading among blue collar voters, has strengthened his lead among investors and among men, and is walloping Obama among NASCAR voters. Joe the Plumber may get his license after all.
The communist dream is over...I suggest you guys make riot plans...Me? I got the old(licensed) handgun out of the drawer...I hope somebody attempts to assault me.
So is TIPP more accurate than Rasmussen?
Google it.
No. I don't feel like looking up the sources for your plagiarism.
Then, don't expect me to help.
Everyone of them makes some sort of claim.
But Rasmussen was the only pollster to call the correct winner of every battelground state in 2004...the only pollster to do so. They were way off on some of the winning percentages though...but the were on the right side of every call. Survey USA was consistently the closest to the winning margins in the state polls but they incorrectly called the winner in one state.
TIPP was probably over all the most accurate throughout the Nation or some like that.
In 2000 Zogby was the most accurate pollster, they actually called Bush losing the popular but winning the Electoral IIRC.
Incidentally...since 2000 Rasmussen has been consistently the most accurate.
They all make some sort of claim...but they've all been off in this election as well. I am citing Rasmussen here and now to prove a point about Penn...but I'm also saying they are off because of their heavy Democrat weights.
Sin,
a registered Democrat.
he has campaign money to spend. what do you want him to do, give it to khalidi?
Dubya (supposedly) won 04 by outspending Kerry - oh, the horror!
I don't
The swwetest part of all this is going to be all the money that was backing Obama going down the drain. I am not just talking about contributions to Obama's campaign directly...I am talking about all the fronts money was poured into, all the corporate dollars backing him on the internet and in the media...
Billions not millions of dollars have been spent trying to elect this . Media companies(like the New York Times, the Washington Post, and NBC) have nearly put themsevles out of business trying to manipulate this guy into office...and they are going to take it up the ass on this one...unlubed.
Yeah who would have thought it would take so much more money to elect the first black president ever. Makes you think...
The horror for you should be that Obama has gotten more contributions from Dubya's big business backers than McCain has.
Dubya was in bed with big oil...Obama's in bed with big oil, and everyone else as well.
then why do you have a problem?
Electing the first black President is a tough road to hoe...electing the first black and socialist President when they are the same guy is next to impossible....let's not forget he's named Hussein as well.
Would it ing kill you guys to nominate someone who doesn't think America is the problem?
You'd be amazed at how easily you can win the election if you stop nominating guys that come off as anti-American.
This means no medal throwing. No flag burning or stomping(or associating with those that two)...no refusing to put hand over heart for the National Anthem...etc.
PS: Calling people with that view stupid isn't likely to garner you many votes...does me calling you guys stupid endear you to my POV?
Now board Republicans believe in polls.
You just don't understand why I supported W....it wasn't because I liked him or his politics.
whottts got this idea in his head that an obama win=his unemployment.
it's personal.
i understand why. by the time you found out, it was too late.
whottt is employed?
No...you don't understand why, you're just stupid.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
