Reply With Quote
If it backs up Dan's POV(s) and hates Bush it's reliable...
They survey is loaded because of its inherent assumption that the 4000+ full time and part-time troops that were lucky enough to be surveyed represents a statistically backed break-down of known political affiliation of the entire army. Which we know from the actual numbers from CNN isn't true.
You mean this survey on CNN?
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pag.../epolls.0.html
The one that is based on 13,660 respondents out of the entire voting population? How is that more reliable?
Last edited by Spurminator; 08-24-2005 at 02:22 PM.
If it backs up Dan's POV(s) and hates Bush it's reliable...
Dan, if you are talking about the CNN survey you linked, the Military voting data was based on even fewer respondents.
USA Today: Based on 4000+ current or former members of the military
CNN survey: Based on the 18% of 13,660 total respondents who currently or have ever served in the military...
13,660 * .18 - 2,459
4,000 > 2,459
Perhaps you are referring to another CNN study?
Last edited by Spurminator; 08-24-2005 at 02:37 PM.
that's ridiculous. 4,000 is a perfectly acceptable sample size and can easily be considered a valuable and random measure of military at udes. Your method is anything but random. Weeding out people first based on whether they are republican or democrat?
excellent work spurminator!
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politic...h-troops_x.htm
Well, now that I've found the link, the survey by the Military WAS unscientific... Not because of the number of respondents, but because the survey was sent to 31,000+ and response was voluntary.
So it wasn't random.
That said, CNN's survey is by no means "actual numbers". It's still a pretty small sample when you consider how many people living right now have ever served in the military. I would still favor the Military results as a more reliable snapshot of Military political affiliations, but the methodology is not sound.
Yes, I was using the actual numbers from CNN 2004 Official Election results and not any CNN study.
Look at the top of the page when you first open it.
"13,660 Respondents"
Here is the official data-collecting and projection number policy from CNN:
CNN(CNN) -- To project an election, CNN and its election experts use scientific statistical procedures to make estimates of the final vote count in each race. CNN will broadcast a projected winner only after an extensive review of data from a number of sources.
CNN editorial policy strictly prohibits reporting winners or characterizing the outcome of a statewide contest in any state before all the polls are scheduled to close in every precinct in that state.
CNN will receive information from the following sources:
The Associated Press: The Associated Press will provide vote totals for each race. The AP will be gathering numbers via stringers based in each county or other jurisdiction where votes are tabulated.
Edison/Mitofsky Research: To assist CNN in collecting and evaluating this information, CNN, the other television networks and the Associated Press have employed Edison Media Research (EMR) and Mitofsky International. In previous elections, Warren Mitofsky and Joe Lenski of Edison Research have assisted CNN in projecting winners in state and national races. Edison/Mitofsky will conduct exit polls, which ask voters their opinion on a variety of relevant issues, determine how they voted, and ask a number of demographic questions to allow analysis of voting patterns by group.
Using exit poll results, scientifically selected representative precincts, vote results from the AP, and a number of sophisticated analysis techniques, Edison/Mitofsky also recommend projections of a winner for each race it covers.
Collecting data
The process of projecting races begins by creating a sample of precincts. The precincts are selected by random chance, like a lottery, and every precinct in the state has an equal chance to be in the sample. They are not bellwether precincts or "key" precincts. Each one does not mirror the vote in a state but the sample collectively does.
The first indication of the vote comes from the exit polls conducted by Edison/Mitofsky. On Election Day, Edison/Mitofsky interviewers stand outside of sample precincts in a given state. They count the people coming out after they have voted and are instructed to interview every third person or every fifth person, for example, throughout the voting day. The rate of selection depends on the number of voters expected at the polling place that day. They do this from the time the polling place opens until shortly before it closes.
The interviewers give each selected voter a questionnaire, which takes only a minute or two to complete. It asks about issues that are important, and background characteristics of the voter, and it also asks for whom they voted in the most important races. During the day, the interviewer phones the information from the questionnaires to a computer center.
Next, vote totals come in from many of the same sample precincts as the exit polls after the voting has finished in those precincts. These are actual votes that are counted after the polls have closed. Election officials post the results so anyone at the precinct can know them.
The third set of vote returns come from the vote tallies done by local officials. The local figures become more complete as more precincts report vote returns. The county or township vote is put into statistical models, and Edison/Mitofsky make estimates and projections using those models. In addition, CNN will be monitoring the Web sites of the Secretaries of State offices and will also use surveys that have done in advance to help analyze the outcome of early voting and absentee voting.
So, I'm not sure what the 13,660 respondents number represents.
Did you miss the article where the military dropped the quotas because they knew they were not going to make them? This is an opinion piece from a NewsCorp paper so it conveniently leaves things like that out. BushCo love to move the goal posts or stop reporting negatives all together.
split personality syndrome?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
