Very nice aggregation .. and interesting. Agreed bias does show through. I looks like a potentially very close general election. Especially if the former article is right: once a republican candidate is chosen, the gap closes. This sounds like a reasonable hypothesis.
-- Owen On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 12:09 PM, glen <[email protected]> wrote: > > Personally, I find polls confusing. I like this page: > > > http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/president_obama_vs_republican_candidates.html > > that projects multiple polls down to a simpler space. Best I can tell, > the error for the ABC/WaPo poll is is 4 points, the Pew poll is 3 > points, and Rasmussen's is 3 points. Even ignoring how the questions > are worded and asked and their domains (RV/LV, demographics, geography, > etc.), we see a lot of wiggle from poll to poll. The most interesting > thing to me are the correlations between who's responsible for the poll, > their political bias, and the results of the poll. It would be > interesting to see how much and in what direction each wiggles over > time. E.g. does Rasmussen wiggle _more_ than Pew? Or do WaPo polls > wiggle with a skewed distribution? > > It's obvious that statistics are lies. But perhaps the statistics of > the statistics would show patterns in they lying that would allow one to > spot lying trends. >
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
