Remember: our rules allow pointed disagreement, but require respectful discussion.
--
I received one of the telephone calls from the Star Tribune for their poll, and
as
as someone with a fair amount of marketing knowlege (graduate level marketing
coursework included), I believe the Star Tribune poll was structured as
objectively as possible to glean accurate data. However, I would remind people
that gathering data is only one portion of the poll - there is significant
latitude in interpreting the data (who to screen out, etc), and often a
significant level of dissonance in words vs. action.
To complicate matters, SSB & RT are similar enough that many "undecideds" are
having difficulty deciding who to vote for, and may sway back and forth between
candidates. Add to that the fact that a significant percentage of voters in the
primary voted for candidates who are no longer in the race, and the rolling
ambiguity of the situation is clear.
As far as the discussion of conservatives having issue with SSB's
African-American heritage, my guess is that most are more focused on what
impacts their pocketbook; how has SSB affected the business climate. The answer
for the largest corporations is clear, but less clear when you move into the
middle and small size businesses - add to that the fact that a large percentage
of the small business people in Minneapolis are of Hispanic, Asian, Somalian, or
other non-European origins and it will be an interesting election!
For my part, I am glad that Mr Stenglein is out of the picture for this
election.
David Piehl
Central / 8th Ward
snip
Steve Brandt wrote:
Tim asks if the Star Tribune adequately screens to determine which
voters are likely to vote, and whether self-reporting produces invalid
results. Here's the procedure:
First, the confirmed non-voters * people who say won't vote in the
upcoming election -- are excluded. Then because people tend not to
admit that they won't vote, a four-question screening is used to
detect who is more and less likely to vote. For example, people might
be asked if they are registered, if they voted last time, if they'll
vote in the next election, and so on. They are then ranked on the
basis of their answers. More weight is given to the poll responses of
people judged more likely to vote, and less is given to the people
less likely to vote. A critical component is that this weighting is
based on historical research. It's not practical, given
considerations of timeliness, to go down to City Hall in the midst of
a poll to see if 400 people actually are registered or did vote last
time. So this weighting is based on the past voting performance of
people who scored similarly on the screening questions. In other
words, after a group of people is screened and polled, whether they
actually voted is researched and sorted by their screening rank The
proportion of these people who actually voted determines the weighting
given to people who will be screened and polled the next time. There
are still flaws in this, such as in 1998 when a larger proportion of
the gubernatorial general election vote was accounted for by
less-likely voters or people who registered on election day, both
groups tending to favor Ventura. But it's based on sound polling
methodology.
______________________________________________________________________
The information contained in this message is private and confidential
information which may also be subject to the attorney-client privilege and work
product doctrine. This information is intended only for the individual or
entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or
copy of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message
in error, please notify the sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of
the message. Thank you.
_______________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls
