tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post748142034698341883..comments2023-10-16T07:13:12.123-05:00Comments on A plain blog about politics: All I Do Sometimes Is Write "A Little Perspective" PostsJonathan Bernsteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15931039630306253241noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-44437380773198093292012-10-10T18:11:27.326-05:002012-10-10T18:11:27.326-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-42125936081280871692012-10-10T18:11:26.363-05:002012-10-10T18:11:26.363-05:00The race will most definitely be interesting to wa...The race will most definitely be interesting to watch as we near November, that's for sure! I've been enjoying your blog, wanted to share another way to get a little politically involved that might strike your fancy: <br /><br />http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1541546554/election-slots-facebook-game-the-new-spin-on-politAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-37772852591426086522012-10-10T17:40:57.121-05:002012-10-10T17:40:57.121-05:00Certainly no one in Kansas, as is your point...
U...Certainly no one in Kansas, as is your point...<br /><br />Unless, some people vote on issues that do not start and end with their own narrow pocket books. Shudder!<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-30057032575268030062012-10-10T14:45:37.460-05:002012-10-10T14:45:37.460-05:00Scott: no idea, but an excellent question. I wonde...Scott: no idea, but an excellent question. I wonder if posting it to Monkey Cage would get Sides or Gelman to ask Silver to look into his repository of data to follow up on his earlier post. They both have connections to him, so posting the same question at Monkey Cage might get it answered.<br />Matt Jarvisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-68013054754323209992012-10-10T14:43:38.428-05:002012-10-10T14:43:38.428-05:00The other thing they constantly tell us is that th...The other thing they constantly tell us is that these polls are within a few points; so who knows. The undecideds, which should be called under informed, are what it's all about. It's not as though a big pro Romney person changed their minds nor one who truly wants what Obama has done. Clinton has a good YouTube out there on it with his take on the debate and Romney's shift to being a moderate-- maybe.Rain Trueaxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07994628226501093880noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-20290613652881719432012-10-10T14:26:54.402-05:002012-10-10T14:26:54.402-05:00Did the Republican primaries give any clues as to ...Did the Republican primaries give any clues as to how accurate the polls are this year? Or are Republican primary voters, perhaps being older, less likely to depend on cell phones anyway?Scott Monjenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-52972426528613202582012-10-10T14:03:12.270-05:002012-10-10T14:03:12.270-05:00Exactly right. Which then poses a puzzler: can the...Exactly right. Which then poses a puzzler: can there exist a set of circumstances where the LV screen does worse?<br />Matt Jarvisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-48451906018532600892012-10-10T13:47:03.410-05:002012-10-10T13:47:03.410-05:00I believe the case is that the LV screens do a ter...I believe the case is that the LV screens do a terrible job of predicting individual cases...but that despite that polls with a LV screen still do a better job of predicting the final result than RV polls. Jonathan Bernsteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15931039630306253241noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-66871423263084029182012-10-10T13:38:19.942-05:002012-10-10T13:38:19.942-05:00The news on LV screens is actually worse. I saw a ...The news on LV screens is actually worse. I saw a paper the other day (think it's a working paper, not yet published) that the screens, while having some predictive value, are actually not terribly good at their core function: predicting whether or not a person will vote. I think that a number of people who get screened out will vote (but, I remember there being HUGE variation in this number...20-something percent in one survey and 50-something percent in another!), and that a number of those screened in won't vote (I think this number was relatively consistent across the various samples they used).<br /><br />For what its worth, I think they were using the exact same screening question in all the studies. Rather, it was the fundamental problem of asking somebody to predict what they were going to do in a month. <br /><br />None of this says that polls using LVs or RVs or whatever are "wrong"....but it is a cause for skepticism. That, plus the cell phone difference that seems to have emerged in this cycle (but did NOT exist in previous cycles!) has made me very iffy on poll quality in the last year. <br /><br />It's not that I don't belive the polls. But, I'm increasingly skeptical of what we can get from them.Matt Jarvisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-21172210715198226072012-10-10T12:39:57.891-05:002012-10-10T12:39:57.891-05:00Interesting point about LV screens. One theory of ...Interesting point about LV screens. One theory of mine: It seems that the polls that are more volatile, like PEW and some of the network polls, have looser LV screens. These are the polls that swung hard to Obama last month and posted big gains for Romney this month. The more enthusiastic side makes big gains.<br /><br />Polls that are less volatile, like Ras, have stingier LV screens. These polls barely moved at all this past week...or in the month beforehand.Kalhttp://twitter.com/#!/Kalbelgarionnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-69882882293589416022012-10-10T12:30:18.988-05:002012-10-10T12:30:18.988-05:00nobody has actually changed their mind because the...<i>nobody has actually changed their mind because the candidates' demeanor overrides substantive policy positions.</i><br /><br />Any American - not already a multimillionaire or older than 40 (and thus likely unable to self-insure) - who took a look at Ryan's "substantive policy position" wrt Medicare would, I think, find it difficult to cast a ballot for a ticket with him on it. Even brief reflection on the voucherization/privatization of Medicare should make it clear that a two-tier system will emerge that will truly suck for the "sick old" and the "old old".<br /><br />And yet, millions upon millions of people who can reasonably expect to be in scope for serious personal hardship from Ryan's Medicare overhaul will vote for a ticket including him anyway.<br /><br />So...this idea that voters make their choice based on the alignment of "substantive policy positions" with their interests...<br /><br />...who exactly do you have in mind here?CSHnoreply@blogger.com