Re: OBAMA v ROMNEY : Thu Oct 11, 2012 9:41 pm  

Ajw71 wrote:

Yes, one had twenty seven THOUSAND replies.

But I guess as the poll outcome doesn't fit with your opinions, it's irrelevant and only your opinion counts.

One only had a couple of hundred too as I recall, yet you still attached equal importance.

What really matters of course is the context of the poll, a poll of audience members at this weeks Tory party conference would have resulted in a predicted 650 seat majority at the next election whereas a poll of six month old turkey chicks this week would have been unanimously in favour of abandoning christmas this year.

Any poll is irrelevant when it is biased in its selection and choice of question regardless of the size of its poll, the readers personal opinion has nothing to do with such careless polling.

Re: OBAMA v ROMNEY : Thu Oct 11, 2012 10:11 pm  

I think Ajw71 would like http://unskewedpolls.com/ When Romney was doing badly, the far right decided to create their own alternate reality where he was, in fact, miles ahead. All you needed to do was change (sorry "deskew") a few characteristics of the opinion polls and suddenly everything was going to be alright. "Deskewing" I guess has the effect of tweaking the samples so that the poll population was corrected to be more Republican (and therefore white, southern, male and elderly) than those biased liberal pollsters were projecting. Suddenly, they were able to comfort themselves that everything was going to be alright.

I think Ajw71 would like http://unskewedpolls.com/ When Romney was doing badly, the far right decided to create their own alternate reality where he was, in fact, miles ahead. All you needed to do was change (sorry "deskew") a few characteristics of the opinion polls and suddenly everything was going to be alright. "Deskewing" I guess has the effect of tweaking the samples so that the poll population was corrected to be more Republican (and therefore white, southern, male and elderly) than those biased liberal pollsters were projecting. Suddenly, they were able to comfort themselves that everything was going to be alright.

Re: OBAMA v ROMNEY : Thu Oct 11, 2012 10:23 pm  

MjM wrote: I think Ajw71 would like http://unskewedpolls.com/ When Romney was doing badly, the far right decided to create their own alternate reality where he was, in fact, miles ahead. All you needed to do was change (sorry "deskew") a few characteristics of the opinion polls and suddenly everything was going to be alright. "Deskewing" I guess has the effect of tweaking the samples so that the poll population was corrected to be more Republican (and therefore white, southern, male and elderly) than those biased liberal pollsters were projecting. Suddenly, they were able to comfort themselves that everything was going to be alright. No you just don't get it. It's a poll. Therefore it is incontrovertible evidence of anything you want to argue regardless of the question asked, the number of respondents, the demographics of the respondents or the weighting involved.

MjM wrote: I think Ajw71 would like http://unskewedpolls.com/ When Romney was doing badly, the far right decided to create their own alternate reality where he was, in fact, miles ahead. All you needed to do was change (sorry "deskew") a few characteristics of the opinion polls and suddenly everything was going to be alright. "Deskewing" I guess has the effect of tweaking the samples so that the poll population was corrected to be more Republican (and therefore white, southern, male and elderly) than those biased liberal pollsters were projecting. Suddenly, they were able to comfort themselves that everything was going to be alright. No you just don't get it. It's a poll. Therefore it is incontrovertible evidence of anything you want to argue regardless of the question asked, the number of respondents, the demographics of the respondents or the weighting involved.

Re: OBAMA v ROMNEY : Fri Oct 12, 2012 6:27 am  

JerryChicken wrote:

One only had a couple of hundred too as I recall, yet you still attached equal importance.

What really matters of course is the context of the poll, a poll of audience members at this weeks Tory party conference would have resulted in a predicted 650 seat majority at the next election whereas a poll of six month old turkey chicks this week would have been unanimously in favour of abandoning christmas this year.

Any poll is irrelevant when it is biased in its selection and choice of question regardless of the size of its poll, the readers personal opinion has nothing to do with such careless polling.

Not but you laughed when I stated thousands, impyling that I had made it up. I had not and you were wrong.

Re: OBAMA v ROMNEY : Fri Oct 12, 2012 6:47 am  

MjM wrote:

When Romney was doing badly

So he's not doing badly anymore. Glad we agree.

I stated he was ahead in some polls last night - this was factually correct.

I'm sorry if these particular polls you don't agree with but others are entiled to an opinion as well y'know. Contrary to popular belief it's not just the likes of Him's opinion that matters.

Re: OBAMA v ROMNEY : Fri Oct 12, 2012 7:18 am  

Ajw71 wrote:

I'm sorry if these particular polls you don't agree with but others are entiled to an opinion as well y'know. Contrary to popular belief it's not just the likes of Him's opinion that matters.

It's been explained to you several times by more than one poster, you are not that bloody thick.

Re: OBAMA v ROMNEY : Fri Oct 12, 2012 7:33 am  

Ajw71 wrote:

So he's not doing badly anymore. Glad we agree.

Things have picked up, no doubt - would have been hard not for them to given how badly it had been going. Let's see if the VP debate has much impact. Biden put in a strong performance but it's hard to read what the take-aways from that will be.

As a general point, however, selectively choosing polls which support your opinion when the consensus of similar polls do not or are inconclusive is either self-delusion or wilful deception.

Ajw71 wrote:

others are entiled to an opinion as well y'know. Contrary to popular belief it's not just the likes of Him's opinion that matters.

If any poster's opinion is batshit crazy then that poster should not be surprised to find the opinion coming under some scrutiny.

Re: OBAMA v ROMNEY : Fri Oct 12, 2012 8:08 am  

Ajw71 wrote:

Not but you laughed when I stated thousands, impyling that I had made it up. I had not and you were wrong.

I laugh at you constantly, it doesn't imply that you are lying, just that I find you funny.

Re: OBAMA v ROMNEY : Sat Oct 13, 2012 9:23 am  

MjM wrote:

As a general point, however, selectively choosing polls which support your opinion when the consensus of similar polls do not or are inconclusive is either self-delusion or wilful deception.

Where has anyone done this? I said 'some' polls have Romney in the lead. The very nature of the word 'some' indicates that some also do not have him in the lead. I didn't go into any further detail.

MjM wrote:

If any poster's opinion is batshit crazy then that poster should not be surprised to find the opinion coming under some scrutiny.

Right....which 'batshit' (absoloutely despise that word) opinions are these?

Re: OBAMA v ROMNEY : Sat Oct 13, 2012 12:37 pm  

Whilst watching the debate between Biden and Ryan I thought that I had seen Ryan before as a character on the Muppet Show.