The remarkable accuracy of scientific polling data

[Willie99]

RCP projected 49 out of 50 states accurately. They were wrong about Wisky, which they had Bush winning by .9 % but Gore won by .4 %. A whopping 1.3% swing which of course, was well within any margin for error.




<!-- amline script--><script type="text/javascript" src="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/scripts/swfobject.js"></script><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/ammap.swf" style="" id="ammap" name="ammap" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" quality="high" flashvars="path=http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/&settings_file=http%3A//www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/11_settings.xml&data_file=http%3A//www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/11.xml&preloader_color=#999999" width="594" height="445">

 

[MichaelScott]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_poll

 

[Willie99]

You do know your link didn't refute the accuracy of scientific polling data.

Unless you think "if the election were held today, who would you vote for?" is a trick question designed to obtain some desired result.

 

[punter]

Willie has already rejected Wikipedia as a biased source.

 

[Willie99]

Willie has already rejected Wikipedia as a biased source.

I reject a reference to opinion polls which can and do lead to biased results to refute "who would you vote for" polling data?

Especially since there is a lot of historical material to refute my claims, why not use specific examples instead of a song and dance routine?

 

[punter]

You also rejected their account of the John Kerry "swift boat" incident. I naturally assumed that you reject anything that you dont agree with.

 

[Willie99]

You also rejected their account of the John Kerry "swift boat" incident. I naturally assumed that you reject anything that you dont agree with.

Ah yes, "their account" of the Swift Boat incident, I recall. That account that presented one side and only one side and looked as if it was written by JFK himself. Laughable.

Did make me realize Wiki is not some all honest objective reporting organization, that's for sure. Do you think it is?

 

[punter]

Yes. Have seen no reason not to.

The only reporting institution that you don't seem to find fault with is Fox News.

 

[Willie99]

http://www.conservapedia.com/Examples_of_Bias_in_Wikipedia

The following is a growing list of examples of liberal bias, deceit, frivolous gossip, and blatant errors on Wikipedia.

Wikipedia's entry on the conservative Oklahoma legislator Sally Kern is seething with bias, unjustified smears and outright distortions.<sup id="cite_ref-3" class="reference">[4]</sup> Wikipedia understates that over 1500 supporters rallied in support of her criticisms of the homosexual agenda,<sup id="cite_ref-4" class="reference">[5]</sup> and instead Wikipedia highlights predictable Hollywood criticisms of her stance. Wikipedia then smears her with false accusations about her family and emphasizes charges that were never brought against her. If that isn't enough, the Wikipedia entry even misrepresents a bill that Kern introduced to protect "a student's voluntary expression of a religious viewpoint"; Wikipedia relies on an anti-Christian blog to distort Kern's bill.

Wikipedia editors tried strenuously to come up with reasons to censor embarrassing stories about the liberal John Edwards,<sup id="cite_ref-7" class="reference">[8]</sup> despite frequently including smears against conservatives.<sup id="cite_ref-8" class="reference">[9]</sup> Several sites have stories about Wikipedia's obvious liberal bias on this issue. <sup id="cite_ref-9" class="reference">[10]</sup><sup id="cite_ref-10" class="reference">[11]</sup><sup id="cite_ref-11" class="reference">[12]</sup>

Wikipedia Disallows Any Mention of Alleged John Edwards Scandal

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/p-...lows-any-mention-alleged-john-edwards-scandal

just a few minute google leads me to learn how right I am about Wiki's objectivity.

 

[punter]

I reject your sources. Turnabout fair play.

 

[Willie99]

I reject your sources. Turnabout fair play.

I'm OK with that

 

[GoSooners]

http://www.conservapedia.com/Examples_of_Bias_in_Wikipedia

The following is a growing list of examples of liberal bias, deceit, frivolous gossip, and blatant errors on Wikipedia.

Wikipedia's entry on the conservative Oklahoma legislator Sally Kern is seething with bias, unjustified smears and outright distortions.<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-3>[4]</SUP> Wikipedia understates that over 1500 supporters rallied in support of her criticisms of the homosexual agenda,<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-4>[5]</SUP> and instead Wikipedia highlights predictable Hollywood criticisms of her stance. Wikipedia then smears her with false accusations about her family and emphasizes charges that were never brought against her. If that isn't enough, the Wikipedia entry even misrepresents a bill that Kern introduced to protect "a student's voluntary expression of a religious viewpoint"; Wikipedia relies on an anti-Christian blog to distort Kern's bill.

Wikipedia editors tried strenuously to come up with reasons to censor embarrassing stories about the liberal John Edwards,<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-7>[8]</SUP> despite frequently including smears against conservatives.<SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-8>[9]</SUP> Several sites have stories about Wikipedia's obvious liberal bias on this issue. <SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-9>[10]</SUP><SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-10>[11]</SUP><SUP class=reference id=cite_ref-11>[12]</SUP>

Wikipedia Disallows Any Mention of Alleged John Edwards Scandal

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/p-...lows-any-mention-alleged-john-edwards-scandal

just a few minute google leads me to learn how right I am about Wiki's objectivity.

Bad example...As far as I'm concerned Wikipedia was being kind to this idiot Kern. I'm embarassed to say I even live in the same state as this bigot. She's the gun carrying wife of a fundamentalist preacher who is even more of an idiot than she is...She's as ignorant as they come...Even the conservatives around here are finished defending her. She just set this state back about 100 years with her stupid remarks..