<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Purple polls</title>
	<atom:link href="http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/09/purple-polls/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/09/purple-polls/</link>
	<description>A first draft of electoral history</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 May 2011 06:45:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sam Wang</title>
		<link>http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/09/purple-polls/comment-page-1/#comment-951</link>
		<dc:creator>Sam Wang</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2008 21:45:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://election.princeton.edu/?p=1721#comment-951</guid>
		<description>I think RCP isn&#039;t that bad. That&#039;s a tempest in a teapot.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think RCP isn&#8217;t that bad. That&#8217;s a tempest in a teapot.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dave kliman</title>
		<link>http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/09/purple-polls/comment-page-1/#comment-950</link>
		<dc:creator>dave kliman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2008 20:19:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://election.princeton.edu/?p=1721#comment-950</guid>
		<description>can you really trust &quot;Real Cherry-picked Polls&quot; after that article Nate wrote about them?

Hm.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>can you really trust &#8220;Real Cherry-picked Polls&#8221; after that article Nate wrote about them?</p>
<p>Hm.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ThatSeattleGuy</title>
		<link>http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/09/purple-polls/comment-page-1/#comment-939</link>
		<dc:creator>ThatSeattleGuy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Oct 2008 14:53:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://election.princeton.edu/?p=1721#comment-939</guid>
		<description>Nice work.

1) Perhaps a more neutral shade - like cross-hatched yellow - would have been better than stark black for the no-poll state? You want them to recede into the background and highlight the states with data, not the other way around.

2) That the US map is mostly purple (and very similar in shade) tells us something...but it also obscures which states have trended which way. Perhaps another map that slightly more exaggerates the color differences (eg, a 35%/75% polling result forcing the top-bottom on the red-blue portion of the color scale) would be helpful - in effect, converting your equilateral color triangle to an isosceles one.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice work.</p>
<p>1) Perhaps a more neutral shade &#8211; like cross-hatched yellow &#8211; would have been better than stark black for the no-poll state? You want them to recede into the background and highlight the states with data, not the other way around.</p>
<p>2) That the US map is mostly purple (and very similar in shade) tells us something&#8230;but it also obscures which states have trended which way. Perhaps another map that slightly more exaggerates the color differences (eg, a 35%/75% polling result forcing the top-bottom on the red-blue portion of the color scale) would be helpful &#8211; in effect, converting your equilateral color triangle to an isosceles one.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

