Comments on: The 1,000,000th site view, the hundredth flower http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/30/the-1000000th-site-view-the-hundredth-flower/ A first draft of electoral history Thu, 12 Nov 2009 02:35:25 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: andrea http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/30/the-1000000th-site-view-the-hundredth-flower/comment-page-1/#comment-1510 andrea Fri, 31 Oct 2008 18:27:42 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=2088#comment-1510 Learn how Presidential campaigns are often predicted far in advance by political scientists. Check this out http://www.thetruthabout.com/public/294.cfm?affID=and16 Learn how Presidential campaigns are often predicted far in advance by political scientists. Check this out http://www.thetruthabout.com/public/294.cfm?affID=and16

]]> By: Michael http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/30/the-1000000th-site-view-the-hundredth-flower/comment-page-1/#comment-1504 Michael Fri, 31 Oct 2008 17:20:22 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=2088#comment-1504 <i>do you care to comment on the Fox poll that has Obama up by only 3 nationally? ... the newest Fox poll has changed its voter makeup.</i> While I think that Sean has largely answered BHS' question, it is worth noting the difference between pollsters who weight their polling data to obtain demographics that they believe match the overall electorate, and those that simply take the voters they are able to reach as they are. The FOX poll is in the latter group, and they simply polled a lot more republicans this week than last. I'm not suggesting that this was intentional on their part. It just shows that two random samples aren't always going to match each other, even if they're large enough to have reasonable margins of error. Elections are always about who actually votes. Polling is always about predicting who is going to actually vote. do you care to comment on the Fox poll that has Obama up by only 3 nationally?

…

the newest Fox poll has changed its voter makeup.

While I think that Sean has largely answered BHS’ question, it is worth noting the difference between pollsters who weight their polling data to obtain demographics that they believe match the overall electorate, and those that simply take the voters they are able to reach as they are. The FOX poll is in the latter group, and they simply polled a lot more republicans this week than last. I’m not suggesting that this was intentional on their part. It just shows that two random samples aren’t always going to match each other, even if they’re large enough to have reasonable margins of error.

Elections are always about who actually votes. Polling is always about predicting who is going to actually vote.

]]> By: Bruce (B) http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/30/the-1000000th-site-view-the-hundredth-flower/comment-page-1/#comment-1495 Bruce (B) Fri, 31 Oct 2008 15:08:20 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=2088#comment-1495 I agree regarding most of the sites listed above. Electoral-vote.com really is classic, the standard. 538 is newest, updated more frequently, chock full of data, more processed, worth reading. Then check Sam Wang -- (of course) serious, more academic method, 3rd opinion, usable comments. Electionprojection.com and 3bluedudes are good for their links, and likewise for http://presidentforecast.andreamoro.net/ I think this site would also benefit from a blogroll of that kind in the sidebar, probably best broken into categories such as primary poll data, poll aggregation, markets, and combination sites. I wish I had known about http://www.election-projection.net/ earlier. I especially like the "Probability of Win by State" graph and the customized simulations. My 2 bits: I always check IEM, Intrade, and Rasmussen Markets. I also like Colley Rankings (Gott and Colley's Median Poll Statistic): http://www.colleyrankings.com/election2008/ Simple methodology (of astrophysicists) is conservative, low-key and powerful. Take the median of all polls for the past month and assign the states according to that. I don't think anyone mentioned http://www.270towin.com/ 270toWin has simulations, probabilities, state voting history, and poll data. There's also http://evstrength.blogspot.com/ -- a better representation of graphical data from electoral-vote.com, similar to the youcalc Michael Wilson mentioned earlier. Thank you! I hope you keep doing what you're doing and enjoy it. I look forward to seeing how the many poll-geek sites emerge after the test of the election. I agree regarding most of the sites listed above. Electoral-vote.com really is classic, the standard. 538 is newest, updated more frequently, chock full of data, more processed, worth reading. Then check Sam Wang — (of course) serious, more academic method, 3rd opinion, usable comments. Electionprojection.com and 3bluedudes are good for their links, and likewise for
http://presidentforecast.andreamoro.net/
I think this site would also benefit from a blogroll of that kind in the sidebar, probably best broken into categories such as primary poll data, poll aggregation, markets, and combination sites.

I wish I had known about http://www.election-projection.net/ earlier. I especially like the “Probability of Win by State” graph and the customized simulations.

My 2 bits:
I always check IEM, Intrade, and Rasmussen Markets.

I also like Colley Rankings (Gott and Colley’s Median Poll Statistic):
http://www.colleyrankings.com/election2008/
Simple methodology (of astrophysicists) is conservative, low-key and powerful. Take the median of all polls for the past month and assign the states according to that.

I don’t think anyone mentioned
http://www.270towin.com/
270toWin has simulations, probabilities, state voting history, and poll data.

There’s also http://evstrength.blogspot.com/ — a better representation of graphical data from electoral-vote.com, similar to the youcalc Michael Wilson mentioned earlier.

Thank you! I hope you keep doing what you’re doing and enjoy it. I look forward to seeing how the many poll-geek sites emerge after the test of the election.

]]> By: Todd S. Horowitz http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/30/the-1000000th-site-view-the-hundredth-flower/comment-page-1/#comment-1492 Todd S. Horowitz Fri, 31 Oct 2008 14:15:08 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=2088#comment-1492 It would be nice to have a plot of the median national margin. I've been doing it by hand from the RCP page, but it would be interesting to watch the national polls vs. the meta-margin. It would be nice to have a plot of the median national margin. I’ve been doing it by hand from the RCP page, but it would be interesting to watch the national polls vs. the meta-margin.

]]> By: David Shor http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/30/the-1000000th-site-view-the-hundredth-flower/comment-page-1/#comment-1491 David Shor Fri, 31 Oct 2008 14:05:28 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=2088#comment-1491 Don Milton, I've tried to explain day to day polling changes using the economy, but econometricly, the relationship doesn't hold up very well. See http://stochasticdemocracy.blogspot.com/2008/10/obama-and-economic-anxiety.html [Shameless plug to my website.] Don Milton,

I’ve tried to explain day to day polling changes using the economy, but econometricly, the relationship doesn’t hold up very well.

See

http://stochasticdemocracy.blogspot.com/2008/10/obama-and-economic-anxiety.html
[Shameless plug to my website.]

]]> By: Sam Wang http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/30/the-1000000th-site-view-the-hundredth-flower/comment-page-1/#comment-1487 Sam Wang Fri, 31 Oct 2008 12:45:13 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=2088#comment-1487 <b>Observer</b> - I was just corresponding with a friend in Virginia. Every vote he turns out is worth about 90,000 of my votes. Makes me want to get down there. But then who would do the essential work of blogging? <b>All panicked consumers of polls</b> - the median national margin's still 6%. At this point voters are pretty well committed - even the undecided ones, who are probably committed but will only find out in the voting booth. The bigger news is that Senate candidates have slipped a bit. The current expectation is 58-59 votes for Democrats, 41-42 for Republicans. A 60-40 split is starting to look unlikely. Observer – I was just corresponding with a friend in Virginia. Every vote he turns out is worth about 90,000 of my votes. Makes me want to get down there. But then who would do the essential work of blogging?

All panicked consumers of polls – the median national margin’s still 6%. At this point voters are pretty well committed – even the undecided ones, who are probably committed but will only find out in the voting booth.

The bigger news is that Senate candidates have slipped a bit. The current expectation is 58-59 votes for Democrats, 41-42 for Republicans. A 60-40 split is starting to look unlikely.

]]> By: Michael Wilson http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/30/the-1000000th-site-view-the-hundredth-flower/comment-page-1/#comment-1486 Michael Wilson Fri, 31 Oct 2008 11:51:55 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=2088#comment-1486 I can recommend: http://www.youcalc.com/apps/1221747067033 if you want to get updated with the election polls. I think you might like it! Make a difference, keep on voting! I can recommend:
http://www.youcalc.com/apps/1221747067033
if you want to get updated with the election polls.

I think you might like it!
Make a difference, keep on voting!

]]> By: Matt http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/30/the-1000000th-site-view-the-hundredth-flower/comment-page-1/#comment-1483 Matt Fri, 31 Oct 2008 07:55:48 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=2088#comment-1483 Sam, I wanted to let you know that I appreciate this column. I'm one of the 88 in the "holy order of geeks." I was maintaining a projection of my own in 2004 but was not nearly savvy enough to create my own site. With today's web publishing tools I decided to take a stab at it. My inspiration largely came from this site in 2004. Thank you very much. Sam,

I wanted to let you know that I appreciate this column. I’m one of the 88 in the “holy order of geeks.” I was maintaining a projection of my own in 2004 but was not nearly savvy enough to create my own site. With today’s web publishing tools I decided to take a stab at it. My inspiration largely came from this site in 2004. Thank you very much.

]]> By: Sean http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/30/the-1000000th-site-view-the-hundredth-flower/comment-page-1/#comment-1482 Sean Fri, 31 Oct 2008 07:16:25 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=2088#comment-1482 Not to mention that the newest Fox poll has changed its voter makeup. That doesn't necessarily make it 'wrong', but a straight comparison between today's poll and the previous ones is not very useful at this point. Not to mention that the newest Fox poll has changed its voter makeup. That doesn’t necessarily make it ‘wrong’, but a straight comparison between today’s poll and the previous ones is not very useful at this point.

]]> By: Observer http://election.princeton.edu/2008/10/30/the-1000000th-site-view-the-hundredth-flower/comment-page-1/#comment-1481 Observer Fri, 31 Oct 2008 07:02:02 +0000 http://election.princeton.edu/?p=2088#comment-1481 I still chuckle every time I notice: NJ 0.020826 I still chuckle every time I notice:

NJ 0.020826

]]>