Quote:
Originally Posted by molson
So it's just a coincidence then that all the liberal posters think the pro-liberal predictions are right and all the conservative posters think the pro-conservative predictions are right?
|
This isn't like policy where there are many ways to solve a lot of problems. Next Tuesday, one poll or set of polls is going to show to be more accurate than the others unless they all converge to very similar conclusions (at which point, I would worry about the non-transparent ones just making some quick and dirty house adjustments) or they are all equally bad.
If Romney wins by +3, Rasmussen will probably be the most accurate as long as there's not some oddball state orientation. If Obama wins by +3, then it's probably PPP that will look the best, again, barring some oddball orientation. Now, no poll is going to be perfect across all 50 states but that plus the Senate races gives a pretty large sample size each election to weight against (~80 odd races). And, yes, finding who is most correct does show who is best at predicting and most accurate not "who is most biased" or "lucky".
Someone will be correct next week. And I really think chalking it up to "luck" or saying "well, your side (whichever side that is) just was right because you wanted it to be that way" is just patently false. If PPP is oversampling Democrats, they will show up as being 3% off in every race, even if Obama wins. And if Rasmussen is undersampling Democrats and it causes them to be 3% off, they will show up at being 3% off in every race, even if Romney wins.
And we can show next week who is most accurate.
SI