Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 9/8/2004 10:32:23 AM EST
I am just wondering bush is ahead by a pretty big margin, plus undecided voters seem to favor the president especially in a time of war.

But does anyone have any example of the polls Vr the actual results?
Link Posted: 9/8/2004 10:38:02 AM EST
As far back as I can remember every election (with the exception of 1996 Clinton/Dole election) have been predicted by the poles as being neck and neck. With the exception of the 2000 election the voting results have always been much more slanted towards one cantidate than the polls have shown.

I think Bush is actually creaming Kerry alot worse than the polls are showing!
Link Posted: 9/8/2004 10:46:05 AM EST
really, I guess if they say 50 50 technically they can't be that wrong right?

That has to be a photoshop job for your avatar if not that would be cool.
Link Posted: 9/8/2004 10:46:49 AM EST
Well, I have been 90% accurate.


That should stand for something.


SGat1r5
Link Posted: 9/8/2004 10:48:56 AM EST

Originally Posted By sgtar15:
Well, I have been 90% accurate.


That should stand for something.


SGat1r5



So you have accurately predicted 90% of elections.
Link Posted: 9/8/2004 10:50:17 AM EST

Originally Posted By WI_Rifleman:

Originally Posted By sgtar15:
Well, I have been 90% accurate.


That should stand for something.


SGat1r5



So you have accurately predicted 90% of elections.




Yup


And GWB WIll win this November by a LAND SLIDE.

Sgat1r5
Link Posted: 9/8/2004 10:50:53 AM EST
so you actually admitted that clinton was going to beat bush and dole?
Link Posted: 9/8/2004 10:53:15 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/8/2004 10:54:55 AM EST by Mauser101]
A scientific poll (ramdon population sample, no leading questions) that samples atleast 1000 people is supposed to be accurate with about a 3-4% margin of error. Increasing the sampling to 5000 people is supposed to only decrease your margin of error by another 1%.

The polls we often hit around here are not scientific polls. The Times, Zogby(sp?) and similar polls are supposed to be scientific, hance pretty accurate.

That's just about the only thing I remember from my college statistics class.
Link Posted: 9/8/2004 10:54:25 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/8/2004 11:00:09 AM EST

Originally Posted By HiramRanger:

Originally Posted By Mauser101:
A scientific poll (ramdon population sample, no leading questions) that samples atleast 1000 people is supposed to be accurate with about a 3-4% margin of error. Increasing the sampling to 5000 people is supposed to only decrease your margin of error by another 1%.

The polls we often hit around here are not scientific polls. The Times, Zoby and similar polls are supposed to be scientific, hance pretty accurate.



Sadly, I did. I also predicted the 1984 Victory down to the fact the Dems would carry one state and DC. And that was at the age of 12. I have always been a political junkie.



so how many states will GWB carry?
Link Posted: 9/8/2004 11:02:50 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/8/2004 11:03:54 AM EST

Originally Posted By WI_Rifleman:
so you actually admitted that clinton was going to beat bush and dole?




No...that's the one I got wrong.


Sgatr15
Link Posted: 9/8/2004 11:05:16 AM EST
Guess I am thge fool.


GWB will take 45 states at least...and maybe California


SGatr15
Top Top