Replies

Thank you very much for going to the trouble of finding that information and providing a link. I read it carefully and find that it just reinforces my point. I know my take on it will surprise you, but bear with me.

The linked info used a CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll re Clinton-Dole to highlight how MOE's are incorrectly reported:

"The CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll taken June 27-30 of 818 registered voters showed Clinton would beat his Republican challenger if the election were held now, 54 to 39 percent, with seven percent undecided. The poll had a margin of error of plus or minus four percentage points."

The "everyman" I've been trying to give a voice to hears or reads that and internalizes it as I previously described, that is, plus or minus 4 percentage points for Clinton's 54, and plus or minus 4 for Dole. The report describes both the poll results and the MOE in percentage terms. What other conclusion is anyone other than a mathematician or a statistician going draw?

Niles goes on to write:

"In this case, the CNN et al. poll had a four percent margin of error. That means that if you asked a question from this poll 100 times, 95 of those times the percentage of people giving a particular answer would be within 4 points of the percentage who gave that same answer in this poll."

Unless I am completely missing his point, in a different way he's saying the same thing I did — with the exception that he adds information about asking the same question 100 times and expecting that 95 times the resulting percent would be within four points of the first result. He does not clarify the use of plus or minus, but I don't see any other way to interpret it except that, using his example, it's +4 and -4 percentage points over or under the original percent. If there is another interpretation, please let me know.

In the recall case study, as already mentioned, I've done exactly what many, many people — including polling firms, themselves — do after elections. Compare a pollster's percentages to actual election results. If this is a flawed way to guage the accuracy of the relative handfull of polls that can be checked against actual elections, then a great many people labor under exactly the same misconception.