Posted on 11/05/2006 11:30:02 AM PST by Western Civ 4ever
You write with the assumption that pollsters are inherently dishonest and knowingly "fix" their results.
This makes no sense at all. Such an attitude would be completely self-defeating. Pollsters get paid for what they do. They sell a product. If their product is intentionally flawed, it's not worth much in the marketplace.
Polls are, indeed, inaccurate. But I believe that is because polling is an inexact science. There are too many variables involved, the most potent of them human nature. Polls attempt to predict the future.
They aim. They often miss. They jiggle the stats in an effort at accuracy. We should take poll data for what it is: an educated, and often useful and interesting, guess. It is nothing more than that, and to ascribe nefarious motives to those collecting the data is illogical.
Imputed income. Steffie, the queer, remember?
If polls were accurate, why would it be necessary to average them?
It's an interesting question because some poll experts will tell you it's entirely inappropriate to average polls which use different methodologies. Still, my experience and the experience of those a lot more educated than I on the subject suggest averages are considerably more accurate than relying on any single poll.
You have to remember basic statistics. The fact that polls have "margins of error" is because of their inherent statistical variability. It might be a representative sample, or it may be an "outlier." Averaging seems to smooth out this variability and give one an overall more accurate picture.
I see your point. Thanks for the response.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.