Making sense out of Gallup and other presidential polls (Obama robots refuse to admit the obvious)

http://news.yahoo.com ^

[NKP_Vet]

Nate Silver, the New York Times political blogger, laid out a detailed argument against the poll in a post called “Gallup vs. the World.”

“We tend to put too much emphasis on the newest, most widely reported and most dramatic pieces of data—more than is usually warranted,” Silver says.

“Apart from Gallup’s final poll not having been especially accurate in recent years, it has often been a wild ride to get there. Their polls, for whatever reason, have often found implausibly large swings in the race,” he adds.

The website The Hill was less generous to Gallup than The New York Times. Allan Lichtman, a professor at American University, challenged Gallup’s concept of likely voters.

[NKP_Vet]

Braindead Kenyan wonderboy robots refuse to believe the obvious. Their boy is fixin' to be taken out behind the barn for a serious ass whupping. Chris Matthews will probably end up in an insane asylum, where he can drool with the rest of the patients.

[RobertClark]

Funny thing: The libtards and MSM didn’t mind drooling all over the various results when the empty suit was up by double digits. Now that the polls are reflecting more reality, they run away from them and seek to discredit their worth.

I’m convinced that the polling orgs, largely, oversampled dems early on in the race to attempt to generate some false “momentum” for Obamao. Now that election day is nearing, they have no choice but to bring the numbers back into reality because credibility is everything in the polling business. They don’t want to go down in the books as the least accurate of the year. The ruse failed!