Pennsylvania: Bush with narrow lead

[The Vorlon]

Here is the link...

http://pdn.philly.com/2004/03/31/keyzpoll.pdf

Two points....

1:  My thread of a week ago asking if PA was "in play" looks a lot more rational than it did... (my March 27th prediction map reflects PA leaning Bush, as you will all note....)

2: Don't pay all that much attention to this poll (as he blatently contradicts point 1)

Firstly, this is a University/College poll.  I don't know all that much about the Keystone Poll, but in an act of blatent "pollster profiling" unless I have crushing evidence to the contrary, I generally ignore College/University polls.

Secondly, the poll found a 47/44 GOP voter identification/registration advantage.

Pennsylvania is actually basically even in GOP/Dem voter registration, so this mini-blip in GOP registration advantage is likely due to the semi-hot GOP Senate primary race which is likely juicing up GOP registrations a bit, so I'd trim Bush's 6 point "lead" back 3 points or so in my own mind.

(That being said the same poll found a 5% GOP registration advantage in February so the actual drop in Kerry support may have been a bit bigger than this poll suggests, however...)

Another question I have about this polls is that all the data tables are headed with the prefix "Weighted Data" but no where does the text of the poll explain their weightings, which renders it very hard to make any qualitative evaluation on this poll at all...

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, this poll was designed to measure the GOP senate race, not the November Presidential race...

As my woodworking friends keep telling me.. "The right tool for the right job...."

[The Vorlon]

I like a man that doesn't need a partner for a debate.  

With ONE fact you can make an easy choice,..

With TEN facts you can make the hard choice,...

With ALL the facts you can make the right choice,...

Ayn Rand

[The Vorlon]

You never did respond to repeated requests for elaboration about your feelings on uni polls.

Why UNI polls have... issues.... would require  the writing of a book...

I will start the book here...

Lets follow the path of a poll to get it right...

Step 1; - Your list of Phone Numbers...

You cannot simply "randomly" pick phone numbers...

Rich people have more phone lines than poor people..
Families with teenagers have more phone lines
Young people have more cell phones than old people
Young people have more land lines than the old
Many people have a cell and an land line..

etc... etc...

To get a list of phone numbers that actually allows you to CONTACT a truly RANDOM sample of the population you need to do a huge amount of cross correlation of census tracks, phone directory information, etc...

This is far too complex a matter to get into here, but I'll make one point..

The generation of a truly random contact list is such a huge and complex matter that not even Gallup does it in house - Gallup buys their phone lists (as do most top-tier firms) from a company called Survey Sample Inc, who does nothing but sell these lists..

If Gallup (which has as many ph'ds as a lot of Universities) has concluded that not even they can do this VITAL step in house, what do you think the chances that one marketing professor and two grad students are going to get it right?

Likely voters?

Most of these Universities have never come within 50 miles of an actual election poll under "combat" conditions.

People lie when they are polled.  Gallup uses 13 questyions to sort the "likely" from the "unlikely" most Universities use 2 or 3...

To pick on Keystone (since it is the topic of this thread) They are projecting that 35% of the entire sample of 565 registered voters meets their criteria as a likely GOP Primary voter..  this means that about +/- 70% of all registered GOP voters will vote in the primary.. are they on Drugs...?

in 2000, in a hotly contest Presidential race, plus a hotly contested Senate race on top of it, only 63% of the registered voters turned up to vote..

70% GOP turnout in a lukewarm Senate Primary...?

Give your head a shake...

Topics to still be covered....

Who are your operators?
Callbacks?
Is the ph'd in Math or Marketing?

TO BE CONTINUED.....

[The Vorlon]

I've made this point time and time again, so what is once more?  

Many of the seniors who voted for Gore in 2000 are dead!!!!

Many of the seniors who voted for Gore in 2000 were dead already.

LOL!

The Voter Fraud Enablement & Crooked Politician Protection Act Moter voter act is, on paper, a nice expression of the democratic sentiment that voting is good.

As a practical matter, I have seen voter turn out in certain areas that..... seems to defy historic turnout patterns....

Here is a stab at bi-partisanship...

Do any of the Democrats on this board think it would be an intrusive violation of somebody's voter rights to require voters registered via the Moter Voter act to produce the very drivers licence that got them registered..?

Or, (while we are on role...) have everybody who shows up to vote present maybe 1 piece of picture ID...?

And if the person has no ID, let any other voter with ID "vouch" for them by signing a declaration that they know the person trying to vote and certify they are who they say they are...?

As a historic note, the Democrats in the Senate have fillibustered these measures again, and again, and again...

Why?

I am generally fairly non-partisan here on these boards, but voter fraud IS an issue, and I don't think any of the stuff above is draconian in any way...

Comments...?

(Yes Dems, you have a legitimate issue on "voter disenfranchinesment" - but that's a DIFFERENT legitimate issue than the voter fraud I am talking about here)