The NY-26 Election. Have fun but keep your shirt on.

[Dgov]

This is a really odd poll actually, and probably indicative of the odd politics of upstate new york more than anything else.  The Sample ideology is 46% Conservative, 24% Liberal, and 30% Moderate, which means it should be closer to the Upper South than Upstate New York, but Corwin is only winning  ~60% of "Conservative" Voters, which means that there a a bunch of voters who said they were Conservative but probably aren't.  Undecideds are overwhelmingly Conservative however, and can probably be expected to break for Corwin in the end.


Also, we have an interesting reverse age gap here, as Corwin is creaming Hochul 2:1 with young voters but is losing Olds by 15.  This is probably just a bad sample, as Young voters are across-the-board more Republican in this poll, with 60% disapproving of Obama versus 47% of their elders.

[Dgov]

Also, we have an interesting reverse age gap here, as Corwin is creaming Hochul 2:1 with young voters but is losing Olds by 15.  This is probably just a bad sample, as Young voters are across-the-board more Republican in this poll, with 60% disapproving of Obama versus 47% of their elders.

Are you in college? If so you seriously need to take a class on polling, at least one that focuses on margin of error.

LOL.  Read my post again

Here, I'll make it easier for you:

Also, we have an interesting reverse age gap here, as Corwin is creaming Hochul 2:1 with young voters but is losing Olds by 15.  This is probably just a bad sample, as Young voters are across-the-board more Republican in this poll, with 60% disapproving of Obama versus 47% of their elders.

[Dgov]

what you cite is not evidence of a bad sample. you are drawing a false conclusion. the samples for each subset are so small that the margin of error is high enough to skew the data wildly even though in the context of the whole, the sample is fitting.

Margins of error are your levels of confidence that your sample accurately represents the whole.  If you have a high margin of error, that means that the odds of getting a bad sample size (i.e. something that would lead you to the opposite conclusion of what actually exists) is fairly high, which is what i'm saying here.

[Dgov]

Another lame spoiler election. It worked in my party's favor this time, but it's still stupid...

It's definitely not a spoiler election because Davis wasn't running on a Tea Party platform, he was running on a protectionist/anti-Paul Ryan plan platform.

lol though read Red State's spin on the election here: http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/05/24/the-gop-loss-in-new-york-was-about-new-york-not-paul-ryan/

Right, because winning 2 special elections in Republican leaning districts in upstate New York was a clear predictor of the Democrat's strong performance in 2010, and a clear repudiation of the Republican's opposition to both the Stimulus and Obamacare.

The only thing this election really means in the long run is that Democrats will probably lose both House seats in NY from this redistricting.  And that some heads should roll in the NYGOP, but if that hasn't happened so far i doubt that this will provoke them into action.

[Dgov]

I think the spoiler effect isn't very existent here, Corwin's favorables were terrible, that would indicate to me that it wasn't all about Davis pulling votes away from her. We also don't know just what percentage of Davis votes weren't going to support her at all, it may have been enough where the result was not spoiled.

You're also forgetting that Corwin spent most of the campaign attacking Davis rather than Hocul.  It's probably one of the reasons her favorability with his voters was so bad, and why Hocul was able to run her campaign comparatively unscathed.

[Dgov]

Another lame spoiler election. It worked in my party's favor this time, but it's still stupid...

It's definitely not a spoiler election because Davis wasn't running on a Tea Party platform, he was running on a protectionist/anti-Paul Ryan plan platform.

lol though read Red State's spin on the election here: http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/05/24/the-gop-loss-in-new-york-was-about-new-york-not-paul-ryan/

Right, because winning 2 special elections in Republican leaning districts in upstate New York was a clear predictor of the Democrat's strong performance in 2010, and a clear repudiation of the Republican's opposition to both the Stimulus and Obamacare.

The only thing this election really means in the long run is that Democrats will probably lose both House seats in NY from this redistricting.  And that some heads should roll in the NYGOP, but if that hasn't happened so far i doubt that this will provoke them into action.

This seat is CONSIDERABLY  more Republican and conservative than NY-20 and NY-23

By a whopping 4 points.  IIRC, you won both those elections by more than that