GA-Rasmussen: Perdue+5 (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 06:29:44 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2014 Gubernatorial Election Polls
  2014 Senatorial Election Polls
  GA-Rasmussen: Perdue+5 (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: GA-Rasmussen: Perdue+5  (Read 2591 times)
DrScholl
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,926
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -3.30

« on: September 23, 2014, 09:43:06 PM »


Terri Lynn Land is within five in Michigan, but no one says that's a comeback.

Indeed.  A 2 point Ras lead for Peters is "Safe D" according to DrScholl.  I think Lean/Likely D is still fair, but Safe D is ridiculous when you have multiple polls within the MoE on that race.

Anyways, this is Lean/Likely R.  It's analogous to Michigan for the GOP.

Land is a horrible candidate and that really makes a big difference. Sure, you could claim that Land is really leading and Peters lead is only due to error, but that's not exactly how polling works. Fact of it is, Michigan was a climb to begin with, but with Land being a horrible candidate, it is quite Safe for Democrats.
Logged
DrScholl
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,926
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -3.30

« Reply #1 on: September 23, 2014, 09:55:12 PM »


Terri Lynn Land is within five in Michigan, but no one says that's a comeback.

Indeed.  A 2 point Ras lead for Peters is "Safe D" according to DrScholl.  I think Lean/Likely D is still fair, but Safe D is ridiculous when you have multiple polls within the MoE on that race.

Anyways, this is Lean/Likely R.  It's analogous to Michigan for the GOP.

Land is a horrible candidate and that really makes a big difference. Sure, you could claim that Land is really leading and Peters lead is only due to error, but that's not exactly how polling works. Fact of it is, Michigan was a climb to begin with, but with Land being a horrible candidate, it is quite Safe for Democrats.

Sigh......all I was saying is that Michigan is as safe for Democrats only as much as Georgia is safe for Republicans, which is lean/likely D/R, respectively.  Since when did I say that Peter would lose?

You mentioned the margin of error and all I was saying is that you can't really contribute error to Peters lead.
Logged
DrScholl
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,926
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -3.30

« Reply #2 on: September 25, 2014, 09:16:59 AM »
« Edited: September 25, 2014, 09:35:32 AM by Invisible Obama »


Terri Lynn Land is within five in Michigan, but no one says that's a comeback.

Indeed.  A 2 point Ras lead for Peters is "Safe D" according to DrScholl.  I think Lean/Likely D is still fair, but Safe D is ridiculous when you have multiple polls within the MoE on that race.

Anyways, this is Lean/Likely R.  It's analogous to Michigan for the GOP.

Land is a horrible candidate and that really makes a big difference. Sure, you could claim that Land is really leading and Peters lead is only due to error, but that's not exactly how polling works. Fact of it is, Michigan was a climb to begin with, but with Land being a horrible candidate, it is quite Safe for Democrats.

Sigh......all I was saying is that Michigan is as safe for Democrats only as much as Georgia is safe for Republicans, which is lean/likely D/R, respectively.  Since when did I say that Peter would lose?

You mentioned the margin of error and all I was saying is that you can't really contribute error to Peters lead.

Are you sure you know what a margin of error is in this context?

I am well aware of what margin of error means, thank you very much. I simply don't think a race being "within the margin of error" means that it will necessarily go either way.
Logged
DrScholl
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,926
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.55, S: -3.30

« Reply #3 on: September 28, 2014, 05:53:11 PM »


Terri Lynn Land is within five in Michigan, but no one says that's a comeback.

Indeed.  A 2 point Ras lead for Peters is "Safe D" according to DrScholl.  I think Lean/Likely D is still fair, but Safe D is ridiculous when you have multiple polls within the MoE on that race.

Anyways, this is Lean/Likely R.  It's analogous to Michigan for the GOP.

Land is a horrible candidate and that really makes a big difference. Sure, you could claim that Land is really leading and Peters lead is only due to error, but that's not exactly how polling works. Fact of it is, Michigan was a climb to begin with, but with Land being a horrible candidate, it is quite Safe for Democrats.

Sigh......all I was saying is that Michigan is as safe for Democrats only as much as Georgia is safe for Republicans, which is lean/likely D/R, respectively.  Since when did I say that Peter would lose?

You mentioned the margin of error and all I was saying is that you can't really contribute error to Peters lead.

Are you sure you know what a margin of error is in this context?

I am well aware of what margin of error means, thank you very much. I simply don't think a race being "within the margin of error" means that it will necessarily go either way.

I'm still not convinced.

Well, I certainly won't lose any sleep over whether or not you are convinced. I don't really care if you are, because it's not that serious to me.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.027 seconds with 14 queries.