ARG...... no longer argh ? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 28, 2024, 01:08:30 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2008 Elections
  2008 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls
  ARG...... no longer argh ? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: ARG...... no longer argh ?  (Read 13486 times)
kevinatcausa
Rookie
**
Posts: 196
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -5.04

« on: November 07, 2008, 01:24:29 PM »

Are those results normalized at all by which states the polls were done in?

For example, I would suspect a pollster which happened to skip over Nevada, Iowa, and Alaska to have a much better average than one which polled all three. 
Logged
kevinatcausa
Rookie
**
Posts: 196
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -5.04

« Reply #1 on: November 07, 2008, 04:43:07 PM »
« Edited: November 07, 2008, 04:48:15 PM by kevinatcausa »

We can do a head to head comparison between any pair of pollsters by focusing just on the states where both competed.  For example, Pollster 1 would beat Pollster 2 by 0.35 if he averaged 0.35% closer to the actual margin in states where both 1 and 2 released a poll in the last week.  This somewhat mitigates the effect of different states being harder to poll. 

What would the results table look like for such a league? 
Logged
kevinatcausa
Rookie
**
Posts: 196
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -5.04

« Reply #2 on: November 07, 2008, 07:10:14 PM »
« Edited: November 07, 2008, 08:24:47 PM by kevinatcausa »

I'm in the process of doing one right now, though possibly based off of a different data set (I included the last poll from every firm which had one with a median date after 10/27).  I'll edit this post once the results are finished. 

______________________________________

hmm...the problem I'm running into here is that some pairs only have one or two states in common, leading to very noisy results (quite a few cycles where A beats B beats C beats A).  The straight averages are below (Positive means the firm in the row is on average that much closer to the mean, negative means the firm in the column)

Code:
          ARG       Mason/D   PPP       Quinn     Rasmuss   R2000     S.USA     SV       Zogby     Joe		
ARG                 1.05      -0.42     -2.5*     0.07      -1.2      -0.87     -1.33*   -0.37     -0.85
Mason/D   -1.05               -0.53     -3*      -0.78      -0.75*    -1.71     -0.33*   -2.83     -1.77
PPP        0.42     0.53                -1*       1.17       0.2       0.9       0.25*   -0.07     -0.14   
Quinn      2.5*     3*         1*                 2.67*      N/A       0.67*     2.67*    0         0.99*
Rasmuss   -0.07     0.78      -1.17     -2.67*              -0.83     -0.12     -0.67    -0.67     -0.99
R2000      1.2      0.75*     -0.2       N/A      0.83                 0.2      -1.5*    -0.2*     -0.2       
S. USA     0.87     1.71      -0.9      -0.67*    0.12      -0.2                 0.8      0.8      -0.88
SV         1.33*    0.33*     -0.25*    -2.67*    0.67       1.5*     -0.8               -2.67*    -0.73*
Zogby      0.37     2.83       0.07      0*       0.67       0.2*     -0.8       2.67*              0.19
Joe        0.85     1.77       0.14     -0.99*    0.99       0.2       0.88      0.73    -0.19

A couple notes:
-As mentioned above, I took all polls with median day after 10/27 (including a couple 10/27-10/28 polls).  If more than one poll came from the same firm, I took the last.   This does leave out the 10/23-10/28 CNN/Time polls. 

-The entries marked with a * in the table above were based on less than 5 states and likely to be rather noisy.  R2000 and Quinnipac never polled the same state. 

-Joe Average is the poll gotten by averaging all of the included polls.  Since its effectively a poll with a larger sampler size, it will normally be better performing than an average individual component. 

Quinnipac only polled two states, but they were within half a point in Florida and Pennsylvania.  They were one of only two polls to on average perform better than Joe Average, the other being...Zogby.
Logged
kevinatcausa
Rookie
**
Posts: 196
United States


Political Matrix
E: -1.94, S: -5.04

« Reply #3 on: November 07, 2008, 08:47:11 PM »
« Edited: November 07, 2008, 08:51:26 PM by kevinatcausa »

One more set of numbers:

For each pollster I took the average of

[(Average Absolute Pollster Error in state)-(Given Pollster's Absolute Error in state)] over all states in which the pollster polled.  Again positive numbers are good.  From top to bottom.

Quinnipac (1.49, 3 states)
Zogby (0.66, 7 states)
PPP (0.49, 15 states)
Research 2000 (0.43, 11 states)
Strategic Vision (0.06, 7 states)
Survey USA (0.05, 14 states)
Rasmussen (-0.29, 19 states)
ARG (-0.43, 14 states)
Mason Dixon (-0.97, 11 states)

This still isn't perfect, and it gives states like Alaska where the pollsters vary widely a disproportionate impact over states where the pollsters are close to each other. 

(EDIT: This is particularly critical in the case of Zogby, who gets a huge bump just from getting Nevada about 5 points closer than anyone else did...)
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 0.025 seconds with 14 queries.