Skip to main content

View Diary: Battleground snapshot, 8 days out (145 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Not correct. From PEC: (0+ / 0-)
    This blog began in 2004 as a meta-analysis directed at the question of who would win the Electoral College. Meta-analysis of state polls provides more objectivity and precision than looking at a single poll and gives an accurate current snapshot of the state of play. Over the course of the campaign, this site attracted over a million visits. In 2004, the median decided-voter calculation on Election Eve captured the exact final outcome (read this article and the follow-up). The 2008 calculation provided results based on decided-voter polling from all 50 states, and in the closing week of the campaign ended up within 1 electoral vote of the final outcome.
    (emphasis added)
    •  not a very long track record, though (0+ / 0-)

      The science of polling still has a long way to go, and so does the field of meta-analysis of polling data.

      Certain poll averages will do better or worse in different elections, as will LV or RV, depending on numerous factors.  It isn't possible to know the most accurate method based on 2004 or 2008 data alone.  

      One thing that is clear, however, is that allowing the poll averages to be dominated by R-leaning polls skews the averages to the right, and makes the data underestimate performance of the Dem candidate.  Of all the poll averages currently available, most make no direct effort to handle the house effects problem.  Nate Silver is so very important because he is one of the few who is using scientific method to offset those like TPM that allow R polls to skew the overall average to the advantage of the R candidates.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site