Judging from the Kansas Republicans’ votes and statements on health reform this year in Congress, you’d think most of their constituents would be pro-status quo. But a new survey from the Docking Institute of Public Affairs at Fort Hays State University found that 56 percent of Kansas adults think the government has the responsibility to ensure that all Americans have health care coverage and that 88 percent think the Kansas health care system needs change — major change, according to 58 percent.
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- CapnAmerica on ACORN stole election?
- CapnAmerica on ACORN stole election?
- janeeyre on Bad timing on mammogram recommendation
- Raptor on Open thread 11/21
- janeeyre on Open thread 11/21
- Regular on Open thread 11/21
- XXX on Open thread 11/21
- Daniel on ACORN stole election?
- Daniel on Open thread 11/21
- satatom on Open thread 11/21
98 Comments
“Informed Consent” has come to the point my primary physician asks me if he should do standard blood tests.
I inherited this guy after my doctor of choice retired. This new guy seems to be competent. But he’s locked into ordering (if I say it’s okay) tests and procedures that have led to to no diagnosis, no purpose. But big billing!
The Docking Institute is a liberal biased agenda; no surprise there; another poll with questionable numbers
Have you actually read the Docking Institute survey, Cynical, or are you merely parroting right-wing pap? The latter, I suspect, as your comments generally indicate a lack of intelligence.
It seems that “liberal” has become a synonym for “educated” and “informed.”
From the linked article…
“the survey had a margin of error of plus or minus 2.9 percent.”
This means that Kansans want the Government to assure health care by a margin of from 53.1 to 58.9%. A clear majority.
“The Docking Institute is a liberal biased agenda; no surprise there; another poll with questionable numbers.”
Let me guess, you saw the name of “Docking” in the title and immediately spotted “liberal bias”.
Please come up with better evidence of “liberal bias” than the connection to the family name of Docking. There are several university based institutes named after famous politicians, and the name does not predict their “bias”.
Surveying less than 1/10th of 1 percent of Kansans about anything doesn’t really say much of anything, other than the sample size was too small.
Regular doesn’t understand polling. In fact, a 1200 sample size is larger than many polls, and is 35% larger than FOX “News” uses in its polls:
“Methodology Notes:
FOX News polls are conducted by telephone among a random national sample of registered voters. In general, the polls include approximately 900 registered voters and have a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points. When necessary, minor weights are applied to key demographic variables to bring the sample into conformity with the most reliable demographic profiles. FOX News polls are not weighted by political party. These poll results were conducted by Opinion Dynamics Corporation for FOX News.”
Get a clue.
56%?
American Democracy Project=Docking Institute=Democrats
Docking Institute Gary Brinker/Mike Walker
Survey margin of error of +/- 2.9%
OBAMA FOR AMERICA
Contributions Federal Election Commission
Brinker $2,300?
Professor Liberal Arts College/Social Sciences/Public Policy
The survey, completed as a class project by students in Dr. Gary Brinker’s research methods class, sampled student attitudes toward guns on campus as well as the perceived likelihood of a random gun attack similar to the April 2007 shooting at Virginia Tech.
“There wasn’t strong support for allowing students, faculty and staff to carry guns,” said Brinker, a professor in MSU’s Sociology, Anthropology and Criminology Department.
The survey was directed by Gary Brinker, associate professor of sociology and associate director of the Center for Social Science and Public Policy Research at Southwest Missouri State University in Springfield, Mo. It was released by the Missourians to Abolish the Death Penalty.
“The data show that the strong general support for the death penalty in Missouri erodes when alternatives are presented,” Brinker wrote in a summary of responses.
“Further, less than one-third of Missourians who favor the death penalty favor it for all convicted murderers,” he said.
Department of Sociology and Social Work
Mike Walker, MS
Instructor and Coordinator of the Community Development Certificate Program
Mike Walker is an instructor in the Department of Sociology and Social Work, and the Assistant Director of the Docking Institute of Public Affairs at Fort Hays State University. He currently teaches social research methods, sociology of urban and rural areas, community theory and development, and demography. Mike also coordinates the Community Development Certificate Program.
You don’t get any more lib that that!
Obama is the hero of community developers.
Contributions Federal Election Commission
Brinker $2,300?
Confirmed. Not same Brinker.
HDChaplain, did you bother to read the PDF attached to the article? I know all the charts and graphs (you know, the ones designed for 9th graders) might be a little overwhelming, but if you skip to page 58, the actual questions asked are right there. Starting on page 67 you’ll find the poll demographics crosstabs. Spend a little time actually studying information before dismissing it like some partisan hack.
The methodology of the Docking Institute is fatally flawed.
Their poll took place from April to September.
Way, way, way too much time. Natl poll # for Obama care sank like a rock during this time.
Of course Rhonda doesn’t know much about polling.
thomaswitt, HDChaplainCorps is the reincarnation of econ101. In other words a paid shill for anything anti-Obama and/or progressive. No brainwork either involved or used in his posts. Scroll over material.
Frankiefarter,
The poll wasn’t about Obama, or so-called “Obamacare.” Did you bother to read the questions?
Go to page 58: http://www.khi.org/resources/Other/1392-KansasSpeaks2009%5B1%5D.pdf
Next, the wingnuts will be claiming all the pollsters were ACORN hires.
I’ve often wondered how many WE Blog CONs are on salary from David Koch.
I dunno.
It just seems likely.
JM, thanks for the info. I go away for a year, and everyone on the “right” has new sock-puppets. The moderates and left all seem to have the same names (or like me, use our real names). What’s up with that?
Twitt a good poll to take would actually be after the ‘real’ plan has been laid out. The more people know about what the dems are putting in their plan the less support it has.
Polls can be manipulated to show what you want them to show.
Voters have said time after time in our own state and many others that they don’t favor same sex marriage and still you are a paid lobbyist trying to get this passed in Kansas. Why?
Clearly the people don’t want it. Now tell me again about the will of the people or is it that you only support those polls that reflect your own opinons.
Actually, I suspect that Politico is econ 101’s latest proll incarnation.
HDChaplin Corps appears a troll identity that was originally developed to harrass Chas. I suspect that the HD troll identity is an alternate nic for another poster here, but I wouldn’t pretend to say I know who exactly it is (I have my suspicions, but that is all they are). But given the on again, off again nature of its posts, while the content of some of its posts indicate that it has been following this board during its “absences”, I suspect HD is a second nic, but not for Politico/econ 101/Franklin/etc. HD is too mean spirited, and frankly, clever in a trollish respect.
And that being said, HD’s chain of questionable inferences is a proll post worthy of Politico/econ 101/Franklin/etc.
Here, by the way, is a link to the actual Docking Institute.
http://www.fhsu.edu/docking/about.shtml
thomaswitt
Posted October 18, 2009 at 9:40 am | Permalink
Regular doesn’t understand polling. In fact, a 1200 sample size
———————-
According to the marketing association calculator, the sample size of 1200 was about half of what was needed.
Confidence Level: 95%
Confidence Interval: 2.12
Population: 2802134
Sample size needed: 2135
I think if I remember correctly the original sample size was 2305. The non-response bias (number of responding) was 48 percent – “1200 respondents.”
Less than 50 percent of a sample size doesn’t help much in the way of forming an opinion on a subject or for validating a hypothesis.
If a large portion of the sample size is unavailable, then common practice in statistics is to redraw the sample size and then start the survey/measurement.
I find the results dubious.
Okobserver,
You’ve made an assertion for which you have no proof. This seems to be typical for you.
As you pointed out, I’m the lobbyist for the Kansas Equality Coaltion, which formed after the 2005 anti-marriage amendment passed. Since passage, no one in this state has lobbied for marriage equality – not me, not anyone affiliated with KEC, no one.
We successfully lobbied in 2007 for the passage of the state’s school anti-bullying bill, the 2008 school anti-cyberbullying bill, and since 2005, have pressed every year for sexual orientation to be added to Kansas’ current non-discrimination laws that already cover things like religion, race, ethnicity, veterans status, etc.
This year we introduced a bill that would require Kansas hospitals to permit visitors from anyone the patient desires. Did you know that hospitals can legally pick and choose from among a patient’s visitors, and that sometimes they keep patients from seeing their life-partners? It’s a horrible injustice that, at a time of tragedy in people’s lives, that hospital administrators can do things like this.
Ensuring someone’s civil rights is something that should never be left to a vote of the people. This is why we have the constitution. Unfortunately gay people aren’t specifically mentioned in it.
If we all voted that you should be institutionalized granny, do you think we can take away your civil rights too? I mean, crazy old women aren’t protected in the constitution either. Your buddy Schafly saw to that.
Twitt yes I am aware of what it is you do. No I don’t think it is right to deny any rights to a life partner. Although I find it hard to beleive that this happens as you have stated. Some other factors are in play here I am sure.
I was merely pointing out that many times the majority of people speak out and say ‘NO’ and still the libs push their agenda. This is what is happening with the Obamacare plan. People all over the nation have said no. People in Kansas in many polls have said no. Still we get this small poll as concrete evidence that Kansas wants the Obama plan.
That was my point. As for the fact that you think I am a liar. I frequently throw back the same garbage some libs on here throw out. I did that last night. It riled the natives.
There are some on here such as BJ, Chas and othere who lie daily and seem to think they are immune from proving their lies. their comeback when faced down about lie is to say ‘prove it’ as if you can prove a lie is a lie.
I am sure you do lobby for some things that need changed. Of those you mentioned they do all have an underlying element and that is to ‘educate’ the public about the slights gays receive in education and life.
I have talked with you before about my opinion on social engineering in public schools. I don’t believe my Christian beliefs should be taught there and I don’t believe that your lobby should have a voice in what children in public school are taught.
Just my opinion.
Pmom everyday you sound more demented. You need to get help while there is still a slim chance that you can be cured.
You and BJ are the left fringe here and it is scary. Read his posts with an open mind and you will see how other view you.
Regular continues to display his ignorance of polling. The Marketing Association Calculator (he didn’t bother to provide the link, but here it is http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm) has this introduction:
“This Sample Size Calculator is presented as a public service of Creative Research Systems. You can use it to determine how many people you need to interview in order to get results that reflect the target population as precisely as needed. You can also find the level of precision you have in an existing sample.”
What they’re polling for with that sample size are the crosstabs that underlie every poll. A sample the size used by FOX “News” and FHSU will give you data concerning the general population. But if you want data that tells you what “College educated women between the ages of 55 and 67″ think, then you have to have the larger sample. That’s how you take your poll from being a general opinion survey to something that can be used for targeting specific demographics, whether it’s selling soap or a specific political message. The larger your sample, the more precise the crosstab data will be. Of course, there is a point of diminished returns, where more surveys doesn’t get your more data.
Regular also can’t do math too well. The poll had a 57.6% response rate, not “less than 50%” as he claims. And that number, my friends, is darn good on a 50 question survey.
thomaswitt
Posted October 18, 2009 at 11:34 am | Permalink
Okobserver,
You’ve made an assertion for which you have no proof. This seems to be typical for you.
————-
This appears to be a favorite lib tactic to try to marginalize the opposition. Give me instances where I have posted lies as the left does frequently. Even you chimed in yesterday with unproved ‘facts’ about Limbaugh. Love him or hate him he still has the right to have the truth told about him.
I think you have the same right. Being a conservative doesn’t take away your right to disagree.
Okobserver, but you did make an assertion, and you have no proof that I’m lobbying for “gay marriage.” I know you have no proof, because I’m not doing it, and I would know if I was.
What unproved facts did I post about Limbaugh? I posted that he has archives of all his shows, posted a link to his website page that has him saying that, and posted the statement itself.
Ksgran, lady, you calling me demented is laughable. You’re the one on here who is CONSTANTLY owned, and yet, you keep pluggin along. Its like you live in some alternate universe, and when its pointed out you do just what the rest of the cons do, defend, deflect, deny.
Do you even get out of your house or did you build your own neverland to live in, because I swear you really do not either see nor care of the plight of people in the world around you.
okobserver,
Where is your proof of your false claim that Al Gore made “millions” from AIT?
Twitt if you are not currently working on the same sex marriage ammendment then I offer my apology. Obviously there is nothing on that front right now in the state of Kansas. If you issue were to be revisited would part of your lobbying duties be to push it in the legislature?
Pmom not agreeing with your political agenda doesn’t make me ‘not see the plight’ of people in the world around me. It simply means that I don’t agree that what you are advocating is the right path to take to cure their ills.
I think the path the left is proposing will not only put a financial burden on this nation it will never recover from but that in the end it will actually hurt the very people the dims are trying to ’save’.
You mean like how the democrats kept saying the war in Iraq would ruin the country and our chance to win the real war against terror?
yeah funny those differences in opinion seem to always end up with the liberals being right.
The only reason we’re not in another depression is because of the stimulus. I completely believe that. We still might be heading there anyway because republicans won’t allow anything worth a darn to be passed. Healthcare reform will HELP AMERICA recover. But you can’t have that, because doing what is good for america isn’t good for your party.
And we all know, your party comes first.
Okobserver, I’m surprised by your apology. Thank you; I accept it.
To answer your question about the marriage ban: I can’t see a scenario in the near future where bringing the issue up makes any sense at all. Repeal takes 2/3 of the Kansas House, 2/3 of the Kansas Senate, and a majority vote of the people of Kansas. I’m not Don Quixote; I don’t imagine that windmills are dragons and I’m going to slay them.
About hospitals, it happens all over the country. Here’s one article, you can google others:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/19/health/19well.html?_r=1
“Sharon Reed says she was denied access to her partner of 17 years, Jo Ann Ritchie, who was dying of liver failure. Although the hospital had liberal visitation policies, a night nurse from an employment agency insisted that Ms. Reed leave her partner’s room”
“In both cases, the couples had prepared for a medical emergency, creating living wills, advanced directives and power-of-attorney documents.”
The survey appendices indicate a slight skewing of the highest income group of over $70,000. The survey results are about 4% over the valid percent of that one category.
jbradley, we saw some of that same skew in our polling on legislative races last year. With the younger voters (hence lower income) being underrepresented, it’s not surprising.
Let me repeat that the extended time frame of the results makes the poll nearly worthless.
As for my reference to “Obamacare” – that is a political shortcut to the notion of government taking over health care. I thought the politically astute posters here would understand that.
The fact is that the various health care proposals, whatever you want to call them, are losing public support. LOTS of public support since April.
That is probably the case in Kansas and maybe even more so.
I don’t think the majority are teabaggers, even though that’s what the media would have you believe.
I do think most people, even in Kansas where elderly numbers are high, believe that we need massive changes to healthcare. Since I work with the elderly and disabled every day, I know that almost every one of them I talk to believes we need healthcare reform.
Unfortunately for some, it takes a major health care crisis for them to see. Even republicans who normally and in the past would have fought against this during the Clinton years have changed their tune.
T.WITT writes: Regular also can’t do math too well. The poll had a 57.6% response rate, not “less than 50%” as he claims. And that number, my friends, is darn good on a 50 question survey.
Doesn’t matter if it is 57.6 or 50 percent response, that is way too low to be considered a valid survey, especially with an invalid sample size.
They should have redone the survey with a larger sample size or disregarded the results.
It would be like doing a sample on 1000 auto parts and saying that only 57.6 percent parts were available and then base an interpretation on 57.6 percent of the total sample size as valid.
If you’re a quality control person and do that it will get you fired.
sample on 1000 auto parts = sample size of 1000 auto parts
Defend, deflect, deny…in any way you can.
Welcome to the weblog, JBradley.
Although don’t give up your important activism work to post here, hehe.
A lot of folks think they’re part of the 101st Fighting Keyboard Brigade.
Regular is perfectly happy with his healthcare.
For a small monthly fee, he can see whatever doctor he wants and get treated for whatever he’s got and the gov’t picks up the tab.
Everybody else can go screw themselves.
That’s the CON way.
Again what were seeing played out here today is exactly what we see every day in the media and everywhere else in this country.
CONs start with the CONclusion they want — gov’t is bad and gov’t programs are bad — and then they seize any evidence no matter how unfactual or wrong-headed that backs it up.
Meanwhile any evidence that refutes their preCONception must be nit-picked, libeled or ridiculed, no matter how good it is.
Fox News polls the entire country with 1000 calls and that’s fine. The Docking Institute polls the single state of Kansas with 1200 calls and that’s not nearly enough. Or they’re liberals. Or the information is too old.
See how it works?
thomaswitt
Posted October 18, 2009 at 11:50 am | Permalink
Regularthomaswitt continues to display his ignorance of polling because he ignores that the supposed demographic was the population of Kansas.As it turns out, the survey was conducted on Kansas with telephones, who were 18 or above, were present at the time of the survey and completed the survey.
That’s narrow demographics and being as less than 1/10th of one percent of the population size were surveyed – it doesn’t really say anything about the opinion of Kansans.
It only says something about the very limited and tiny sample sized used.
It couldn’t simply be that a majority of people just aren’t happy seeing their insurance rates climb 10 or 20 percent a year even when they don’t get sick, seeing friends and family wiped out by one catastrophic medical problem even when they have insurance, knowing that if they lose their job they will lose their insurance coverage and won’t be able to afford anything good even if they have the money to pay for it.
Nah.
It must be the poll . . .
Regular is right. We can assume that people like him collecting disability from the gov’t and enjoying gov’t paid health care insurance are perfectly satisfied with their situation.
Everybody else may have a slightly different view however.
The State of Kansas pays for your health insurance Capn.
Hypocrite much?
Actually, that’s not correct. I’m not on any State plan.
But at any rate, I pay far too much for the coverage, I don’t really have a choice, AND if I lose my job, I lose my insurance too.
AND I want to give EVERYBODY better insurance . . . not just me.
CapnAmerica
Posted October 18, 2009 at 4:04 pm | Permalink
Actually, that’s not correct. I’m not on any State plan.
———————–
The state of Kansas pays both you and your wife’s salary, so you are using a transfer of funds from Kansas to pay for your health insurance.
How about you make your case to the “free” market there “Regular”. See if they’ll insure ya.
BlueJay
Posted October 18, 2009 at 4:12 pm | Permalink
How about you make your case to the “free” market there “Regular”. See if they’ll insure ya.
—————————
Unlike you BlueJay, I chose the military for my profession as I knew they had a health care plan as part of their retirement benefits.
I planned, you didn’t – sorry you got left behind for not planning.
Yeah.
I really want my life to end up like “Regular’s.”
“BlueJay” has a kid who loves him.
“Regular” lives in his sister’s basement.
“BlueJay” is committed to a world where you don’t go broke if you get sick.
“Regular” longs for a perfect world when he can frog march me into an empty field and put a bullet in my skull.
It’s all you have MonkeyHock, to insult people on the Internet.
Must be sad, to be a scared and lonely primate like yourself.
“Regular” –
Oh, the irony!
The comments in the press about what is being discussed as universal/singlepayer or even reformed rules for the health insurance industry have nothing to do with reform. I fear a deformed, malignent piece of legislation will come forth that will benfit no one, reward the culprits and be abandoned. Then we’ll all be told “See we tried it and it didn’t work, now make them socialist keep their plans and stop imposing their foreign ways on America, this is not Australia, Europe, Japan or Canada, we’re free here, not like them commies”.
Regular,
You clearly have no idea how polling is conducted, what sample sizes look like, what contact and response rates look like, or what kind of data one expects to find in a properly conducted poll.
I previously posted FOX “News” statement about their polls conducted by Opinion Dynamics, where they clearly state they limit their sample size to ~900 surveys. Here’s one from a WSJ poll:
“The Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll was based on nationwide telephone interviews of 1,008 adults, including a sample of 101 interviews with people who only use a cell phone. It was conducted June 12-15 by the polling organizations of Peter D. Hart and Bill McInturff.” (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124527518023424769.html)
Go to conservative-leaning Rasmussen (rasmussenreports DOT com) and look at the stats on their national polls – all in the ~1000 range.
The sample size used by the Docking Institute is clearly a little larger than the national pollsters use in national polling; they probably wanted to make sure they had enough subgroup sampling to come up with some rudimentary crosstabs (see the last pages of the PDF report). And a 57% response rate is actually very good in polling.
Your complaint that the poll was only conducted with people over 18 who answered their phones: That’s how polls are conducted. Oh my. And conducting polls isn’t the same as inventorying auto parts. It’s ridiculous to even suggest it.
The non-partisan website “Public Agenda” says this (I’m not posting extra links because it’ll force “moderation” of my comments; you can google this):
“The bigger the sample, the smaller the margin of error, but once you get past a certain point — say, a sample size of 800 or 1,000 — the improvement is very small. The results of a survey of 300 people will likely be correct within 6 percentage points, while a survey of 1,000 will be correct within 3 percentage points, a lower margin of error. But that is where the dramatic differences end — when a sample is increased to 2,000 respondents, the margin of error drops only slightly, to 2 percentage points. But why ask two or three thousand respondents when 800 will do? Usually when a study has a large sample, it is so certain subgroups — like parents or the elderly — can be teased out and compared to each other or to the whole.”
This whole exchange reminds me of the night you tried to explain database programming to me. A total eye-roller.
Frankiefurter,
Of all the criticisms about the FHSU/Docking poll, yours about the time-in-field is the only comment that approaches credibility. Don’t get too excited, though; your criticism is valid when the poll questions asked are of an immediate nature concerning specific events currently in the news.
Imagine we were polling 1000 adult Kansans about their views on slavery. A couple of grad students could get through the two or three thousand calls it would take in a few months. It’s not unusual for research polls of this nature to be in the field for two or three months, and in that time frame, the views on slavery of those surveyed really aren’t going to change much (if at all).
On the other hand, if we were doing a 1000 survey tracking poll on the question “If the election were held today, would you vote for candidate A or candidate B,” you’d have about three or four days, tops, to field the poll.
The questions on this poll aren’t of an immediate nature, and the only thing that catches my eye about the time-in-field is that it went four months instead of three. That’s a little long, but I don’t think so long that it will seriously impact the results. I’m sure pollsters and statisticians on both sides could debate that extra 30 to 45 days, but it’s really a matter of hair splitting.
thomaswitt
Posted October 18, 2009 at 7:42 pm | Permalink
Regular,
You clearly have no idea how polling is conducted, what sample sizes look like,
———————————————-
Sample size, sure I know what it is. I was using this back the 1970s.
http://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/pmc/section2/pmc231.htm
———————————————-
Later on, MIL-STD-1916 and ISO19114:2003 and several others regarding sampling in research environment and for development testing.
All formally trained – how about yourself T.WITT?
Regular,
Just as SQL and XML are not the same (a distinction that escaped your understanding two years ago), manufacturing quality control and public opinion polling aren’t the same, either.
Regular incorrectly opines that The state of Kansas pays both you [CapnAmerica] and your wife’s salary, so you are using a transfer of funds from Kansas to pay for your health insurance.
Even if true, which it isn’t, it is wholly illogical in my case to call me hypocrite. There are plenty of CON state reps who are paid by the state who are against gov’t funded health care.
You can call them hypocrites if you want to. However I want EVERYONE to have what state employees have, a gov’t option, so I’m NOT the hypocrite.
The hypocrite is Regular, Am-Way, the Price boys etc etc who get their guaranteed health care from the gov’t and want everybody else to go suck eggs.
I took a robust Research and Methodology course (as well as Statistics) when I was in grad school, taught by a major figure in the field, and everything TomWitt says rings true.
Regular . . . not so much.
BTW, Regular,
What is the margin of error?
When a survey says that the “margin of error” is + or – 3, what does that mean?
Feel free to google it if you have to.
thomaswitt
Posted October 18, 2009 at 8:20 pm | Permalink
Regular,
Just as SQL and XML are not the same (a distinction that escaped your understanding two years ago), manufacturing quality control and public opinion polling aren’t the same, either.
———————–
Evidently, T.WITT, you have become a mind reader of what I don’t or do know.
Instead of insulting my knowledge, let’s see some statistical manipulation, complete with formulae and examples from you. Not what Fox news or some other blah dee blah blah blah.
You know what I think of polls? I think that back in 2000 there was a life lesson in polling when many TV stations predicted by exit polling that Gore had won the election before all Florida voters had a chance to vote. How’d that work out for them?
There have been many other polls that used statistics daily that mislead and provide a false look of what is actually happening. This poll in this topic is one of them.
I know what margin of error is Capn.
Let’s see how smart you are then. Name the biochemical matrices arrising from the afferent and efferent neural bundles of the optic nerve.
The exit polls in Florida were exactly right.
Gore did win in Florida.
However when electronic card readers threw out voters who voted for Gore and also wrote in under “write in candidate” Al Gore, those votes were not electronically counted.
Any human who looked at the votes, as a consortium later did, could see the “intent of the voter,” and they were legal votes, and Gore was robbed.
But heigh ho.
You CONs got what you wanted: 9-11, the War in Iraq, a doubling of the national debt, gov’t spying and gov’t propaganda sold as the nightly news and WORSTPRESIDENTEVER.
Well done.
We’re talking about research methodology.
What is margin of error? What does it describe?
It’s actually a fairly easy question for someone who has studied statistics and research.
Apparently, Regular hasn’t.
Also, according to Iraqi gov’t reports recently released, 85 thousand people died as a direct result of the American invasion of Iraq.
Well done, CONs.
Cap still telling lies. Independent news organizations looked at the ballots and said Bush won Florida. Where do you get your fairy tales. You need to change publishers.
And you really teach students. That is scary.
Oko–
Getting the links to prove it.
Will brb.
Study of Disputed Florida Ballots Finds Justices Did Not Cast the Deciding Vote
By FORD FESSENDEN and JOHN M. BRODER
Published: Monday, November 12, 2001
A comprehensive review of the uncounted Florida ballots from last year’s presidential election reveals that George W. Bush would have won even if the United States Supreme Court had allowed the statewide manual recount of the votes that the Florida Supreme Court had ordered to go forward.
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/12/politics/12VOTE.html
————–
Why do some libs think they lie without being challenged. Capn you are one of the worse with this tired tactic.
Oko–
That refers to the recount as Gore wanted.
Had the recount been held as The State Supreme Court demanded however, Gore would have won.
Hang on . . .
The latest unofficial Florida recount shows Al Gore with a net gain of 682 votes from the Miami Herald/USA Today examination of “overvotes” – those that counting machines had kicked out for registering more than one vote for president.
It turned out that 1,871 of these disqualified ballots were clearly marked for Gore and 1,189 were clearly marked for George W. Bush, giving Gore that net gain of 682 votes.
For those who remember Bush’s official victory margin of 537 votes, the math would seem simple. Subtract 537 from 682, giving Gore a narrow win by 145 votes.
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2001/051201a.html
The Miami Herald noted that a recent statistical study by six academics from leading universities concluded that the infamous “butterfly ballot” in Palm Beach County probably cost Gore at least 3,400 votes from accidental double punches and up to another 2,400 votes that were mistakenly cast and counted for Reform Party candidate Pat Buchanan. [Miami Herald, May 11, 2001]
While these unofficial newspaper tallies obviously won’t change the fact that George W. Bush was awarded Florida’s 25 electoral votes and thus the presidency, they do underscore the fact that the American people chose Gore to be their leader.
Beyond the evidence that a plurality of Florida voters went to the polls to pick Gore – a fact buttressed by the new newspaper analysis – voters nationwide favored Gore over Bush by more than a half million votes.
Sure Cap you know more than the NYTimes. Gotcha.
Capn with all of your woulda, coulda, shouldas if Gore had just carried his own home state Florida would have been irrelevant.
Those who knew him best didn’t think he was suited to the presidency. I think they were right.
CapnAmerica
Posted October 18, 2009 at 8:58 pm | Permalink
It’s actually a fairly easy question for someone who has studied statistics and research.
Apparently, Regular hasn’t.
——————————–
A little knowledge can be dangerous Capn. Your one course evidently didn’t expose you to real world 101.
==========
We didn’t use margin of error in the type of engineering research, it’s too simplistic and inaccurate. Margin of Error is accurate, but it’s not precise enough for engineering. When nanometers and micro volts count, you don’t guess your way along.
Terms used were associated with risk factors in critical limitations like: standard deviation depending on whether it was quantitavtive or qualitative analysis. Also depends on the integrals devised in a system of biological (man), radiation, chemical, physical or other forces such as gravity, atmospheric and etc.
I’ve proven and reproven my point about sample sizes, and used conservative websites and pollsters to do it. Now Regular wants me to perform math tricks on command. Regular is also demanding to know my college education – and if I told him, he’d only be satisfied if I gave him the placenta from the ewe that gave birth to the lamb they skinned to print my diploma on.
Sorry, Regular, but I’m not going to play that game with you. It’s tiresome and irrelevant. Just like when you pasted XML code into the blog and claimed it was SQL, you just don’t know what you’re talking about. It’s a pity, really, because you’re not incapable of learning.
Capn, why did you take the Al Gore bait? He tried several different things, from milspec qc stuff to weird ophthalmology garbage, all in an attempt to derail the conversation. He’s like Ash from the movie “Alien.” He starts every day seemingly sane, but as the day progresses, gets twitchier and twitchier, and finally erupts in a crazed, flailing rage.
The Times article is correct as far as it goes. If Gore had gotten the recount that he wanted and argued for in front of the Supreme Court, he would have lost.
Because Gore did not ask for a state-wide recount, which is how he would have won.
http://www.aei.org/docLib/20040526_KeatingPaper.pdf
Here’s what the official media consortium report:
the media consortium’s findings indicated that Gore could have won a full statewide recount of all votes (all undervotes and overvotes) . . .
And later, overvoted optical ballots often had errors that left potential votes to be claimed in a recount. The most common was the “double-bubble”
first revealed by the Orlando Sentinel’s recount in Lake County. On those ballots, a voter marks a candidate and then where it says “Write In candidate,” the voter follows the instructions and writes the candidate’s name. If both the candidate and “write-in” ovals are filled (or arrows completed), machines read an overvote and residential choice is invalidated. Since the write-in was not a “qualified write-in candidate,” state election law says that the write-in is void and the vote counts for the candidate chosen.
These were the legal votes that were never able to be hand counted thanks to CONs “white riot” and disruption etc.
Good point, Tom. The CONs around here are past masters at deflection.
“Hey, look at that shiny object over there!”
Sorry, my bad.
T.WITT writes: Sorry, Regular, but I’m not going to play that game with you.
—————–
That’s okay if your just blowing smoke, you just can’t perform. It’s understable with someone who claims false intellect as much as you and the Capn do.
Regular whines, “We didn’t use margin of error in the type of engineering research . . .”
So?
If you’re going to argue why the Docking Institute survey is wrong, you’d have to understand simple concepts like margin of error.
If you don’t, then you don’t know sh it about it.
CapnAmerica
Posted October 18, 2009 at 9:44 pm | Permalink
Regular whines, “We didn’t use margin of error in the type of engineering research . . .”
So?
If you’re going to argue why the Docking Institute survey is wrong, you’d have to understand simple concepts like margin of error.
If you don’t, then you don’t know sh it about it.
============================
I know what it is Capn.
You don’t seem to understand that the ‘margin of error’ is a range that is only acceptable in ‘cow flop statistics’ like Polling where precision isn’t desired. They only what to hit the outside rings of the target, not the bullseyes.
Margin of error is a statistical deviation allowance used by low accuracy statisticians.
It doesn’thave much use in science or engineering.
It’s equivalent to ‘best guess’ in everyday terms.
In my view, that’s not acceptable.
Margin of error is simply this–whenever somebody does research, one has to assume the null hypothesis unless the evidence is significant to 95 percent certainty of higher (higher with drugs and medicine etc). The null hypothesis (that the drug had no effect or that no conclusion can be drawn) can never fully be ruled out.
The certainty that enough vitamin D eliminates the disease of ricketts can never be 100 percent. However, careful research can raise the certainty level to 95 percent or above.
A p of 5 means a 95 percent certainty.
A p of 1 means a 99 percent certainty.
A p of .5 = 99.5 and so on.
The margin of error then attempts to quantify the statistical error of the sample, usually to a p of 5 or 95 percent statistical significance.
A MOE of + or – 3 would mean that one can assume with a 95 percent degree of certainty that the true score is within a range of 3 up or 3 down from the reported score.
And btw, if you don’t know that, you don’t know sh it about polling and research.
They only what = They only want
I defined it. Regular simply claimed he knew what it was and that it wasn’t important.
Dear reader, you be the judge.
Posted October 18, 2009 at 9:54 pm | Permalink
I defined it. Regular simply claimed he knew what it was and that it wasn’t important.
Dear reader, you be the judge.
=================================
Learn to read English major:
Regular
Posted October 18, 2009 at 9:52 pm
Margin of error is a statistical deviation allowance used by low accuracy statisticians.
Yeah, Regular . . . you win, heheheheh.
“I’ve proven and reproven my point about sample sizes, and used conservative websites and pollsters to do it. Now Regular wants me to perform math tricks on command. Regular is also demanding to know my college education – and if I told him, he’d only be satisfied if I gave him the placenta from the ewe that gave birth to the lamb they skinned to print my diploma on.
“Sorry, Regular, but I’m not going to play that game with you. It’s tiresome and irrelevant.”
Good choice. Regular’s performance on this thread is a classic example of trolling by red herring and moving the goal posts.
The Docking Institute’s methodology is consistent with professional polling methodology. There really isn’t anything else that needs to be said.
Correct, Agnatha. 88 percent want change in health care.
And the other 12 percent are 1. either already covered by gov’t health care like Regular or 2. watch a helluva lot of Fox News.
‘Regular” has not outlined how he is dissatisfied with his public health care AND has not volunteered to subject himself to the “free” market.
He remains a welfare case protecting his own turf.
The ‘jawless fish’ joins the crows of the inaccurate poll dweebs by contributing: Regular’s performance on this thread is a classic example of trolling by red herring and moving the goal posts.
———————————–
Okay, let’s consult an expert:
##############################
Just how accuracy are poll on opinions based questions?
The outcomes of both political and marketing polls — and whether or not the public trusts the results — are influenced by many factors, including polling technology, how the question is worded, the perception of who is asking the question, when and how the polling sample is drawn, and who agrees to take the poll (the responders) and who decides not to (the non-responders).
Quote from Robert Stine
Robert A. Stine, Professor of Statistics
PhD, Princeton University, 1982; MA, Princeton University, 1979; BS, University of South Carolina, 1977
Research Areas
Credit scoring; model selection; pattern recognition and classification; statistical computing and graphics; time series analysis and forecasting
————————
————————
As I said, these type of polls are cow flop statistics.
Whatever drops randomly out of the cow chute and within a splatter area on the ground is good enough for political pollsters.
This is a good case of inviting members of the right to justify themselves.
Just how is it “Regular” that you feel that you are entitled to health care and your fellow Americans are not? How is it you are special? What have you contributed to your country lately?
Speaking of trolls, there’s BlueJay – always getting personal and never on topic.
Why doesn’t the ‘jawless fish’ address his constant trolling?
We all know the reason why.
Why not tell us of your difficulties with Government health care “Regular”??
You only tell us why you are deserving of being kept alive. But you do not put yourself in the place of other Americans. Indeed, you assume you are somehow more valuable than them.
Why? Because you fell down an aircraft ramp?
See, where we are at “Regular” is judging you by your own standards.
You have long ceased to be a productive member of society. And yet we keep you alive tell the rest of us who should live and who should die.
The original con in me is wondering, what right have you to live while you deny it to others?