|
Serrath posted:You're obviously familiar with this so I'm not saying this to derail the thread into a lengthy debate about this but being familiar with polygraphs, rules of evidence, and psychology as well, I would argue that it's not as unequivocal as you're making it out to be. For one thing, it's profoundly under-researched; you can draw your own conclusions as to why this is but finding good evidence that isn't more than 15 years old is very difficult and, while those studies that do encourage polygraph use that have come out in the last five years, they tend to be very small scale which doesn't contribute the strength of evidence that you would expect to be unequivocally demonstrated. I don't disagree with what you're saying but I do think, given the available standard of evidence, that skepticism is still justified. To clarify, the "unequivocal" part was in response to this paragraph specifically: quote:The real value of polygraphs is the pomp and circumstance lets you read the person's body language while they're being asked difficult questions. It's one thing if your heart speeds up, it's another thing entirely if you start fidgeting or avoiding eye contact.
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 07:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 06:39 |
|
|
HOTLANTA MAN posted:I'll believe Georgia goes blue ever again when I loving see it Georgia is gonna be minority majority within a decade man.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 07:55
|
|
|
Filthy Hans posted:Should be fun, the second was about as bad as you could expect for Clinton and she still won, and now Trump's going scorched earth on everyone who isn't strongly supporting him
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 07:57
|
|
|
It's been said previously, but man alive, the tell-all books about this election are going to be must-reads, from all sides.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 07:59
|
|
|
Holy poo poo - the USC/LAT poll is Clinton +0.4% 44.4 Clinton, 44 Trump
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:12
|
|
|
canepazzo posted:Holy poo poo - the USC/LAT poll is Clinton +0.4% 
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:13
|
|
|
I've been holding my breath waiting for all the post- pussygrab-schism polls to show that full impact. This is a great first sign.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:18
|
|
|
Instant Sunrise posted:feminist majority foundation had this article as a part of domestic violence awareness month, it's long and sad, but worth a read. Thanks for this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:22
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Reminder: Hillary Clinton as a young woman wrote NASA a letter wanting to be an Astronaut and NASA said "lol no girls allowed" I remember seeing something years ago about NASA concerns with women in space, that they wouldn't be able to handle it, their bones would fall apart, they wouldn't be able to use a bathroom, and blood would come out of... wherever, all over or backwards. As to the discussion a few pages back about token female president or whatever that wouldn't change anything, I like to think of it like female astronauts. For an older generation of geeks, it probably seemed like a big deal with Sally Ride becoming the first woman (in America) to go into space, but for me, that was years before I was ever born, the idea that I could be an astronaut one day wasn't even a question it was just a "yeah, well of course I could, there are women astronauts whats the big deal?". For a lot of people it's going to be a big deal by itself that a women will finally be president even though its not going to just change sexism and patriarchal systems, but a whole generation now will grow up thinking "yeah, well of course I could, there are women presidents (Michelle 2024), whats the big deal?". I think that kind of poo poo is really powerful.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:24
|
|
|
canepazzo posted:Holy poo poo - the USC/LAT poll is Clinton +0.4% This is one that's been pro trump for an extended period right? I'm new to how these polls work.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:26
|
|
|
Banana Man posted:This is one that's been pro trump for an extended period right? I'm new to how these polls work. They've had Trump up for the last month, by almost 7 points for about a week.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:27
|
|
|
Banana Man posted:This is one that's been pro trump for an extended period right? I'm new to how these polls work. It's been consistently (other than during the DNC falloff period, and I think once in the beginning of September) between +3 and +6 Trump.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:27
|
|
|
Banana Man posted:This is one that's been pro trump for an extended period right? I'm new to how these polls work. It's been running about 8 points redder than the rest of the polling averages but more interestingly before the swing today it's been seemingly impervious to change which is funny because it's a daily tracking poll. Edit: In theory optimized to be responsive to change but not necessarily accurate to the absolute margin of the election however whatever methodology they chose doesn't seem to track the bulk of polling with either.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:28
|
|
|
Just another log to throw on the outrage bonfire. http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2016/10/11/donald_trump_would_raise_taxes_on_single_parents.html
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:29
|
|
|
canepazzo posted:Holy poo poo - the USC/LAT poll is Clinton +0.4% Impossible. I would seriously read a book about this poll after all this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:31
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:On a serious related note, does the thread have any book recommendations on biographical material for either Clinton and/or his administration? My history on that time period is weak and I find both of them immensely interesting people.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:33
|
|
|
As much as I want to see a flawless victory + fatality in round 3 of the debates, the adult in me is thinking we're probably better off with more of the same. She can't get the people who think she's literally possessed by demons, the men who can't stand the idea of a woman doing a man's job, the single issue pro-life voters, the white supremacists, or the NWO isolationists. So that leaves the churchgoers who aren't okay with the locker room talk, the business people who depend on international trade, and the culturally conservative immigrants who aren't thrilled by the wall idea for her to talk to. If she wants those votes (she wants them all) she has to walk a very fine line where she's showing those groups that what she offers them is better than what he offers, without alienating them for the other ties they have to the GOP. Too many people associate assertive women with mythological beasts of yore (Harpy, Siren, Medusa), so simply being the only rational adult on the stage is probably her best chance to win over the people with whom she has a chance. She's got to stay above the fray, ignore his bait, and subtly bring up points that make him act more Trumplike. She can't out-big him, she can't out-rhetoric him, she can't overpower him, so she's got to be Bugs Bunny, casually deflecting his craziness with a wink to the audience, but always always always making sure she's the good guy and he's the angry, misguided one. I won't turn down a chaos dunk, though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:34
|
|
|
Banana Man posted:This is one that's been pro trump for an extended period right? I'm new to how these polls work. Yeah, that's the crazy tracking poll. I really don't understand why it's being aggregated. It's highly experimental and has no track record. I think there's also a lot of questionable decisions they've made with their methodology that wouldn't be tolerated if they were made by a respected pollster with a good track record. You can read some of the details here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/innovative-interesting-new-poll-not-believable_us_57bb1bc9e4b007f181993144
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:35
|
|
|
Tricky Ed posted:As much as I want to see a flawless victory + fatality in round 3 of the debates, the adult in me is thinking we're probably better off with more of the same. She can't get the people who think she's literally possessed by demons, the men who can't stand the idea of a woman doing a man's job, the single issue pro-life voters, the white supremacists, or the NWO isolationists. The ones who will never, ever vote for her could simply just not vote.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:36
|
|
|
Your way works too posted:Impossible. The Black Man Who Voted For Trump : The LATimes Tracker Poll Story
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:40
|
|
|
Why is that poll such a loving outlier?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:42
|
|
|
I don't know. It's not even graded on FiveThirtyEight. Its presence is baffling.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:44
|
|
|
Anidav posted:Why is that poll such a loving outlier? Maybe it's the last hold out of Unskewed methodology.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:45
|
|
|
Anidav posted:Why is that poll such a loving outlier? It's doing a lot of experimental things that have added up to being pretty skewed in the long run.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:45
|
|
|
Your way works too posted:Impossible. You're in luck! It's a university research project so I'm sure there will be a pretty good postmortem saying, "This was busted. We'll fix it for next cycle if we can get funding to do this again." dis astranagant posted:It's doing a lot of experimental things that have added up to being pretty skewed in the long run. This is true, but the mistakes it's making have nothing to do with the experimental nature of it. Most of them are just pedestrian polling newb mistakes. ErIog fucked around with this message at 08:49 on Oct 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:46
|
|
|
By experimental to you mean holding the phone up to Karl Rove's rear end?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:47
|
|
|
Anidav posted:By experimental to you mean holding the phone up to Karl Rove's rear end? Over emphasizing who you say you voted for in 2012, for one. There's a Huffpo link above that actually covers some of the problems their in their methodology.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:50
|
|
|
Anidav posted:By experimental to you mean holding the phone up to Karl Rove's rear end? Man I hope we get some bonkers moments like that from this election. Still not certain whether or not I'm taking the day off to watch coverage. 2012 was great because they were so convinced Romney was going to win. This year, though, with the stink of defeat emanating from Trump I can't help but feel like it's going to have a more somber fait accompli tone to it. CNN might be the coverage to go with since they've shown they can put together a looney bin of Trump supporters.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:52
|
|
|
I understand wanting to try something new in polling but why not run a traditional poll simultaneously so your credibility doesn't get dragged through the mud?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:55
|
|
|
Anidav posted:Why is that poll such a loving outlier? instead of dialing a random sample of voters they use the same pool of 3000 voters, dial up a ~400 person chunk every day, and ask them the same set of questions it's basically lesson one in how not to design a statistical test
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 08:56
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:reaching back a bit, but while 'The Hunting of the President' isn't about the administration per se it does offer an interesting look into the media movements that have culminated in our current right-wing medias and the history of the anti-Clinton smear campaigns. There's apparently a documentary version of this. Book or documentary?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 09:00
|
|
|
ErIog posted:Yeah, that's the crazy tracking poll. I really don't understand why it's being aggregated. It's highly experimental and has no track record. I think there's also a lot of questionable decisions they've made with their methodology that wouldn't be tolerated if they were made by a respected pollster with a good track record.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 09:02
|
|
|
Alec Bald Snatch posted:instead of dialing a random sample of voters they use the same pool of 3000 voters, dial up a ~400 person chunk every day, and ask them the same set of questions  plus there's not a single person in that poll who won't start answering differently sometimes just to gently caress with the pollsters
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 09:02
|
|
|
Tricky Ed posted:As much as I want to see a flawless victory + fatality in round 3 of the debates, the adult in me is thinking we're probably better off with more of the same. She can't get the people who think she's literally possessed by demons, the men who can't stand the idea of a woman doing a man's job, the single issue pro-life voters, the white supremacists, or the NWO isolationists.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 09:09
|
|
|
Alec Bald Snatch posted:instead of dialing a random sample of voters they use the same pool of 3000 voters, dial up a ~400 person chunk every day, and ask them the same set of questions I mean, if the idea isn't to test "who's winning" but rather "who's doing better than last week", the idea isn't unreasonable. It seems they probably messed up in the details (choosing the sample), but the core concept is fine.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 09:10
|
|
|
canepazzo posted:This Utah poll is quite the thing: The smallest margin of victory(and it's always a victory) for a Republican in the Utah presidential election is more than 20%. So far. Mormons must absolutely despise Trump. Which is slightly surprising given how willing evangelicals have been willing to stick by him.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 09:12
|
|
|
TheOneAndOnlyT posted:Honestly I'm expecting less of a chaos dunk from Hillary and more of a self-immolation from Trump. Trump is loving pissed at the GOP right now, and I bet that if Hillary prodded him with a few instances of "even the GOP isn't supporting Donald anymore", he'd spend the next hour telling millions of viewers how much the Republican Party sucks while Hillary looks on with a grin on her face. She gave a line like that in the last debate, so she's definitely aware and probably enjoying it a lot. If the madness continues there's no way she doesn't hit him on it in the next one. And, because this is Trump here, it will continue. The main issue I can see if the rear end in a top hat Fox moderator trying to tip things.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 09:14
|
|
|
Solved the mystery - they didn't poll that famous outlier, looks like: Vote breakdown Afro-american % supporting Trump: 5.2%, down from 18/20% Also, check out "who do you think will win, regardless of your vote?" (usually a more predictive indicator of an election): 55.5% Clinton 38.9% Trump and "do you intend to vote?" 86.1% Clinton 83.5% Trump Enthusiasm gap
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 09:15
|
|
|
Ditocoaf posted:I mean, if the idea isn't to test "who's winning" but rather "who's doing better than last week", the idea isn't unreasonable. It seems they probably messed up in the details (choosing the sample), but the core concept is fine. rolling samples and plain ol aggregators taking the mean already exist if you need something less volatile, and the latter will by design be more accurate than a single poll
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 09:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 12, 2024 06:39 |
|
|
The Insect Court posted:The smallest margin of victory(and it's always a victory) for a Republican in the Utah presidential election is more than 20%. So far. Mormons place a lot of value in appearing decent in public. Trump has always been just about the opposite of everything they think a public figure should be. Evangelicals already had jumped the shark by ho-ing themselves out for divorced adulterer Ronald Reagan and his wife Nancy, the Tony Hawk of pro Hollywood blowjobs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 09:18
|
|