redblueamerica.com

My understanding is that when you do a poll which is nothing more than a representive type of polling that you have to have enough of a sample which would reflect direct results.

Based on polling numbers over the last year and applying the results against actual voter turnout and actual results show that the polls are too small.

I suspect that for a poll to be really viable it would have to be somewhere around 10k to 20k. 489 which are samples taken against a speed 500 is no where possible of a reliable poll.

Thus MSNBC, AP and CNN should stop their polling as they have be abismal.

In the largest of the polls which was under 5k had the closest to the end result of being only 7% off actual verses 29% for the smaller sampling ones.

Thus polls which predict a certain result should fall within 3% of the result. If it does not then two things happened. 1. not large enough of a sampling or that the data gathered was biased and flawed.

That the total number of people polled is very very small as compared to the whole.

NBC, CNN, CBS, ABC, Time, AP rarely get more than 1000 and most of the time its less than a 1000 people polled.

When you look at the polls which the most people then you see something which is no secret.

This nation is divided along party lines. Thus you see a dead heat, or a one or two point difference when you look at the larger pool of people.

The smaller the group polled the more wide one candidate has over the other. Which means that that poll was made to be that way.

But the polls that everyone is point to is just not large enough of a sample to be respective of the nation as a whole.

All these polls would get an F in common college statistics.

The polls sampling is just plainly too small to be worth something.

So the next time I hear a candidate say that the poll is this or that, then its clear that the candidate is off target and is fooling himself and not working for the people.