How much faith do you put in polls?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
With more than five months to go before election day, there's one thing you can count on: the polls.
There will be polls. Lots and lots of polls.
Some of us in the media tend to hyperventilate about the latest polls, their significance, and what we can read into them. but it's worth remembering that sometimes, they're just numbers.
The Los Angeles Times has a smart piece that lays out some rules on how to be smart about the polls.
For starters, don't forget the limits of national polls.
While presidential elections are fought out state-by-state in the electoral college, most polls are nationwide. It's too expensive to keep polling all the battleground states individually.
So while national polls can be helpful, they may hide important changes at the state level.
Next up: don't obsess about small shifts in the horse-race numbers.
Small bounces in the polls for Pres. obama or Mitt Romney from week-to-week are likely a result of natural changes in the statistical sample. Instead - pay attention to what issues are moving voters.
Another hint: be skeptical of apparent big swings. They usually don't happen in the general election.
Also: don't mix apples and oranges.
Every polling organization does things a little bit differently, which could explain significant "shifts" in surveys done by different pollsters in the same state.
Lastly, this Los Angeles piece suggests it's wise not to set out looking for a poll that supports what you already think, "as the saying goes, some people use data the way a drunk uses a lamppost - for support rather than illumination."
Here’s my question to you: How much faith do you put in polls?
Tune in to the Situation Room at 5pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.
And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.
Was it a mistake for Democrats to pick North Carolina for their convention?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Right about now, Democrats are probably wishing they hadn't picked North Carolina as the site for this summer's convention.
When President Obama selected Charlotte, North Carolina, more than a year ago, it seemed like a smart way to double down on a state that propelled him to victory in 2008.
North Carolina hadn't gone to the Democrats since Jimmy Carter.
But things have gone downhill – fast – in the Tar Heel State for Democrats, and the list of problems seems endless.
For starters, North Carolina voters overwhelmingly approved a state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage at the same time President Obama was saying he thinks it's a good idea.
Now gay rights activists want the convention moved out of North Carolina, practically impossible at this point.
Unemployment in North Carolina is 9.4%, far above the national average.
Plus, who dreamed this up? President Obama will give his convention speech in Bank of America Stadium. Perfect – not.
Then there are the unions, one of the Democrats' key voting blocs. They're angry and aren't in the mood to help fundraise.
That's because there are no unionized hotels in Charlotte. Also, North Carolina has the smallest proportion of union members and union membership in the country.
To top it all off, there are two sex scandals engulfing prominent North Carolina Democrats: the trial of former Sen. John Edwards and the ongoing investigation of the state party chair, David Parker.
The Obama political operation used to be better than this.
Here’s my question to you: Was it a mistake for Democrats to pick North Carolina for their convention?
Tune in to the Situation Room at 4pm to see if Jack reads your answer on air.
And, we love to know where you’re writing from, so please include your city and state with your comment.
@jackcafferty on Twitter
Recent Comments