this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2024
126 points (90.9% liked)

politics

19104 readers
2591 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] taiyang@lemmy.world 5 points 7 months ago

As with others, I also say ignore the polls. Even done right, we're a bit too far to say how it'll go. And they generally aren't done right. But here's a rant anyway, since it's on my mind:

Pay attention to who is asked, and pay attention to the margin of error. The latter is just a simple truth about sampling error: small-ish samples get a lot of noise, especially with yes/no statements. I've actually seen news report statistically insignificant findings before, especially if it fit their narrative (what otherwise should be rejected as too close to call). These can be false positives, but pundits aren't exactly scientists and there's incentive to report it anyway.

But, the biggest issue is validity. Two forms matter here: external validity is in regards to if results generalize correctly (e.g. a poll using only land lines means you exclude a large chunk of people, ruining generalizability); and construct validity, which is if the question/meteic used is really getting at the researchers question. Such as, if a question includes different language or has something prime answers, like asking questions about Gaza and then asking about Biden may lead to different results than asking about abortion rights and then asking about Biden. (One can argue this is reliability, and it is, but the two concepts are related and you can't have validity without reliability).

Plenty of well meaning pollsters fall into both traps, either from lack of resources or lack of critical thinking about metrics used. Doing it right also requires control over confounding variables, which requires advanced models they simply don't know how to use.

That's my little PSA while I get ready to teach my stats class this evening, haha.