Comments on: What the numbers say… http://rhetorica.net/archives/1817.html Fri, 03 Feb 2012 05:01:36 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: JohnHays.net http://rhetorica.net/archives/1817.html/comment-page-1#comment-1517 JohnHays.net Tue, 21 Oct 2003 23:37:14 +0000 http://localhost/wpp3/?p=1817#comment-1517 <strong>Mayer predictive model of primary campaigns</strong> Rhetorica is trying to get one or more reporters interested in the Mayer predictive model of primary campaigns. I think at least one reporter ought to give it a chance just to see if it works.... Mayer predictive model of primary campaigns

Rhetorica is trying to get one or more reporters interested in the Mayer predictive model of primary campaigns. I think at least one reporter ought to give it a chance just to see if it works….

]]> By: Eric Berlin http://rhetorica.net/archives/1817.html/comment-page-1#comment-1516 Eric Berlin Tue, 21 Oct 2003 16:54:50 +0000 http://localhost/wpp3/?p=1817#comment-1516 <strong>THE CARNIVAL OF THE VANITIES</strong> Welcome, my friends, to the Carny of Vanity! With all these great links, you could stay here all day! We’ve THE CARNIVAL OF THE VANITIES

Welcome, my friends, to the Carny of Vanity! With all these great links, you could stay here all day! We’ve

]]> By: acline http://rhetorica.net/archives/1817.html/comment-page-1#comment-1515 acline Tue, 21 Oct 2003 14:12:21 +0000 http://localhost/wpp3/?p=1817#comment-1515 Jay-- I checked Mayer's article from PS and did not find a specific answer to your question (although this data may show up in othere...he's been writing about this model since 1996). He does note that, in most cases, the winner of the last Gallup poll had also been leading for nearly a year before the Iowa vote. It would be interesting to find out just what the MoEs were. And I agree with your observation that the primaries validate voter "preference." Mayer agrees, too. But what I question in my use of Mayer is how that preference is formed since the model indicates to me that the pre-primary period is the true "race." Hence, my interest in the quality of press coverage during that time. Jay– I checked Mayer’s article from PS and did not find a specific answer to your question (although this data may show up in othere…he’s been writing about this model since 1996). He does note that, in most cases, the winner of the last Gallup poll had also been leading for nearly a year before the Iowa vote. It would be interesting to find out just what the MoEs were.

And I agree with your observation that the primaries validate voter “preference.” Mayer agrees, too.

But what I question in my use of Mayer is how that preference is formed since the model indicates to me that the pre-primary period is the true “race.” Hence, my interest in the quality of press coverage during that time.

]]> By: Jay Manifold http://rhetorica.net/archives/1817.html/comment-page-1#comment-1514 Jay Manifold Tue, 21 Oct 2003 13:51:24 +0000 http://localhost/wpp3/?p=1817#comment-1514 One obvious question is whether, in those years covered by the Mayer model, the winner not only led in the polls but had a statistically significant lead, which in most polls would require at least a 5% margin over the 2nd-place candidate(s) (I note that a poll described at http://www.gallup.com/poll/releases/pr031010.asp shows Clark with such a lead, but it's a couple of weeks old now).<br /> But <i>whether or not this is the case</i>, I think the real lesson to be drawn is that the primary process, irrespective of its many (to my mind) undesirable features, "works" extremely well in the sense of faithfully reflecting voter preferences.<br /> This is all the more remarkable in that many delegates are still not chosen by caucus or primary; Walter Mondale, for example, would have obtained the Democratic nomination in 1984 even had he lost most of the early primaries, because the party leadership in various states had already appointed numerous delegates committed to him. One obvious question is whether, in those years covered by the Mayer model, the winner not only led in the polls but had a statistically significant lead, which in most polls would require at least a 5% margin over the 2nd-place candidate(s) (I note that a poll described at http://www.gallup.com/poll/releases/pr031010.asp shows Clark with such a lead, but it’s a couple of weeks old now).
But whether or not this is the case, I think the real lesson to be drawn is that the primary process, irrespective of its many (to my mind) undesirable features, “works” extremely well in the sense of faithfully reflecting voter preferences.
This is all the more remarkable in that many delegates are still not chosen by caucus or primary; Walter Mondale, for example, would have obtained the Democratic nomination in 1984 even had he lost most of the early primaries, because the party leadership in various states had already appointed numerous delegates committed to him.

]]>