I guess I don’t quite see the difference from a pointless poll, but let’s bite. A right-wing blogger is asking for bipartisan participation in a “survey” about the expected winner in the presidential election. Results will not be available until after the election, but go ahead and give it a shot.
Pharyngula
Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
I want Obama to win, of course, but sadly I think the Republicans will pull off another successful coup d’etat.
Hey I just read something that should really appeal to those of us on this blog who don’t think science and religion are compatable:
List of Christian thinkers in science in Wikipedia
Consider my agrument that this website is not about science, it is about being an atheist. Nothing wrong there, just be fucken honest.
What’s the point of the survey if it won’t be posted until after the election? I could see if they held it until just before the polls open so that others could see if the prediction was accurate, but what is the use of a postdiction?
I think it’s a very sensible way to poll. Not publishing the results until after the election maximizes the chance of getting an honest assessment from all participants.
What’s the point? All this poll will tell is whether more McCain or Obama supporters heard about it.
-jcr
Llauraa | September 9, 2008 8:24 AM #2
Could you elaborate? I’m not sure what you mean.
Hi all,
The point is to see how well people can guess the outcome of a presidential election given roughly equal information about each candidate.
This is not a poll per se—there are plenty of those out there that do a better job. Instead, we are interested in what contributes to the skill of people guessing.
We don’t release the results until after the election to discourage internet-ballot box stuffing, which is the phenomena where people boost a favorite response in the hopes of making it seem more popular. That can’t happen here.
More details will be released at the link above.
Thanks for guessing everybody!
#2: Repetitious troll is repetitious.
And being thick as a wall.
No one claims that Christians can’t be good scientists. It’s when their Christianity starts to invade their science where the issue starts.
From the few comments you’ve left here it’s obvious you chose to ignore that distinction.
“Fucken”? Is that German for something?
@#5:
Not really, there’s a part for ‘Who do you think will win?’ and a part for ‘Who do you want to win?’ I, for example, want Obama to win but think McCain will probably win unfortunately.
This poll is way too restrictive. While I can swallow the fact that only Obama and McCain are given as plausible winning choices, the political view question is too restrictive with only two pigeonholes to choose from. What about libertarian green, anarchist etc etc etc?
#2 wrote:
You are a barely literate cretin. Why should PZ (or anyone here) pander to your particular level of ignorance?
Cool… I get to pick what sex and age I want to be. What did you pick Llauraaaaaah?
-DU-
Wow! That really was pointless. Fortunately I don’t waste enough time ordinarily, so that helped boost my quota.
Hmm, sounds particularly pointless to me.
To comment on the subject matter anyway, I definitely want Obama to win, but I will not be surprised if America votes in that mess of a man McCain. It just boggles my mind that anyone would vote for McCain to run their country, especially after he’s now appointed Palin to his side. But I’m pretty sure it’s going to happen, and that will be a scary day… even for us Canadians.
Frankly, I’d like Obama to win but I fairly certain McCain is going to win. A view shared by many over here in Europe. (okay, exaggerated…. I only asked a few people *grin*)
Here’s another Palin-poll that seriously needs some crashing!
You get to vote whether you find Palin favorable – after reading an article on how her church promotes the conversion of homosexuals through praying. Lovely.
If Europeans could vote McCain wouldn’t stand a chance.
If nothing else had done so, the political spectacle of the last eight years (well, Reagan onward, really) would have cemented my atheism. I cannot be more blunt than that. I need no further proof that NO ONE IS IN CONTROL, no further proof of the bottomless stupidity and venality of humankind, than this already-sickening century.
#18 “If Europeans could vote McCain wouldn’t stand a chance.”
Duhhhh! the election in November is about AMERICANS voting.
CS said:
Unfortunately the same was true of Bush the last time around (and the time before that I think) and yet it didn’t do his opponents much good!
This is why I was somewhat baffled by Obama’s tour of Europe. Sure it’s nice to have a Presidential Candidate who notices that the US’s foreign allies actually exist but why tour Europe in the middle of the campaign? OK, over here we tend to like Obama (particularly given the alternative on offer) but at the end of the day we can’t actually vote for him – so what was the point of the tour?
These days, every day is fail day and every hour is fail o’clock in America.
Therefore, McCain is going to win, I’m 90% certain.
#2
It’s neither “about science” or “about being an atheist”, it’s the personal blog of PZ Myers, biology professor, squid fanatic and atheist, it therefore contains part of all this.
Hell, if it was to be renamed it’d become a blog about squids sooner than a blog about “being an atheist” whatever that means
I suppose that strengthening his ties in Europe and showing the reception that he received helped his credibility at home.
Considering the impact of the US policies on the rest of the world, it wouldn’t be so unreasonable for the rest of the world to be able have a say on who will be elected.
I was somewhat baffled by Obama’s tour of Europe.
That was a massive tactical error for his campaign. He was trying to show that he could do a good job on foreign policy, but it came across as acting like he’d already won. The time to go and give a speech in Berlin is during the cold war, not during the 2008 campaign season. That was Obama’s “senator, you’re no John F. Kennedy” moment.
-jcr
Folks, you really need to listen to yourselves. You act like the election is lost because McGriddle picked a nutjob and got a convention bounce. We’ve got two months to go, and some real battleground states to look at. Did the fundy bounce in overall popularity come in states that were already solidly in McCain’s camp, or were they in places that could make a difference?
We’ve got a ton of campaigning, debates, and time left. Why so disenheartened now? You can’t win on pessimism; Reagan taught us that, if nothing else. You can be optimistic and grounded in the real world, however, and that’s where the Dems need to be. In the last week, I’ve watched a lot of the Dem/left blogs I vists go from elation to hand-wringing. That’s a recipie for loss.
Obama went to Europe to assuage fears about his foreign policy cred, and he played it like a winner. He looked like a damn President. The Dems need to share that vision; that confidence. So much of the campaign is style over substance, and, for the first time in a decade, the Dems have some real style. Going into panic mode erodes that and probably dooms the effort. Play to win; don’t play to not lose.
Did you look over his website? He claims to be a statistician but he obviously either knows little about statistics or is a liar. For example, he calls “smoothing” by use of p-values “fictional data”. He does not understand that raw data, what he calls “real data”, must be analyzed in varying ways.
He’s a conservative, so which do you think it is? (Note those options are not mutually exclusive.)
Well, I participated in the poll, and it is now INVALID, because I am not American!
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!
I love skewing nonsense polls!
The Big Dumb Chimp asks:
“Fucken”? Is that German for something?
No, that would be Ficken.
I, too, think McCain will win. I keep getting in trouble with all my lefty friends, most of whom are to the right of me, when I point this out. Obama and McCain are different only in terms of style, not substance. People know this, so they don’t rally around one or the other except along strict party lines.
If the Dems want to win, they have to quit running moderate Republicans for President.
No love for us third party supporters? I don’t want Obama or McCain to win. I would prefer Obama over McCain, but it approaches nowhere near “want”. I’ll have to abstain from playing with this one, I’m afraid.
Whats with all the statistics today? Statistics are BS 80% of people know that.
“Folks, you really need to listen to yourselves. You act like the election is lost because McGriddle picked a nutjob and got a convention bounce.”
Ranson, thank you. I feel you are correct … I am just speaking from a place of terror that has deepened as I have grown older.
Good post. Thanks again.
I think Ranson makes a good point.
While I find it incredibly sad that this election appears to be as close as it is, considering how terrible of a ticket the Republicans have chosen, the game isn’t over yet. McCain’s pick of Palin has done exactly what is was supposed to do, which was get him a bunch of attention, but that is already fading. As Palin has to actually answer questions about her opinions, her record, and her qualifications, it is going to become apparent to those who haven’t already figured it out that she is an absolutely awful choice for VP.
Personally, I am working on my boss. She’s a Republican but she was leaning towards Obama. She likes Palin right now (she’s quite influenced by media coverage, so while the coverage is positive she likes Palin) but I think she can be convinced that the woman is not a good choice for VP, and she already dislikes McCain.
I decided to be just as honest as our current commander in thief and voted in this poll in order to add fuel to the worst fears of conservatives. So I voted like this:
Who will win the election? Obama
Who do you want to win? Obama
Select your majority political opinion: Conservative
Select your sex: Female
What is your age (nearest year)? 62
It is my honest hope that the conservatives stay awake at night worrying about retirement age women in their ranks that want Obama to win the election.
If anyone here can think up an even better combination of choices to make the Conservatives even more paranoid, please do so.
I’m sorry but that is just not true. All you need to do is read their stated positions (they are posted on each candidate’s website) or look at their voting record to see that there are real differences between the two candidates. Perhaps there are not as many differences as you would like, but you are fooling yourself if you think a McCain presidency and an Obama presidency would be exactly the same.
This attitude really bothers me, and it seems to come mostly from the left. Why is that? It came up in 2000, and I have yet to meet someone who seriously thinks that Gore would have been as abysmally bad as a Bush.
Ranson,
The thing that’s surprising isn’t that McCain picked up several points in the polls by taking a hard right turn with his VP pick, it’s how much of the lead Obama had lost before that happened.
I really think Obama blew his lead through overconfidence. He might still win, but if he does it’s going to be a squeaker, not a landslide.
-jcr
“If the Dems want to win, they have to quit running moderate Republicans for President.” — Justin
So the most Liberal (capital “L”) member of the Senate is a moderate Republican? Just out of curiosity, what color is the sky on your planet?
Natalie said:
I’d agree with you and Ransom that she is eminently beatable, in fact I think you might have hit on a very good campaign point in your post Natalie. Palin was chosen as VP, not because anyone thought that she could do a good job or even cared whether she could for that matter (McCain barely did more than a Google search on her before picking her), but as an campaign gimmick to get McCain into the Oval Office.
In other words McCain is prepared to risk saddling the US with an incompetent VP (and possibly acting President if anything were to happen to him) in order to satisfy his personal ambition to become president – hardly a good look for someone setting himself up as the Nemesis of the “old me first, country second Washington crowd” is it?
#38
Though Obama is not the most liberal senator, you can check politifact if you want, you know if you happen to like facts.
Someone mentioned the other day that the Republans are already making sure they exclude likely Democratic voters from the polling stations.
Still, I fear they’ll win anyway.
*bzzzzzzzzzt*
McBush doesn’t know how teh Google works. He may not even have heard of it for all I know.
This poll is invalid because the sample is uncontrolled. Simple as that. Self chosen samples are basically useless.
And all you naysayers above. Please note that McCain’s post convention bounce barely brought him to equity and is already beginning to fade. Unless Palin shows up to the VP poll wearing Osama bin Ladin’s scalp as a hat it is all downhill from here for them.
From a recent Obama speech: “Words mean something, you can’t just make stuff up.”
I know he’s going to struggle to stick to that, but it’s nice to hear a politician acknowledge that it’s true, even just in principle.
Lluraa comes through once again, and neatly demonstrates one of the things that’s wrong with the United States of America.
(Or is she a Poe? I can’t tell anymore.)
@ Matt
That’s one of the few things that I ever heard from Rush Limbaugh that made actual sense (admittedly, it was part of a criticism of Bill Clinton back in the early ’90s, and an opinion I shared); “Words mean things.”
The most basic sense of truth-telling is contained in that phrase. It’s hard to find a politician that can hold to it; they’re pretty much required to not address nuance, and have to boil things down to a basic soundbite. That wreaks havoc on one’s ability to keep promises or express a consistent viewpoint. Like you, though, I’m glad to see it acknowledged.
VegeBrain, It would be great if you—and everybody else—could please answer the questions honestly. To purposely lie to me because somebody else lied to you is not gentlemanly.
I really would like answers as honest as possible. This is not a poll but a study on how well people can guess the outcome of an election. Stuffing the ballot box does no good here because nobody sees the results until after the election.
Chris,
Your not being American in no way skews the survey. It is open to all. Thank you for participating.
Prof MTH,
Actually, if you’d like to pop over to my site and show me where my statistical argument is flawed, I’d welcome it. I can—and do—make mistakes and I’d be thrilled if you can show me where I’ve gone wrong. Thanks.
the “poll” in question is supposed to be about how good people guess about elections and how it relates to their overall political stand. kind of narrow question if it is really true but interesting.
In my opinion this election is the election that will shape the rest of this century. Will we reach forward and embrace the problems and changes that time is bringing us or will we resist the inevitable and reach back into some imagined past of power, glory and stability?
Are we going to join in with our fellows both here in the U.S. and the rest of the world in cooperation and find some creative solutions for the many problems we all face in surviving in peace and prosperity or will it by “our way or the highway ” with us in the end out on that highway alone?
There is nothing like a sure thing other than the old saying about death and taxes though the republicans seem to think that they can outlaw half of that without any consequences. We have a good chance of moving forward and I hope I can help.
I can’t even tell what your statistical argument is. What are you trying to demonstrate?
Crap, is that an actual Limbaugh quote? I started saying that at hippy liberal college, where some of our stupider and more fanatical students were fond of redefining common English words for maximum shock value. As I’m still a rather radical leftist, I find it weird that Limbaugh and I were on the same page there.
First time for everything, I suppose…
See, that’s what the words “if”, “could” and “would” are doing in that sentence. If you want me to explain this in another language, please tell me.
He isn’t, but he’s where the Republicans should be. He is where other countries have their conservative parties.
Exactly.
Hi Darth,
The statistical argument about the misuse of smoothing? I make that over at my blog. I won’t want to take the space here on a thread with a different topic, but you’re welcome to come over and criticize.
The survey is to see how good people can guess the results of the election from about two months out. This is why the poll closes on the 14th.
If people really believe Obama will win, then this is who you should say will win—but please just vote once. I have already noticed several people who came from this site who voted multiple times (one did over a dozen!). I can understand people’s enthusiasm for a particular candidate, but this won’t do much for the cause.
Anyway, wouldn’t it be more interesting if we can keep this legitimate?
Again, thanks to all who are guessing.
I’ll admit, I went through my “Young Republican” period, though I never bought the religious crap (economics, mostly — I’m better now). I’ve got those first two Limbaugh books floating around somewhere on my shelf, and I even watched his short-lived TV show. That quote is a Limbaugh line from at least 15 years ago.
In a shameless attempt to get some more readers (with whom I sympathize) I am inviting you to vote in my polls:
http://thefrustratedteacher.blogspot.com
This was my reaction, too. It doesn’t have to be all-encompassing, but a choice between ‘right’ and ‘even-further-right’ is way too much of a false dilemma.
In my humble opinion, as a liberal democrat, Obama is going to lose.
Democrats keep making the mistake of thinking that winning the presidency has something to do with qualifications. It doesn’t.
Every four years since the Clinton presidency this nation sees a resurgent culture war. And it’s happening again. We laugh at the right’s ridiculous candidates, at their total lack of qualifications, at their complete ignorance of reality. And then they win.
Why? Because the right gets energized about snobby intellectual elites looking down their noses at the bible belt, evangelicals, and conservatives. Palin may be utterly unqualified–the right doesn’t give a fuck. They only talk about qualifications when they are attacking the left or defending their candidate–they don’t actually CARE about that. They don’t even necessarily believe in it. What matters is getting fuckjob fundies into positions of power… and that’s all.
We look at McCain’s choice as a cynical ploy to capture disgruntled Hillary voters, but that’s not all it is. He’s put a bonafide fundie nutcase a heartbeat away from the presidency, and the religious whackaloons are eating it up. You can forget criticizing her qualifications, they only care about her woo-woo-nonsense bonafides. Pick on her inexperience and you are an “east coast elitist snob”.
McCain’s energized his base, and that’s all it takes. Because the republicans have managed to capture enough of the moderate and independent voters each time around, and I don’t see that stopping any time soon. The base will vote to the right, and enough talk from McCain about Obama raising taxes, (and promises from Obama for all these expensive things he wants to do), and the moderates and indies will be frightened away from Obama.
And yes, this dooms our future as a nation. There is no doubt that the things Obama is talking about need to be done. But man is a party animal and long term problems are out of sight and out of mind. You think things are bad now? It will have to get a whole lot worse before people will be seriously willing to (do/pay for) what needs to be done.
We will continue to see republican presidents into perpetuity as long as they manage to excite the fundie-fucknuts and scare the moderates and indies away from the liberal candidate.
It’s sad, but unfortunately I think that’s the way it is going to go down. Believe me I desperately want to be wrong about this.
Llauraa @ 2
“Fucken”? As in “fucken adolesant”?
Evil will always win because good won’t fight dirty.
chuck s. | September 9, 2008 12:47 PM, #56
You’ve got it “sort of” right. Occasionally the religious nuts get to shout their insanity to the rooftops, and in religion-obsessed America this often results in the candidate most shamelessly willing to pander to the know-nothings getting enough votes to win.
But that situation won’t last forever. The religious right is on notice. America is growing up, becoming better educated, and finally becoming more religiously diverse. For the first time ever, even American atheists are throwing off the shackles of an age-old stigma. Amazingly, homosexuals now have the right to fully recognized marriage in the states of Massachusetts and California, while New Mexico, New York and Rhode Island recognize marriages where a couple has been married abroad.
For this election, Obama is still in the fight, and yes, the left knows what it will cost America to lose this one. But the religious right will lose the culture wars, and they know it. They’d lost the minute they declared war.
Fun poll. I cast my votes as follows:
http://wmbriggs.com/president.php?q1=Batman&q2=Spiderman&q3=Disestablishmentarian&q4=N&q5=26
Ian,
Of course you realize that those answers won’t be saved.
Maybe you could try to answer honestly?
Thanks
Unfortunately I can’t, since the candidate I want to win is not one of the available options, and I don’t want my guess lumped in with the guesses of others whose politics do not actually agree with mine.
Ian,
Not seeing the candidate you want is grounds for not taking the survey. But it isn’t for purposely trying to cause me grief.
You should know I get nothing for this study and I am doing it for the sole reason of trying to learn how people think about elections.
Many, many people from this site are instead trying to have some fun at my expense by trying to “stuff the ballot box.” This might bring gales of laughter from, but it isn’t doing me or them any good. I will simply remove the data.
I actually think that Obama will win. I hope this isn’t wishful thinking on my part. The current crop of polls have given McCain a small lead, but as I understand it, it is within the error margin.
McCain has had a boost recently since his choice of Palin for VP. So far she has only helped the campaign, but soon she is to be thrown to the media wolves, and seriously – I don’t think she will stand up to scrutiny. She has already lied about this bridge to nowhere, they’ve made a big deal about her standing up to oil companies, but i don’t think that will hold up to examination by the media.
McSame has picked up a lot of points by taking the Obama ‘Change’ line, but surely, SURELY, people are going to start questioning what he’s saying. It wasn’t so long ago that he was boasting of being behind Bush 90% of the time. This isn’t change, it’s a different shade of the same.
It’s frustrating being unable to vote. I watched helplessly, with the rest of Europe, as you guys let Bush back in yet again. I trust the American people enough not to do it a third time…
@Rick Lumb: you are dreaming. Candidates on the right don’t get voted into office based on their past performance.
It looks to me as if the Obama campaign has stalled, and Palin being the new kid on the block is making all the news. I hope he manages to seize it back, but with the election just two months off he’s cutting it awfully close.
If I remember from previous elections, what happens next is that the candidates go on frenzied tours in swing states to scoop up as many votes as they can. Obama really needs to identify what those swing voters want and put whatever he can into convincing them, not that McCain and Palin will be bad, but that he will be good. Gallup has identified this about the swing voters this time around: generally they have a higher opinion of both candidates than the committed supporters, and they just haven’t found a strong enough reason to vote for one guy rather than the other. Obama needs to push his vision–which his bestselling books show he is perfectly capable of doing.
@ Chuck s. Sad to say, but I expect you’re right.
However, I still think Obama will pull through. I am worried that his campaign will be too restrained though. They need to mythbust this pack of lying republicans – now isn’t the time to pussyfoot around. He will risk losing his footing as the bigger man who doesn’t call names, but so be it. If he doesn’t get a bit more agressive he will lose.
This should be bumped, not just so people can go an read what is an interesting (dare I say scientific) use of data from this survey.
With luck it might also lead to some pause for reflection among bloggers and commenters who prejudge to the extent that their subsequent reactions can potentially jeopardise genuine scientific endeavour – albeit in this case just for a bit of educational value.
Surely something a science blogger would like to see discouraged?
Maybe PZ could make some constructive comment on we should be more open minded for the benefit of propogating scientific ethos?