This IS SO crazy?
It took a while to load from the original site….
TONS of hits I’d think…
If TRUE?
We DO have a crazy WIDE OPEN Democratic primary race….
BTW?
The pundits ARE knocking it and Nevada polls in general today…
…
Tom Steyer leads a tight race in the Nevada Democratic Caucus with a slim 2-point lead, according to a poll commissioned and conducted by Point Blank Political; however, the top five candidates are all within the poll’s 5.6 percent margin of error. Steyer, Klobuchar, Biden, Sanders and Buttigieg led the pack, while Warren and Gabbard were decidedly behind the leaders. Point Blank Political surveyed 256 likely Democratic caucus-goers from February 13th through February 15th. The survey results were weighted by race, gender, and age using a Random Iterative Model and the model’s weighting efficiency was 84 percent, resulting in an effective sample size of 215.
For more information, contachttps://www.pointblankpolitical.com/nv-democratic-caucus-2020/t Hunter Lamirande: (407) 751-1900….
Image…CNN.Com
Point Blank Political?
Was their home office?
Moscow or St Petersburg?
He, he, he….
Maybe in China?
We’ll see what others have to show….
And cross our fingers for the count….
BTW?
I think Iowa IS going ahead with a recount or recanvas….
Maybe Zreebs, who has a far deeper understanding of statistics, can tell us more, but if their small sample size is meant to be counterbalanced by careful weighting according to various demographics, that sounds much like what got the 2016 Clinton campaign in trouble, using “analytics” to extrapolate from limited data.
With such a small sample, I can’t see how — within small groups whose preferences among no fewer than seven candidates are being counted — you can get the granularity required. For example if a sample of five 25-35-year old Spanish-speaking African-American college graduates splits three for Biden and two for Sanders, how reliably can you extract much useful information? Perhaps a sample of 20 would give 7 to Biden, 4 to Sanders, 3 to Klobuchar, 3 to Steyer, 2 to Buttigieg and 1 to Warren.
When he shows up maybe….
They ALL factor in certain things…
I notice that in the last 24 hours several pundits are hedging their bets on the results for the next two weeks…
Writing ‘if’s, for Biden and back stepping on Sanders and Bloomberg….
Could it be from all to Opposition Research dumps coming out for Bloomberg and Sanders?
Actually Bide IS getting pass right now?
Another debate on Wednesday….
Hmmmm?
Where will the media herding go?
Nevada Democratic Presidential Caucus Data for Progress (D)
Sanders 35,
Biden 14,
Warren 16,
Buttigieg 15,
Steyer 10,
Klobuchar 9,
Gabbard 2
Sanders +19
Who knows how accurate that poll might be, but it certainly looks more believable than the PointBlank one.
And allowing for margins of error, it clearly breaks the field in three (or four). While the individual candidates’ relative positions within those brackets might be, or could be, different, a jump between the brackets would be more significant.
35% Sanders
15% +/- 1% Biden, Warren & Buttigieg
9-10% Steyer & Klobuchar
(2% Gabbard)
WE KNOW the PointBlank IS a outlier….
But it DIDS have the pundits backing up for the last 24 hours….
Most candidates have hinted at Sanders 1st and Biden 2nd….
Even Biden has hinted at that…
Harry Enten
No pollster is perfect, but I’m taking that Data for Progress poll quite seriously. Reason? They’ve been pretty good the last few months, and in some not so easy to poll races… (cuse any minor errors on my part.)
Dave,
Thank you, but you give me more credit than I deserve. I don’t think the main problem with this poll is the sample size. There is something else going on which might have caused some people who support Steyer to be over-polled.
Note that Point Blank is a Marketing firm – which just might be a red flags as to the accuracy of its poll. Who knows? Maybe the poll was paid for by Tom Steyer? Who knows how the poll was conducted?
Unless Point Blank has a good reputation that I don’t know about, I wouldn’t pay attention to this poll.