Serious news.... Obama is leading NYT poll. I have news for you... your shit polls are adjusting their sample sizes. And they still have a ways to go. But now the numbers are coming back even. You may also note that in the CBS/NYT poll Romney had very big leads over Obama with independent voters.
Of course the "numbers are coming back" on "shit polls", so that's not to be trusted either. Anyway, allow me to assist you. You mean the polls are "adjusting" their sample composition, not size, right? I don't know what the hell you studied as an undergrad but it damn sure didn't include statistics.
Frustrated leftist book - page 4... When you have been shown to be wrong, distract others with the nomenclature argument -- leftist love that stuff, it makes them feel superior and helps them forget they are wrong.
So I was right about the samples distorting the results... but that was luck. I have news for you Ricter... you can have a deep understanding of stats without remembering the textbook names. I took out a stats professor here on ET - over a long discussion about (generals - battles - luck ) and the null hypothesis... in the end he was proven to be wrong and admitted it.
No, you're probably still wrong about the validity of the samples, but for reasons you do not understand. If you've been lucky, it's bad luck.
Trust me, Romney isn't losing any votes over this, and Obama isn't gaining any. The undecided vote at this point is looking for something huge to move them in one direction or the other. We won't see that until October. Some deep dark secret, or one of these political androids has a major malfunction in a debate. Until then, it's just sniper fire hoping to get lucky.