NH-Magellan Strategies (R): IT'S HAPPENING???

[Lief 🗽]

http://www.wmur.com/political-scoop/gop-poll-puts-brown-ahead-of-shaheen-for-first-time-since-april/28065340

Brown leads by 1.6%, though the article doesn't list the actual numbers.

[Maxwell]

ahahahaha Magellan Strategies.

[backtored]

ahahahaha Magellan Strategies.

But they're showing the same thing as other pollsters in this race.

Democrats are is trouble.

[DrScholl]

No other pollster is showing a number like this. You can't just make up numbers to suit your argument. No pollster has shown Brown with a lead.

[tmthforu94]

No other pollster is showing a number like this. You can't just make up numbers to suit your argument. No pollster has shown Brown with a lead.

CNN has him tied, so based on that, a polling showing Brown up 1.6% isn't too far-fetched.

[backtored]

No other pollster is showing a number like this. You can't just make up numbers to suit your argument. No pollster has shown Brown with a lead.

There two other pollsters showing the race tied.  Maybe the race really is tied.  

[SteveRogers]

Never trust a poll that uses decimal points.

[Heimdal]

It looks like Brown will make NH competitive.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Poor Magellan.

[SWE]

lol

[DrScholl]

No other pollster is showing a number like this. You can't just make up numbers to suit your argument. No pollster has shown Brown with a lead.

CNN has him tied, so based on that, a polling showing Brown up 1.6% isn't too far-fetched.

That doesn't really line up with what other polls have shown as of late, though.

No other pollster is showing a number like this. You can't just make up numbers to suit your argument. No pollster has shown Brown with a lead.

There two other pollsters showing the race tied.  Maybe the race really is tied.  

Yes, and both are basically internals.

[free my dawg]

>decimals

[Free Bird]

>decimals

[muon2]

The problem in the linked article is an inconsistent use of decimals. They cite the difference between the candidates with one decimal point, but the margin of error with no decimal points. That's just poor reporting. The source at Citizens for a Strong New Hampshire gives a more consistent picture.

Headline: CSNH's Latest Poll: Scott Brown leads Senator Jeanne Shaheen by almost 2 points: 45.9% to 44.3%

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Here they are consistent. This is a large sample and the standard error of the sample is 1.063% and since the sample size (2,214) has four significant figures it is appropriate to keep the same number of figures for the standard error to avoid errors from rounding too early. If they used the standard error based on Brown's percentage the standard error of the sample becomes 1.059%. Either way the 95% margin of error is 1.96 times the standard error or 2.08%. This should be rounded to 2.1% to match the precision of the quoted percentages for the candidates (I'm not sure where they get 2.0%). It is not necessary to round the figures off to the nearest percent, the calculations are perfectly meaningful with one decimal point. Many top scientific papers will quote two significant figures of error.

In this case the extra decimal actually helps to understand the spread. If everything was rounded to the nearest percent the top line would read Brown 46% to Shaheen 44% with a 2% MoE. That makes it look like Brown is ahead at the limits of the MoE or about two times the standard error. Using the given decimal points shows Brown up by 1.6% with a 2.1% MoE. The MoE on the difference is actually somewhat larger that the MoE on the sample, but that doesn't change the conclusion that the difference is well inside the MoE and its 95% confidence level. That makes it look much more like the statistical tie that it is.

Bottom line: Decimals in polls are not necessarily a sign of bad polling or bad statistics.

[JRP1994]

Brown almost certainly trails Shaheen, yet appears to possibly be closing the gap. More time will tell.