The second part of the interview with Dr. Mark Lindeman is up on Neural Gourmet: Of public opinion, exit polls and fraud (or the lack thereof) (Part 2):
Some people have referred to the "uncanny accuracy" of the exit polls. I think it's a very bad sign when the adjective "uncanny" drifts into nominally scientific discourse. That doesn't mean that we scrap the data; it means that we try to interpret it judiciously. It's a pretty banal point, but some folks can't seem to get past it.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Mark Lindeman is a guy who did the statistical analysis of the exit polls and final numbers of the 2004 election and conluded that there was NO fraud, or at least not enough to make a difference. He is, thus, a liberal unloved by some other liberals. He is thus a liberal unhappy that his data…
Of public opinion, exit polls and fraud (or the lack thereof) (Part 3)
Maybe that is the main point that gets missed: reality is messy. Science in general, and certainly "social science," proceeds incrementally and cautiously on the basis of radically incomplete information. Some folks have argued…
I've gotten an absolutely unprecedented number of requests to write about RFK Jr's Rolling Stone article about the 2004 election.
RFK Jr's article tries to argue that the 2004 election was stolen. It does a wretched, sloppy, irresponsible job of making the argument. The shame of it is that I…
It is with some trepidation and more than a little regret that I begin writing this piece. The reason for my hesitation is that, by doing so, no matter what I say I'll be inserting myself into what appears to be a disagreement among people all of whom I admire very much. I don't really want to do…
Hi coturnix,
I just thought your readers would be interested in the third, and final, part of the interview with Mark. Link to Part 1.
Thanks for promoting this. I think most people will come away from this series a little more knowledgeable than they went in.