Comments:US presidential candidate John McCain now leads slightly in the polls
This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.
Quick hints for new commentators:
- Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
- Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
- You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading
The polls are rigged with fewer than 2,000 people polled and with a questionable sampling group at that. Everyone knows where the economy is going if Republicans rig the election process again. McCain is for the environment: Palin = Big Oil Pipeline. Give me a break. McCain will fix the economy: What a bunch of bunk. He should try fixing his temper first. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.19.14.31 (talk • contribs)
- It's not like either of them are very good candidates. Fephisto (talk) 11:36, 9 September 2008 (UTC)\
- For the record, 2,000 people is plenty to have a small margin of error. Generally the polls are statistically sound, and reflect years of scrutiny. In addition, the article quotes a meta-poll analysis that incorporates results from seven different polls, it seems, and so is probably an even more accurate reflection of reality. I have little faith in polling, but not because of statistics -- rather, it's because people don't always tell the truth, and sometimes change their minds. -- IlyaHaykinson (talk) 17:32, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
- I love it when McCain is winning in the polls Dems talk crap about the polls but when Obama is winning they say noting.--KDP3 (talk) 23:14, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
- No, we just know that Republicans are testing out their stuff before they rig another election..."Hey! Let's just have a poll of 1000 white people from Alabama and see what they think of Obama! That represents the nation!" I can't wait to see McCain get CRUSHED in the election because all these polls are wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.166.175.146 (talk) 02:38, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- An other case of Liberal double standards.--KDP3 (talk) 01:11, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
- No, we just know that Republicans are testing out their stuff before they rig another election..."Hey! Let's just have a poll of 1000 white people from Alabama and see what they think of Obama! That represents the nation!" I can't wait to see McCain get CRUSHED in the election because all these polls are wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.166.175.146 (talk) 02:38, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- I love it when McCain is winning in the polls Dems talk crap about the polls but when Obama is winning they say noting.--KDP3 (talk) 23:14, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
- Assuming a nice, random sample of size 2,000, differences larger than about 2 percentage points are significant. Of course, the number of factors that keep this from being a nice, random sample will have an effect that could quite easily invalidate that. Chris Mann (Say hi!|Stalk me!) 03:40, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- Also does not matter,in 2000 Al Gore won most popular votes but in the end G.W. Bush Jr. won the election since he had most electoral votes.85.139.83.55 15:56, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
FALSE
[edit]this is not true and you know it. FIX IT OR YOU ARE HELPING. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.91.195.116 (talk) 04:35, 2 November 2008 (UTC)