data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a28be/a28bed0b334d25ed894b382b53797fa7e5569163" alt=""
Recent
Rasmussen Reports polling shows that despite Hillary Clinton's lead in the Democratic Primary pack, she's behind John Edwards and Barack Obama in match-ups with Republicans. Today's poll puts Hillary Clinton neck and neck with Fred Thompson and Rudy Giuliani while a poll from last week puts John Edwards 11 points ahead against Fred Thompson and 7 points ahead against Rudy Giuliani. Even Barack Obama holds 6 point leads over both Rudy Giuliani and Fred Thompson, despite being a white male only in spirit. So when push comes to shove, is America ready for a female president, or just not Hillary?
2 comments:
Here's a straw poll that actually means something, because plurality (vote for one) voting performs horrendously when you have more than two candidates. That's because candidates Y and Z can be preferred by a huge majority to candidate X, but can split the vote such that X still "wins". Here's a severe hypothetical example to illustrate this phenomenon.
The solution is Range Voting.
* The "rate this" feature on this post is an example of Range Voting. Simple, huh?
This is really interesting. But I do have a quesiton: If I am asked to participate in a range poll and I already know who I will be voting for (let's pretend it's Mike Gravel), won't the results be terribly skewed if I give Gravel 5 stars and everyone else 1 star? I could see this working amongst voters that call themselves undecided, but amongst decided voters it seems one is apt to vote 5 stars for their candidate and 1 star for everyone else, thus reverting to a traditional binary system where 5 means yes and 1 means no. Given the skew of your results, this certainly seems to be the case. The results appear to be no different to the newsvine straw poll. thoughts? -marlowe
Post a Comment