From: CurtAdams@aol.com
Date: Mon Nov 13 2000 - 21:48:31 MST
In a message dated 11/13/00 8:09:38 PM, spike66@ibm.net writes:
>CurtAdams@aol.com wrote:
>
>> Impressive that he could get this out so fast. I note in
>> http://elections.fas.harvard.edu/node3.html
>> that this isn't the only really outrageous Buchanan outlier, just the
>only
>> only one that would make a difference.
>
>Curt, this is not intended as a criticism of you in any way,
>but this anaysis is in my opinion completely bogus and
>irrelevant. They calculated the predictor of expected
>Buchanan votes by the number of Nader votes! The
>reasoning there is quite fautly, and there is no reason
>whatsoever the number of Nader fans should be used to
>calculate the probability of a Buchanan vote in Florida.
No; Buchanan and Nader voters are two very distinct groups
of people and I would expect a strong negative covariance.
Buchanan's supporters are mostly conservative and rural
while Nader's are liberal and urban. The Palm Beach outlier
graph I've seen several times shows that Buchanan's vote
percentage decreases with the size of the county, presumably
due to the rural effect.
>Recall that Nader was one of those promoting the idea
>of spending billlllions and billlllions of dollars to convert
>the Everglades reclaimed farmland back into a god-forsaken
>swamp, and also recall that Pam Beach county is not so
>far from the Everglades. Where are the other handful of
>Florida counties that were more Pro_Buchanan than
>Palm Beach?
By percentage, there are a few: very small, very rural,
very conservative, and very few votes for Nader.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:31:56 MST