i wrote this long post yesterday after work and it never published right. apparently blogger is down--i can access sites but i've also looked at the date stamps around the blogisphere and noticed that every site with "blogspot" in its name has not updated since 8:37 p.m. last night.
as a result, this will not publish when i try to post it and you are not reading this now.
but why should that stop me?
i went to an out of town hearing this morning and, as usual, listened to a lot of n.p.r. on the way. they were interviewing "switchers," i.e. people who used to vote for one party but who plan to vote for a different one in this coming election. there seems to be a tacit debate about which party has the most switchers. i know quite a few (including, i believe, my father), but all of the one's i know are republicans who are supporting kerry. on n.p.r. this morning they had a guy who voted for gore in 2000 and now supports bush. i guess they do exist.
it reminded me, once again, that the people i deal with on a day-to-day basis are not a representative sample. i know that on a rational level, but its hard to keep in mind when the people i talk to, by probably a 4-to-1 margin will not vote for bush. it makes the polls, at times, look unbelievable. now i happen to believe that polls are a lot less accurate than people give them credit to be (e.g. al gore was consistently 2-3 points behind in the polls going into the general election in 2000 for over a month before the election, and yet he won the popular vote). but just because my gut tells me they look wrong does not mean they are. my gut has never quite gotten the concept of sampling down. i just have to remember that.
