Did any of you look at this 5.23% skew in favor of HRC in every poll we've seen so far?

[awaysidetraveler]

Actually, I've posted this twice. I just couldn't stand the idea of not having sent this data out twice, because this polling bias sickens me.

No matter who wins, the least we can do is to check out the numbers.

There is a minimum of a 5.23% difference against Obama so far. This difference is outside the margin of error.

I’m sure Edwards supporters and Clinton supporters have their own opinions as to what’s going on in the polls, and I’d really appreciate it if you’d add any information that you can. But this bias against Obama, which is skewing the polling results, also needs to be accounted for.

In Iowa, the polls averaged a 7.9% skew in favor of Hillary. It was a skew that not only disfavored Obama, but also Edwards, who won over Clinton in Iowa.

In New Hampshire, the polls showed a skew disfavoring Hillary by roughly 8% while showing some statistical accuracy about Obama’s support (an average of the polls put him at 38%, while the final results put him at 36% and within the margin of error). Here it looks as if at least 6% of Hillary’s support base came from Edwards voters or undecided voters.

There’s something else that’s unusual about the New Hampshire polls: the earlier polls show Hillary with a vast statistical advantage over Obama--as high as a 20% difference only two weeks prior to the elections. There can be no test of the validity of those polls. Why you ask? Things change in any election, and so the final polls are always the ones--the only ones--ever checked for validity.

In Nevada, it finally seems as if the pollsters have figured out the correct results. The skew is only slightly in favor of Hillary (4% by this graph), and one of the polls shows a 2% advantage for Obama. All of this is well within the margin of error, so it looks like these pollsters did good work. Notable is that the Zogby poll managed a perfect zero score.

Then in South Carolina we see an average of an astonishing 16.8% skew against Obama! Zogby–the pollster usually credited with favoring Obama–is off by 13% disfavoring Obama.

?

This is the data I've used to check this polling bias as of yet. Underneath you'll find a link to pollster's reportcard on pollsters.

http://www.surveyusa.com/index.php/2008/02... /

If we add up the democratic primary skew so far and average it, we end up with a 5.23% skew against Obama across the board. Obviously, some of the polls are more accurate than others, so using the validity of this average to extrapolate a realistic outcome is unrealistic. So this 5.23% skew against Obama could only act as an accurate predictor of the outcome of the race if the cause of this skew turned out to be pollster prejudice-–of whatever kind-–against Obama.

What this exercise does show is the inaccuracy of our polls as of yet, which are biased against Obama in an obvious and mathematical way.

Look, we're watching a bunch of lies. The fact of the matter is that Obama is being lied about, and it doesn't matter whether he wins or loses in a mathematical way--vote by vote. It's already clear that we're being lied to, and all we have to do is to check the math. Please watch these lies: I'm accounting for them using ordinary math, and that tell you something no matter who you want in the office.