Originally Posted by tbomachines

Ok I see your game here. My issues (as I've stated, in summary) with the video:
- guys knows very little about statistics - he basically says "1%? That's nuts!" without any substantiation. What he should have done is actually SHOW why 1% is supposedly not sufficient or representative. From a statistical standpoint, it very well can be and often is.
- uses that to base an argument with little working knowledge of media - his questioning of why they report at 1% is "they must know ahead of time!" rather than actually looking at the numbers mathematically and cross examining that with the purpose of media - to report quickly and make a profit (i.e. maintain viewers). Talk about jumping to conclusions. Your retort for these two glaring issues? To tell me that my "common sense is common". Nice.

Did I ever say that computer polling devices were safe and secure? No
Did I ever say Ron Paul hasn't been slighted by the media? No

I don't disagree with those points and never implied it in any way.

So, if you decide to be caustic I will too - mister "detailed observation" perhaps you should stop putting words in my mouth and read what I actually stated.