Interesting diavlog. Great to hear from Dave Noon, who I've been enjoying since he started posting on LGM. Nice to hear Jim lay off the partisan cheerleading for the first time in a while, too. A very good interview/conversation. Dave: one piece of criticism intended as constructive: Don't be so hesitant about talking about things that you don't absolutely know. I could tell many times that you had better answers to Jim's questions about Group X's attitudes or the general view of Politician Y, but didn't want to say because you didn't have hard data. Just say, "As far as I can tell, Group X leans this way" or "Most people think of Mr. Y as a hard core [whatever], although that's more the conventional wisdom than anything based on polling." And don't be afraid to repeat gossip, as long as you identify it as such. I'm not saying to go whole hog into FriedmanLand, where one cab driver and one lunch with a CEO tells you everything you need to know about, say, India, but you can find a good place, well short of that, to convey a sense of where you live. No one who watches these diavlogs expects perfect, footnoted

There was an unanswered question on Alaska's bordering Canadian territory, the Yukon. I worked in mineral exploration, mostly in the Yukon but also in Alaska. To answer James' question, there are economic and political similarities in terms of mineral extraction and rural political conservatism. The major difference is that there are about 30,000 people in the Yukon compared to Alaska's 700,000, which makes it hard to compare the two.

Great idea doing this right next to a highway with a window open. I enjoyed scrambling for the volume to turn it down when Pickerton speaks and then turning it up when Noon speaks. Annoying.

Quoting Larry Bird: Great idea doing this right next to a highway with a window open. I enjoyed scrambling for the volume to turn it down when Pickerton speaks and then turning it up when Noon speaks. Annoying.

Alaska is quite noisy nowadays, what with all the off shore drilling.

Next time he should do the chat in a less noisy place like a football stadium in the 4th quarter of a playoff game.

Alaska is quite noisy nowadays, what with all the off shore drilling.

And melting.

...that both hilzoy and David Noon are now on record saying that energy export bans are stupid. I love Sarah, but she is dead wrong on this issue. Oh by the way, do you know who else wants to ban US energy exports from Alaska? Just about the entire House Democratic Caucus. Including Nancy Pelosi. watch:
http://www.speaker.gov/legislation?id=0234
What a bunch of neanderthals!!!

A few points as a fellow Juneauite.
Wow, he really doesn't know the town he lives in very well. Southeast Alaska and Juneau border northern British Columbia, not the Yukon. The City of Juneau borders Canada ( though like he said, you have to cross ice fields to get there). It's a bit like someone in Chicago not knowing if Illinois borders Indiana or Michigan. On federal spending, if you consider the number of personnel employed by the national park service, NOAA, fisheries personnel, military personnel, the coast guard, the BLM and our small population it really distorts the per capita spending numbers. I disagree that socially conservative Christians are a new phenomena. There have long been pockets of various types of religous groups. Some places like Glenallen have been intensely conservative Christian for decades, and there are a few russian speaking Russian orthodox towns on the Kenai. Alaska Natives means Indian, eskimo, and Aleut. He didn't explain that very well. Our dividend checks are silly, the money should all be saved for when the oil runs out, or distributed only to the impoverished. Palin was able to raise the taxes primarily because the preceding law was written while six

Quoting Larry Bird: Great idea doing this right next to a highway with a window open. I enjoyed scrambling for the volume to turn it down when Pickerton speaks and then turning it up when Noon speaks. Annoying.

Weird. It just sounded like fairly quiet background noise on my speakers, and was not even slightly annoying. In fact, it created a nice ambiance. Maybe it sounds different on different speakers.

seems to me
that to be appetizing
pinkerton needs corn
as much as a cob does

Quoting JimS: A few points as a fellow Juneauite.
Wow, he really doesn't know the town he lives in very well. Southeast Alaska and Juneau border northern British Columbia, not the Yukon. The City of Juneau borders Canada ( though like he said, you have to cross ice fields to get there). It's a bit like someone in Chicago not knowing if Illinois borders Indiana or Michigan.

Uh, no. It's much more like someone in Michigan not knowing that Michigan borders on Ontario. And you know Americans: We just don't pay any attention to "foreign" countries. Like Canada. And when we do think about our Canadian neighbors, we think of the nearby cities, like Windsor, not provinces, like Ontario. I don't think I've heard one of my Michigan neighbors say "Ontario" in 20 years. Furthermore, my analogy is too generous, because Ontario is populated. And you can actually get to Ontario from Michigan. Easily. And you might actually have reason to go there from time to time if you live in Michigan. Yukon? British Columbia? Evidently not. And consequently, you're just never going to think about it, except maybe in elementary school when you're learing geography. Question for you, Jim: By paved road, what's the shortest distance in miles that you can travel

Hey, thanks for the clarifications -- I'm embarrassed about the geography thing, though in my own defense (and as someone downthread suggested) the fact that we can't actually drive out of Juneau partially explains my Palin moment there. If nothing else, though, I should have recalled the fact that my Canadian friends refer to SE AK as "American Occupied British Columbia."

Quoting TwinSwords: Weird. It just sounded like fairly quiet background noise on my speakers, and was not even slightly annoying. In fact, it created a nice ambiance.

Maybe it sounds different on different speakers.

Uhh yea. I found the ambulance in the backround very soothing.

After watching this vlog and the debate I have to conclude that Mr. Noon knows very little about Alaska or its governor. While listening to him I felt his opinion purposefully, contrived. In any case...everyone here should go to Drudge and put in your Biden vote as it is getting a little embarrassing.

Here's a few that were. What was interesting was seeing the above last night and then bouncing to NBC/CBS/ABC and listening to their hosts and guests calling things for Biden. The disconnect is not surprisING ING ing ing g.

Quoting Whatfur: Here's a few that were.

What was interesting was seeing the above last night and then bouncing to NBC/CBS/ABC and listening to their hosts and guests calling things for Biden. The disconnect is not surprisING ING ing ing g.

Good grief Whatfur. Of all of the well publicized focus groups, you picked the most ideologically inclined and the one which produced results that were inconsistent with the rest. Luntz's result may have been honest, (though he was embarrassed by an opposite result a week ago, and Frank knows on which side his bread gets buttered) but it's still an outlier, with at least two other focus group results showing a completely different reaction. That's not an ringing endorsement of the point of view you'd like to highlight.

The noise was very loud on my speakers (and I live right near an airport so it takes a lot to make me notice).

[quote=AemJeff;92951]Good grief Whatfur. Of all of the well publicized focus groups, you picked the most ideologically inclined ...[quote] So these people were liars then. Liars when they said they voted
50% Bush/50% Kerry and liars when 50% said they would be voting for Obama, and to this point, liars when they said they thought Palin was the
most impressive here. Oh yeah...forgot...you all like your polls about 55/35/10. Maybe you are right, and the Drudge vote was just more right wing manipulation. Can you provide me with one of the other "well publicized" focus groups so my keel can straighten back up? I wasn't out shopping amongst them nor even looking for one...just happened to see this one. In any case, you seemed to have forgotten to back up your point with anything other than hearsay.

Quoting Whatfur:

Quoting AemJeff: Good grief Whatfur. Of all of the well publicized focus groups, you picked the most ideologically inclined ...

So these people were liars then. Liars when they said they voted
50% Bush/50% Kerry and liars when 50% said they would be voting for Obama, and to this point, liars when they said they thought Palin was the
most impressive here. Oh yeah...forgot...you all like your polls about 55/35/10.

Maybe you are right, and the Drudge vote was just more right wing manipulation. Can you provide me with one of the other "well publicized" focus groups so my keel can straighten back up? I wasn't out shopping amongst them nor even looking for one...just happened to see this one. In any case, you seemed to have forgotten to back up your point with anything other than hearsay.

You're not responding to what I said, which was, to paraphrase: you picked the one study whose results were consistent with your desired end, and which was conducted by Frank Luntz who is ideologically aligned with you. Whether or npt the results of Luntz's study turn out to representative (and there were at least two other focus groups conducted at

Quoting AemJeff:

Quoting Whatfur:

Quoting AemJeff: You're not responding to what I said, which was, to paraphrase: you picked the one study whose results were consistent with your desired end, and which was conducted by Frank Luntz who is ideologically aligned with you.
...
And, come on - the Drudge thing doesn't even count as a survey. Pick an ideological website with a poll up on this debate, how many of those toy polls don't come out with a lopsided victory for their own side?

I understood exactly what you said and again...

You discount the participants as liars because of who the moderator was and who the station was.

You cast aspersions that I chose this one over others because it validated my own opinion. There were no others that I came across or looked for, but yeah the one I did validated my own opinion.

You again refer to said "others" without specifics or did I miss that too in "not responding to what you said". If you don't care to validate your opinion or if, for some odd reason, you think its my job to do so well we can let it rest.

And Drudge (70% Palin), you are correct, barely even an

Quoting Whatfur: You discount the participants as liars because of who the moderator was and who the station was.

You cast aspersions that I chose this one over others because it validated my own opinion. There were no others that I came across or looked for, but yeah the one I did validated my own opinion.

You again refer to said "others" without specifics or did I miss that too in "not responding to what you said". If you don't care to validate your opinion or if, for some odd reason, you think its my job to do so well we can let it rest.
""

I assumed, because there were a total of three that got lots of publicity, the others would have been obvious. Mea culpa. Ambinder has a good summary. By the way, I didn't "discount" Luntz' and his group. I implied you were engaging in selection bias, and tried to cast some doubt on the wisdom of depending on his result alone.

Quoting Whatfur: Here's a few that were.

What was interesting was seeing the above last night and then bouncing to NBC/CBS/ABC and listening to their hosts and guests calling things for Biden. The disconnect is not surprisING ING ing ing g.

Many of those people had VERY strong opinions -- pro-Palin opinions. They were just jumping out of their seats, dying to defend her good name. Only you, Whatfur, would believe those were undecided voters. No one goes from undecided to passionate advocate in 90 minutes.

Quoting TwinSwords: Many of those people had VERY strong opinions -- pro-Palin opinions. They were just jumping out of their seats, dying to defend her good name.

Only you, Whatfur, would believe those were undecided voters. No one goes from undecided to passionate advocate in 90 minutes.

No, I think they were passionate in feeling that Palin did a good job (better than JoeJoe), only 3 admitted to solidifying allegiances because of the the debate...one going Obama's way. I think it is you who actually is reading more into what I took from the group... albeit 2 undecided, McCain-leaning, people becoming less undecided(passionate even) because of the debate...I think that is easily in the realm of possiblility. But yeah...I wonder where they got all these actors...left over from filming moon landings no doubt? Thanks for the link Jeff...I'll take a peek. I'm not going to find that 55/35 thing I talked about there am I?

Quoting AemJeff: I assumed, because there were a total of three that got lots of publicity, the others would have been obvious. Mea culpa. Ambinder has a good summary.

By the way, I didn't "discount" Luntz' and his group. I implied you were engaging in selection bias, and tried to cast some doubt on the wisdom of depending on his result alone.

Ummm...I guess I went there expecting to see some other "Focus Group" results. Is that not what you were originally insinuating? Instead I get a CNN poll and a CBS poll??? "Good Grief" is right.

Quoting Whatfur: Ummm...I guess I went there expecting to see some other "Focus Group" results. Is that not what you were originally insinuating?

Instead I get a CNN poll and a CBS poll??? "Good Grief" is right.

Um, I think I've heard them referred to both ways. (I might not have paid enough attention to the terms used. It wouldn't be the first time.) A "poll" that isn't a "focus group " implies a much larger sample (and therefore a higher confidence level) in most cases. What important distinction do you see here?

Quoting AemJeff: Um, I think I've heard them referred to both ways. (I might not have paid enough attention to the terms used. It wouldn't be the first time.) A "poll" that isn't a "focus group " implies a much larger sample (and therefore a higher confidence level) in most cases. What important distinction do you see here?

Oh, let him have his one meaningless data point, Jeff. Think about how silly you'd feel if you found yourself boxed into the corner of defending the fitness of Sarah Palin. That and his echo thing are all he has left at this point oint oint oint. We now stand by while 'fur says something about back-patting and "queef."

I would imagine that a sequestered, face to face, focus group all treated to the same instructions, rules, and debate experience would prove to be a little better yardstick than telephone poll. We might have to get one of the science guys on that. 500,000 or so voted ultimately on Drudge...at what point does that become an acceptable sample. In any case, its over, they both did seemingly ok. Your press, still dumpster diving in Wasilla and running scared is writing obtuse stories like "Why Women Hate Palin" (Time), while your Larry Flynt films a porn film with a lookalike. At the same time notable left wing writers continue to embarrass themselves (aka. Sullivan) and notable left wing blogs(ThinkProgess), afraid Palin did to well, are throwing things out about Palin knowing what the questions were and using prepared note cards. (Where also before the debate there was a story about checking her for wires)
Yeah, stay classy guys. Funny at the same time, you know, days after he was given a pass on his grasp of American history, Biden... in what was one of his most emotional, admonishing retorts, seemingly schools Palin on the Constitution. I assume you all knew or know

Quoting Whatfur: I would imagine that a sequestered, face to face, focus group all treated to the same instructions, rules, and debate experience would prove to be a little better yardstick than telephone poll. We might have to get one of the science guys on that. 500,000 or so voted ultimately on Drudge...at what point does that become an acceptable sample.

The sample size is important, but for this particular purpose, the most important aspect is sample bias. Coming up with a sample that accurately r