The polls were accurate. The pundits RIGGED the message and in the end it screwed Hillary.At this point, I don’t see enthusiasm for Trump waning on the Republican side. Just the opposite. I don’t see him being complacent either. I’m not saying the polls are always wrong. I just don’t trust them implicitly. I trust what I see and what I research. I didn’t believe the polls in 2016. Most were saying Hillary had a 90% chance of winning. The polls were trying to sway puplic opinion and depress the Trump vote. I would say 99% of the voters don’t dig deep into the polls methodology and how some deceptively form their questions. But just like the media, the polls show a liberal bias.
She was overconfident on the "message" she was seeing and interpreting. Trump took advantage of that and beat her ass.
I don't want Conservatives getting that same overconfidence. Keep up the enthusiasm, but do and don't use 2016 as a model. Take the polls and margins of errors in them seriously as they were accurate in 2016, but don't allow pundits/etc. to guide your dialog to believing Trump is doing better than he is right now.
At this point, it's going to be a bitter fight to the end even if it's Biden. Best thing for Trump is a far far lefty gets the nomination. Originally Posted by eccielover
At this point, I don’t see enthusiasm for Trump waning on the Republican side. Just the opposite. I don’t see him being complacent either. I’m not saying the polls are always wrong. I just don’t trust them implicitly. I trust what I see and what I research. I didn’t believe the polls in 2016. Most were saying Hillary had a 90% chance of winning. The polls were trying to sway puplic opinion and depress the Trump vote. I would say 99% of the voters don’t dig deep into the polls methodology and how some deceptively form their questions. But just like the media, the polls show a liberal bias. Originally Posted by bambinoAnd that's the point I'm trying to make. The polls generally have no inherent bias(with the exception of the occasional worded question that puts a slant into the poll). The polls don't give
And that's the point I'm trying to make. The polls generally have no inherent bias(with the exception of the occasional worded question that puts a slant into the poll). The polls don't giveJust think about Trumps recent ass kissing of Putin on the G7. Disgraceful Anti American scum. His 38% and Putin's support might get him another Russian induced win
a percentage of win to say Hillary.
It's the pundits that do.
For example, the majority of polls had Hillary winning by anywhere from 3-5 % with a margin of error of 5%. So an example would be Hillary winning 52% to 48% with a margin of error of even 4%. The poll is saying Trump is within the margin of error and has a shot at winning.
Now that poll would have been used by the the pundits to try and extrapolate that 90+% likely to win for Hillary.
The polling was accurate and Trump bucked the odds of the poll within the margin of error. The Pundit got it totally fucking wrong with their estimate.
On election day 2016 most polls had Trump in the margin of error. Today, most polls have Trump losing by more than the margin of error(To at least Biden, Sanders, and some Warren) which to me is a concern regardless.
Do I think Trump turns it around by election day, yes, there's a lot of time left. I think the Dems bury themselves through the primaries.
But I largely trust the basis of the polling and as I said, Trump is well aware and reacting to them as well.
And Conservatives need to be wary of false confidence. Originally Posted by eccielover
And that's the point I'm trying to make. The polls generally have no inherent bias(with the exception of the occasional worded question that puts a slant into the poll). The polls don't give35/8, did give Hillary a 90% chance of winning the day of the election. Nate Silver, who runs it, is a Liberal. How many polls use more democrats than republicans in their samples? How do they formulate their questions. Rasmussen got it right in 2016. Coincidentally, they have Trumps approval rating higher than other polls. Are they just an outlier? IMHO, no. I don’t think conventional polls capture Trump support accurately.
a percentage of win to say Hillary.
It's the pundits that do.
For example, the majority of polls had Hillary winning by anywhere from 3-5 % with a margin of error of 5%. So an example would be Hillary winning 52% to 48% with a margin of error of even 4%. The poll is saying Trump is within the margin of error and has a shot at winning.
Now that poll would have been used by the the pundits to try and extrapolate that 90+% likely to win for Hillary.
The polling was accurate and Trump bucked the odds of the poll within the margin of error. The Pundit got it totally fucking wrong with their estimate.
On election day 2016 most polls had Trump in the margin of error. Today, most polls have Trump losing by more than the margin of error(To at least Biden, Sanders, and some Warren) which to me is a concern regardless.
Do I think Trump turns it around by election day, yes, there's a lot of time left. I think the Dems bury themselves through the primaries.
But I largely trust the basis of the polling and as I said, Trump is well aware and reacting to them as well.
And Conservatives need to be wary of false confidence. Originally Posted by eccielover
35/8, did give Hillary a 90% chance of winning the day of the election. Nate Silver, who runs it, is a Liberal. How many polls use more democrats than republicans in their samples? How do they formulate their questions. Rasmussen got it right in 2016. Coincidentally, they have Trumps approval rating higher than other polls. Are they just an outlier? IMHO, no. I don’t think conventional polls capture Trump support accurately. Originally Posted by bambinoAgain, Rasmussen is the lowest rated polling company because they have the worst track record over many years. They over sample Republicans so when Republicans pull an upset Rasmussen will look great. They were by far the WORST of approximately 20 polling companies in the 2018 midterms, actually predicting Republicans to hold the House.
Again, Rasmussen is the lowest rated polling company because they have the worst track record over many years. They over sample Republicans so when Republicans pull an upset Rasmussen will look great. They were by far the WORST of approximately 20 polling companies in the 2018 midterms, actually predicting Republicans to hold the House.Mainstream polls DO over sample democrats:
Are current polls over-sampling Democrats? Possibly. The polls have been very accurate in the past and as I said the approval ratings have been 100% accurate in predicting who will win when the sitting POTUS is up for reelection.
Unfortunately we won't know how accurate the polls are for another 14 months and they may change quite a bit between now and then. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX
Oh Jesus. The CHUCKLEHEADS ARE BACK TODAY.Your quote:
I guess rexdutchman had that extra cup of coffee this morning!
Originally Posted by Yssup Rider