That's the bad news...sorry I don't have any good new.
P.S. This is a poll from your party speed...it could mean a total loss...Presidency and Congress.
![Nopity](images/smilies/modern/nopity.gif)
https://www.axios.com/alexandria-oca...d569dfdf9.html
Hey speed the poll leaked of swing state voters isn't looking good for your new party. You have been pinning you hopes on the "SWING STATES"!!It is always important to understand which voters are included in the sample:
That's the bad news...sorry I don't have any good new.
P.S. This is a poll from your party speed...it could mean a total loss...Presidency and Congress.
https://www.axios.com/alexandria-oca...d569dfdf9.html Originally Posted by bb1961
Not what I would call an unbiased sample. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXXAnd as the story alludes to, it's not an unbiased sample that should be taken in this particular instance.
that Poll is at least a year too early to have any meaning. 20 years ago, that Poll would have been scoffed at, for being immaterial. today Politics is a blood sport, so meaningless polls (and ECCIE Political Threads) are afforded significance to those who engage in the sport. Originally Posted by Chung TranIt does illustrate Trumps strategy. He came out guns blaring again today. He wants Pelosi to own the squad and their anti American views. He’s painting the Democrats as AOC. Looks like it’s working.
It is always important to understand which voters are included in the sample:You try and explain away everything you disagree with SPEED.
"The poll — taken in May, before Speaker Pelosi's latest run-in with AOC and the three other liberal House freshmen known as "The Squad" — included 1,003 likely general-election voters who are white and have two years or less of college education.
These are the "white, non-college voters" who embraced Donald Trump in 2016 but are needed by Democrats in swing House districts."
So the sample consisted of voters solidly in Trump's base. White. Non-college. Not what I would call an unbiased sample.
I agree that AOC is a distraction and is getting far more air time than she should as a first year House rep. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX
It is always important to understand which voters are included in the sample:Maybe AOC is a political infiltrator planted by Republicans to fuck up the Democratic party. Because that's basically whats she's doing.
"The poll — taken in May, before Speaker Pelosi's latest run-in with AOC and the three other liberal House freshmen known as "The Squad" — included 1,003 likely general-election voters who are white and have two years or less of college education.
These are the "white, non-college voters" who embraced Donald Trump in 2016 but are needed by Democrats in swing House districts."
So the sample consisted of voters solidly in Trump's base. White. Non-college. Not what I would call an unbiased sample.
I agree that AOC is a distraction and is getting far more air time than she should as a first year House rep. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX
It is always important to understand which voters are included in the sample:
"The poll — taken in May, before Speaker Pelosi's latest run-in with AOC and the three other liberal House freshmen known as "The Squad" — included 1,003 likely general-election voters who are white and have two years or less of college education.
These are the "white, non-college voters" who embraced Donald Trump in 2016 but are needed by Democrats in swing House districts."
So the sample consisted of voters solidly in Trump's base. White. Non-college. Not what I would call an unbiased sample.
I agree that AOC is a distraction and is getting far more air time than she should as a first year House rep. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX
Maybe AOC is a political infiltrator planted by Republicans to fuck up the Democratic party. Because that's basically whats she's doing. Originally Posted by Levianon17
And as the story alludes to, it's not an unbiased sample that should be taken in this particular instance.The poll sample was biased but it was supposed to be biased. The poll may have or may not have met its intent of mining into the swing vote in certain House districts.
The goal of it was to apparently mine into the "swing" vote that cost 2016 and is very important to the 2020 House races in swing districts.
And accordingly, AOC is not helping the cause in any of those areas. The Dems certainly need to eat their own in her case if they don't want to screw up moving forward. Originally Posted by eccielover
1,003 samples?Take a course in Market Research 101 and it will explain all about required sample sizes to make the results of a survey valid within a specific margin of error.
Then extrapolated to the nation?
Although I agree with some of the conclusions, the professional business guy in me has to say: Invalid due to insufficient sample size.
However, put the slam squad in a room with those 1,003 sample folks and I'll bring the dust collector (dustpan not needed). Originally Posted by Unique_Carpenter
So the sample consisted of voters solidly in Trump's base. White. Non-college. Not what I would call an unbiased sample. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXXThe article refers to them as swing voters, not the same as "Trump's base". I agree that the sample size is small and limited. But even broad random polls show AOC and Omar are highly unpopular. In this case, the 9% favorable number for Omar is jaw-droppingly low.
The article refers to them as swing voters, not the same as "Trump's base". I agree that the sample size is small and limited. But even broad random polls show AOC and Omar are highly unpopular. In this case, that 9% favorable number for Omar is jaw-droppingly low. Originally Posted by lustyladThey are also unpopular with me. Had I been in AOC's congressional district and been able to vote in the Democratic primary in 2018, I'm fairly certain I would have voted for Joe Crowley. But AOC, Omar and the others won their seats and I am not going to question the voters of their districts. It will be interesting to see what happens to them in 2020.