|
|
It wasn’t their politics that hurt the pollsters, but the huge margin of error in state polls relative to national polls (state pollsters just aren’t as good as the national ones) and the fact the demographic modeling, particularly in modeling the turn out of uneducated white voters, was not a good fit for what happened in 2016.Originally Posted by PawDawg
But even then the pollsters were giving Trump a better chance then than they are now.
No, I don't know that at all. I said at the time that Biden would've faired better than HRC. I'm afraid Rush and Moon are fooling you. That would explain why you refuse to believe the polls. In 2016, voters who disliked both Clinton and Trump broke to Trump. That's not happening this year. HRC was one of the least popular nominees ever...frankly, it's the only way Trump won. He's not so lucky this time.
Time is your friend. Impulse is your enemy. -John Bogle
That is mostly true pertaining to 2016. There was a HUGE anti-Killary vote. I have posted many times Biden would have beaten Trump in '16. And, he might in 2020. But, the landscape has changed some too. There are many of us who pushed the button for Trump in '16 mostly because he wasn't Killary. But, Trump has proven to be a much better POTUS than any of us expected. I voted FOR Trump this go-around and would have no matter who the Dems had put up.
It is fair to say there is an anti-Trump factor. Yeah, true, but most of that is from the Left and might manifest with Biden garnering some of the votes Killary didn't get, from the Left, and the small % of petty, self-righteous, spoiled brats who fancy themselves "conservative" and are jealous of Trump's success. But, they didn't vote for Trump in '16 either, so that is a wash.
Trump's path to victory is through Pennsylvania. The USA Today poll they just discussed on Fox News showed almost no movement in PA after the debate...that's pretty shocking. Biden's lead there is outside the margin of error, but just barely. IF Trump can claw back in PA, I think he'll win. If not, he's toast. There is a path for Biden without PA, but it's very precarious. There is no path for Trump without PA...well, it's something like 2%.
Time is your friend. Impulse is your enemy. -John Bogle
FOX did an analysis last week, as I posted, and they said Pennsylvania is the key.
If you can watch Biden and not realize he is totally not there, your orange man hate has taken over.
LOL at the "uneducated white voters" slap. That's voters w/out a college degree, which means nothing. You are such an elitist...the perfect white apologist democrat.
He way over performed Trump's caricature of him in the debates and on the stump. Regardless, don't you think it's possible that "totally not there" Biden is STILL a stronger candidate than HRC? That's certainly what the polls show.
Time is your friend. Impulse is your enemy. -John Bogle
proof that the polls are not scientific, but biased.
He way over performed Trump's caricature of him in the debates and on the stump. Regardless, don't you think it's possible that "totally not there" Biden is STILL a stronger candidate than HRC? That's certainly what the polls show.
What do you mean? What is your issue with the current polling science?
I’ve already told you...they are not using random samples. They are using selective sampling. The only difference between now and 2016 is the increased “non-educated” white male factor. They are still way low on black, Hispanic, and female Trump voters
How do you think they're selecting? Random samples wouldn't be predictive unless they mirrored the demographics of the state.
Time is your friend. Impulse is your enemy. -John Bogle
Most of those pollsters are trying to pump up Biden's numbers to make him look electable to get people to vote for him. Their numbers are overinflated toward Biden just like last year's for Clinton. Trafalgar's numbers are the only ones you can trust and he has Trump winning every swing state except Minnesota and he's tied in Minnesota.
I've heard of a half dozen of people who have been polled for the first time in their lives. All of them are huge Trump supporters, but they told the pollsters that they are voting Biden.. This could be very similar to what happened in 2016.
I like Trafalgar's methodology and think it is more accurate than most of the polls, and as accurate as any other...but, it too uses assumptions. They all do. You can plug in whatever assumptions you want and then weight them however you wish. Overall, I think they do as well as anyone.
It will be very interesting to measure how well the polls did this go-around. Of course, there is one additional factor which will mostly go unmeasured as I doubt any poll has this built in...the amount of cheating. We'll have recorded numbers (albeit some % will be fake, contrived) to compare to the polls. I don't how much that might skew the results, but it is a factor.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
