you tell me, Professor dikkheadIs there a different version of this take that makes you not look like an idiot? Like, what would be the non-cacmambaish way of saying it where it could even be considered as an opinion?
you tell me, Professor dikkheadIs there a different version of this take that makes you not look like an idiot? Like, what would be the non-cacmambaish way of saying it where it could even be considered as an opinion?
Polling is not to be used as a prediction tool, this is why so many of you are upset with polling. Polling is a snapshot/point in time to identify where focus needs to be.
What does it mean when we have months worth of snapshots and on actual election days they are wrong? Maybe people are changing their mind at the boothPolling is not to be used as a prediction tool, this is why so many of you are upset with polling. Polling is a snapshot/point in time to identify where focus needs to be.
It's a snapshot that's true but the issue is that we have no certainty that it's representative enough. If the bias of the poll have too many variables (age, gender, party affiliation, place to vote, ability to vote, months from election...), then how meaningful is that snapshot ?Polling is not to be used as a prediction tool, this is why so many of you are upset with polling. Polling is a snapshot/point in time to identify where focus needs to be.
Speak on it breh.. @FAH1223 posting 10 polls back to back to back talkin bout it’s bad news for Biden but posting senate posts on swing states showing the Dems being upNo word on Haley's donors giving to Biden's campaign instead of Trumps, huh? Big shocker.
But polls
Rut roh! Trump drools over how hot Kristi Gnome is, Tulsi likely punching the air RN
They're supposed to be averaged considering they only encompass a specific group. For example, everybody will say the Coli HL poll had Biden winning by 10% all year but he only won by 2%, therefore the Coli HL poll must be trash because it was 8% off. But if you were to average the Coli HL, Coli TLR, Coli Booth, etc numbers, you would have gotten a better indicator.What does it mean when we have months worth of snapshots and on actual election days they are wrong? Maybe people are changing their mind at the booth
Chances are extremely likely that is a sh*tty poll all around. I'd immediately look up their pollster grade.True but if a poll shows drastic, historical shifts in American sentiment from week to week something is wrong.
If the number of participants being polled does not equal the actual number of people who cast a vote, it will never be 100% representative.It's a snapshot that's true but the issue is that we have no certainty that it's representative enough. If the bias of the poll have too many variables (age, gender, party affiliation, place to vote, ability to vote, months from election...), then how meaningful is that snapshot ?
Pollsters now say that they have margins of error so they don't lose face. But unless the margin is very narrow then the poll becomes as reliable as a decision in a close boxing fight.
NYT/Sienna is considered a good poll yet they're doing this too. I was referencing one of their recent polls, where their main pollster guy (Nate Cohn) wrote an article about Biden's troubles with black voters based on a clear outlier. And then when the next poll showed Biden back to normal democrat levels with black voters, there was no "Biden bounces back" analysis. I'm not saying that article should be written, I'm saying the entire thing is based on a false premise. NYT has also shown Trump only down with women voters by a couple points. It's clear they are making terrible samples, but using them to dictate narratives.Chances are extremely likely that is a sh*tty poll all around. I'd immediately look up their pollster grade.
Exactly… GOP is clearly underwater with white women, it’s beyond the scale at this point…NYT/Sienna is considered a good poll yet they're doing this too. I was referencing one of their recent polls, where their main pollster guy (Nate Cohn) wrote an article about Biden's troubles with black voters based on a clear outlier. And then when the next poll showed Biden back to normal democrat levels with black voters, there was no "Biden bounces back" analysis. I'm not saying that article should be written, I'm saying the entire thing is based on a false premise. NYT has also shown Trump only down with women voters by a couple points. It's clear they are making terrible samples, but using them to dictate narratives.
That was just a WAG based on the ballpark that missing 20% of the races would mean getting 87 House races wrong out of 435.
And House races get minimal polling compared to presidential races. Out of 50 states each year, how many do you think pollsters are actually missing? Back in the Obama era 538 managed to get 100% and 98% in the two elections. Do pollsters as a whole ever get more than 10 states wrong in a modern presidential election?