WHO else is SICK of hearing about [POLL,s], most of them were completely WRONG in 2016, yet all the news outlet,s still CHANT POLLS, IMO POLL,s dont mean anything, they are allway,s slanted to dictate the party that the pollsters are embracing. just another dose of B/S from the media JMO
poll,s
jimbowie1
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
Joined
·
5,093 Posts
WHO else is SICK of hearing about [POLL,s], most of them were completely WRONG in 2016, yet all the news outlet,s still CHANT POLLS, IMO POLL,s dont mean anything, they are allway,s slanted to dictate the party that the pollsters are embracing. just another dose of B/S from the media JMO
Polls are science. They will occasionally screw up because underlying assumptions are violated. However future polls will take into account the new assumptions.
Also the data wasn't wrong but the interpretations were. Many polls were within the standard error.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Also the data wasn't wrong but the interpretations were. Many polls were within the standard error.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Joined
·
7,160 Posts
Do you know this for a fact, or are you just repeating what other people say? Were you carefully watching the polls in 2016?
Because I was. And the polls were not wrong in 2016.
- The general, nationwide polls had Clinton leading. And they were right - she got the majority of the national vote.
- The individual, state-wide polls were all very close in the swing states. They weren't wrong. Those actual races were close. And in the actual election, Trump got the edge in most of them. Some, barely.
The talking heads in the MSM all focused on number 1, above. Those are the people YOU listened to. But the presidential election is not a popular vote.
The polls were also not wrong last November. Almost all the guys on this board said the Republicans were going to keep the House, because "the polls are always wrong".
But they weren't. Do your own research! Stop repeating the BS! Show some facts!
Yep. I've been saying it for two years but people don't want to hear it.
.
Joined
·
18,844 Posts
One of the worst kind of polls will say are you for "x" or for anybody or thing else. That is not choice. Polls are not done for information they are done to push an agenda.
Joined
·
3,605 Posts
Polls are for fishing.....
I can get a poll, to reflect a 100% outcome.
Just depends on how the question is asked.....
And who you ask....
Joined
·
7,160 Posts
For some polls yes. But not the kind we're talking about.
Election polling is a big BUSINESS, and in that case MOST pollsters are really trying to find results, not make up results.
Otherwise, the people doing it wouldn't be in business for long.
I'd ask anyone who says I'm wrong to show me averages of 2016 swing state polling data showing Hillary was definitely going to win those states, because I watched them carefully in that year.
But I already know that's too much effort for you guys. It's much easier to just keep repeating the BS.
.
Joined
·
3,605 Posts
For some polls yes. But not the kind we're talking about.
Election polling is a big BUSINESS, and in that case MOST pollsters are really trying to find results, not make up results.
Otherwise, the people doing it wouldn't be in business for long.
I'd ask anyone who says I'm wrong to show me averages of 2016 swing state polling data showing Hillary was definitely going to win those states, because I watched them carefully in that year.
But I already know that's too much effort for you guys. It's much easier to just keep repeating the BS.
.
Have a "bit" more cool aid..?..hmmmm
Naïve, at least...…
And ignorant, at best.....
Joined
·
12,885 Posts
This! Polls can, and some are, manipulated to show certain results. It depends how the poll questions are asked, the size of the group asked, and the make-up of the group who are polled.
Were I to conduct a poll asking if AOC was a great Congressperson and only polled people I thought would say yes, I could get the results I wanted.
Any poll needs to be viewed with a critical eye.
There are political polls like what sarco is mentioning and opinion polls the news agencies try to pass off to show support for issues. Like how X percent of the country favors gun control. Yet they fail to mention that X percent of the country doesn't support MORE gun control.
So polls can be accurate, polls can be inaccurate, and polls can be used to draw wrong or misleading conclusions.
Most every poll reference I see on CNN is crap. The other day they said their polls showed more people believe Cohen then Trump. I'm assuming that was a CNN online poll. Winning that poll does not mean Cohen is speaking the truth or is more believable then Trump.
So polls can be accurate, polls can be inaccurate, and polls can be used to draw wrong or misleading conclusions.
Most every poll reference I see on CNN is crap. The other day they said their polls showed more people believe Cohen then Trump. I'm assuming that was a CNN online poll. Winning that poll does not mean Cohen is speaking the truth or is more believable then Trump.
Joined
·
2,456 Posts
As the saying goes there are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics. There is actually a fourth kind of lie: polls.
[For those who like to nitpick, I know polls are a form of statistic. But I treated them as something separate to make a point.]
I agree with what has been said here about some polls being accurate and some being deliberately made inaccurate. But as long as the liberal cult controls the biggest media machines, both kinds will be used to lie to and manipulate their consumers.
According to the doctrines of liberal media, newsworthiness is determined by propaganda effect: if it will promote liberalism it is newsworthy; if it will detract from the liberal agenda it is not. Newsworthiness is proportional to propaganda effect.
This doctrine forms the basis of how the liberal press takes polls, and how it pretends to report polls taken by real pollsters. This is why polls are so commonly seen as inaccurate.
[For those who like to nitpick, I know polls are a form of statistic. But I treated them as something separate to make a point.]
I agree with what has been said here about some polls being accurate and some being deliberately made inaccurate. But as long as the liberal cult controls the biggest media machines, both kinds will be used to lie to and manipulate their consumers.
According to the doctrines of liberal media, newsworthiness is determined by propaganda effect: if it will promote liberalism it is newsworthy; if it will detract from the liberal agenda it is not. Newsworthiness is proportional to propaganda effect.
This doctrine forms the basis of how the liberal press takes polls, and how it pretends to report polls taken by real pollsters. This is why polls are so commonly seen as inaccurate.
Joined
·
7,160 Posts
You don't even know how to use a metaphor!Have a "bit" more cool aid..?..hmmmm
Naïve, at least...…
And ignorant, at best.....
"Drinking the Kool-aid" means following the groupthink on blind faith, without checking the facts for yourself. The person who defies the groupthink (which you are a part of) is not drinking the Kool-aid, you are!
Of the two of us, I'm the only one who actually did check the facts for myself.
People are incredibly lazy.
Good point and I completely agree with that. But as the OP stated specifically "most of them were completely WRONG in 2016" I assumed the topic was political election polls, and that is what I'm talking about.
I'm talking about THESE polls: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/e...litics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html
.
I followed the polls pre 2016 election and couldn't see what everyone was talking about when they all but anointed Clinton. I went to the poll of polls at fivethirtyeight.com/politics/ and then started looking at state level polling. I noticed the battleground states tightening to within the margin of error on the polls. I assumed that areas where they were within the margin of error would go to Trump, due to Clinton's name recognition, national popularity, and the constant anti Trump drum beat; since she should have been winning by larger margins then the error. I also factored in the huge support he was getting at rallies in swing states, versus her smaller crowds in states she was destined to win, her not campaigning as much, and the fact that some people weren't answering polls due to the harassment of Trump supporters; partially due to unfair media reporting calling them all sorts of names. The closet Trump supporters. The Dems still can't help but continue to create strawman Trump supporters. Racists, fascists, hate women, hate whatever, …. blah, blah.
In the midterm elections, I assumed the polls started to take into consideration many of the factors that over-weighted their results and that they would correct them to make the polls more accurate at a national level. Locally, they weren't that far off last time anyway. So I wasn't surprised when the Dems took the House. I was hoping the Rs would hold it by 1 just because I knew the Dems would abuse their oversight. Trump did a good job stumping for candidates. That's why the controlling party lost less then they historically did at that point.
After the constant deluge of negativity and harassment, if Trump is within 5% in a poll going into 2020 I think he has a greater than 50% chance of winning.
In the midterm elections, I assumed the polls started to take into consideration many of the factors that over-weighted their results and that they would correct them to make the polls more accurate at a national level. Locally, they weren't that far off last time anyway. So I wasn't surprised when the Dems took the House. I was hoping the Rs would hold it by 1 just because I knew the Dems would abuse their oversight. Trump did a good job stumping for candidates. That's why the controlling party lost less then they historically did at that point.
After the constant deluge of negativity and harassment, if Trump is within 5% in a poll going into 2020 I think he has a greater than 50% chance of winning.
Joined
·
912 Posts
The only polls that mattered were the ones who predicted Trump would win. The rest of them were complete BS.
I don't pay attention to polls. I pay attention to results.
Trump is President. Clinton and the democrats are sore losers. That is the results.
I don't pay attention to polls. I pay attention to results.
Trump is President. Clinton and the democrats are sore losers. That is the results.
Joined
·
7,160 Posts
That was pretty much my experience exactly, although I spent a lot of time on Real Clear Politics rather than 538. I did check 538 once in awhile though.
You, me, and a couple others on this board seem to be the only ones who saw what happened, and now everyone else, who didn't pay attention, think WE are the uninformed ones. :thumb:
.
Joined
·
7,160 Posts
Joined
·
10,789 Posts
The problem with the political polls are twofold:
1. The liberal polls all ask random participants in selected areas, rather than a broad base of "likely voters." If a person does not plan to vote, their opinion regarding election results does not matter. The only poll that I'm aware of that asks likely voters is RasmussenReports.com.
2. Most polls are intentionally politically skewed to favor Democrats. I believe pollsters legally or at least ethically have to provide the underlying data regarding the Demographics and political leanings of the people who participate in political polls, but they never provide that information up front. Most of the polls for the 2016 election favored Democrats by at least 20% because of where the polls were taken and who they asked.
Why do you think Hillary was favored to win in 2016 in literally every liberal poll?
The idea was to discourage conservatives from voting by making it look like Trump had no chance of winning. When a candidate has no chance of winning, a lot of their supporters will not take the time to vote. Trump votes were very likely underrepresented because of the media's antics.
Joined
·
7,160 Posts
If true, you are probably referring to some national polls, which don't mean anything in a presidential election, so it's meaningless. I didn't waste my time paying attention to any of them. What's the point?
Also, most of the real presidential election polls that ARE meaningful are with registered voters, and there were a LOT of them on 2016.
When trying to predict the winner, they don't concentrate on Democrat areas because that would not be an accurate poll, and those particular pollsters are in the business of doing accurate polling. Otherwise, no one will pay them to do polls. Why would they put themselves out of business?
.
Joined
·
24,132 Posts
Polls CAN be science.
But the way they are worded often makes them political BS, and forces one to either select things they don't really agree with, or NOT be able to choose an answer they DO agree with.
As in...1. Do you beat your wife? 2. When did you stop beating your wife?
How do you answer that? What if you answer no to the first? If you DON'T answer the second, your poll is thrown out, or worse, they count it as "Never stopped", with no regard to how or if you answered the first...so in the end, if X% even bothered to answer the second question, they can say, "statistically, only X% of those surveyed have quit beating their wives."
That's NOT science....that's polling.
There is a reason most polls are built with the help of psychologists, and not scientists or mathematicians.
Umm...who, exactly, is paying for this BIG business? The parties, and the media, the lobbyists, and those with an iron in the fire.
And no, being wrong isn't going to stop that. You simply tell the guys footing the bills that the margin of error made it too close to call, or you tell them they got outspent in this area, or that category, and so the data you gave them was right, but those rotten evil other people stole the whole thing with money, or collusion, or whatever...
I mean...do you REALLY think honesty and integrity is part of that whole business? Have you ever READ the questions they ask?
It's usually TOTALLY BS.
Of course they do.
The problem is...If you are doing a poll...who is going to answer the polls?
Answer...the left. Most conservative guys I know don't care to bother telling some person on the phone squat. Fill out an on-line survey? Riiiigghhhttt.
Stop and talk to someone in front of the gun store, or the furniture store? PuuuLEEASE .
They don't "concentrate" on the left...but their responses are going to be primarily from...the left, and the young, because the right doesn't give a crap about them, or their ridiculous poll with the leading questions and BS responses.
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
