Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well, we have an ass and a liar running for President. Seems you like the liar. Fair enough.
The thing about an ass is that most often it is a means to an end. A liar though, it's part of them and they'll lie about anything and everything without reason, they just lie, it really is who they are.
I am wondering how anyone can do a poll that reflects the outcome. Popular vote maybe but sometimes the person winning the popular vote loses the election??
That's why sites like 538 and RCP aggregate state and national polls, feed them into models that take the electoral college into account, and publish results that covers both popular and electoral votes. It's just that Trump's followers hate them, because it's looking - bad.
That's why sites like 538 and RCP aggregate state and national polls, feed them into models that take the electoral college into account, and publish results that covers both popular and electoral votes. It's just that Trump's followers hate them, because it's looking - bad.
Yes, the worst thing that can be done is when non experts try to skew the polls. Hell, even experts sometimes try to do that as well. Remember Dick Morris in 2012? Sometimes you can see obvious bias in the polling data of course. The Survey USA polls in NC are a good example of this. They aren't using the voter file to weight their results and assuming the electorate will be less black and more older whites. Overall the polls give a pretty good picture of things. My guess is that after the bound the polls will settle back to +3-4 for Clinton. Basically back where we were before the election.
I am wondering how anyone can do a poll that reflects the outcome. Popular vote maybe but sometimes the person winning the popular vote loses the election??
That's what makes the fivethirtyeight site so compelling. Silver currently has the best track record of translating the polling data on the popular vote into the Electoral College vote.
Losing the popular vote but winning the electoral vote has happened 3 times, including Bush v. Gore.
"In fact, it is possible for a candidate to not get a single person's vote -- not one -- in 39 states or the District of Columbia, yet be elected president by wining the popular vote in just 11 of these 12 states:
California
New York
Texas
Florida
Pennsylvania
Illinois
Ohio
Michigan
New Jersey
North Carolina
Georgia
Virginia"
That's what makes the fivethirtyeight site so compelling. Silver currently has the best track record of translating the polling data on the popular vote into the Electoral College vote.
Losing the popular vote but winning the electoral vote has happened 3 times, including Bush v. Gore.
"In fact, it is possible for a candidate to not get a single person's vote -- not one -- in 39 states or the District of Columbia, yet be elected president by wining the popular vote in just 11 of these 12 states:
California
New York
Texas
Florida
Pennsylvania
Illinois
Ohio
Michigan
New Jersey
North Carolina
Georgia
Virginia"
They survey 3,000 people. That's why I tend to look at that poll rather than a Reuters poll that surveys like 600 people and sees wild swings all the time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA
As far as I can tell, only 400 people per poll. That's questionable methodology.
The FOX NEWS poll that came out a few days ago had Clinton ahead by 10.
Is FOX NEWS conservative enough for the conservatives out there??
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.