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.
Midterms never poll as good the general election. There just isn't enough interest for quality pollsters to invest a lot of time there. They got trend right but just miss called how large it would be. So that wouldn't exactly be helpful to Trump. Because going by that line of thinking Clinton would be winning by a blowout.
Considering it was a tossup, and you obviously don't actually do anything but get information from talk radio, it was not a shock. From 3 months out the polling was equally divided between remain and leave. Technically there were a few more leave polls than remain ones. Nice try though! #postfail
Considering it was a tossup, and you obviously don't actually do anything but get information from talk radio, it was not a shock. From 3 months out the polling was equally divided between remain and leave. Technically there were a few more leave polls than remain ones. Nice try though! #postfail
Trump and Hillary have exchanged leads in the polls too.
"Opinion polls on Brexit were all over the place; the theoretical lead had changed hands dozens of times since September, although “leave” never reached 50 percent support. Still, betting odds put the chance of remaining at 90 percent as the polls closed on Thursday. Ladbrokes was offering 4-to-1 on a leave vote, according to The Guardian."
Trump and Hillary have exchanged leads in the polls too.
"Opinion polls on Brexit were all over the place; the theoretical lead had changed hands dozens of times since September, although “leave” never reached 50 percent support. Still, betting odds put the chance of remaining at 90 percent as the polls closed on Thursday. Ladbrokes was offering 4-to-1 on a leave vote, according to The Guardian."
Hillary has led since the end of the Convention, and we are now far enough from the Convention that if the bounce would have faded we would have seen it, we aren't seeing that.
"Opinion polls on Brexit were all over the place; the theoretical lead had changed hands dozens of times since September, although “leave” never reached 50 percent support. Still, betting odds put the chance of remaining at 90 percent as the polls closed on Thursday. Ladbrokes was offering 4-to-1 on a leave vote, according to The Guardian."
This discussion is about polls, not about opinion. So why do you post a link that is almost entirely about pre-Brexit opinion pieces, and not polls?
Your link contains all of one sentence about the Brexit polling:
Quote:
Opinion polls on Brexit were all over the place; the theoretical lead had changed hands dozens of times since September, although “leave” never reached 50 percent support.
Do you see that? Your own link concedes that the polls were split. But then it goes on to falsely claim that LEAVE never hit 50%. In reality, LEAVE twice got 50% (which I highlight below, in bold). Of course, in a tight race with a fairly sizable number of undecideds, it's not surprising that most polls showed LEAVE and REMAIN both below 50%.
Quote:
Date - Leave - Remain - Undecided - Pollster - Type
22 Jun 2016 45 45 10 YouGov online
22 Jun 2016 45 44 11 Opinium online
22 Jun 2016 43 41 16 TNS online
22 Jun 2016 42 48 11 ComRes phone
20 Jun 2016 44 45 11 Survation phone
19 Jun 2016 44 42 13 YouGov online
19 Jun 2016 47 53 2 ORB phone
18 Jun 2016 42 45 13 Survation phone
17 Jun 2016 43 44 13 YouGov online
17 Jun 2016 44 44 12 Opinium online
16 Jun 2016 44 42 14 YouGov online
15 Jun 2016 45 42 13 Survation phone
15 Jun 2016 43 46 11 BMG phone 15 Jun 2016 51 41 9 BMG online
14 Jun 2016 49 43 8 Ipsos Mori phone
13 Jun 2016 45 46 9 ComRes phone
13 Jun 2016 49 44 7 ICM online 13 Jun 2016 50 45 6 ICM phone
13 Jun 2016 46 39 15 YouGov online
13 Jun 2016 47 40 13 TNS online
The majority of the polls called the outcome correctly. Of the five biggest spreads, four were for LEAVE (10%, 7%, 7%, 6%) and only one was for REMAIN (6%). Aggregated, these polls collectively show LEAVE over REMAIN by 1.5%. In other words, the Brexit polling did, in fact, correctly predict the result. And given that the final result was LEAVE by 3.8%, the differential is 2.3%, well within the MoE of virtually any poll. So not only did the pre-Brexit polling hit the result, it got within the MoE on the numbers.
In your quest for the rare aggregated polling that calls an election wrong, you can't even cherry-pick properly. And why not?
Probably because you've never even seen the numbers before I posted them here. You've confused opinion pieces for polls. You've probably read fellow Trumplings making the same claim on these forums - without actually offering any proof - and you believed them. Maybe you read the same sorts of assertions on FreeRepublic, or heard them on Fox News or from Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh. But you never thought to check for yourself. You just believe assertions that weren't actually backed up by any evidence.
And that's why you had no idea that the polls actually were right.
This poll isn't rigged, and Trump leads Hillary 67% to 19%
A few weeks ago, Pat Cadell slammed the Reuters poll which showed Clinton with a 10 point lead after just the previous week showing Trump with a 10 point lead. That simply isn't possible, and Cadell knew it. He also used the occasion to slam other polls that had changed there methodology in order to favor Clinton.
Now we have a real poll, done fairly, of 50,000 people. It shows Trump leading Hillary, 67% to 19% nationwide.
A few weeks ago, Pat Cadell slammed the Reuters poll which showed Clinton with a 10 point lead after just the previous week showing Trump with a 10 point lead. That simply isn't possible, and Cadell knew it. He also used the occasion to slam other polls that had changed there methodology in order to favor Clinton.
Now we have a real poll, done fairly, of 50,000 people. It shows Trump leading Hillary, 67% to 19% nationwide.
A few weeks ago, Pat Cadell slammed the Reuters poll which showed Clinton with a 10 point lead after just the previous week showing Trump with a 10 point lead. That simply isn't possible, and Cadell knew it. He also used the occasion to slam other polls that had changed there methodology in order to favor Clinton.
Now we have a real poll, done fairly, of 50,000 people. It shows Trump leading Hillary, 67% to 19% nationwide.
Even you, lotsofnonsenseguy, know this is... well, nonsense. But it is all you've got, isn't it? How did that unskewing for you last time around?
But... Pat Caddell? LOL! Hilarious!
And speaking of the last election, remember in 2011, when Caddell (and his eternal twin, Doug Schoen) were peddling the idea that President Obama's reelection bid was doomed, and the only chance the Democrats had to hold the White House in 2012 was... to nominate Hillary Clinton! Remember that? I do. The usual suspects bought it.
Quote:
By PATRICK H. CADDELL AND DOUGLAS E. SCHOEN
November 21, 2011
When Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson accepted the reality that they could not effectively govern the nation if they sought re-election to the White House, both men took the moral high ground and decided against running for a new term as president. President Obama is facing a similar reality—and he must reach the same conclusion.
He should abandon his candidacy for re-election in favor of a clear alternative, one capable not only of saving the Democratic Party, but more important, of governing effectively and in a way that preserves the most important of the president's accomplishments. He should step aside for the one candidate who would become, by acclamation, the nominee of the Democratic Party: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
For those not in the know, Caddell worked as a political advisor to President Carter in the 1970s. Since then, he's made a living as a concern troll. He expresses skepticism about Democratic chances (like "Gee, Obama is doomed in 2012 so Clinton should run!"), and places like Fox News (where he's a regular) fall all over him. If Sanders was the nominee, you can bet your last dollar that Pat Caddell would be writing articles saying "Sanders should step aside because only Hillary Clinton can win this election!".
Do you live in an alternate universe? Posting crap like this that is the only solution I can think of.
he posts and then never returns
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.
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.
This poll isn't rigged, and Trump leads Hillary 67% to 19%
