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.
A common argument from Trump supporters in the last few weeks has been that the polls were rigged or at least massively inaccurate. Let's say -- and I consider this to be unlikely -- that Trump continues closing the gap, and the last polls before the election have him with a slight lead. If Trump wins by a small margin, would Trump supporters here be willing to admit that the polls were correct and were in fact not rigged or massively inaccurate?
Similarly, if HRC wins and does so with a margin somewhat close to what the polls predict, will those who have alleged inaccurate polls be willing to make the same admission?
It's probably been closer than the polls indicated all along.
If it has been closer than the polls have indicated, then we should expect Trump to outperform the polls on election day. My question is what if he performs more or less how the polls are predicting him to perform?
If it has been closer than the polls have indicated, then we should expect Trump to outperform the polls on election day. My question is what if he performs more or less how the polls are predicting him to perform?
How would that prove polls were correct 2 months ago?
How would that prove polls were correct 2 months ago?
I'm not referencing two months ago. Claims of poll inaccuracy have been made here in large numbers as recently as this week. The move in the polls is clearly attributable to a real event in the election -- the new FBI investigation. If that move continues, we probably have good reason to believe it is due to voter response to that investigation, not merely a coincidental (or otherwise) improvement in poll accuracy.
I'm not referencing two months ago. Claims of poll inaccuracy have been made here in large numbers as recently as this week. The move in the polls is clearly attributable to a real event in the election -- the new FBI investigation. If that move continues, we probably have good reason to believe it is due to voter response to that investigation, not merely a coincidental (or otherwise) improvement in poll accuracy.
How would we know the polls are moving solely due to a current event and not due to baked in support that was always there? Look at the ABC poll - from Hillary +12 to Hillary +1 in five days (only one polling day post FBI). It seems like the only polls not moving a lot are the one that supposedly heavily favored Trump all along.
A common argument from Trump supporters in the last few weeks has been that the polls were rigged or at least massively inaccurate. Let's say -- and I consider this to be unlikely -- that Trump continues closing the gap, and the last polls before the election have him with a slight lead. If Trump wins by a small margin, would Trump supporters here be willing to admit that the polls were correct and were in fact not rigged or massively inaccurate?
Similarly, if HRC wins and does so with a margin somewhat close to what the polls predict, will those who have alleged inaccurate polls be willing to make the same admission?
The polls are all about PROJECTING. They create the results they wish, to produce an illusion. Then as the election winds down, they start to come around to reality, so they do not look like idiots.
Brexit 2.0
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.
