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.
To be able to state that a pollster is "oversampling" a group means you know two things:
1. The actual, current, accurate count of that group
2. WITH CERTAINTY, that the groups are going to vote a certain way-e.g. every Democrat will vote for Biden or every Republican will vote for President Trump, and possibly that independents will vote in particular proportions identical to the last time.
If you already know those things, there's no sense in taking a poll. Just get a count of Democrats and Republicans and plug the numbers.
The poll is meant to actually measure, at that moment, a random sample that will accurately reflect current party identification (vaguely interesting) and whether those polled will both actually vote, and how they intend to vote (usually the point of the poll). You infer how the population then is likely to vote from the sample...thus the term, inferential statistics.
A bunch of...uh...logic-challenged people?... keep saying that "oversampling" Democrats is happening and thus polls must be "correctly weighted" to make up for that. The polls they quote that are "correctly weighted" take incredible liberties with the actual polled numbers, and appear to be based on the theory that party identification and how independents will vote is at best static..or possibly just assigning everyone who doesn't positively say they will vote Biden to President Trump. The polite term for that is "bold faced lie." It's at best, complete ignorance and an unwillingness to actually look at the situation and determine how to fix your candidate's glaring flaws so he legitimately polls better.
In this case, the poll that Strehl's adjustments are based on clearly shows the percentage of polled people that identify with one party or another:
-Democrat 33%
-Republican 37%
-Neither 31%
(with a bit of rounding error).
In 2016, the actual vote was:
-Republican 52.3%
-Democrat 42.3%
Clearly independents broke for President Trump that year.
But this isn't 2016. You can't know the percentage of independents, or Democrats, or Republicans on the day of election-and you definitely can't know how independents will break. Thus...the whole reason for a poll.
It is clear claims Democrats are oversampled, and the poll "adjustments" by Strehl, are designed to do one thing: present a picture that shows their favored candidate winning, in a state that historically, he should take without major issue. That's kind of a sad commentary on how badly the President is polling that you have to brag he's actually doing alright in Texas, don't you think?
They don't get reelected when there is high unemployment....
Trump would defy history if he's reelected.
It'd confirm his status as the greatest man in American history.
What trump said about veterans resonates with many texans. They are behind him.
Except he didn't say it....
They were all with President Trump during the alleged incident and they are saying The Atlantic article is completely false:
-Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Former White House Press Secretary
-Hogan Gidley, Former Deputy White House Press Secretary
-Dan Scavino, White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Communications
-Jordan Karem, Personal Aide to President Trump
-Johnny DeStefano, Former Counselor to the President
-John Bolton, Former National Security Advisor
-Mick Mulvaney, Former Acting White House Chief of Staff
-Stephen Miller, White House Senior Advisor
-Tony Ornato, Then-Secret Service Special Agent In Charge Of The Presidential Protective Division
-Derek Lyons, Staff Secretary and Counselor to the President
-Dan Walsh, Former White House Deputy Chief of Staff https://www.donaldjtrump.com/media/w...tory-is-false/
Biden only leads Florida by 1.8 according to the RealClearPolitics average, and that is seriously trending against Biden, because Biden led by 5.0 on August 21st! https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...iden-6841.html
That is the big one, because the last 2 men to win the General Election without Florida were Clinton 1992 and JFK 1960.
Very rare to win without Florida.
I agree that Trump could easily win FL. NC too.
But I think he is going to lose the northern swing states and Arizona.
To be able to state that a pollster is "oversampling" a group means you know two things:
1. The actual, current, accurate count of that group
2. WITH CERTAINTY, that the groups are going to vote a certain way-e.g. every Democrat will vote for Biden or every Republican will vote for President Trump, and possibly that independents will vote in particular proportions identical to the last time.
If you already know those things, there's no sense in taking a poll. Just get a count of Democrats and Republicans and plug the numbers.
The poll is meant to actually measure, at that moment, a random sample that will accurately reflect current party identification (vaguely interesting) and whether those polled will both actually vote, and how they intend to vote (usually the point of the poll). You infer how the population then is likely to vote from the sample...thus the term, inferential statistics.
A bunch of...uh...logic-challenged people?... keep saying that "oversampling" Democrats is happening and thus polls must be "correctly weighted" to make up for that. The polls they quote that are "correctly weighted" take incredible liberties with the actual polled numbers, and appear to be based on the theory that party identification and how independents will vote is at best static..or possibly just assigning everyone who doesn't positively say they will vote Biden to President Trump. The polite term for that is "bold faced lie." It's at best, complete ignorance and an unwillingness to actually look at the situation and determine how to fix your candidate's glaring flaws so he legitimately polls better.
In this case, the poll that Strehl's adjustments are based on clearly shows the percentage of polled people that identify with one party or another:
-Democrat 33%
-Republican 37%
-Neither 31%
(with a bit of rounding error).
In 2016, the actual vote was:
-Republican 52.3%
-Democrat 42.3%
Clearly independents broke for President Trump that year.
But this isn't 2016. You can't know the percentage of independents, or Democrats, or Republicans on the day of election-and you definitely can't know how independents will break. Thus...the whole reason for a poll.
It is clear claims Democrats are oversampled, and the poll "adjustments" by Strehl, are designed to do one thing: present a picture that shows their favored candidate winning, in a state that historically, he should take without major issue. That's kind of a sad commentary on how badly the President is polling that you have to brag he's actually doing alright in Texas, don't you think?
FWIW the Hill article flipperd the #'s for the Black and Hispanic vote.
Biden is up 87-9 among likely Black voters and 58-28 among likely Hispanic voters according to the crosstabs of the poll
Still 87% is worse than Clinton who got 88% and still lost.
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.
