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 forum is filled with Trump supporters who both claim "all the polls are wrong," and yet rush to post any poll that has Trump winning, tied, or losing by less.
Sweet jumping Jesus Christ on a bicycle...how many times must this be explained when it is so obvious?
Dem cheerleader news outlets and pollsters demonstrably rig the samples in their favor, so we always consider that we are doing five points better than advertised. When the polls are bad for Trump, it is mitigated. When they are good, they are great.
We believe this because we saw it not only last year, but in Reagan's races, in the Bush-Dukkakis race, etc.
Sweet jumping Jesus Christ on a bicycle...how many times must this be explained when it is so obvious?
Dem cheerleader news outlets and pollsters demonstrably rig the samples in their favor, so we always consider that we are doing five points better than advertised. When the polls are bad for Trump, it is mitigated. When they are good, they are great.
We believe this because we saw it not only last year, but in Reagan's races, in the Bush-Dukkakis race, etc.
Care to explain 2012 and 2008 when Obama won? How about 2000 and 2004 when Bush won? The national polls before the election accurately predicted the winner those times. And many other times.
And Trump wasn't that far behind in 2016. RCP average no-toss-up map had Trump at 266. Add in 40 EV from WI, MI and PA that he won by 77,000 votes and you get to 306. I know you might think it was some sort of miracle, but it wasn't.
So in 2016, Trump was at 266 EV with the no-toss-up map where Trump +1 assumes a win. In 2020, that same RCP average map has Trump at 185. This is not 2016. Maybe in the next four weeks he'll close that gap. If this is what it looks like on November 2nd, Trump is not going to win the election.
Yes, let's not believe the polls that historically have been very accurate. National polls alone have called 17 of the last 19 elections.
In 2012, the polls said Obama would win. Obama won.
In 2008, the polls said Obama would win. Obama won.
In 2004, the polls said Bush would win. Bush won.
In 2000, the polls said Bush would win (by a nose). Bush won.
In 1996, the polls said Clinton would win. Clinton won.
In 1992, the polls said Clinton would win. Clinton won.
In 1988, the polls said Bush would win. Bush won.
In 1984, the polls said Reagan would win. Reagan won.
In 1980, the polls said Reagan would win. Reagan won.
In 1976, the polls said Ford would win by a nose. Carter won.
In 1972, the polls said Nixon would win. Nixon won.
In 1968, the polls said Nixon would win. Nixon won.
In 1964, the polls said LBJ would win. LBJ won.
In 1960, the polls said JFK would win. JFK won.
In 1956, the polls said Eisenhower would win. Eisenhower won.
I don't know where you get the idea that "polls are wrong." Even RCP had a no toss-up map with Trump at 266 EV in 2016. That's called a "close election." And they were right. Trump won based on 3 close margins in WI, MI and PA. Not sure where this idea that we can't believe the polls came from. Other than it doesn't suit the narrative in 2020.
You have two huge fallacies going here.
1. In some of these years, the polls were going (sometimes massively) the other way until near the end. The old adage that "polls tighten towards the election" is often used to explain this, which us utter horse ****. In my political lifetime, the electorate has always been massively polarized, with the few "swing voters" being morons who vote on the candidate's smile. The "swing" that often takes place at the end (and always towards the Republicans) comes from the fact that pollsters have traditionally realized that they have to get it right at the end, or they are out of business.
2. In 2016, what we saw is the abandonment of even this concern for reputation. They are now simply cheerleaders.
Look, if you believe the polls, good for you. Show up in November...because we intend to. I think you know in your heart that the Dems are not going to prevail in an environment where cops are being ambushed on a daily basis, people are being attacked in the streets, and the electorate hears cheerleading and encouragement from the democrat party, but hey, maybe I am wrong. So let's see in November.
Care to explain 2012 and 2008 when Obama won? How about 2000 and 2004 when Bush won? The national polls before the election accurately predicted the winner those times. And many other times.
And Trump wasn't that far behind in 2016. RCP average no-toss-up map had Trump at 266. Add in 40 EV from WI, MI and PA that he won by 77,000 votes and you get to 306. I know you might think it was some sort of miracle, but it wasn't.
So in 2016, Trump was at 266 EV with the no-toss-up map where Trump +1 assumes a win. In 2020, that same RCP average map has Trump at 185. This is not 2016. Maybe in the next four weeks he'll close that gap. If this is what it looks like on November 2nd, Trump is not going to win the election.
No, its not science. Its bias within the polling agency and almost ALL of them are left leaning, they poll people in democrat areas and large cities.
A few weeks ago, one of the major pollsters was being interviewed on the radio. It might have been John Zogby, but I can't recall now.
Anyways, he even admitted the polls have a left lean by ~4 points, and its not done on purpose, but its just personal biased that creeps into the framing of the questions, to interpreting the results. He admitted the pollsters almost all lean left...except Rasmussen.
I wish I had that interview on tape, or a transcript of it. I think it was on Hannity's show 3-4 weeks ago.
Thus, I now add 4 points to Trump on every poll I see mentioned here.
I have also repeatedly said the polls will narrow each week as we get closer to the election. They cannot afford to be so wrong again in the Electoral College, or in individual states. They'll go out of business if they blow it that bad again.
The polls were horrendouse with the Dem primarys. Look at Iowa for instance.
Wait. The fallacies are that they were right 17 of 19 times? They were. I'm talking about polls before the election (late October, early November). Those national polls alone nailed it.
So either my list is right or Bush won the presidency in 1992 and Dole won it in 1996 and Kerry won it in 2004 and Romney in 2012.
These polls that Trump supporters bash so much have done a better job than pretty much anyone else around.
Trump supporters live in a world where they watch someone flip a coin many times and one time it lands on edge and they assume that since the last time it landed on its edge that it will land on its edge again in 2020.
1. In some of these years, the polls were going (sometimes massively) the other way until near the end. The old adage that "polls tighten towards the election" is often used to explain this, which us utter horse ****. In my political lifetime, the electorate has always been massively polarized, with the few "swing voters" being morons who vote on the candidate's smile. The "swing" that often takes place at the end (and always towards the Republicans) comes from the fact that pollsters have traditionally realized that they have to get it right at the end, or they are out of business.
2. In 2016, what we saw is the abandonment of even this concern for reputation. They are now simply cheerleaders.
Look, if you believe the polls, good for you. Show up in November...because we intend to. I think you know in your heart that the Dems are not going to prevail in an environment where cops are being ambushed on a daily basis, people are being attacked in the streets, and the electorate hears cheerleading and encouragement from the democrat party, but hey, maybe I am wrong. So let's see in November.
Mine was based on fact. Yours on conjecture.
"It happened once, therefore it will happen this time." I don't "believe" in polls or "disbelieve" polls. I vote. Every presidential, midterm, offyear, primary, local, etc. Historically, polls are valid data points. They track trends.
Does it matter that on September 24th, 2020 Joe Biden is up 7 points nationally as per RCP average? Not necessarily. It matters what that reads on November 2nd. Ultimately, it matters what happens November 3rd when the election ends. However, 17 of the last 19 elections, the national polls accurately predicted the winner. End of story.
I don't assume Joe Biden is winning this year because of polls in September (or August or July). Usually when I make any sort of statement about polls, I nearly always say "If the polls don't trend towards Trump soon, Trump is going to lose." This is based on the notion that if the polls don't trend towards Trump, that means they remain where they are. And that means Biden would be up by a large margin. And the national polls have been right 90% of the time since WWII. That's a good track record.
I like how you covered your a** in both ways. Either the polls would tighten because "pollsters have to get it right" and if they don't tighten up it is because they are completely bogus. Where will you be on November 4th? If Biden wins the election and the polls didn't tighten.
Quote:
The "swing" that often takes place at the end (and always towards the Republicans) comes from the fact that pollsters have traditionally realized that they have to get it right at the end, or they are out of business
And you should double-check your own assertions and assumptions.
In 2004, polls had Bush up 8 points in September and tightened to even. Wait, I thought polls only improved for Republicans at the end? Polls had Bush up by 7-10 points in October of 2000. And then it moved towards Gore who ultimately did win the popular vote. Again... Democrats underestimated - not Republicans. Look at 2008. This time in 2008, polls had Obama and McCain even. By October, McCain had lost 9 points on Obama. Again... Democrats underestimated.
Yeah, yours is a bogus premise that you didn't fact check in reality. You only checked it with your own narrative since it sounded good. In the echo chamber of 2016 it might be true. But there are countless examples of the opposite than what you said.
This forum is filled with Trump supporters who both claim "all the polls are wrong," and yet rush to post any poll that has Trump winning, tied, or losing by less.
Sweet jumping Jesus Christ on a bicycle...how many times must this be explained when it is so obvious?
Dem cheerleader news outlets and pollsters demonstrably rig the samples in their favor, so we always consider that we are doing five points better than advertised. When the polls are bad for Trump, it is mitigated. When they are good, they are great.
We believe this because we saw it not only last year, but in Reagan's races, in the Bush-Dukkakis race, etc.
Remember the unskewed polls in 2012. That didn't work out, did it?
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.
That didn't work out, did it?
