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.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 25 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,561 posts, read 16,552,753 times
Reputation: 6043
Quote:
Originally Posted by tribecavsbrowns
Right, it's as if you argued "the Cincinnati Reds are in third place in their division this year," and I said "no, they're not" and sent a link to the standings showing them in fifth (last), and you said, "no, I mean by runs scored." Well, baseball standings aren't done by runs scored, bub.
Your analogy in no way even matches your argument, let alone somehow proves me wrong. I never moved the goal post, you did.
Quote:
Nearly everyone "outperforms his polling average" in the semantical sense you're using, because of the number of undecided voters in the polls.
Thats not even close to true, in fact, its more accurate to say "everyone outperforms the margins because of undecideds" lol
Quote:
But I think you know that. You just wanted an example of an end result of a statewide election in Ohio ending up looking better for Democrats than the polls forecasted. But I was here to call you out and show that the example you used is actually (yet another) example of the end result looking better than the polls for Republicans.
You literally posted a link to polls that proved me right and you wrong. you changed the argument to margin of victory which doesnt matter.
Whether a candidate wins by 300,000 votes, or 30, they still won, and that was my argument. Stay mad though.
Whether a candidate wins by 300,000 votes, or 30, they still won, and that was my argument. Stay mad though.
No, your claim was "Brown overperformed his polls."
He didn't. His Republican opponent ended up making it a closer race than polls would have had us believe.
You seem really committed to painting the false picture that polling underestimated Sherrod Brown in a Senate race four years ago (when, as I've said a few times, it actually underestimated his Republican challenger). What part of Ohio do you live in again?
Last edited by tribecavsbrowns; 07-25-2022 at 10:46 PM..
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 25 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,561 posts, read 16,552,753 times
Reputation: 6043
Quote:
Originally Posted by tribecavsbrowns
No, your claim was "Brown overperformed his polls."
He didn't. His Republican opponent ended up making it a closer race than polls would have had us believe.
again margin of victory and individual candidate polling performance are not the same thing.
im 100% fine with you arguing that one is more important than the other, but pretending they are the same is obtuse. And enough that moderators will claim you are playing obtuse and ban you , so stop.
Quote:
You seem really committed to painting the false picture that polling underestimated Sherrod Brown in a Senate race four years ago (when, as I've said a few times, it actually underestimated his Republican challenger). What part of Ohio do you live in again?
Sir, you again are arguing a false premise.
Sherrod Brown still won that race, which negates what ever stretched point you are trying to make. A dem can and has won in Ohio.
again margin of victory and individual candidate polling performance are not the same thing.
im 100% fine with you arguing that one is more important than the other, but pretending they are the same is obtuse. And enough that moderators will claim you are playing obtuse and ban you , so stop.
Sir, you again are arguing a false premise.
Sherrod Brown still won that race, which negates what ever stretched point you are trying to make. A dem can and has won in Ohio.
The 2018 Senate race ended up more Republican (Brown +6.8) than polls would have had us believe, and that's part of a pattern in Ohio where every statewide race has ended up more Republican than the polls in recent years. If you're trying to read polls a few months before the 2022 Senate race, that's relevant.
You can assume that this pattern will be break, if you want. But I won't. Neither will the people at Predictit with money on the outcome. That's why the market there is almost 80-20 Vance. People are aware of the polls' (poor) track record in Ohio.
If you wish to engage in real discussion about why, this time, the polls might be more accurate, that's great. If, instead, you wish to continue to bicker over semantics, I'll put you on ignore.
Last edited by tribecavsbrowns; 07-26-2022 at 08:18 AM..
The 2018 Senate race ended up more Republican (Brown +6.8) than polls would have had us believe, and that's part of a pattern in Ohio where every statewide race has ended up more Republican than the polls in recent years. If you're trying to read polls a few months before the 2022 Senate race, that's relevant.
You can assume that this pattern will be break, if you want. But I won't
I dont have to assume the pattern will break, thats the other flaw in your argument because again, we are arguing 2 different things.
you could be 100% right about the pattern, and Ryan could win by 1 vote. See how that works.LOL
Quote:
If you wish to engage in real discussion about why, this time, the polls might be more accurate, that's great. If, instead, you wish to continue to bicker over semantics, I'll put you on ignore.
1. you replied to me
2. you are arguing semantics, not me
3. again, even if you were right about the polls being wrong about the spread, that would still mean Ryan can win, the same as you are literally arguing it was wrong about Brown and he still won. Your own argument contradicts it self.
Its pretty clear at this point that what you actually want to say is that you simply dont believe Ryan will win and that Vance is actually in the lead and will eventually win, and thats fine, you have every right to believe the polls are simply wrong about who is winning. But instead, you chose to make an argument about MoV in which the key example you used still had the Democrat winning, LOL
I dont have to assume the pattern will break, thats the other flaw in your argument because again, we are arguing 2 different things.
you could be 100% right about the pattern, and Ryan could win by 1 vote. See how that works.LOL
1. you replied to me
2. you are arguing semantics, not me
3. again, even if you were right about the polls being wrong about the spread, that would still mean Ryan can win, the same as you are literally arguing it was wrong about Brown and he still won. Your own argument contradicts it self.
Its pretty clear at this point that what you actually want to say is that you simply dont believe Ryan will win and that Vance is actually in the lead and will eventually win, and thats fine, you have every right to believe the polls are simply wrong about who is winning. But instead, you chose to make an argument about MoV in which the key example you used still had the Democrat winning, LOL
I remember you now. I had stumbled on a thread where a bunch of Democrats were whining about a tweet or press release or something from a polling outfit called AtlasIntel claiming that they were the most accurate at polling swing states for the 2020 presidential election, along with Trafalgar. I chimed in and said, essentially, they look like they did pretty well to me, does anyone know anyone who did better? And you talked in circles and claimed that I was misunderstanding stuff...but you couldn't name anyone who did better than AtlasIntel or Trafalgar, despite all the energy you were spending trying to show I was wrong.
Here's how that thread ended. With Nate Silver saying exactly what I had been saying:
Anyway, 538 currently has the Ohio Senate race at Ryan +0.4. Based on recent history in Ohio, I'll just go ahead and add 5-7 points or so in favor of Vance to that margin, and if I end up being wrong, I end up being wrong. You do what you want. But I'll point out that you've not offered one single reason why we should expect the polling this cycle to be any more accurate than it has been in recent history in Ohio. Hell, we don't know if you've ever set foot in Ohio.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 25 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,561 posts, read 16,552,753 times
Reputation: 6043
Quote:
Originally Posted by tribecavsbrowns
I remember you now. I had stumbled on a thread where a bunch of Democrats were whining about a tweet or press release or something from a polling outfit called AtlasIntel claiming that they were the most accurate at polling swing states for the 2020 presidential election, along with Trafalgar. I chimed in and said, essentially, they look like they did pretty well to me, does anyone know anyone who did better? And you talked in circles and claimed that I was misunderstanding stuff...but you couldn't name anyone who did better than AtlasIntel or Trafalgar, despite all the energy you were spending trying to show I was wrong.
Here's how that thread ended. With Nate Silver saying exactly what I had been saying:
LOL, if you want to make that argument go ahead. im not rehashing your failed argument from a year ago.
Quote:
Anyway, 538 currently has the Ohio Senate race at Ryan +0.4. Based on recent history in Ohio, I'll just go ahead and add 5-7 points or so in favor of Vance to that margin, and if I end up being wrong, I end up being wrong. You do what you want. But I'll point out that you've not offered one single reason why we should expect the polling this cycle to be any more accurate than it has been in recent history in Ohio. Hell, we don't know if you've ever set foot in Ohio.
I dont have to, its irrelevant to both our arguments.
if Ryan wins 50/49.9, he would both beat his polling average, and underperformed the margin of victory of polls.
Both of us would be right.
Again, your actual argument is that you simply believe Vance is winning. just say that. You dont need to pretend you dont understand the difference between polling average and MoV, LOL
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.
