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.
All that matters is accuracy. Cahaly makes it clear in his interview the data we see on RCP was paid for by Trafagler. And a sample size of 1000 or more was used. (Cahaly feels anything under 1000 won't work.)
When I see Fields with a 2 point (Trafagler) lead over Masters and another polling outfit with Fields up by 10 something is off. Those two numbers aren't close at all.
So, I look to see if an outside party was involved and the sample size. The recent poll which shows Fields up by 7 over Masters was conducted by Suffolk and likely paid for by someone else (AZ Republic or maybe USA Today.) Sample size 500. https://www.suffolk.edu/-/media/suff..._marginals.pdf
Anything a pollster puts out today doesn't matter... so why not tell a client what **they want to hear. It's their money. But why doesn't it matter?
Because 538 does not start collecting data in order to grade a polling outfit until 21 days out.
My guess is a majority of the races across the country will become much closer just before the election which is what I saw in 2020.
**I suspect those paying understand the polling data is skewed and that's fine. The idea is to try and influence the public.
I don't think it has much to do with a pollster wanting to influence anything (aside from the partisan polls or internal polls released by a campaign). At the end of the day pollsters get paid, and a pollster that is more accurate and has a better track record is going get paid better to conduct a poll than someone who isn't.
FWIW a recent Marist poll with virtually the exact sample size as the Trafagler one had it at Kelly (which is who I believe you meant not Fields) up 5 LV and 10 RV, RCP currently has Kelly up 5.4, 538 ranges from 5.7-7.3 depending on the model
Also keep in mind is polling is just a snap shot at that time, things can always change, which is why 538 will use polls no more than 21 days out when doing its pollster rankings. A poll from 3 months out, might have been accurate at that point in time, even if the results are a bit different, but there is no true way to know that for sure. A poll closer in, is easier to analyze if the poll was accurate or not.
The point with Trafagler not releasing the methodology is a valid one. When the methodology isn't transparent (which most other pollsters are) it goes against the general standard of practice in the industry.
Mark Kelly might be a nice guy, but he's nothing but a rubber stamp for Joe Biden's failed agenda. He needs to go and I hope he does. That's why I donated to Masters. We'll see what happens.
Why would you donate money to a politician do you think they are lacking money?
I have never spent a penny on politics most they get from me is a vote. Why would you give money to someone who isn't even running in Florida. Wondering how much you spend on politics do you donate thousands of dollars?
I don't think it has much to do with a pollster wanting to influence anything (aside from the partisan polls or internal polls released by a campaign). At the end of the day pollsters get paid, and a pollster that is more accurate and has a better track record is going get paid better to conduct a poll than someone who isn't.
FWIW a recent Marist poll with virtually the exact sample size as the Trafagler one had it at Kelly (which is who I believe you meant not Fields) up 5 LV and 10 RV, RCP currently has Kelly up 5.4, 538 ranges from 5.7-7.3 depending on the model
Also keep in mind is polling is just a snap shot at that time, things can always change, which is why 538 will use polls no more than 21 days out when doing its pollster rankings. A poll from 3 months out, might have been accurate at that point in time, even if the results are a bit different, but there is no true way to know that for sure. A poll closer in, is easier to analyze if the poll was accurate or not.
The point with Trafagler not releasing the methodology is a valid one. When the methodology isn't transparent (which most other pollsters are) it goes against the general standard of practice in the industry.
Again it doesn't matter. What matters is this: Is Trafagler's snap shot in time (2 point Kelly lead) much more accurate than polls showing Kelly up by 7-12. I suspect it is.
With regard to methodology: Cahaly keeps their questionnaire short and the sample size at least 1000. Cahaly believes there's a "submerged" Rep. vote which other pollsters miss. That a social-desirability bias is often in play esp. with live calls.
Trafagler's "secret sauce" is the way they evaluate a response.
I don't think it has much to do with a pollster wanting to influence anything (aside from the partisan polls or internal polls released by a campaign). At the end of the day pollsters get paid, and a pollster that is more accurate and has a better track record is going get paid better to conduct a poll than someone who isn't.
FWIW a recent Marist poll with virtually the exact sample size as the Trafagler one had it at Kelly (which is who I believe you meant not Fields) up 5 LV and 10 RV, RCP currently has Kelly up 5.4, 538 ranges from 5.7-7.3 depending on the model
Also keep in mind is polling is just a snap shot at that time, things can always change, which is why 538 will use polls no more than 21 days out when doing its pollster rankings. A poll from 3 months out, might have been accurate at that point in time, even if the results are a bit different, but there is no true way to know that for sure. A poll closer in, is easier to analyze if the poll was accurate or not.
The point with Trafagler not releasing the methodology is a valid one. When the methodology isn't transparent (which most other pollsters are) it goes against the general standard of practice in the industry.
Marist (A rated) is reliable and they paid for the poll. It's all good.
My point is the outliners throw off the overall average. I noticed a poll (B rated) which has Kelly up by 1 today. I would toss that as well.
Use Trafagler, Marist and Emerson (627 LV) and we see Kelly up by 3.
"A super PAC aligned with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has canceled nearly $10 million it had reserved for television ads in Arizona, an official with the group said Tuesday, pulling out of a battleground state where Republican challenger Blake Masters trails Sen. Mark Kelly (D) in the polls."
Polls tend to over-sample Democrats. Kelly is not winning by 7%. In 2020 Kelly won by 2.4%. Poll average was 5.7% for Kelly before the election. A difference of 3.3%. Emerson was the closest with 3%. Today Emerson has it by 2% for Kelly. Trafalgar who has a A- rating has it now with Kelly 2% with 5 weeks to go.
Last edited by SanJuanStar; 09-28-2022 at 06:32 PM..
Polls tend to over-sample Democrats. Kelly is not winning by 7%. In 2020 Kelly won by2.4%. Poll average was 5.7% for Kelly before the election. A difference of 3.3%. Emerson was the closest with 3%. Today Emerson has it by 2% for Kelly. Trafalgar who has a A- rating has it now with Kelly 2% with 5 weeks to go.
No he's not and I'm sure the Kelly campaign would agree. All that money spent and they can't put Masters away. He's still very much in this race.
No he's not and I'm sure the Kelly campaign would agree. All that money spent and they can't put Masters away. He's still very much in this race.
Their debate is next week (Oct 6.)
I saw Mark Kelly debate McSally she was horrible at debating. I was impressed with Mark Kelly's debating skills. It will be interesting to see how well Masters does I didn't bother with watching the primary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanJuanStar
Polls tend to over-sample Democrats. Kelly is not winning by 7%. In 2020 Kelly won by 2.4%. Poll average was 5.7% for Kelly before the election. A difference of 3.3%. Emerson was the closest with 3%. Today Emerson has it by 2% for Kelly. Trafalgar who has a A- rating has it now with Kelly 2% with 5 weeks to go.
I saw Mark Kelly debate McSally she was horrible at debating. I was impressed with Mark Kelly's debating skills. It will be interesting to see how well Masters does I didn't bother with watching the primary.
Wishful thinking at best.
Yes, it should be interesting. I'm looking forward to the debate.
New Lincoln Project attack ad released. Highlight the odd things Masters said about how every General above 2 star is a left wing politician, and "Take the most conservative colonels and promote them to Generals". It's obvious Masters has no idea what he is talking about which doesn't surprise me.
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.
