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.
Just like everything else, polls are purely partisan. President Clinton has an extramarital affair and the left is all 'status quo.' Trump does it and hides it with money before the election and the right is all 'status quo.' The only polls that matter are some polls taken by the actual likely voters prior to an election. There is some correlation between that and who gets elected. Trump could shoot a puppy and he's ratings wouldn't drop.
And the fact still remains that these are the same polls that said Hillary was going to win in a landslide ...yet the Left ignore that little "factoid."
The polls said she would win in a landslide based on electoral votes. And if you compare the projected to actual...the electoral votes Clinton didn't get were in states were Trump won by a relatively small margin. So it appears he won by a 'landslide' because he squeaked in more electoral votes.
And before someone else posts.....He still won. that's all that matters really.
And -- I don't remember saying it would be a land slide. Why were so many people so nervous the night of the election if they thought she would win by a land slide?
I have a different perception of how things were going?
How come nobody -- including Trump -- is talking about this?
I wonder why?
Hmmmm.
Having nothing to do with Trump, I wonder why people would trust polls to begin with. Most are skewed and manipulated to get the results they want to begin with. It is hoped that the polls will influence people into a pack mentality, wanting to be part of the majority, not an outlier.
This is true not only of polls but others forms of media manipulation, whether it be advertising, research studies, etc.
Here is a brief video of Sharyl Attkisson talking about how many things some people take for granted are framed in ways most do not know.
I have also read her books, and have become much more educated, not that I trusted the media or polls anyway. This is true even when it purports to back up my own thought process or ideology.
The bottom line is that framing the question certain ways, and whom you specifically target to ask said question can make a night vs. day difference.
I'm tired of people pointing to polls as some kind of "gotcha" moment. Trump's approval numbers creep up, the far right goes bonkers and celebrates. Trump's approval numbers go down, leftists moan with delight.
Who cares about approval ratings. All I've ever wanted was a functional, frugal, debt-conscious federal government with a calibrated moral compass that puts the American people's needs first. And we haven't had that in decades.
These polls are really just report cards for the media outlets, allowing them to assess their effectiveness in shaping public opinion.
Dick Morris has been wrong more than right even when he was Clinton's go to guy for info. I think Fox eventually got rid of him as a guest on their shows for that reason. He still pops up on various shows from time to time to discuss how the Clinton WH functioned, but his crystal ball has been cracked for some time.
There is a big difference between talking heads giving their opinions on various news outlets vs. purported scientific polls.
Yet in reality they are little better as I stated in my last post.
Even if you wanted to assume this last presidential election cycles polls were an aberration, it has happened before. Look back at 2008 when Hillary was supposedly a lock until Obama came from nowhere.
Probably the worst example was when Carter who was an unpopular president was shown by the polls to wipe out Reagan, just days before the election.
We all know how that went.
The media has been left leaning since the 1960's, but has gone more left since the 70's-80's. Today most are little more than propaganda arms of the leftist ideology that would suborn our freedoms and individual rights, to the good of the collective state.
Whether that would evolve into socialism or communism who knows, but either would be an anathema to our constitutional republic.
The polls said she would win in a landslide based on electoral votes. And if you compare the projected to actual...the electoral votes Clinton didn't get were in states were Trump won by a relatively small margin.
The state-specific polls weren't that far off. If we relied 100% on polls, none of us would have to go out and vote on Election Day. The state polls that were off, unfortunately for the pollsters, happened to be off on the higher end of the margin of error, in states that tipped the election to Trump.
It's been 1.5 years or so since that election. If I recall, the estimate overall was Clinton had an 80% chance of winning. It is hard to say if that number was accurate. Her losing doesn't make it inaccurate. And we can't play out Nov 8 2016 thousands of times to see if 80% was accurate. But, at a bare minimum, it still meant Trump had a 20% chance of winning.
In most scenarios, when you lose by 2.1 percentage points in the popular vote, you lose the election. Trump won by 1.2% in Florida, 0.2% in Michigan, 0.7% in Pennsylvania, and 0.7% in Wisconsin. That's all within polls' margins of error for those states. In those four states combined, Trump had a tiny lead of 190,655 votes. It was enough to win the day for him, but when it comes to the vast numbers of overall voters, the polls were within the margin of error and Trump eked out a win thanks to surprising wins in these states.
I'm tired of people pointing to polls as some kind of "gotcha" moment. Trump's approval numbers creep up, the far right goes bonkers and celebrates. Trump's approval numbers go down, leftists moan with delight.
Who cares about approval ratings. All I've ever wanted was a functional, frugal, debt-conscious federal government with a calibrated moral compass that puts the American people's needs first. And we haven't had that in decades.
This.
I couldn't agree more about a government with a calibrated moral compass. Once upon a time we could look to the Republicans as the party of fiscal responsibility. Instead, we now have Republicans setting up huge tax breaks for the wealthy and global corporations who take the money and run elsewhere, leaving the American worker to panhandle on the streets.
Once upon a time, we could look to the Democrats for compassionate programs to help our own countrymen in times of need. Now we have a federal and state government drowning in paperwork with the people who genuinely need help getting buried while those who actually could better themselves rely on federal programs instead.
What we have now is a spendthrift government with taxpayers money subsidizing billionaires and programs for the poor which are hand OUTS instead of hand UPS.
The middle class and the working class are funding special interests and paying for programs that only bring the country down. At this point in time, we are NOT MAGA. Rather, we have become a comedy show to our allies, a pushover for N. Korea and China and new BFF's with Putin who would love to bring America down.
What's wrong with this picture? Let me count the ways...
Last edited by Colorado Rambler; 03-16-2018 at 09:13 AM..
Reason: typo
The state-specific polls weren't that far off. If we relied 100% on polls, none of us would have to go out and vote on Election Day. The state polls that were off, unfortunately for the pollsters, happened to be off on the higher end of the margin of error, in states that tipped the election to Trump.
It's been 1.5 years or so since that election. If I recall, the estimate overall was Clinton had an 80% chance of winning. It is hard to say if that number was accurate. Her losing doesn't make it inaccurate. And we can't play out Nov 8 2016 thousands of times to see if 80% was accurate. But, at a bare minimum, it still meant Trump had a 20% chance of winning.
In most scenarios, when you lose by 2.1 percentage points in the popular vote, you lose the election. Trump won by 1.2% in Florida, 0.2% in Michigan, 0.7% in Pennsylvania, and 0.7% in Wisconsin. That's all within polls' margins of error for those states. In those four states combined, Trump had a tiny lead of 190,655 votes. It was enough to win the day for him, but when it comes to the vast numbers of overall voters, the polls were within the margin of error and Trump eked out a win thanks to surprising wins in these states.
Thank you -- I was lazy and didn't do the work for my post. I am glad someone was more thorough than I was.
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.
didnt yall learn anything from fake news CNN? 
