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.
So maybe you should actually learn what a POLL IS - and ISN'T, before making ignorant statements about them eh?
Yes, polls did favor Hillary over Trump leading up to the election - by an average of +5/6 or so. Then, 11 days before the election, Comey announced he was re-opening the Clinton e-mail investigation - and Clinton's lead began falling. Just prior to the election, the average of the last of the polls had Clinton up by +2 - within the margin of error. Comey's re-opened investigation found nothing new, but by then the election was over. Trump took the electoral vote - squeaking by because of 4 states that gave him a slim 70-80 thousand vote edge, but even so, still lost the popular vote by nearly 3 million.
Overall, the polls ended up close. They WERE on the wrong side of the line, but not by much, and well within their margin or error.
So maybe you should actually learn what a POLL IS - and ISN'T, before making ignorant statements about them eh?
Yes, polls did favor Hillary over Trump leading up to the election - by an average of +5/6 or so. Then, 11 days before the election, Comey announced he was re-opening the Clinton e-mail investigation - and Clinton's lead began falling. Just prior to the election, the average of the last of the polls had Clinton up by +2 - within the margin of error. Comey's re-opened investigation found nothing new, but by then the election was over. Trump took the electoral vote - squeaking by because of 4 states that gave him a slim 70-80 thousand vote edge, but even so, still lost the popular vote by nearly 3 million.
Overall, the polls ended up close. They WERE on the wrong side of the line, but not by much, and well within their margin or error.
What? By by pointing out that the polls were within the margin of error? How is that "deflecting"? It is what it is, the the polls were off, but not by much - well within their margin of error.
Do you not understand how polls work?
Well, actually you've already shown you don't, so that was a silly question on my part.
what? By by pointing out that the polls were within the margin of error? How is that "deflecting"? It is what it is, the the polls were off, but not by much - well within their margin of error.
Do you not understand how polls work?
Well, actually you've already shown you don't, so that was a silly question on my part.
I suppose the concept of flipping a coin twice to show that Trump's odds were roughly 1 in 4 was beyond you.
Then again, I look at how you post in this thread and I realize there is no reason to engage you in any meaningful dialogue. The meaning of odds and polls eludes you.
I suppose the concept of flipping a coin twice to show that Trump's odds were roughly 1 in 4 was beyond you.
Then again, I look at how you post in this thread and I realize there is no reason to engage you in any meaningful dialogue. The meaning of odds and polls eludes you.
Right, everyone knew Trump was going to win 2016, my bad.
There are no national polls with disapproval under 50%. Even Rasmussen, who polls those still answering landlines, has him at 52%
at 49% today making it +1 in approval on rasmussen.
but.... that's a 7% fluctuation since yesterday with no significant action/decision on trump's part to correlate. it just speaks to the erratic nature of the rasmussen poll.
Polls mean diddly squat, did you learn nothing in 2016?
I've never been polled in my life, and don't know anyone else who has been either.
The polls in 2016 were actually quite accurate, Trump didn't win the popular vote he won the electoral college. Polls reflect the popular vote.
Quote:
National polls only measure the popular vote. Clinton did, in fact, win the national popular vote by 2.1 points. The average of the 13 final national polls had Clinton ahead by 3.1 points, which was only a point off the actual result.
Ironically, all 12 polls that had Clinton ahead turned out to be closer to the final outcome than the poll that had Trump ahead. While that may seem crazy — since Trump, not Clinton, is headed to the White House — it's true. The poll that put Trump ahead (by 2 points) was off by 4.1 points, while polls that gave Clinton the lead were off anywhere from only one-tenth of a point to less than 4 points
What gave Trump his electoral victory was not his national voter strength — which he lost by nearly 3 million votes — but his strength in eight swing states, which he won by a little over 1 million votes. https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-bl...ot-a-lot-right
Bloomberg talking about the dem field isn't strong enough to beat Trump. Just means Trump has a better likelihood of re-election than the Fake News cares to admit.
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.
