The Polls in the 2016 election were ACCURATE

[Jarod]

Despite popular opinion, the polling numbers, almost all came in within the Margin of Error.

There was some dramatic shifting in the week before the vote, but if you take the election day numbers they almost all were within the Margin of Error...

 

[Cancel 2018.1]

So what?

 

[zappasguitar]

So what?

That means that, like most of his other claims, Trump was full of shit when he claimed the polls were wrong.

 

[Cancel 2018.1]

That means that, like most of his other claims, Trump was full of shit when he claimed the polls were wrong.

Impeach!

 

[Cancel 2018.2]

Why 2016 election polls missed their mark

The results of Tuesday’s presidential election came as a surprise to nearly everyone who had been following the national and state election polling, which consistently projected Hillary Clinton as defeating Donald Trump. Relying largely on opinion polls, election forecasters put Clinton’s chance of winning at anywhere from 70% to as high as 99%, and pegged her as the heavy favorite to win a number of states such as Pennsylvania and Wisconsin that in the end were taken by Trump.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/why-2016-election-polls-missed-their-mark/

4 Possible Reasons The Polls Got It So Wrong This Year

http://www.npr.org/2016/11/14/502014643/4-possible-reasons-the-polls-got-it-so-wrong-this-year

Great thread Jarod!!!

 

[Русский агент]

he thinx if he keeps saying the polls were right and clix his heels 3 times the wicked witch will be magicked in 2 the white house

 

[Tarpon]

Despite popular opinion, the polling numbers, almost all came in within the Margin of Error.

There was some dramatic shifting in the week before the vote, but if you take the election day numbers they almost all were within the Margin of Error...

So the polls that said Donald Trump had a zero percent chance of victory were correct.

Time to take your pills kid

 

[Cancel 2018.1]

In the summer of 2015 one of the authors of How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution , noticed a lot of dems changed their registration to rpub so they could vote for Trump in the primary. It was then that Larry Schweikart (the author) predicted Trump would win and never wavered from that prediction.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?431251-6/trump-won

 

[Jarod]

So what?

People on the Right keep saying they were not accurate as justification for saying they are not currently accurate.

 

[Cancel 2018.2]

People on the Right keep saying they were not accurate as justification for saying they are not currently accurate.

Pew Research and NPR are the right?

 

[Jarod]

Why 2016 election polls missed their mark

The results of Tuesday’s presidential election came as a surprise to nearly everyone who had been following the national and state election polling, which consistently projected Hillary Clinton as defeating Donald Trump. Relying largely on opinion polls, election forecasters put Clinton’s chance of winning at anywhere from 70% to as high as 99%, and pegged her as the heavy favorite to win a number of states such as Pennsylvania and Wisconsin that in the end were taken by Trump.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/why-2016-election-polls-missed-their-mark/

4 Possible Reasons The Polls Got It So Wrong This Year

http://www.npr.org/2016/11/14/502014643/4-possible-reasons-the-polls-got-it-so-wrong-this-year

Great thread Jarod!!!

You see, a 70% chance means there is a 30% chance on the other side, and if the 30% chance happens the poll was not necessarily wrong.

See how that works?

 

[Jarod]

So the polls that said Donald Trump had a zero percent chance of victory were correct.

Time to take your pills kid

Exactly 0 polls said that Rump had a zero percent chance of winning, you are a liar.

 

[Cancel 2018.1]

People on the Right keep saying they were not accurate as justification for saying they are not currently accurate.

OK. I thought most on the right considered them accurate. They were as surprised as everybody else.

 

[Cancel 2018.2]

You see, a 70% chance means there is a 30% chance on the other side, and if the 30% chance happens the poll was not necessarily wrong.

See how that works?

 

[Jarod]

Why 2016 election polls missed their mark

The results of Tuesday’s presidential election came as a surprise to nearly everyone who had been following the national and state election polling, which consistently projected Hillary Clinton as defeating Donald Trump. Relying largely on opinion polls, election forecasters put Clinton’s chance of winning at anywhere from 70% to as high as 99%, and pegged her as the heavy favorite to win a number of states such as Pennsylvania and Wisconsin that in the end were taken by Trump.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/11/09/why-2016-election-polls-missed-their-mark/

4 Possible Reasons The Polls Got It So Wrong This Year

http://www.npr.org/2016/11/14/502014643/4-possible-reasons-the-polls-got-it-so-wrong-this-year

Great thread Jarod!!!

HAHAHA,

The very first point in you cite reads as follows,


"The national polls weren't that off — they did predict more people would vote for Clinton. That's what happened."

You are a fool!

 

[Cancel 2018.2]

HAHAHA,

The very first point in you cite reads as follows,


"The national polls weren't that off — they did predict more people would vote for Clinton. That's what happened."

You are a fool!

Retard, it does not say they were "ACCURATE".

 

[Русский агент]

 

[Jarod]

Retard, it does not say they were "ACCURATE".

YOU ARE FUNNY!

 

[tsuke]

If I were a polling company I would put up fake polls the whole time to help push my narrative then just put one real one at the end. After all you are only judged on the last poll.

Funny how all polls tighten towards election day.

 

[Jarod]

Give me a link to a respected poll that was off by more than 5% points, not including the MOE! You cant!