Another fake Democrat poll exposed

[Flash]

This. If there are more Democrats than Republicans, more Democrats will appear in the sample. That's how polling works. Apparently, this is another skill that the Trump Cult is lacking.

That is true if polls could be a truly random sample, but that is impossible. They do stratified random samples where people are called in designated areas to insure proper representation of various groups. The higher percentage of Democrats is built into the sample.

Some of the polls use the same raw data but differ in the results based on how they handle issues like likely voters, registered voters, etc.

 

[Concart]

That is true if polls could be a truly random sample, but that is impossible. They do stratified random samples where people are called in designated areas to insure proper representation of various groups. The higher percentage of Democrats is built into the sample.

Some of the polls use the same raw data but differ in the results based on how they handle issues like likely voters, registered voters, etc.

If that was true, those pollsters would reveal their bias. But it is true to only a small extent, and the bias goes both ways depending on the pollster.

 

[Flash]

Hillary Clinton never had the lead in 2016. Donald Trump was elected President. Perhaps you didn't notice.

Yes, the final polls showed her with a 3% lead. They only poll popular votes (not electors). In the final count she had 3% more popular votes than Trump meaning the polls were right on the money.

We know who won the presidency, my statement was only about poll results and actual popular vote outcome.

 

[Flash]

That didn't "prove accurate." Democrats have to cheat with fake absentee ballots, "early voting" scams, ballot harvesting, and automatic voter registration for illegal immigrants to even STAY IN THE GAME.

It was very accurate. The polls showed the same result as the actual vote count.

There is no evidence of illegal immigrants voting--that is just Trump fake news.

 

[Flash]

If that was true, those pollsters would reveal their bias. But it is true to only a small extent, and the bias goes both ways depending on the pollster.

They do reveal their polling methods in the methodology section of the full reports. If polls are biased nobody is going to hire them if they want accurate results. If they want biased results for public consumption that usually comes from "internal polling" or that done by partisan organizations.

 

[Concart]

It was very accurate. The polls showed the same result as the actual vote count.

There is no evidence of illegal immigrants voting--that is just Trump fake news.

Yep, they were very accurate. But perhaps Arminus is giving them even MORE credit. According to him they were accurately able to predict that massive democratic voter fraud and the exact impact on the popular vote. You can't make up that kind of dumb.

 

[Flash]

Polls do not work. They are completely meaningless.

But the usually accurately predict the final results.

If they were meaningless campaigns would not spend millions on pollsters to find who to target in their campaigning.

 

[Into the Night]

Yes, the final polls showed her with a 3% lead. They only poll popular votes (not electors). In the final count she had 3% more popular votes than Trump meaning the polls were right on the money.

Argument from randU fallacy. Irrelevance fallacy. We do not elect the President by popular vote.

We know who won the presidency, my statement was only about poll results and actual popular vote outcome.

Poll results are completely meaningless. The 'prediction' of Hillary and how much she supposedly took in the 'popular vote' is also meaningless.

Manufactured numbers are not data.

 

[Flash]

Argument from randU fallacy. Irrelevance fallacy. We do not elect the President by popular vote.

Poll results are completely meaningless. The 'prediction' of Hillary and how much she supposedly took in the 'popular vote' is also meaningless.

Manufactured numbers are not data.

The topic of the post was the accuracy of the polls. Since polls on measure popular votes it is the only relevant issue. Polls are not meant to "predict" but are only responses to the questions on that day.

There was nothing "manufactured" since the 3% lead in the polls was exactly the final result.

Polls are very relevant for those who follow and discuss them in the media and sites like JPP, and for political campaigns who make great use of them to determine strategy. Polls have won elections as in Nixon's Southern Strategy and Clinton's Triangulation strategy.

Polls were also very useful to the Trump campaign that used them to determine battleground states to target for Trump rallies and campaign advertising. Without polls nobody would know which states are "battleground."

 

[Bourbon]

Let me Guess: The Poll doesn’t tell you what you want to hear, therefore it’s FAKE

 

[Into the Night]

The topic of the post was the accuracy of the polls.

There is none. Polls are completely meaningless.

Since polls on measure popular votes it is the only relevant issue.

An equally meaningless poll.

Polls are not meant to "predict" but are only responses to the questions on that day.

Still meaningless. Idiots like you quote polls that predict all the time, too.

There was nothing "manufactured" since the 3% lead in the polls was exactly the final result.

Argument from randU fallacy. A completely random number of type randU.

Polls are very relevant

Not a bit of it.

for those who follow and discuss them in the media and sites like JPP,

The media only uses 'polls' to try to change opinion, not measure it. Idiots on JPP quote these random numbers as if they were data. They aren't.

and for political campaigns who make great use of them to determine strategy.

Meaningless there too. The only 'strategy' one needs to be concerned with is the planks of your campaign.

Polls have won elections as in Nixon's Southern Strategy and Clinton's Triangulation strategy.

Polls have won nothing. They are completely meaningless.

Polls were also very useful to the Trump campaign that used them to determine battleground states to target for Trump rallies and campaign advertising.

All States are battleground States.

Without polls nobody would know which states are "battleground."

All States are battleground States. All States can contribute to the Electoral College.

 

[Into the Night]

Let me Guess: The Poll doesn’t tell you what you want to hear, therefore it’s FAKE

A poll doesn't tell anybody anything.

 

[Flash]

All States are battleground States. All States can contribute to the Electoral College.

The Trump campaign should spend as much time and money campaigning in CA and NY as they do on FL, WI, MI, or PA?

 

[Irish]

Every poll, even Fox News polls over sample dems. Just more part of the Leftist media mob's attempt at sabotaging the Republic.

 

[Flash]

The media only uses 'polls' to try to change opinion, not measure it.

If polls are meaningless they obviously cannot change opinion.

 

[Into the Night]

The Trump campaign should spend as much time and money campaigning in CA and NY as they do on FL, WI, MI, or PA?

False dichotomy fallacy. Trump will spend his campaign money and time where he wants.

 

[Into the Night]

If polls are meaningless they obviously cannot change opinion.

The do change opinions of morons like you, that have a god like belief in polls.

 

[BRUTALITOPS]

Trump is losing voters he badly needs, 65+ and women.

i have made multiple posts about the 65+

women aren't as important, though the ratios are obviously bad for him. but he won last time without big women support.

 

[BRUTALITOPS]

Every poll, even Fox News polls over sample dems. Just more part of the Leftist media mob's attempt at sabotaging the Republic.

they weight polls. anyone that says this doesn't understand stats.

 

[Flash]

False dichotomy fallacy. Trump will spend his campaign money and time where he wants.

A no-answer fallacy. The question was whether he will spend as much time and money in CA and NY as he will in battleground states. We know he (meaning his campaign managers) will decide where to spend it, but we know it is a waste of time and money in CA and the election will probably be decided in battleground states (those that are very close).

How will the campaign know which states are close? Polls. That shows their value. And which voters will his campaign target in those battleground states? Polls will give them that information.