The Polls in the 2016 election were ACCURATE

tsuke said:
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.
Click to expand...

Why would a polling company want to push a narrative?
 
Jarod said:
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...
Click to expand...

Some polls were. Some were not.

What was wildly off kilter was the interpretation of the polls. The media and JPP liberals all read them wrong
 
Jarod said:
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...
Click to expand...

http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-hillary-clinton-why-polls-wrong-2017-5

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/09/how-wrong-were-the-polls-in-predicting-the-us-election/


margin of error .the margin was 10 points that is not a margin that is a gap.

http://analyticsdemystified.com/analysis/you-can-make-the-data-say-whatever-you-want-it-to/
 
The OP is correct. It's a myth that the polls were "way off" this year - especially the national polls.

Hillary won the popular vote by 2%, which was right in line w/ most polls. Historically, pretty close to the norm.
 
Thing1 said:
The OP is correct. It's a myth that the polls were "way off" this year - especially the national polls.

Hillary won the popular vote by 2%, which was right in line w/ most polls. Historically, pretty close to the norm.
Click to expand...

Yup
 
tsuke said:
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.
Click to expand...

Why am I not surprised you'd support something so dishonest?
 
Yaya said:
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!!!
Click to expand...

Proof Jarod and Thingy are morons.
 
Jarod said:
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...
Click to expand...

I was one of the first people after the election to say that the polls were pretty close, it was peoples interpretation of the polls that was off. That is still true of JPP largely.

However some state polls very much undervalued trump. I think Ohio and obviously michigan and PA were off a bit.

Additionally it's one thing to be inside of the margin of error but when you are on the wrong side of the margin of error in like every single state that might speak to a broader problem with some of the methodology. States like florida and NC are not the same as Michigan, so the correlation shouldn't be as strong.

The main takeaway though is you are a huge fucking retard that should never even consider talking about polling or stats.
 
The problem is most people are very bad at inherently understanding probabilities. A 30% chance coming to fruition does not mean a poll was "wrong" - we can expect 30% to happen very frequently. In the weeks leading up the election I said very distinctly that trumps chances of winning were better than the cubs chances of winning when they were down 3-1, and yet I talked to multiple retards on here saying it was literally impossible for trump to win. These idiots literally denied the existence of statistically probability, they couldn't fathom it. Much of this history of JPP delusions has been retconned and forgotten though. Jarod will continue to make the same mistake next time though and learn nothing. If trump is 20% to win in 2020 jarod will say trump can't win. He will literally make the exact same mistake next time. book it.
 
Jarod said:
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?
Click to expand...

lol fucking idiot, you are literally a year behind on this. Maybe you should have read my posts last year and you would have learned something.
 
Thing1 said:
The OP is correct. It's a myth that the polls were "way off" this year - especially the national polls.

Hillary won the popular vote by 2%, which was right in line w/ most polls. Historically, pretty close to the norm.
Click to expand...

I remember specifically telling you that if the national polls were under 3% than a whole host of possabilities of trump winning were on the table and you were having none of it. I love it now that liberal polling chumps like you all of a sudden think you are experts, given how stupid you were last year on the matter. November 5th you still said it was impossible for trump to win. The internet does not forget.
 
National polling will always be better than state polling, as state polling is closer to the ground and harder for polling companies to have accurate regular polling of all swing states. There will be more variance with state polls because of this. National polling only tells us so much about electoral politics given we don't have a national election.
 
Tarpon said:
So the polls that said Donald Trump had a zero percent chance of victory were correct.

Time to take your pills kid
Click to expand...

Polls don't say things like that...analysts do.
The polls were within their stated margins of error...
Your argument is with punditry not polls.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top