You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
#1091 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 499 weeks ago
polluxlm wrote:The fact that almost every poll is oversampling democrat heavy groups is the meaty supporting evidence. .
Not it most certainly is not. Dude this has been explained to you in this thread a few times already. Why do you keep doing this?
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the … ing-badly/
The basic premise of the unskewers is wrong. Most pollsters don’t weight their results by party self-identification, which polls get by asking a question like “generally speaking, do you usually think of yourself as a….” Party identification is an attitude, not a demographic. There isn’t some national number from the government that tells us how many Democrats and Republicans there are in the country. Some states collect party registration data, but many states do not. Moreover, party registration is not the same thing as party identification. In a state like Kentucky, for example, there are a lot more registered Democrats than registered Republicans, but more voters identified as Republican in the 2014 election exit polls.
A person’s party identification can shift, and therefore the overall balance between parties does too. Democrats have typically had an advantage in self-identification — a 4 percentage point edge in 2000, a 7-point advantage in 2008 and a 6-point edge in 2012, according to exit polls — but they had no advantage in the 2004 election. Since 1952, however, almost every presidential election has featured a Democratic advantage in party identification.
Yes we know there are more democrats. Obama had +7. These polls are way exceeding that, and it has been increasing. They're also oversampling women and college grads.
This is just Reuters:

You can chalk it anyway you like, these oversamples are in no way a true picture and they are not random. You don't think they are cooked? When "scientific polls" have a 15 point variance they either don't know what they are doing or they are skewing the result.
We'll see which ones are which.
#1092 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 499 weeks ago
Primary voting has been an accurate predictor of elections since 1912.
#1093 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 499 weeks ago
Disgust is a poor motivator for turnout. Obama didn't turn out minorities in record numbers because McCain and Romney were hated. And let's not forget Republicans are way up compared to Democrats in the primaries.
#1094 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 499 weeks ago
I hate to break it to you, but that appears to be "internal polling."
Even if its not, that's why you use Nate Silver. He adjusts poll results by looking at the raw data. That's why that LA Times poll that oversamples GOP and has Trump leading almost always is a Clinton win on 538.
I'm not sure oversampling democrat leaning areas is what you want for your internal polling. There's also the part about making a list of recommendations for the media. The fact that almost every poll is oversampling democrat heavy groups is the meaty supporting evidence. Democrats turned out for Obama +7 in 08, these polls have an average of about +10. You really think Hillary is going to break the bank?
Nate somehow manages to consistently skew these polls oversampling democrats, women and college grads in favor of Hillary. I don't know why, but it could be the same reason he gave Trump even lower odds than he is giving him now to win the primaries.
#1095 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 499 weeks ago
Looks like the crazies were right again:

From attachment -
Florida: "On Independents: Tampa and Orlando are better persuasion targets than north or south Florida (check your polls before concluding this). If there are budget questions or oversamples, make sure that Tampa and Orlando are included first."
"A microtargeting project with oversamples in specific regions or with Independents"
Iowa: "Oversample of No Party registrants and 'soft' supporters of Democratic and Republican nominees."
Missouri: "Consider individual polls for specific media markets, or at least oversamples for important regions."
Virginia: "Increasingly large Democratic margins in Northern Virginia are making the state much more competitive. The division of the Washington, D.C. market into 'D.C. inner' and 'D.C. outer' has been a common practice in recent statewide campaigns. Oversample these voters"
West Virginia: "Regional differences in jobs and coal in West Virginia should be explored by micro-targeting programs, oversamples in regions and focus groups."
Minnesota: "Consider focus groups or an oversampling of the following blocs of infrequent progressive voters: youth (18-29) vote (96,000 infrequent progressive voters), urban apartment dwellers (45,000), urban African Americans (24,000), Somali, Native American, and Urban Hmong (5,000)."
#1096 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 499 weeks ago
polluxlm wrote:https://i.redditmedia.com/Sm7pd0f8GJncp … 9f7151d1d9
A blue list turning red was my point.Wouldn't it make more sense to post the video or would you rather someone drew some kind of conspiracy theory from it instead?
It's a joke because Bill recently talked down Obamacare when Hillary is running on it.
#1097 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 499 weeks ago

polluxlm wrote:Starting to clean up the polls?
The national polling average has Hillary up by 5, funny you left that part out.
A blue list turning red was my point.
#1098 Re: The Garden » 270 to win 2016 Edition » 499 weeks ago
You bet 25 the states will turn out exactly like that? I will certainly take those odds.
So you think that's what the result will be pollux
?
I find it impossible to predict anything by state, but if he wins I think he will win big.
#1099 Re: The Garden » 270 to win 2016 Edition » 499 weeks ago
All in.

#1100 Re: The Garden » US Politics Thread » 499 weeks ago
Starting to clean up the polls?


?