Total Posts:26|Showing Posts:1-26
Jump to topic:

oline Presidential polls

sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/8/2016 9:55:30 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
I have yet to see a single on line poll that doesn't show Hillary Clinton losing by 30 points
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
PetersSmith
Posts: 5,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/8/2016 9:56:52 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/8/2016 9:55:30 PM, sadolite wrote:
I have yet to see a single on line poll that doesn't show Hillary Clinton losing by 30 points

I have https://en.wikipedia.org...
Empress of DDO (also Poll and Forum "Maintenance" Moderator)

"The two most important days in your life is the day you were born, and the day you find out why."
~Mark Twain

"Wow"
-Doge

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet just because there's a picture with a quote next to it."
~Abraham Lincoln

Guide to the Polls Section: http://www.debate.org...
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/8/2016 10:04:46 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/8/2016 9:55:30 PM, sadolite wrote:
I have yet to see a single on line poll that doesn't show Hillary Clinton losing by 30 points

So what?
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/8/2016 11:34:14 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/8/2016 10:04:46 PM, TBR wrote:
At 10/8/2016 9:55:30 PM, sadolite wrote:
I have yet to see a single on line poll that doesn't show Hillary Clinton losing by 30 points

So what?

Your girl is getting beat in reality. No one votes based on what Trump says. It's all ideological.
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
idoubtit
Posts: 163
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2016 12:21:21 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
I know with certainty that many Trump supporters are fed up with the media, fed up with polls, and refuse to participate. He has a lot more support than the polls show.
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2016 1:21:02 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/8/2016 9:56:52 PM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 10/8/2016 9:55:30 PM, sadolite wrote:
I have yet to see a single on line poll that doesn't show Hillary Clinton losing by 30 points

I have https://en.wikipedia.org...

This is not an on line poll, I don't believe.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2016 2:23:39 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/9/2016 1:21:02 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 10/8/2016 9:56:52 PM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 10/8/2016 9:55:30 PM, sadolite wrote:
I have yet to see a single on line poll that doesn't show Hillary Clinton losing by 30 points

I have https://en.wikipedia.org...

This is not an on line poll, I don't believe.

It's not.
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
PetersSmith
Posts: 5,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2016 3:31:21 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/9/2016 1:21:02 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 10/8/2016 9:56:52 PM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 10/8/2016 9:55:30 PM, sadolite wrote:
I have yet to see a single on line poll that doesn't show Hillary Clinton losing by 30 points

I have https://en.wikipedia.org...

This is not an on line poll, I don't believe.

Right...
Empress of DDO (also Poll and Forum "Maintenance" Moderator)

"The two most important days in your life is the day you were born, and the day you find out why."
~Mark Twain

"Wow"
-Doge

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet just because there's a picture with a quote next to it."
~Abraham Lincoln

Guide to the Polls Section: http://www.debate.org...
lannan13
Posts: 23,065
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2016 4:50:45 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/8/2016 11:34:14 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 10/8/2016 10:04:46 PM, TBR wrote:
At 10/8/2016 9:55:30 PM, sadolite wrote:
I have yet to see a single on line poll that doesn't show Hillary Clinton losing by 30 points

So what?

Your girl is getting beat in reality. No one votes based on what Trump says. It's all ideological.

lol I highly doubt Trump will win the election at the current rate.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-Lannan13'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

If the sky's the limit then why do we have footprints on the Moon? I'm shooting my aspirations for the stars.

"If you are going through hell, keep going." "Sir Winston Churchill

"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." "Eleanor Roosevelt

Topics I want to debate. (http://tinyurl.com...)
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
lannan13
Posts: 23,065
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2016 4:52:17 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/8/2016 9:55:30 PM, sadolite wrote:
I have yet to see a single on line poll that doesn't show Hillary Clinton losing by 30 points

I've seen an ample amount.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com...
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-Lannan13'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

If the sky's the limit then why do we have footprints on the Moon? I'm shooting my aspirations for the stars.

"If you are going through hell, keep going." "Sir Winston Churchill

"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." "Eleanor Roosevelt

Topics I want to debate. (http://tinyurl.com...)
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
lannan13
Posts: 23,065
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2016 4:53:20 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/9/2016 1:21:02 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 10/8/2016 9:56:52 PM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 10/8/2016 9:55:30 PM, sadolite wrote:
I have yet to see a single on line poll that doesn't show Hillary Clinton losing by 30 points

I have https://en.wikipedia.org...

This is not an on line poll, I don't believe.

Online polls are easy to rig. You can easily spam a ton of votes.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-Lannan13'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

If the sky's the limit then why do we have footprints on the Moon? I'm shooting my aspirations for the stars.

"If you are going through hell, keep going." "Sir Winston Churchill

"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." "Eleanor Roosevelt

Topics I want to debate. (http://tinyurl.com...)
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
Bennett91
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/9/2016 5:00:03 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/8/2016 9:55:30 PM, sadolite wrote:
I have yet to see a single on line poll that doesn't show Hillary Clinton losing by 30 points

You do realize that those aren't scientific and 4chan trolls regularly flood them with votes right?
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 4:24:00 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
The online polls I take you have to enter your email. All polls can be rigged. As if the big network media polls are not rigged. They have proven beyond all doubt that they are liars and have been caught countless times lying and don't even deny it but just shrug it off. So with that said why do people use polls as an indicator of anything? They are all rigged.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
vortex86
Posts: 568
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 4:36:17 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/8/2016 9:55:30 PM, sadolite wrote:
I have yet to see a single on line poll that doesn't show Hillary Clinton losing by 30 points

CNN and YouGov are 2. But I think it's apparent that Trump won. By the way I think it was equally obvious that Clinton won the first debate.
Bennett91
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 4:52:53 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/10/2016 4:24:00 AM, sadolite wrote:
The online polls I take you have to enter your email. All polls can be rigged. As if the big network media polls are not rigged. They have proven beyond all doubt that they are liars and have been caught countless times lying and don't even deny it but just shrug it off. So with that said why do people use polls as an indicator of anything? They are all rigged.

Not all online polls require emails, and individuals can make many email accounts for free. What evidence do you have that more credible polling institutions are rigged?
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 5:05:55 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/10/2016 4:36:17 AM, vortex86 wrote:
At 10/8/2016 9:55:30 PM, sadolite wrote:
I have yet to see a single on line poll that doesn't show Hillary Clinton losing by 30 points

CNN and YouGov are 2. But I think it's apparent that Trump won. By the way I think it was equally obvious that Clinton won the first debate.

yep
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 11:18:56 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
First because polls are irrelevant. They are a snapshot of a race, similar to looking at a game or race 1/3, 1/2, or 3/4 through.

Second, even if the questions, methodology, and sample population are fully published (rarely to the public) understating scalability and measurability aren't.

The responders are always anonymous so they are never objective.

Finally, if one allows a poll to shape their opinion, then they haven't formed their own opinion. To modify a wise axiom: a belief in everyone (poll) is a belief in no one (candidate)

Because I don't mind criticism, I'll even post gallups historical 'scorecard'. Note: this is, in skeptic circles, sometimes referred to as self serving bias.

http://www.gallup.com...
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/10/2016 11:59:03 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/8/2016 9:55:30 PM, sadolite wrote:
I have yet to see a single on line poll that doesn't show Hillary Clinton losing by 30 points

Information and understanding reality is critically important. It allows you to drive policy, and in a political campaign, understanding how people are thinking and what they feel allows political campaign to make decisions about where to campaign and to an extent how to campaign.

Like it or not, polling organisations have come about to fill this need for information; and earn the money by being accurate. These are not like pundits, or commentators where they will keep collecting paychecks and never get called on their speculative assertions whether they are right or wrong; if an organisation polls that a candidate is +10, and the candidate is actually down -5 points; it has an impact on their bottom line, because their accuracy is generally measurable and that accuracy is what allows them to make money.

While it's pretty easy to fudge a poll; for a polling organization, whose funding and earnings are driven based in part upon their accuracy; it's no less self defeating than a company misreporting earnings. Sure, it may get additional investment now; but it will end up destroying the companies credibility and earnings in the longer term.

Any poll that is conducted by anyone, is primarily measuring how the people who were asked a question answered.

While in a lot of cases the answers given match how a person is thinking; pscyhology should tell you that the answer given relies in part on how the question is asked, and what the question is asked. Even something as trivial as the order in which the candidates names are given has an impact on the answers given.

The biggest barrier, however, is how representative the people polled are of the general electorate for which you are trying to extrapolate.

An poll conducted outside a whole foods in the middle of a Gay Pride parade is going to give you different answers than an online poll hosted on www.HilaryForPrison.com. Neither are representative of reality because both are going to grossly oversample a particular demographic or particular ideological leaning; and will not be worth the paper they are printed on; even if they come emailed on PDF.

Online polls, in general, are normally horrifically bad for this reason. There is no control of demographics, in most cases they don't attempt to correct for any oversampling; and most are inherently biased towards the people who don't mind filling in online polls, and the ones who are visiting the site or have seen the advertising for the site hosting the poll. If the respondees are 95% republican, most online polls won't account for that; and so when you get answers that show 90% of the respondents say that Donald Trump is the best, it's really not all that surprising, but shows pretty much nothing.

This is not even going into the detail of poll rigging, bombing and trolling, which is the case in at least some polls.

For that reason, generic polls like this, without any mathematical rigor, really can't be trusted very much.

Primary polling organisations; the ones that make money by being accurate, are not by any means foolproof, but are most assuredly more accurate for several reasons.

Many of them actually attempt to weight respondees answers by comparing the demographics of the poll with demographics of the country.

For example, if they sample 400 democrats, and 200 republicans; they weight the responses based on country wide statistics on democrats and republicans. So if the answers were 400 for Hillary and 200 for Trump split along party lines, instead of reporting a poll that says Hilary's support is at 66%, it would be adjusted to around 50/50.

This is done for age, race, income, education, sex, and party affiliation in many cases; and is done to try and make the inexact and non representative polls representative. In most cases, these organisations attempt to get at least a minimal representation of each group to make it so that the weighting and adjustment is as accurate as it can be.

Most of the innaccuracies come down to a combination of how the poll is taken (robo polls are more innaccurate than phone polls, mainly due to laws about robocalling mobile phones in some states), and the adjustments and estimations of things like response bias (For example if democrats and young people are far less likely to respond than older retired republicans who have a land line, are at home a lot), and this gives an inherent flaw in the polling systems that need to be corrected for; if they can't.

If you're interested in accuracy, if you look at the last election, FiveThirtyEight has actually crunched the numbers, and found that the polls were actually broadly accurate, with the overwhelming majority of the pollsters used getting within 2% accuracy in terms of mean adjusted bias.

In reality, however, while one, or two polls maybe biased; the best way of comparing polls is two fold; compare movement in any one polling organisations polls over time; ignoring individual poll results (any which can be outliers), and focusing on trends.

Almost all of these have shown broad movement towards clinton.

The second, is that you can use all the polling results, and see what they all seem to say together; a poll-of-polls. That again, broadly shows movement towards Clinton.

As for online polls concerning the debate, for example, most of the scientific polls; the one that carefully control demographics, weighting, etc; all show that Clinton won the first debate in most cases by a margin of 2:1.

You all have to ask yourself an important question. Are you complaining about the polls, because you don't like what they say, or because you have a legitimate reason for doubting their veracity?

One of the major problems in the US, especially with this election, is that a lot of people are redefining reality based on what they want to believe. Polls say that their candidate is losing, so they reject the polls. News coverage is unflattering for the person they like, so the media is biased against them.

Wanting to avoid uncomfortable facts, and dismissing conflicting information for spurious, or flawed reasoning may make you feel better but what if you're wrong? Is it not better to try and deal with the facts and reality as they can be seen rather than try and protect yourself in a bubble of facts that agree with you.

It's kind of important, because if you're living in your own bubble of facts, and those facts are wrong, there is going to come a point where that's going to become clear to you; there will come a point where you can no longer hide from reality.
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2016 2:23:55 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/10/2016 4:52:53 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 10/10/2016 4:24:00 AM, sadolite wrote:
The online polls I take you have to enter your email. All polls can be rigged. As if the big network media polls are not rigged. They have proven beyond all doubt that they are liars and have been caught countless times lying and don't even deny it but just shrug it off. So with that said why do people use polls as an indicator of anything? They are all rigged.

Not all online polls require emails, and individuals can make many email accounts for free. What evidence do you have that more credible polling institutions are rigged?

I could kick the question back on you. What evidence is there that they are not. It has been show that the big media polls are biased as hell by their sampling blocks.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2016 2:46:56 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/10/2016 11:59:03 AM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 10/8/2016 9:55:30 PM, sadolite wrote:
I have yet to see a single on line poll that doesn't show Hillary Clinton losing by 30 points

Information and understanding reality is critically important. It allows you to drive policy, and in a political campaign, understanding how people are thinking and what they feel allows political campaign to make decisions about where to campaign and to an extent how to campaign.

Like it or not, polling organisations have come about to fill this need for information; and earn the money by being accurate. These are not like pundits, or commentators where they will keep collecting paychecks and never get called on their speculative assertions whether they are right or wrong; if an organisation polls that a candidate is +10, and the candidate is actually down -5 points; it has an impact on their bottom line, because their accuracy is generally measurable and that accuracy is what allows them to make money.

While it's pretty easy to fudge a poll; for a polling organization, whose funding and earnings are driven based in part upon their accuracy; it's no less self defeating than a company misreporting earnings. Sure, it may get additional investment now; but it will end up destroying the companies credibility and earnings in the longer term.


Any poll that is conducted by anyone, is primarily measuring how the people who were asked a question answered.

While in a lot of cases the answers given match how a person is thinking; pscyhology should tell you that the answer given relies in part on how the question is asked, and what the question is asked. Even something as trivial as the order in which the candidates names are given has an impact on the answers given.


The biggest barrier, however, is how representative the people polled are of the general electorate for which you are trying to extrapolate.

An poll conducted outside a whole foods in the middle of a Gay Pride parade is going to give you different answers than an online poll hosted on www.HilaryForPrison.com. Neither are representative of reality because both are going to grossly oversample a particular demographic or particular ideological leaning; and will not be worth the paper they are printed on; even if they come emailed on PDF.

Online polls, in general, are normally horrifically bad for this reason. There is no control of demographics, in most cases they don't attempt to correct for any oversampling; and most are inherently biased towards the people who don't mind filling in online polls, and the ones who are visiting the site or have seen the advertising for the site hosting the poll. If the respondees are 95% republican, most online polls won't account for that; and so when you get answers that show 90% of the respondents say that Donald Trump is the best, it's really not all that surprising, but shows pretty much nothing.

This is not even going into the detail of poll rigging, bombing and trolling, which is the case in at least some polls.

For that reason, generic polls like this, without any mathematical rigor, really can't be trusted very much.

Primary polling organisations; the ones that make money by being accurate, are not by any means foolproof, but are most assuredly more accurate for several reasons.

Many of them actually attempt to weight respondees answers by comparing the demographics of the poll with demographics of the country.

For example, if they sample 400 democrats, and 200 republicans; they weight the responses based on country wide statistics on democrats and republicans. So if the answers were 400 for Hillary and 200 for Trump split along party lines, instead of reporting a poll that says Hilary's support is at 66%, it would be adjusted to around 50/50.

This is done for age, race, income, education, sex, and party affiliation in many cases; and is done to try and make the inexact and non representative polls representative. In most cases, these organisations attempt to get at least a minimal representation of each group to make it so that the weighting and adjustment is as accurate as it can be.

Most of the innaccuracies come down to a combination of how the poll is taken (robo polls are more innaccurate than phone polls, mainly due to laws about robocalling mobile phones in some states), and the adjustments and estimations of things like response bias (For example if democrats and young people are far less likely to respond than older retired republicans who have a land line, are at home a lot), and this gives an inherent flaw in the polling systems that need to be corrected for; if they can't.

If you're interested in accuracy, if you look at the last election, FiveThirtyEight has actually crunched the numbers, and found that the polls were actually broadly accurate, with the overwhelming majority of the pollsters used getting within 2% accuracy in terms of mean adjusted bias.

In reality, however, while one, or two polls maybe biased; the best way of comparing polls is two fold; compare movement in any one polling organisations polls over time; ignoring individual poll results (any which can be outliers), and focusing on trends.

Almost all of these have shown broad movement towards clinton.

The second, is that you can use all the polling results, and see what they all seem to say together; a poll-of-polls. That again, broadly shows movement towards Clinton.

As for online polls concerning the debate, for example, most of the scientific polls; the one that carefully control demographics, weighting, etc; all show that Clinton won the first debate in most cases by a margin of 2:1.


You all have to ask yourself an important question. Are you complaining about the polls, because you don't like what they say, or because you have a legitimate reason for doubting their veracity?

One of the major problems in the US, especially with this election, is that a lot of people are redefining reality based on what they want to believe. Polls say that their candidate is losing, so they reject the polls. News coverage is unflattering for the person they like, so the media is biased against them.

Wanting to avoid uncomfortable facts, and dismissing conflicting information for spurious, or flawed reasoning may make you feel better but what if you're wrong? Is it not better to try and deal with the facts and reality as they can be seen rather than try and protect yourself in a bubble of facts that agree with you.

It's kind of important, because if you're living in your own bubble of facts, and those facts are wrong, there is going to come a point where that's going to become clear to you; there will come a point where you can no longer hide from reality.

The correct polls are never..ever released to the unwashed masses, who most certainly did not pay for them.
Bennett91
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2016 3:03:14 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/11/2016 2:23:55 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 10/10/2016 4:52:53 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 10/10/2016 4:24:00 AM, sadolite wrote:
The online polls I take you have to enter your email. All polls can be rigged. As if the big network media polls are not rigged. They have proven beyond all doubt that they are liars and have been caught countless times lying and don't even deny it but just shrug it off. So with that said why do people use polls as an indicator of anything? They are all rigged.

Not all online polls require emails, and individuals can make many email accounts for free. What evidence do you have that more credible polling institutions are rigged?

I could kick the question back on you. What evidence is there that they are not. It has been show that the big media polls are biased as hell by their sampling blocks.

Sorry sado, the BoP is on you to justify your claim, not for me to prove how baseless it is.
sadolite
Posts: 8,838
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2016 11:27:36 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/11/2016 3:03:14 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 10/11/2016 2:23:55 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 10/10/2016 4:52:53 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 10/10/2016 4:24:00 AM, sadolite wrote:
The online polls I take you have to enter your email. All polls can be rigged. As if the big network media polls are not rigged. They have proven beyond all doubt that they are liars and have been caught countless times lying and don't even deny it but just shrug it off. So with that said why do people use polls as an indicator of anything? They are all rigged.

Not all online polls require emails, and individuals can make many email accounts for free. What evidence do you have that more credible polling institutions are rigged?

I could kick the question back on you. What evidence is there that they are not. It has been show that the big media polls are biased as hell by their sampling blocks.

Sorry sado, the BoP is on you to justify your claim, not for me to prove how baseless it is.

Here is an example http://www.chicksontheright.com...
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Bennett91
Posts: 4,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2016 11:55:08 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/11/2016 11:27:36 PM, sadolite wrote:
At 10/11/2016 3:03:14 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 10/11/2016 2:23:55 AM, sadolite wrote:
At 10/10/2016 4:52:53 AM, Bennett91 wrote:
At 10/10/2016 4:24:00 AM, sadolite wrote:
The online polls I take you have to enter your email. All polls can be rigged. As if the big network media polls are not rigged. They have proven beyond all doubt that they are liars and have been caught countless times lying and don't even deny it but just shrug it off. So with that said why do people use polls as an indicator of anything? They are all rigged.

Not all online polls require emails, and individuals can make many email accounts for free. What evidence do you have that more credible polling institutions are rigged?

I could kick the question back on you. What evidence is there that they are not. It has been show that the big media polls are biased as hell by their sampling blocks.

Sorry sado, the BoP is on you to justify your claim, not for me to prove how baseless it is.

Here is an example http://www.chicksontheright.com...

This seems more blown out of proportion than it needs to be. Yes 500 is a low number, but they don't hide any of their data. And while linking the poll to people who support Clinton is interesting, looking at other polls as your source does shows Clinton is still in the lead. The one with over 20k people puts her at 7 points head, factor in MSNBC's poll it fits within the margin of error.
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 8:28:05 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/11/2016 2:46:56 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 10/10/2016 11:59:03 AM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 10/8/2016 9:55:30 PM, sadolite wrote:
I have yet to see a single on line poll that doesn't show Hillary Clinton losing by 30 points

Information and understanding reality is critically important. It allows you to drive policy, and in a political campaign, understanding how people are thinking and what they feel allows political campaign to make decisions about where to campaign and to an extent how to campaign.

Like it or not, polling organisations have come about to fill this need for information; and earn the money by being accurate. These are not like pundits, or commentators where they will keep collecting paychecks and never get called on their speculative assertions whether they are right or wrong; if an organisation polls that a candidate is +10, and the candidate is actually down -5 points; it has an impact on their bottom line, because their accuracy is generally measurable and that accuracy is what allows them to make money.

While it's pretty easy to fudge a poll; for a polling organization, whose funding and earnings are driven based in part upon their accuracy; it's no less self defeating than a company misreporting earnings. Sure, it may get additional investment now; but it will end up destroying the companies credibility and earnings in the longer term.


Any poll that is conducted by anyone, is primarily measuring how the people who were asked a question answered.

While in a lot of cases the answers given match how a person is thinking; pscyhology should tell you that the answer given relies in part on how the question is asked, and what the question is asked. Even something as trivial as the order in which the candidates names are given has an impact on the answers given.


The biggest barrier, however, is how representative the people polled are of the general electorate for which you are trying to extrapolate.

An poll conducted outside a whole foods in the middle of a Gay Pride parade is going to give you different answers than an online poll hosted on www.HilaryForPrison.com. Neither are representative of reality because both are going to grossly oversample a particular demographic or particular ideological leaning; and will not be worth the paper they are printed on; even if they come emailed on PDF.

Online polls, in general, are normally horrifically bad for this reason. There is no control of demographics, in most cases they don't attempt to correct for any oversampling; and most are inherently biased towards the people who don't mind filling in online polls, and the ones who are visiting the site or have seen the advertising for the site hosting the poll. If the respondees are 95% republican, most online polls won't account for that; and so when you get answers that show 90% of the respondents say that Donald Trump is the best, it's really not all that surprising, but shows pretty much nothing.

This is not even going into the detail of poll rigging, bombing and trolling, which is the case in at least some polls.

For that reason, generic polls like this, without any mathematical rigor, really can't be trusted very much.

Primary polling organisations; the ones that make money by being accurate, are not by any means foolproof, but are most assuredly more accurate for several reasons.

Many of them actually attempt to weight respondees answers by comparing the demographics of the poll with demographics of the country.

For example, if they sample 400 democrats, and 200 republicans; they weight the responses based on country wide statistics on democrats and republicans. So if the answers were 400 for Hillary and 200 for Trump split along party lines, instead of reporting a poll that says Hilary's support is at 66%, it would be adjusted to around 50/50.

This is done for age, race, income, education, sex, and party affiliation in many cases; and is done to try and make the inexact and non representative polls representative. In most cases, these organisations attempt to get at least a minimal representation of each group to make it so that the weighting and adjustment is as accurate as it can be.

Most of the innaccuracies come down to a combination of how the poll is taken (robo polls are more innaccurate than phone polls, mainly due to laws about robocalling mobile phones in some states), and the adjustments and estimations of things like response bias (For example if democrats and young people are far less likely to respond than older retired republicans who have a land line, are at home a lot), and this gives an inherent flaw in the polling systems that need to be corrected for; if they can't.

If you're interested in accuracy, if you look at the last election, FiveThirtyEight has actually crunched the numbers, and found that the polls were actually broadly accurate, with the overwhelming majority of the pollsters used getting within 2% accuracy in terms of mean adjusted bias.

In reality, however, while one, or two polls maybe biased; the best way of comparing polls is two fold; compare movement in any one polling organisations polls over time; ignoring individual poll results (any which can be outliers), and focusing on trends.

Almost all of these have shown broad movement towards clinton.

The second, is that you can use all the polling results, and see what they all seem to say together; a poll-of-polls. That again, broadly shows movement towards Clinton.

As for online polls concerning the debate, for example, most of the scientific polls; the one that carefully control demographics, weighting, etc; all show that Clinton won the first debate in most cases by a margin of 2:1.


You all have to ask yourself an important question. Are you complaining about the polls, because you don't like what they say, or because you have a legitimate reason for doubting their veracity?

One of the major problems in the US, especially with this election, is that a lot of people are redefining reality based on what they want to believe. Polls say that their candidate is losing, so they reject the polls. News coverage is unflattering for the person they like, so the media is biased against them.

Wanting to avoid uncomfortable facts, and dismissing conflicting information for spurious, or flawed reasoning may make you feel better but what if you're wrong? Is it not better to try and deal with the facts and reality as they can be seen rather than try and protect yourself in a bubble of facts that agree with you.

It's kind of important, because if you're living in your own bubble of facts, and those facts are wrong, there is going to come a point where that's going to become clear to you; there will come a point where you can no longer hide from reality.

The correct polls are never..ever released to the unwashed masses, who most certainly did not pay for them.

Is this what you want to believe; because the polls all disagree with the state of reality you wish to believe in, or is this what a careful and in-depth analysis of the data and evidence?

If so, would you like to share, because your response was TS;DJ

Remember, if you want to think with your gut, which many people here do, that's fine; but it should be pretty obvious what your gut ends up producing.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 9:30:33 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 8:28:05 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 10/11/2016 2:46:56 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 10/10/2016 11:59:03 AM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 10/8/2016 9:55:30 PM, sadolite wrote:
I have yet to see a single on line poll that doesn't show Hillary Clinton losing by 30 points

Information and understanding reality is critically important. It allows you to drive policy, and in a political campaign, understanding how people are thinking and what they feel allows political campaign to make decisions about where to campaign and to an extent how to campaign.

Like it or not, polling organisations have come about to fill this need for information; and earn the money by being accurate. These are not like pundits, or commentators where they will keep collecting paychecks and never get called on their speculative assertions whether they are right or wrong; if an organisation polls that a candidate is +10, and the candidate is actually down -5 points; it has an impact on their bottom line, because their accuracy is generally measurable and that accuracy is what allows them to make money.

While it's pretty easy to fudge a poll; for a polling organization, whose funding and earnings are driven based in part upon their accuracy; it's no less self defeating than a company misreporting earnings. Sure, it may get additional investment now; but it will end up destroying the companies credibility and earnings in the longer term.


Any poll that is conducted by anyone, is primarily measuring how the people who were asked a question answered.

While in a lot of cases the answers given match how a person is thinking; pscyhology should tell you that the answer given relies in part on how the question is asked, and what the question is asked. Even something as trivial as the order in which the candidates names are given has an impact on the answers given.


The biggest barrier, however, is how representative the people polled are of the general electorate for which you are trying to extrapolate.

An poll conducted outside a whole foods in the middle of a Gay Pride parade is going to give you different answers than an online poll hosted on www.HilaryForPrison.com. Neither are representative of reality because both are going to grossly oversample a particular demographic or particular ideological leaning; and will not be worth the paper they are printed on; even if they come emailed on PDF.

Online polls, in general, are normally horrifically bad for this reason. There is no control of demographics, in most cases they don't attempt to correct for any oversampling; and most are inherently biased towards the people who don't mind filling in online polls, and the ones who are visiting the site or have seen the advertising for the site hosting the poll. If the respondees are 95% republican, most online polls won't account for that; and so when you get answers that show 90% of the respondents say that Donald Trump is the best, it's really not all that surprising, but shows pretty much nothing.

This is not even going into the detail of poll rigging, bombing and trolling, which is the case in at least some polls.

For that reason, generic polls like this, without any mathematical rigor, really can't be trusted very much.

Primary polling organisations; the ones that make money by being accurate, are not by any means foolproof, but are most assuredly more accurate for several reasons.

Many of them actually attempt to weight respondees answers by comparing the demographics of the poll with demographics of the country.

For example, if they sample 400 democrats, and 200 republicans; they weight the responses based on country wide statistics on democrats and republicans. So if the answers were 400 for Hillary and 200 for Trump split along party lines, instead of reporting a poll that says Hilary's support is at 66%, it would be adjusted to around 50/50.

This is done for age, race, income, education, sex, and party affiliation in many cases; and is done to try and make the inexact and non representative polls representative. In most cases, these organisations attempt to get at least a minimal representation of each group to make it so that the weighting and adjustment is as accurate as it can be.

Most of the innaccuracies come down to a combination of how the poll is taken (robo polls are more innaccurate than phone polls, mainly due to laws about robocalling mobile phones in some states), and the adjustments and estimations of things like response bias (For example if democrats and young people are far less likely to respond than older retired republicans who have a land line, are at home a lot), and this gives an inherent flaw in the polling systems that need to be corrected for; if they can't.

If you're interested in accuracy, if you look at the last election, FiveThirtyEight has actually crunched the numbers, and found that the polls were actually broadly accurate, with the overwhelming majority of the pollsters used getting within 2% accuracy in terms of mean adjusted bias.

In reality, however, while one, or two polls maybe biased; the best way of comparing polls is two fold; compare movement in any one polling organisations polls over time; ignoring individual poll results (any which can be outliers), and focusing on trends.

Almost all of these have shown broad movement towards clinton.

The second, is that you can use all the polling results, and see what they all seem to say together; a poll-of-polls. That again, broadly shows movement towards Clinton.

As for online polls concerning the debate, for example, most of the scientific polls; the one that carefully control demographics, weighting, etc; all show that Clinton won the first debate in most cases by a margin of 2:1.


You all have to ask yourself an important question. Are you complaining about the polls, because you don't like what they say, or because you have a legitimate reason for doubting their veracity?

One of the major problems in the US, especially with this election, is that a lot of people are redefining reality based on what they want to believe. Polls say that their candidate is losing, so they reject the polls. News coverage is unflattering for the person they like, so the media is biased against them.

Wanting to avoid uncomfortable facts, and dismissing conflicting information for spurious, or flawed reasoning may make you feel better but what if you're wrong? Is it not better to try and deal with the facts and reality as they can be seen rather than try and protect yourself in a bubble of facts that agree with you.

It's kind of important, because if you're living in your own bubble of facts, and those facts are wrong, there is going to come a point where that's going to become clear to you; there will come a point where you can no longer hide from reality.

The correct polls are never..ever released to the unwashed masses, who most certainly did not pay for them.

Is this what you want to believe; because the polls all disagree with the state of reality you wish to believe in, or is this what a careful and in-depth analysis of the data and evidence?

If so, would you like to share, because your response was TS;DJ

Remember, if you want to think with your gut, which many people here do, that's fine; but it should be pretty obvious what your gut ends up producing.

I don't believe them when they do mirror my gut. My gut did not pay for the poll.
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2016 10:07:39 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/12/2016 9:30:33 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
Wanting to avoid uncomfortable facts, and dismissing conflicting information for spurious, or flawed reasoning may make you feel better but what if you're wrong? Is it not better to try and deal with the facts and reality as they can be seen rather than try and protect yourself in a bubble of facts that agree with you.

It's kind of important, because if you're living in your own bubble of facts, and those facts are wrong, there is going to come a point where that's going to become clear to you; there will come a point where you can no longer hide from reality.

The correct polls are never..ever released to the unwashed masses, who most certainly did not pay for them.

Is this what you want to believe; because the polls all disagree with the state of reality you wish to believe in, or is this what a careful and in-depth analysis of the data and evidence?

If so, would you like to share, because your response was TS;DJ

Remember, if you want to think with your gut, which many people here do, that's fine; but it should be pretty obvious what your gut ends up producing.

I don't believe them when they do mirror my gut. My gut did not pay for the poll.

Okay, I'm assuming by your unwillingness to defend your assertion, that you're conceding that you made it up.