Eventually the criminals who run the democrat party will buy off or bully pollsters - but until then they’re one of freedom’s safeguards. They assist with stopping democrat voter fraud...
The gist of the article is that polls are not accurate because far more people today are not willing to take a poll.
That’s why they were so far off in the Brexit poll and that’s why Trump is about to win in a landslide.
Looks like we might have an advantage if lots of Trump supporters or leaning Trump voters simply aren’t responding to polls.
On the other hand, the polls probably aren’t sampling enough poor, latino, black, etc. which will go for Hillary.
Those hesitant or latent Trump voters are what is killing him—and they are the direct result of his gaffes, tirades, and perceived temperment against women, latinos, etc.
I think he could have been up substantially in the polls if he wasn’t tweeting at 3 am.
Hmmmmm...could it. The jig: could it be that they are polling answering machines? Since many people like myself do not answer the out of area or unknown calls I usually let my answering machine pickup. Could it be that these lying pollster weasels are at their leisure marking those calls as a vote for Hillary? Nothing is out of the question for them they lie they cheat they kill whatever it takes to win ! We should be weary..all polls should be suspect!
People who don’t like to respond to pollsters are probably those who have determined that the establishment has closed its ear to their voices.
Wrote this a few weeks back, but can do with a repost (and some minor stealth edits):
.......
It has been discussed for years what the reduction in response rate has on the reliability of polls. PEW research published an article in 2012 showing that their response rate (actually making an interview) was now down to 9% (nine percent). I have seen another article indicating 8% response rate in 2014.
This is a problem for the pollsters since it makes it more expensive for the pollsters to sample a large enough group. But there is another problem: What if there is a difference between those who reply to the poll and those that don’t? That could induce a large, an overwhelming bias in a poll.
Some research has gone in to answer that question, and in data published in WaPo comparing accuracy and response rates in polls between 1999 - 2014 it did not appear that the accuracy had declined, despite the fact that the response rate had gone from just below 35% to below 10%.
However, for the polling companies this is like skating on thin ice. Just because it worked yesterday, and an hour ago, it may not work now!
In some previous threads I noted that if there is such a low response rate then a single percent difference in response rate between groups voting for different candidates will cause a large difference in the polling result even though there may be an underlying 50/50 split in the preference for the candidates.
For example if there is a real 50/50 split between candidate A and B, but the response rate of the voters who support candidate A is 7.5% and the response rate of supporters of candidate B is 8.5% then a totally unbiased, properly carried out poll (but not able to weigh for the response rates) will show 53% for B and 47% for A.
In the old days when the response rates were well above 80% then you needed much larger differences in response rates between candidates to skew your poll. Such large differences may have been picked up elsewhere.
So to this election: It is quite obvious that the media bias has been worse than ever before. One has to go back to the election 1980 to find anything close - and that was not an election which the pollsters remember with fondness.
Now, is it very unlikely that people who are thinking of voting for a candidate that is vilified almost universally are more (and remember we are talking of a difference of a few percent only) reluctant to answer a poll?
I think the answer to that question is pretty obvious, and therefore I am much less interested in polls this election than previous ones.
So basically the polls show Hillary ahead and her followers are so sure in voting for her they don’t bother showing up to her rallies.
Most polls have a built in bias depending upon who is paying them and their ideological bent of the firm.
Just changing a couple of words in a question can change the responses. I worked first hand with university pollsters who did nothing but research on how to elicit responses by simple word changes and tone of the questioner. The subtle voice inflictions by the person asking the question can means as much as a six point difference in poll responses.
I have repeatedly declined to take polls.