Posted on 09/23/2017 4:30:52 PM PDT by ForYourChildren
Most of the top political polls that got the 2016 presidential race dead wrong are continuing to use a flawed methodology in rating President Trump's approval ratings that favors Democrats, women and younger voters, according to a new analysis.
The report shows that the mainstream polls oversample an average of 29 percent more Democrats than Republicans and the results skew anti-Trump. The result is that it robs Trump of about 8 points in his approval ratings, from 46 percent to 38 percent, it said.
And, said the report from Bombthrowers.com, one outfit, the Economist, used 58 percent more Democrats than Republicans in a recent poll on Trump's approval ratings.
"In every poll, Democrat respondents outnumbered Republicans by significant amounts. The Economist poll was the worst. Only 24 percent of respondents (360) were Republicans compared to 38 percent (570) Democrats – which means that 58 percent more Democrats were polled than Republicans, as shown in the %D/R column. On average, in these seven widely recognized national polls, only 29 percent (409 people) of the total 1,383 polled were Republicans, while 37 percent (518) were Democrats. Another way of saying it is that, on average, 29 percent more Democrats than Republicans were polled," wrote James Simpson, an economist, businessman and journalist.
Simpson called the practice "fraud."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Then they always act shocked and surprised when their polls are wrong. They know what they’re doing.
I think the standard argument is that they poll more Democrats simply because the population contains more Democrats.
But I believe the Democrats have lost over 1000 political seats (net) at all levels, all across the country over the past 8 years or so. This is not a Majority party no matter how you slice it.
The population contains more Republicans than Democrats. But the thought of actually polling that way terrifies the Establishment.
“I think the standard argument is that they poll more Democrats simply because the population contains more Democrats.”
63M voted for Trump
62M voted for Clinton
A tip of the hat to everybody here who sniffed this out at the time and/or posted articles last fall noting these oversamplings of Dems. That said to me that Trump’s blowout rallies were real, not to be dismissed as just local carnival shows for the rubes.
And that kept me, and I would guess some of the rest of us, off the ledge.
And obviously a lot of the 62M who voted for Clinton did not really exist. The Establishment knows that as well.
Very true.
Then there’s the hidden intangible, if polls are done with a person interviewing another person. We all know the politically correct view of a candidate or issue, and some people will tell a pollster they favor the liberal or politically correct view of something.
This happened a lot, back when we were still allowed to vote on the definition of marriage. Pre election polls in some states suggested a tight vote, but on election day, voter initiatives to support traditional marriage always got more support than the polls suggested.
This was also called the Bradley effect, after Tom Bradley in California, when he was running for governor. He was black, and polls suggested he would win the election. But on election day, he lost. After the fact, the liberals said it was because people were racist, and lied to pollsters about who they would vote for.
It’s simple fraud, known to all with any reason. That’s why there is hatered of the media, pollsters, politicians and Hollywood. Deep, real hatred
“And obviously a lot of the 62M who voted for Clinton did not really exist.”
I already took that into consideration and came up with 62M.
Pollsters are not entirely to blame. Conservatives are far more likely to hang up on us that Pajama Boy lurking in Mommy’s basement, or the welfare mom waiting for her EBT to come through. Conservatives have productive lives and often don’t have time for polls.
Note: Professionals should remove that bias, but there is so much more money in lying for the media than in telling the truth.
Come on, now...you really cannot believe that the overwhelming number of Americans believe any polling numbers from the mainstream media. LMAO!!! Real numbers for Trump range in the high fifties, and climbing!!!
Read my lips...The Democrat Party, the National Football League and The National Basketball Association are all self-destructing themselves!!! Go figure!!!
Obviously, it was the Russians! (/sarcasm)
I m betting that about 10,000,000 votes for Clinton and maybe 750,000 were by voters that were ineligible to vote. of course because there is very little investigation into voting fraud there is no way know the real numbers.
And how many illegal aliens with stolen social security numbers?
I picture it as a mathematical inequality like this:
(people who vote for more conservative national candidates) >(people who vote for more leftist national candidates).
But not sure you're right about party registration. More and more voters are now calling themselves "independents."
I’ve always heard that they produce fake polls, to make people think that a Democrat candidate is way ahead. But then closer to election day, the polls tighten up, so that the final polls will be close to the actual election results.
I think it would be an interesting exercise, at least from the pure math aspect, to conduct a reverse sample percentage. By that, I mean to take a given result (election results) and then work backwards to the poll / sample percentages.
Then use that set to go forward. It would be interesting to see how close that model then comes in the next election.
“The Economist” should be renamed “The Communist”. They are one-world-order buggars.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.