Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: yadent

Yes sir.
Cooking the polling books 101.
Decrease the numbers polled and only include those geographic areas likely to give the desired result.

If someone like me can figure them out, are they stupid enough to think they are fooling anyone?


22 posted on 11/28/2015 8:13:14 AM PST by oldvirginian (American by birth, Southern by the grace of a loving God and Virginian because Jesus loves me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: oldvirginian
Decrease the numbers polled and only include those geographic areas likely to give the desired result.

Did you ever consider the possibility that because of the holiday week, there were just a lot fewer people willing to take the time to be polled? Not everything has a malicious intent... The number of people polled when it showed Trump at 31% (358) was not that different from the number polled when it showed him at 38% (381). In fact, the sample size on the day Trump hit 43% was only 464 people.

And remember that this is a 5 day rolling poll. What happened is that Trump had a set of 3-4 VERY good polling days (highest was 47.6%), but those have now rolled off the average. Looking at the Reuters polling site the last few individual days had Trump at 32%, 27% and 26%.

48 posted on 11/28/2015 8:35:06 AM PST by CA Conservative (Texan by birth, Californian by circumstance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson