Posted on 10/20/2016 2:29:39 PM PDT by BlackFemaleArmyColonel
If you listened to the mainstream media, you might be tempted to believe that Democrat presidential nominee Hillary Clinton leads Republican rival Donald Trump in the polls by double digits. However, it’s no secret that polls can be manipulated to a yield certain result.
A group of statisticians and actuaries compiled data from previous polls to show how just how unreliable polls can be. They took data from a recent Fox poll from Oct. 14 that showed Clinton ahead of Trump by seven points and a WSJ/NBC poll from Oct. 16 that showed Clinton with an 11-point lead.
The statisticians first noted that both of these polls were “heavily skewed” toward Democrats. The Fox sample group consisted of 43 percent Democrats to 36 Republicans to 21 “other,” and the NBC poll showed 44 percent Democrats to 37 Republicans to 19 “other.”
Simply put, by selecting more Democrats to participate in the polls, they are tailored to favor a Democrat result.
When the actuaries calculated results using the same data from the same surveys with an even split of 40 Democrats, 40 Republicans and 20 “other,” they got a different result, which put Trump in the lead.
The statisticians also looked at past polls from 1980 and 1988, where Democrats were favored to win but ended up losing. In 1980, Jimmy Carter was ahead of Ronald Reagan 47 to 39. Reagan ended up winning the election in a landslide. In 1998, Michael Dukakis was ahead of George H. W. Bush by 17 points, and Bush ended up winning the election easily.
This election season has been unlike any other in recent years, and independent voters, as well as undecided voters, remain difficult to predict.
(Excerpt) Read more at conservativetribune.com ...
Nobody has a clue the percentage of each type of demographic to poll.
Clinton allegedly has a well funded, well staffed ground game in the swing states. Normally such a ground game can be the basis for an accurate prediction of her turnout and vote total. But this is not a normal year. Regardless of how great the ground game, can it really produce for such an unlikeable candidate? Here in GA in 2014 a well funded, well staff ground game could not convince dependable 2010 Dems to vote for Nunn when they were pissed about their insurance premiums.
Strange how insurance enrollment always comes around election day. Things like that can mess up even the best ground game.
Apparently Trump has no ground game according to most media. If he does, he has managed to keep it well under the radar. Will that be a big surprise?
A good ground game produces big in early voting. In 2013 in an off year election I could produce 10 to 20 votes week days and 50 plus votes on Saturday going door-to-door in early voting.
In swing states how many people does Trump have going door-to-door? Are they trained? Do they know how to get the vote of people who are not already energized to vote one way or the other? Can precincts with a ground game be compared to precincts without a ground game and use that to measure the effectiveness of the ground game... and the effectiveness of individual volunteers?
Some workers are much more effective than others, just as in sales and similar endeavors. (I’m average; not great; not terrible.) Will the effective volunteers share (in time) with the less effective what works and what does not work?
If Trump wins, he can credit Chris Wallace. Immigration is the issue where the undecided disagree with Trump most strongly. Clinton was beating Trump in the immigration segment. Chris Wallace allowed the segment to digress from immigration to save Trump.
If Trump loses, he can blame Anne Coulter who led the opposition to Trump building a winning position on immigration.
Allowing the Democrats to import millions of third world voters over the past 50 years is not without consequences.
Trump has been the hungriest, most active and incisive political candidate I've seen in the last 25 years.
Every debate performance has improved.
He's on top of the breaking wikileak, O'Keefe and FBI revelations. He takes advantage of political opportunities--Mexico, Matthew, Haiti--to name just a few. He's everywhere. Hillary is nowhere to be seen, unless she struggling to ascend a flight of stairs, or falling into a van.
What a contrast with a feeble, lying pasty politician.
Amen! We should humbly pray for our country. Ask God for His guidance.
I don’t believe anyone like those unskew the polls crowd but I do believe in Helmut Norpoth!!! LOL
I saw the first 3 minutes of See BS News last night in which Scott Pelley and three "serious commentators" talked about how Trump is down by 6 points, and no Presidential candidate has ever come back from that kind of deficit. I immediately remembered this statistic. Of course, I'm not a "serious commentator". I'm just a peasant.
Only way that will happen is if Trump runs ahead of his statewide total in Vigo County, IN.
I’m expecting Trump to carry IN with better than 60%.
“if the actual turnout does not match the historical data, the result will be skewed. The pollster may try to make a better prediction by “adjusting” these numbers to make their prediction more accurate or to try to change public opinion.”
The easy way to solve this problem is to release the data with the weighting prominently displayed. Then release the results with various other weightings. Stating you assumptions for you conclusions is research methodology 101.
1980 Poll Numbers
October/November
Reagan Carter Anderson
40% 44% 9%
39% 45% 9%
47% 44% 8%
Actual Result
51% 41% 7%
Difference between actual result and final poll
+4% -3% -1%
Read more: http://www.headlineoftheday.com/#ixzz4NfdiLhpF
Reagan was down by 12 in last batch of polls in 1980.
At the current time, Trump is down by 6.
And we’re reading stories he knows he’s lost and its all over.
Cuz no one has come back from the political graveyard.
Oh yeah - Larry Hogan and Matt Bevin did it recently in 2014.
“I just can’t understand her support. Is it her long list of achievements? Her charisma and winning personality? He intriguing original ideas? Her sterling integrity? What??”
All of the above. JUST KIDDING! It’s because she has a “D” behind her name, and no matter what monstrous act she has committed, she is automatically forgiven and voted for by every Democrat voter alive (and plenty who are not alive). The Democrat party is the official party of CORRUPTION and I fear it will always be so.
According to Gallup, party ID split in 2014 was 33 Ds, 31 Rs and 35 I.
This years polls show 10 to 14 times more Ds than Rs in the electorate when in real life, its almost close to an even split.
That’s how you lie with statistics in oversampled D+ polls.
The clue is in what Hillary’s henchman Fallon let slip a few days ago - “we expect the polls to tighten significantly as the election gets closer” - they know the polls are rigged and that this is and will be a much closer election than they’re trying to let on - eventually all the rigging in the world won’t be able to hide Trump’s ascendency......
The clue is in what Hillary’s henchman Fallon let slip a few days ago - “we expect the polls to tighten significantly as the election gets closer” - they know the polls are rigged and that this is and will be a much closer election than they’re trying to let on - eventually all the rigging in the world won’t be able to hide Trump’s ascendency......
she is scared or she would have skipped the debate and been home safely pooping in the bus or ambulance van.
II Chronicles 7:14 a must do for Christians!
(play it loud!)
And they routinely under-represent Independents, who by most studies are going by anywhere from 5% to 15% for Trump - an additional advantage they are denying to Trump....
I was five.
“Go visit a Walmart or a downtown area of a city. You’ll see a whole lot of strange folks that you would cross the street to get away from. Those are the ones voting for Hillary. Can’t trust them. And there are a bunch of them.”
BUMP.
I think the average length of an American memory is about fifteen minutes these days.
You have me by thirteen years. But I recall arguing with a friend about Nixon/Humphrey in ‘68. Ancient history to my 26 year old kids.
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.