Posted on 08/01/2016 8:27:01 PM PDT by LS
Going for the black vote is a waste of time. He should go after Hispanics with small business and job opportunities.
Kahn is a lawyer, a democrat and a muslim...
I wouldn’t pee on him if he was on fire.
The reason we should ignore ALL polls, good or bad, is because they make us complacent.
Bred it consistently polled as losing. Massive voter turn out changed that. That is all that counts
Get Out The Vote
Fred, your post is a great explanation of polling. Every Freeper should read it. I personally think the turnout models this year are going to be way off. I’m sure most pollsters think that a 2008/2012 based turnout model is the way to go, but I don’t think Hillary is going to get anywhere near the black/hispanic support Obama did. Not saying it’s going to go for Trump. I think a lot will stay home. Also, Trump is going to get support from white voters, especially middle aged and older white voters, in unprecedented numbers. Groups like Bikers for Trump and the alt right are registering old white guys who’ve never voted before by the tens of thousands. Those guys aren’t the type to answer a poll and, even if they do answer, are unlikely to make make it through a traditional likely voter screen, so they won’t be counted.
2008 was hard to poll because of the first black candidate, so polls using 2000/2004 turnout models oversampled McCain’s support. 2016 will be even more difficult.
As you know, a poll is only as good as its turnout model, and recent polls have done a lousy job at predicting who is actually going to vote, Brexit being the most recent example.
Good post, LS...
I have gotten to the point that I simply don’t even look at poll results any more. Looking at the internals of polls (when they are available) is enough to make me invalidate nearly all of them.
I see polls as being political tools, commissioned to give a certain result, knowing full well that the vast (overwhelming) majority of people who read the results of them don’t have any idea of what the internals of a given poll mean with respect to results.
People like us look at the poll that came out today, take it apart, and say “Hey! This poll is no better than an stupid Internet poll on a website!” and 95% of the people we might say that to simply show signs of having their eyes glaze over before squinting their eyes and saying “Now, what poll was that?”
You realize they don’t have any idea how the poll was run, and often don’t even remember where it came from. All they remember is “X is leading in the polls”.
Sigh. I have tried as hard as I can to remain educated on the issues, studied as much history as I can to build logical and historical underpinnings for my stance on issues, only to realize I am living in a fantasy world.
For every one of me out there, there are 20 people casting votes who have been glued to the tube watching CBC Nightly News, and that is their reality.
This isn’t a knock on your analysis, which is on the money and appropriate. It is just me being frustrated.
LOL. The love is great with this one...
Good memory. And my post analysis on turnout was exactly right. OH was lost by less than 300,000 votes after Bush won it in 224 by 117,000 votes. So really a mere 135,000 vote flip occurred.
Where did they come from?
A good indicator was the very numbers several of us were told over and over again were the key—”early votes.”
These were up about 5% for Rs in OH, down about 3% for Ds. But OH has a little known law that anyone who doesn’t vote in a primary is automatically put into “independent” status. No other states that I know of do this. So large numbers of independents were really Dems who didn’t vote in the non-competitive primaries.
Even with all that, the undecideds broke for Zero at the last minute. ROMNEY LED in one of the final polls, was tied in two, was only down one in others.
Pretty much validates my post. Thanks for supporting it.
Well, Trump down about 4 with women. All he needs from “minorities” is 10% of blacks to beat McCain, Romney, and pretty much tie Bush in 2004 (11%). He needs about 27% from Hispanics.
So it’s not like Cankles has all these voters.she has a percent lead.
Agree but it sounds like this poll, then, better captures true “likely” voters than any other. That’s the key. We’ll see.
Since 1996, almost every cycle ONE poll was pretty good at really capturing the race. One year it was Zogby, another year Rasmussen, another 538. Maybe this is USC’s year.
Yep-—but whet’s interesting is that going back to 1996 it seems a different pollster captures the right formula.
I think polls also have a new bias that is not understood yet. What demographic is most likely to still have a land line telephone?
I used to get polling calls on my land line. I no longer have a land line and I do not answer cell phone calls from unknown numbers. In effect, I can no longer be polled.
Correct. I got polled 2-3 times when I had a land,ine. Not once since (5 years).
“Kahn is rapidly becoming a liability to Killary as the hits on him keep on coming. He is getting torn apart.”
I hope that Kahn is getting ripped apart in places where low info voters will see it. If he’s only being dissected on talk radio and in conservative cyberspace, it’ll do little good.
“Kahn is rapidly becoming a liability to Killary as the hits on him keep on coming. He is getting torn apart.”
By whom?
Britebart?
Daily Caller?
Conservative Treehouse?
Hannity is running with this.
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.