Posted on 08/22/2016 3:21:56 PM PDT by orchestra
By now most CTH readers are familiar with the more notoriously biased polling manipulators.
One of those is Patrick Murray from Monmouth University [@PollsterPatrick on Twitter].
If you want to know where his political affiliations lie, you only need to read his twitter feed. Murray has also been on Fox News with Bill O’Reilly several times selling his polling results to the unwitting audience.
Today, Monmouth via Patrick Murray presents a presidential poll of Ohio voters. The actual raw data (pdf available here – see pg, 6 and 7) showed Donald Trump with a lead in the result; however, Murray changed the data through weighting to show Hillary Clinton with a lead.
“GOUSAAMER114” pointed out the manipulation:
Monmouth just announced that Clinton leads Trump 43-39 in Ohio. But Pollster Patrick actually laid out what he did on pages 6 and 7 of the PDF.
He sampled 402 voters. In the unweighted sample, the split was 33.3R/29.3D/35.6I. With that split, Trump leads Clinton 41-39 in Ohio. But Pollster Patrick re-weighted it to a 29R/33D/37I split. Nothing else was re-weighted.
It’s obvious Murray didn’t expect to be called out on it – because when confronted with what he did, pollster Patrick Murray flat out lied.
(Excerpt) Read more at theconservativetreehouse.com ...
The poster may be correct. He is re-weighting the poll to account for massive voter fraud. This is Ohio after all, there is precident to justify this action. :)
He is re-weighting the poll so that it reflects the demographics of the expected turnout. No conspiracy here.
I wish there was more substance in the posted synopsis; no numbers at all.
Weighted numbers at link.
How is this not CRIMINAL FRAUD???
He is SELLING THIS FRAUDULENT POLL RIGHT??
A typical Monmouth poll is 15 questions or more.
It requires naivete on a cosmic scale to think that respondents - regardless of affiliation, likely voter status, etc. - are going to give thoughtful/honest/complete answers to every last question to a stranger on the phone. A thousand biases come into play, foremost among them a desire to please the pollster by giving PC answers.
Apart from sheer inaccuracy, this is a huge problem since it feeds the media’s Appeal To Majority fallacy.
402 people were polled.
33.3R/29.3D/35.6I.
But that particular split is not an accurate indication of how actual voters have split in the past.
In the past, dems have voted slightly more than pubbies.
So...following those numbers you extrapolate polled numbers, to what you would have if your entire voting population were polled.
It’s my understanding that there is no regulation of polling companies.
Criminal Fraud is Still Criminal Fraud regardless of WHAT YOU ARE SELLING!!! If you MISREPRESENT THE PRODUCT FOR PROFIT OR GAIN it is a FELONY!!!
Standard media cover up. Nothing to see here...
But, but, but just today, Mara Liasson said that Hillary was winning in all the Battleground states, including Ohio!
Dizzy Mara is in an alternate reality.
Depends on how you do the poll. If, as most pollsters do, you say at the outset, “We will interview 30% Rs 35% Ds, and 35% Is,” then you would be correct.
Another way to do it is to randomly get 400 likely voters and go with what the numbers tell you. Now, you MIGHT have gotten unlucky and by accident have gotten “too many” GOP, or in fact the randomness may have picked up a shift.
That was my point. It’s not difficult to write “Trump 41-39, changed to Clinton 43-39”
You may be right, but changes that end up with an eight-point shift in D/R/I breakdown is not typical by any means.
“He is re-weighting the poll so that it reflects the demographics of the expected turnout. No conspiracy here.”
Maybe and that is what I think are wrong with these polls. I don’t think you can reweigh the polls based on say the 2012 voting sample. I think there will be a lot of crossover votes for one example.
This pollster is well aware that there is most likely going to be a “Bradley Effect” with Trump’s vote along with an “Enthusiasm gag” between Clinton & Trump in Trump’s favor....yet he went back & switched things up when he did not like the results. I suppose he can fall back upon past elections....in this election IMO that’s more of an excuse than an honest reading of the results, but it gives him an “out” so it is what it is.
Propaganda kills.
Yup....and we do indeed live in a delusional culture with most younger people no longer having any critical thinking ability.
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.