Posted on 11/12/2024 10:27:15 AM PST by EnderWiggin1970
Every four years, presidential opinion polling reliably causes regime media to misplace their poop. But after the actual polling places close and report, the stenographer journalists generally don’t expose which—if any—of these influential prognosticators should be publicly grilled for fouling up.
A current exception proves the rule.
On the weekend before Election Day, pollster Ann Selzer unleashed an Iowa survey for the Des Moines Register purporting to show Kamala Harris leading Donald Trump by 3 points in a state Harris supposedly had no business winning. The “late shift toward Harris,” declared the Des Moines Register, was happening because of older women dumping Trump. An editorial page writer from the Arizona Republic warned the “sudden and potentially seismic” numbers “change the nature of the national race.” MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow spent 11 minutes gleefully promoting Selzer and calling her the “gold standard.” The liberal ladies of The View on ABC celebrated. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg X-posted “Iowa, you have shocked the nation.”
On it went, but Ms. GoldStandard™ missed the Iowa call by two touchdowns, plus a pair of two-point conversions. Trump won Iowa by 13 points, ran the table in the battleground states, and silenced Electoral College critics by winning a popular vote majority.
(Excerpt) Read more at capitalresearch.org ...
Where is the histograms of how all polling institutions reported thought out the last year so we can witness the fraud first hand
Good article.
We need a class action lawsuit against all these folks for gross negligence and malpractice.
Just before the election Disney bought 538. They removed the two honest polling orgs from the pool so they could manufacture a late surge for Harris which they did. This helped rat turnout if nothing else. Disney is probably the biggest single weapon the Dems have.
A large group of people need to pay for all of the lies
The customer is always right.....WHOEVER PAYS FOR THE POLL GETS THE RESULTS THEY WANT............
Venn Diagrams would be better...............🙄
Something severe needs to happen to ghem.
Who was the guy - played up as an expert - who kept saying on one of the MSM programs that never, in the history of polling, did pollsters make a polling error by over/under sampling in the same direction in three election cycles in a row?
Good point. In all three Trump elections, pollsters underestimated the actual vote for him.
I’ve never understood the poll thing. Polls do not affect the way I vote. I vote based on the candidate and their policies and what they will do.
What the heck. A person sees the polls favor someone and so then they vote for that person? Or is it all about trying to influence the donors?
I said 3 years ago Trump would KO the Democrats in a blowout win in 2024. I remained confident until the election.
Some people can read and understand the mood of the people. Some people need polls.
These pollsters don’t bother me.. I respect Baris and a few others - but mostly I ignore the polls and watch Trump’s demeanor - I could tell that he was confident..
What is the agenda of the article?
“So, the “All the news that’s fit to print” newspaper failed to call the winner correctly in six of the seven battlegrounds.”
to discredit polling by main stream media. They are purveyors of fake news.
“Polling” is not to inform, but to influence.
One might call these ‘products’ as bunk or even hokum.
There’s a big difference between being a pollster and a water boy. Most pollsters and MSM did little to inform the public. Instead, they chose to carry the Biden/Harris water bucket.
So the Democrat Selzer went flat. But the “experts” will be back in business for the next election.
In light of these results, it’s interesting to note that in the predictions markets (where people bet on the outcome of the election) one fellow made $48M betting on Trump. It turns out he wasn’t a random dumb-luck billionaire; he actually commissioned and ran his own polls using a superior methodology, that showed him a blowout was coming. His method involved asking those polled “who are your neighbors voting for?” rather than asking them directly whom they were voting for, and it correctly indicated the eventual result.
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.