Posted on 02/01/2016 3:28:59 PM PST by Kaslin
With all the attention generated by the 2016 election, political spectators obsess over the steady diet of polls served up by the media. Poll numbers are hailed by victors, criticized by losers. Some critics are from campaigns, some criticisms come from political celebrities on social media. Do these criticisms hold any merit?
No, reminds the American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR), the leading professional association of public opinion researchers. The professional association is leading an outreach effort to educate and demystify issues surrounding political polling:
An important part of this effort is to tell an old story again-and again. Despite headline-grabbing claims to the contrary, studies continue to show that the average error rate in candidate preference polls by the leading survey organizations was less than 3 percentage points in 2014.
Here's the real headline: The accuracy of election surveys has been virtually unchanged over the past 20 years.
Now, some polls are poorly constructed and poorly executed. Some are "online" polls which are not scientific -- they aren't based on a random sample, and no "special sauce" will make them so. People who participate in an online poll (really, a panel) are compensated. The whole thing is more like a giant focus group.
AAPOR says:
The proliferation of pre-election polls using a wide variety of methodologies, some less rigorous than others, makes it expected that a few high-profile mistakes will occur. We urge the media and the public to not lose focus on the usefulness of pre-election polling and to ask questions about methodology when they disseminate and consider poll data.
Perhaps the first test of the 2016 political season will be the results tonight from the Iowa caucus. And it seems especially relevant to point out that polling for a caucus is a different breed than polling for a primary: it's much harder.
First, we have the issue of turnout in caucuses.
In a primary, voters have options like early voting, voting by mail, or showing up on election day and voting in their precinct. But in a caucus, a voter has to commit to showing up at the right place, and cannot just drop an envelope in a post office box. It's an hours-long commitment.
Caucus voters are surrounded by electioneering, which is not permitted at polling places for a primary election. A poll respondent will be confronted by all sorts of attempts to dissuade them from their choice at a caucus, but in a primary that's much less likely. Maybe you told a pollster one thing, but after a few hours of the caucus, you change your mind. It's difficult to measure that precisely.
When you ask people on the phone if they are planning to show up for a caucus, they like to say "yes" -- even if they aren't going to attend. This is "social desirability bias."
And then there's the various campaign ground games. Some candidates benefit from low turnout, some benefit from high turnout. Are new people being approached to participate, armed with information to show up and caucus? Will there be an avalanche of new participants at the Iowa caucus? We don't know (2012 exit polls say 38% of Iowa caucusers were first-timers), especially this year, when the conventional wisdom suggests there's a group of politically alienated people energized by Donald Trump.
How many of them should be added to the mix? It's hard to say. Are they being effectively "turned-out," or just saying so on the phone? Also hard to know.
Tonight, of course, we will have a better idea of how accurate the pollsters have been. But one thing's for sure -- the media won't be giving up their obsession with polls and their accuracy anytime soon, so be on alert.
Wonder the difference in our expectations of OUR next President and the actual results.
Would be interested in knowing what Trump’s supporters actually expect.
Take care.........pilgrim
NY Times: Trump ‘Solid Bet’ to Win GOP Nomination
NewsMax ^ | 2/01/2016 | Bill Hoffman
Posted on 2/1/2016, 3:21:38 PM by GilGil
The New York Times considers Donald Trump a solid bet to win the Republican presidential nomination with a slightly better than 50 percent chance of becoming the GOP’s candidate.
Mr. Trump is the clear favorite, Justin Wolfers, a professor of economics and public policy at the University of Michigan, writes in The Times Upshot column.
Basing his opinion on PredictWise.com, which tracks political prediction markets where traders bet on who will win, Wolfers says Trump leads with 51 percent, followed by Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida with 33 percent.
Much farther behind are Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas in third place with 8 percent and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush in fourth with 6 percent.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3391557/posts
Would you answer an Interrogative Sentence?
I understand you enthusiasm to have Mr. Trump elected but with respect what does your post relate to my post?
In the general election I will probably vote for Mr. Trump. A lot of his supporters are making me question that.
Take care.........Great Grampa pilgrim
Still am interested in the following.
What Trump’s supporters actually expect him to do as OUR President?
Simple question and really would like to know.
I feel that post was my answer!
What about that recent KY poll for Governor. The polls were way off on that one.
You expect him as President to :
NY Times: Trump ‘Solid Bet’ to Win GOP Nomination
NewsMax ^ | 2/01/2016 | Bill Hoffman
Posted on 2/1/2016, 3:21:38 PM by GilGil
The New York Times considers Donald Trump a solid bet to win the Republican presidential nomination with a slightly better than 50 percent chance of becoming the GOP’s candidate.
Mr. Trump is the clear favorite, Justin Wolfers, a professor of economics and public policy at the University of Michigan, writes in The Times Upshot column.
Basing his opinion on PredictWise.com, which tracks political prediction markets where traders bet on who will win, Wolfers says Trump leads with 51 percent, followed by Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida with 33 percent.
Much farther behind are Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas in third place with 8 percent and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush in fourth with 6 percent.
Make America Great Again.
Good!
Amy specificity?
LOL!!!
Not “Amy’s specificity”
Any specificity!
Would also expect him to keep breathing.
Everything you ever wanted to know about the accuracy of political polling you can learn from President Howard Dean.
Irrelevant. Whoever wins, conditions in this country will get worse. Count on it.
An average of the most recent polls just before a presidential election gets pretty much every state correct.
Truth, Justice, and the American Way.
Easy.
#1 Build the wall.
#2 Stop Islamic immigration
#3 Renegotiate trade deals with China, Japan, Mexico
#4 Streamline government the way a businessman would
#5 Immediately improve American stature, prestige, and power around the world just by the presence of someone who cares about those things.
That’s a great year one. I’ll worry about year two later.
You know I ‘kinda’ expected this.
I have read his statements, I respectfully asked a simple question. Did not ask what Trump believes but since you have no definite expectations I will accept that.
I expect Donald Trump to continue being himself, in other words I have no idea what he will do. Just asked what you expected of him.
Won’t bother to ask you again. Do not wish to agitate you. :)
Thanks.
Take care.........pilgrim
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.