The Polls, reliable?

In the days leading up to the election polls jumped around they were different polls and most of them were pretty darn close

 

hell no polls aren't reliable they purposely skew their polls by one example over sampling democrats

here I will give you a recent prime example

Fake Polls? How CNN And ABC Are Fudging The Numbers To Tank Trump’s Favorability

Two polls released Tuesday — one from ABC and a second from CNN — tout Donald Trump as being the most unfavorable incoming president in modern history — yet on second look, the data(*)is clearly boosted by the pollers’ decision to oversample Democrats.

According to Gallup, 28 percent of Americans identify themselves as a Republican, while 25 percent identify as a Democrat.
Despite this information, eight more percent of participants in both(*)the(*)ABC and CNN(*)polls identified as Democrats, leading to an 11 point swing in partisanship breakdown off the national average.
ABC’s poll sampled 1,005 adults across the nation. However, partisan breakdown shows that only 23 percent of(*)participants identified as Republican.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/17/f...rs-to-tank-trumps-favorability/#ixzz4WbuiIexV

 

it was the state polls that mattered not the national polls because we don't elect by national voter count and those state polls especially in Pennsylvania Wisconsin and Michigan those states that Trump won that cost Clinton the election where all off by 5 to 9 points

 

Using RCP's polling averages, they showed Clinton winning the popular vote by 3 points with a margin of error of plus or minus 3 points. Clinton won the nationwide popular vote by 2.1 points which was within the margin of error. RCP's average missed the final result by just 0.9, nine tenths of a point. Pretty darn accurate, but RCP averages polls which which tends to limit the more outrageous ones. Most of the polls taken right before election day did fall within their margin of error.

The fact Trump won the electoral college which had nothing to do with the polls or polling averages nationwide, everyone seems to think the polls were way off. They weren't, they pretty much called the actual results. A popular vote win by Hillary Clinton.

If one looks at the last three polls taken in Pennsylvania, one had Clinton winning by 4, one had Trump winning by 1 and the third predicted a tie. That averaged out to a 1.6 point Clinton win, Trump won by 0.7% But the margin of error was plus or minus four points. The 2.3 point difference was once again well within the margin of error.

Michigan was the same, in fact the last poll taken on the 6th showed Trump winning Michigan by 2 points. Where I think most people tend to do is ignore the margin of error. That and ignoring the fact Trump won the electoral college, but lost the popular vote. It seems a lot of folks are equating the two as the same, they are not. The polls predicted Hillary would win the popular vote and she did.

 

Polls: Hillary by a landslide!

The liberals here know this. They posted a million threads with them leading up to the election.

 

Thank you. I was hoping someone would expose this.

 

BS. She won the popular vote for one reason, CA.

 

Pollster and there partnering networks do this an attempt to mold public opinion the group think concept saying to the public see look how many disapprove of Trump why do you continue to approve of him

 

it is just to dam bad we don't elect our president by nation wide popular vote there for making those polls irrelevant we elect our presidents by state wide popular vote and if you go look at the polls in the states Trump won that according to the polls didn't have a chance in. the states Clinton thought she had in the bag according to those very same polls
the states of Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan those polls where off between 5 and 9 points

 

The polls prior to the actual election had Hillary winning more electoral votes than Trump. Even the media itself said exit polling couldn't be trusted on election night. That put everything they said and did into doubt. They were as shocked as anyone when state after state went to Trump. Some of us warned people the polls this cycle were way off, but were told we were stupid and Hillary was going to be president. I still laugh out loud at pictures of crying liberals...

 

BS? Last time I looked California was still part of the U.S. Fact is when polling they include California. Are you saying the polls should only include 49 states? Fact is the polls got the popular vote right. Right within their margin of error. That is all that can be expected of them.

 

Wisconsin, granted. Michigan, polls from 4-6 November. Trafalgar Trump by 2 on the 6th, On the 4th PPP had Clinton by 5 and Gravis had Clinton by 5. Averaging the three, the polls showed Clinton winning by 2.6 points with an margin of error of plus or minus 3 points. Trump won by 0.3% which means the polls were off by 2.9 points or just within their margin of error to consider them accurate.

Pennsylvania polls 3-5 November, Pennsylvania wasn't polled after the 5th. Trafalgar Trump by 1, Harper tie, Morningcall Clinton by 4 for an average of Clinton by 1 point. Trump won by 0.7%. The polls had a margin of error of plus or minus 4 points. The difference was 1.7 points or well within the margin of error.

Just like the nationwide polls had Clinton winning by 3 points, she won the popular vote by 2.2 points. an 0.8% difference well again within the margin of error of plus or minus 3 points.

With Wisconsin most of the polls were done in October with only two done in November. on the first of November, Loras Clinton by six and on the second, Remington, Clinton by 8. The week leading up to the election no polling was done. There was really no new data on Wisconsin at all. Perhaps the polling firms decided since Clinton had a big lead in their polls, no more was need. If so, they screwed the pooch. The fact is the final week of the general campaign the trend was going Trump. By no polling in Wisconsin, that trend was missed.

But overall, those polling firms and polls conducted up to election day, conducted in the final week of the campaign without a doubt showed things going Trump's way.

Since presidential elections are in reality 50 separate state elections, nationwide polls mean little. They let one know the mood of the nation on any particular date, but nationwide polls do not let us know what each state is thinking or their mood. I think the media ignored those two polls that showed Trump winning Pennsylvania and Michigan, Trafalgar just happened to be the last poll taken in those states and Trafalgar showed Trump winning them. The newest data to emerge was the correct data, the old data wrong.

 

What I'm say is polls aren't settled science & shouldn't be used, especially by news org's, as if they are. I hear pundit after pundit sighting Trump's unpopularity based on polling, but I have yet to hear any analysis of political leaning sample size that got the results they're claiming as "fact". Why is that? And, they did the same thing leading up to the election. How did that work out?

 

Unintentionally or intentionally, polls have been wrong. It isn't just our media which cannot be trusted, but it includes the polls too. When the polls meet reality, and the polls do not reflect it, one has to take them with a big grain of salt.

For me, whether intentional or unintentional, the media worked hard to beat trump and support Hillary. Their attempts seems to be mixed in with the polls, and I do not think this mere coincidence folks. So if you think you can trust the media to give you a factual reality in regards to trump, you better think again. You will get what you are seeing now. An outright propaganda war waged against the 45th president of the US. Trump is about to send shots broadside against globalization, which has hollowed out and will continue to hollow out our once great industrial nation, until it is reversed and the damage mended.

 

As I stated, the problem with the news organizations is they put out the poll numbers as if they are gospel. They do not report on the margin of error of the poll which in the nationwide polls which showed Clinton up by three, she could be up by as many as six or the race tied. The media hammers away at the three and that is not what the three means when the margin of error of the poll is taken into consideration.

When looking at polls, the first thing I check out is the margin of error. The reliable polls give it. In small print it will say something akin to "The results of this poll will be within plus or minus three points of the final results 95% of the time." So two different polls could be considered accurate if on showed Trump and Clinton tied and the other Clinton ahead of Trump by 5 points and Clinton won the popular vote by 2.3 points, each would be within the margin of error of plus or minus three points.

Yes, the media is at fault for not explaining exactly what is meant by the numbers in each poll.

 

Pennsylvania
Trafalgar is a republican polling firm Morning Call had Clinton up by 6 trump won (rounding off) by 1 that makes Morning Call off by 7 out side the margin of error by 4

Wisconsin
the RCP average was Clinton 6.5 last poll was taken by Remington research on 11/2 had Clinton up by 8 going with the RCP average those polls was off by 6 points out side the margin of error by 3

Michigan
last poll taken was by PPP had Clinton up by 5 on 11/4 another was taken one day earlier 11/3 by FOX 2 Detroit/Mitchell also had Clinton up by 5 Trump one by .3 both off by 5 outside the margin of error by 2