Here’s why Trump will come out of health-reform debacle relatively unscathed

[Colonel Hogan]

I don't know if the polls can be believed. They couldn't be believed before he was elected either. The last one I saw, an NBC poll a few days ago, was heavily weighted with Democrats, only 23% Republicans polled.

Dude, don't ever make that argument. It only makes you look ridiculous. Here is an article about the poll differentials on October 30, 2016. It was anywhere from a 1% to 3% race. Clinton's 2% popular vote "victory" proves the statistical accuracy of the poll data within the acceptable margin of error, not their unreliability. No poll at that late date was likely to show the upcoming electoral vote swing in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan.

http://www.newsweek.com/presidential-election-polls-october-30-2016-515091

 

[spacekowboy]

You realize, of course, that kind of argues against the 36% figure.

I have lost all faith in my fellow Americans.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

I have lost all faith in my fellow Americans.

Was that before or after you joined this forum?

 

[phrodeau]

Dude, don't ever make that argument. It only makes you look ridiculous. Here is an article about the poll differentials on October 30, 2016. It was anywhere from a 1% to 3% race. Clinton's 2% popular vote "victory" proves the statistical accuracy of the poll data within the acceptable margin of error, not their unreliability. No poll at that late date was likely to show the upcoming electoral vote swing in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan.

http://www.newsweek.com/presidential-election-polls-october-30-2016-515091

Don't count on it never coming up again. He'll carry that thought for as long as Trump does.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Dude, don't ever make that argument. It only makes you look ridiculous. Here is an article about the poll differentials on October 30, 2016. It was anywhere from a 1% to 3% race. Clinton's 2% popular vote "victory" proves the statistical accuracy of the poll data within the acceptable margin of error, not their unreliability. No poll at that late date was likely to show the upcoming electoral vote swing in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan.

http://www.newsweek.com/presidential-election-polls-october-30-2016-515091

Sorry Colonel. Go back to the summer polls and our comments.

They were being over-sampled to dishearten Republicans. We stated it at the time and we also stated that a week or two before the election, they would suddenly get more "correct" because then, and only then would reputations be on the line because those would be the polls that they would point to to "prove" their methodologies work.

As with everything else, most polling, especially that done in partnership with media has itself become politicized and corrupt.

 

[Ishmael]

Sorry Colonel. Go back to the summer polls and our comments.

They were being over-sampled to dishearten Republicans. We stated it at the time and we also stated that a week or two before the election, they would suddenly get more "correct" because then, and only then would reputations be on the line because those would be the polls that they would point to to "prove" their methodologies work.

As with everything else, most polling, especially that done in partnership with media has itself become politicized and corrupt.

Precisely!!!! Many of those polls are commissioned to make news in and of themselves. You really have to dig into the questions and how they're worded to extract any meaningful information.

Polls are being used to do 'bandwagon' marketing these days. To mold public opinion, not to gauge it.

Ishmael

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

They're basically nationalized push polls working to advance the Progressive agenda and agents of change.