A Poll of 2016 Polling, F- for FOX and Major Media

JimBowie1958

Old Fogey
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
60,880
Reaction score
12,405
Points
2,220
Location
Fredericksburg, VA
FOX has been notoriously inaccurate in polling, like most of the polls by major media sources.

In this one most recently on Americans for/against impeachment, they once again over sample Democrat voters and get a predictable slim 51% majority favoring impeachment.

upload_2019-10-10_9-48-36.png


FOX also had Clinton winning Michigan by 4% in 2016, over sampling Dems by 5%,

FOX had Clinton up by 4% in Florida but had an even sample in that poll,
in Pennsylvania I don't see a FOX poll after April but the rest had on average Clinton up almost 3%.

In Ohio, FOX doesn't keep that poll any more, but they had Trump up by 5%, he won by 8%.

In Wisconsin FOX had Clinton up by 14%, but that was in March, the average had Hillary winning by more than 6%, and Trump won that state.
Iowa polls on average showed Trump winning by 3%, but he won that state by 9.5%. FOX doesn't have polls available for that state on RealClearPolitics.

In North Carolina, FOX had Trump up by 5%, the average had him barely ahead by less than a 1% margin, but Trump won by 3.6%. FOX poll no longer available.

In Arizona, Virginia, and Nevada were all within a 3% margin.

So, if we average the accuracy of these ten swing state polls, FOX had an accuracy of being skewed 4% in favor of Democrats and usually this is due to over sampling Democrats, while national polls were off, on average by about 6% in swing states. The Trafalgar Group had the most accurate polls in swing states that they did poll, all of them within a 3% margin of error compared to actual vote results.

So when you read a FOX poll about trump, give him another 4% and if it is a major media poll, give him 5% and you are more likely to get something accurate.
 

kyzr

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2009
Messages
15,304
Reaction score
5,714
Points
350
Location
The AL part of PA
Whenever the "polls" say Trump is losing, please remember back in 2016, that the polls said that Trump had no way to win, Hillary had a 95% probability of winning!!

 
OP
JimBowie1958

JimBowie1958

Old Fogey
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
60,880
Reaction score
12,405
Points
2,220
Location
Fredericksburg, VA
With the exception of Tucker and Gutfeld, Fox is unwatchable.
I record three shows, Ingraham, Tucker and Hannity. I love Lou Dobbs, but he is so predictable after watching him for five years, I feel like I know what he is going to say. Hannity is predictable in how he reacts, but he usually brings plenty of guests with new information, like this one fellow last night that talked about how Nike basically runs the NBA.

Ingraham has interesting guests on, but FOX is going liberal, like is fairly predictable as soon as Murdocks sons take over completely.

Now I mostly watch One America News as they have a completely pro-Conservative slant to their reporting, but it balances the rest of the liberal pile of shyte being broadcast as 'news'.

Shep 'Skeleton' Smith is just pure horse crap.
 
OP
JimBowie1958

JimBowie1958

Old Fogey
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
60,880
Reaction score
12,405
Points
2,220
Location
Fredericksburg, VA

sealybobo

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
83,104
Reaction score
6,030
Points
1,845
Location
Michigan
Whenever the "polls" say Trump is losing, please remember back in 2016, that the polls said that Trump had no way to win, Hillary had a 95% probability of winning!!

That was a fluke. He won't be running against Hillary next time and I think a lot of people who didn't show up to vote in 2016 are sorry and they are going to show up and vote against Trump.

Trump got all the votes he is ever going to get in 2016. He hasn't won over any new voters. He has only enraged everyone else.

Oh, and he's a criminal. Who's going to re elect such a criminal?

Two foreign-born associates of President Donald Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani are in law enforcement custody and have been indicted on federal campaign finance charges.

Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, who helped Giuliani investigate allegations against Joe Biden and his son Hunter, are accused of illegally funding American political campaigns. The Wall Street Journal, which first reported the arrests, said that Parnas and Fruman had donated to Trump’s campaign as well as a pro-Trump super PAC.
 

Toro

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2005
Messages
78,982
Reaction score
16,852
Points
2,180
Location
Surfing the Oceans of Liquidity
FOX has been notoriously inaccurate in polling, like most of the polls by major media sources.

In this one most recently on Americans for/against impeachment, they once again over sample Democrat voters and get a predictable slim 51% majority favoring impeachment.

View attachment 283839

FOX also had Clinton winning Michigan by 4% in 2016, over sampling Dems by 5%,

FOX had Clinton up by 4% in Florida but had an even sample in that poll,
in Pennsylvania I don't see a FOX poll after April but the rest had on average Clinton up almost 3%.

In Ohio, FOX doesn't keep that poll any more, but they had Trump up by 5%, he won by 8%.

In Wisconsin FOX had Clinton up by 14%, but that was in March, the average had Hillary winning by more than 6%, and Trump won that state.
Iowa polls on average showed Trump winning by 3%, but he won that state by 9.5%. FOX doesn't have polls available for that state on RealClearPolitics.

In North Carolina, FOX had Trump up by 5%, the average had him barely ahead by less than a 1% margin, but Trump won by 3.6%. FOX poll no longer available.

In Arizona, Virginia, and Nevada were all within a 3% margin.

So, if we average the accuracy of these ten swing state polls, FOX had an accuracy of being skewed 4% in favor of Democrats and usually this is due to over sampling Democrats, while national polls were off, on average by about 6% in swing states. The Trafalgar Group had the most accurate polls in swing states that they did poll, all of them within a 3% margin of error compared to actual vote results.

So when you read a FOX poll about trump, give him another 4% and if it is a major media poll, give him 5% and you are more likely to get something accurate.
State polls are less reliable than national polls because they are smaller, less frequent, and usually less reliable as the sampling methods aren't as good.

Most of the national polls in 2016 were within the margin of error. In the RCP averages, the average polls were off by 1.2%, which is in within the margin of error.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein

So if you're looking at national polls on impeachment, using state polls isn't a good analogy.
 

Oddball

Unobtanium Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2009
Messages
63,208
Reaction score
19,729
Points
2,260
Location
Drinking wine, eating cheese, catching rays
Hannity is predictable in how he reacts, but he usually brings plenty of guests with new information, like this one fellow last night that talked about how Nike basically runs the NBA..
Jason Whitlock....Tucker had him on Tuesday...Hannity can't even get fresh guests.

If I want the latest from Sara Carter, John Salomon, or Greg Jarrett, I can go to their websites and don't need to expose myself to Hannity's drearily stale and mind numbingly repetitive presentation.
 

Stratford57

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2014
Messages
8,429
Reaction score
8,243
Points
2,255
Location
Kievan Rus'
Today, the major outlets are almost all owned by six conglomerates. They can easily hide the truth or spread all kinds of lies simultaneously. And that's basically what we have been witnessing lately.

Big6:
The 6 Companies That Own (Almost) All Media [INFOGRAPHIC]

View attachment 283843
They are supposed to be in competition with each other, but instead they are all in cahoots.

Where is the FEC?
In other words, they all are in Soros' pocket.
 

Billy_Kinetta

Paladin of the Lost Hour
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
48,506
Reaction score
14,256
Points
2,210
FOX has been notoriously inaccurate in polling, like most of the polls by major media sources.

In this one most recently on Americans for/against impeachment, they once again over sample Democrat voters and get a predictable slim 51% majority favoring impeachment.

View attachment 283839

FOX also had Clinton winning Michigan by 4% in 2016, over sampling Dems by 5%,

FOX had Clinton up by 4% in Florida but had an even sample in that poll,
in Pennsylvania I don't see a FOX poll after April but the rest had on average Clinton up almost 3%.

In Ohio, FOX doesn't keep that poll any more, but they had Trump up by 5%, he won by 8%.

In Wisconsin FOX had Clinton up by 14%, but that was in March, the average had Hillary winning by more than 6%, and Trump won that state.
Iowa polls on average showed Trump winning by 3%, but he won that state by 9.5%. FOX doesn't have polls available for that state on RealClearPolitics.

In North Carolina, FOX had Trump up by 5%, the average had him barely ahead by less than a 1% margin, but Trump won by 3.6%. FOX poll no longer available.

In Arizona, Virginia, and Nevada were all within a 3% margin.

So, if we average the accuracy of these ten swing state polls, FOX had an accuracy of being skewed 4% in favor of Democrats and usually this is due to over sampling Democrats, while national polls were off, on average by about 6% in swing states. The Trafalgar Group had the most accurate polls in swing states that they did poll, all of them within a 3% margin of error compared to actual vote results.

So when you read a FOX poll about trump, give him another 4% and if it is a major media poll, give him 5% and you are more likely to get something accurate.
FOX News, under new management, has joined the ranks of the MSM. They are no more trustworthy than any other.
 
OP
JimBowie1958

JimBowie1958

Old Fogey
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
60,880
Reaction score
12,405
Points
2,220
Location
Fredericksburg, VA
State polls are less reliable than national polls because they are smaller, less frequent, and usually less reliable as the sampling methods aren't as good.
That is not true at all. Gravis samples over 15000, but the rest go on the same sample size as state polls, and since that is a bigger share of the state population than the general national population, it should be MORE accurate.

Most of the national polls in 2016 were within the margin of error. In the RCP averages, the average polls were off by 1.2%, which is in within the margin of error.
Clinton carried the national vote by 2.1%, the poll average was 3.3%, a greater than 50% margin in favor of Clinton.

If you deduct California's tainted vote, that whole state is a Democrat political machine that can and has manufactured massive numbers of votes with their vote 'harvesters' bringing in ballots off the street, Trump won the popular vote
Trump national votes:.........62,984,828
Trump California votes:........4,483,810
Trump vote outside CA.......58,501,018

Clinton national vote:..........65,853,514
Clinton California...................8,753,788
Clinton outside CA...............57,099,726

California's Mexican Cartel controlled political machine stuffed the ballot boxes in California by the millions with their 'vote harvesting' fraud and gave Clinton a 2 to 1 majority, which is horse crap. That was 6.5% OVER the RCP polling average of 22%. And the rest of the country shows that the polls were way over the top for Clinton by about 6% on average.
RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein


Yeah, still off by millions.

upload_2019-10-10_10-54-31.png


So if you're looking at national polls on impeachment, using state polls isn't a good analogy.
IF you are looking for accuracy, yes it is as it is minus the California machines control, and shows the inaccuracy of the polls in detail.
 
Last edited:
OP
JimBowie1958

JimBowie1958

Old Fogey
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
60,880
Reaction score
12,405
Points
2,220
Location
Fredericksburg, VA
FOX News, under new management, has joined the ranks of the MSM. They are no more trustworthy than any other.
If ti were not for their opinion shows in the evening, I wouldnt give FOX the time of day.

In daytime I watch OAN.
 

Jitss617

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2019
Messages
36,534
Reaction score
7,406
Points
1,140
David Shaw who (r) next to the poll ,, is no republican, he donated to Hillary Clinton..

It’s all fake news
 

sealybobo

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
83,104
Reaction score
6,030
Points
1,845
Location
Michigan
Claudette can laugh but consider this

How the Democrats Took Back Michigan
A Democratic tsunami in the midterms engulfed the state Trump won most narrowly in 2016—and could keep the state blue in 2020.

Trump had to win Michigan. And based on the 2018 midterms, he will not win Michigan in 2020. So he is going to lose this time.
 

sealybobo

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
83,104
Reaction score
6,030
Points
1,845
Location
Michigan
David Shaw who (r) next to the poll ,, is no republican, he donated to Hillary Clinton..

It’s all fake news
Lots of Republicans donated to Hillary. They thought she was going to win. I bet they didn't vote for her though.

And I bet if they gave her $100,000 they gave Trump 3 times as much.

Trump donated to Hillary's campaign when she ran against Barrack.
 

Jitss617

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2019
Messages
36,534
Reaction score
7,406
Points
1,140
David Shaw who (r) next to the poll ,, is no republican, he donated to Hillary Clinton..

It’s all fake news
Lots of Republicans donated to Hillary. They thought she was going to win. I bet they didn't vote for her though.

And I bet if they gave her $100,000 they gave Trump 3 times as much.

Trump donated to Hillary's campaign when she ran against Barrack.
Glad you agree the pollster voted for Hillary lol
 

sealybobo

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
83,104
Reaction score
6,030
Points
1,845
Location
Michigan
David Shaw who (r) next to the poll ,, is no republican, he donated to Hillary Clinton..

It’s all fake news
Lots of Republicans donated to Hillary. They thought she was going to win. I bet they didn't vote for her though.

And I bet if they gave her $100,000 they gave Trump 3 times as much.

Trump donated to Hillary's campaign when she ran against Barrack.
Glad you agree the pollster voted for Hillary lol
He probably didn't vote for Hillary. As I said, these rich republicans will give 3 dollars to the democrat and $7 to the Republican. That way no matter who wins, they have a friend in the white house.

This Graph Shows Which Political Party Corporate America Loves the Most

Look at Exxon. It gave 2.1 million. 36% of it went to Democrats and 63% went to Republicans because Republicans deny global warming.
 

Jitss617

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2019
Messages
36,534
Reaction score
7,406
Points
1,140
David Shaw who (r) next to the poll ,, is no republican, he donated to Hillary Clinton..

It’s all fake news
Lots of Republicans donated to Hillary. They thought she was going to win. I bet they didn't vote for her though.

And I bet if they gave her $100,000 they gave Trump 3 times as much.

Trump donated to Hillary's campaign when she ran against Barrack.
Glad you agree the pollster voted for Hillary lol
He probably didn't vote for Hillary. As I said, these rich republicans will give 3 dollars to the democrat and $7 to the Republican. That way no matter who wins, they have a friend in the white house.

This Graph Shows Which Political Party Corporate America Loves the Most

Look at Exxon. It gave 2.1 million. 36% of it went to Democrats and 63% went to Republicans because Republicans deny global warming.
Cool
Story thanks
 

Toro

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2005
Messages
78,982
Reaction score
16,852
Points
2,180
Location
Surfing the Oceans of Liquidity
State polls are less reliable than national polls because they are smaller, less frequent, and usually less reliable as the sampling methods aren't as good.
That is not true at all. Gravis samples over 15000, but the rest go on the same sample size as state polls, and since that is a bigger share of the state population than the general national population, it should be MORE accurate.

Most of the national polls in 2016 were within the margin of error. In the RCP averages, the average polls were off by 1.2%, which is in within the margin of error.
Clinton carried the national vote by 2.1%, the poll average was 3.3%, a greater than 50% margin in favor of Clinton.

If you deduct California's tainted vote, that whole state is a Democrat political machine that can and has manufactured massive numbers of votes with their vote 'harvesters' bringing in ballots off the street, Trump won the popular vote
Trump national votes:.........62,984,828
Trump California votes:........4,483,810
Trump vote outside CA.......58,501,018

Clinton national vote:..........65,853,514
Clinton California...................8,753,788
Clinton outside CA...............57,099,726

California's Mexican Cartel controlled political machine stuffed the ballot boxes in California by the millions with their 'vote harvesting' fraud and gave Clinton a 2 to 1 majority, which is horse crap. That was 6.5% OVER the RCP polling average of 22%. And the rest of the country shows that the polls were way over the top for Clinton by about 6% on average.
RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein


Yeah, still off by millions.

View attachment 283848

So if you're looking at national polls on impeachment, using state polls isn't a good analogy.
IF you are looking for accuracy, yes it is as it is minus the California machines control, and shows the inaccuracy of the polls in detail.
That's not how the math works.

Sampling is not based on a percentage for a large population. It's based on an absolute amount that is larger so that the expected variation around a mean declines. This can only happen with a sizeable sampling. Typically, national polls are around 1000 are accurate to a 3% error on a 95% confidence interval, i.e. they are accurate to within 3% 19 times out of 20. That also means 1 time out of 20, the polls will be outside of the error term, i.e. the difference between the actual and the polled results will be greater than 3%. The way to read a poll is that if one candidate is ahead by 2% with a 3% error, we would expect the actual result to be between a lead of 5% to being behind 1% with 95% confidence. In the RCP polling averages, Hillary was within in the margin of error on the national averages. If Hillary was ahead by 3.3%, we would expect the actual result would be a lead between 0.3% and 6.3%. In fact, it came in at 2.2%, which is within the national margin of error.

State polls usually aren't sampling 1000 people. They are usually sampling around 400 to 500, which means the margin of error is wider, somewhere between 4% and 5%. And since state polls are less frequent, we are less confident in them. If there national polls coming out every day, we are more confident in them if they are saying similar things.

People who are saying that polls aren't accurate simply don't understand the nature of polling and the math behind them. Polls try to predict the future, and nobody knows what will happen in the future with certainty. But they are usually pretty good at capturing what people are thinking at any given time.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top