Dante
"The Libido for the Ugly"
Anyone Remember UnSkewed Polls [.] Com? I do.
Hillary Clinton 87.6% chance of wining versus Donald Trump 12.3% chance of winning
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo
The Polls Aren’t Skewed: Trump Really Is Losing Badly
We’ve reached that stage of the campaign. The back-to-school commercials are on the air, and the “unskewing” of polls has begun — the quadrennial exercise in which partisans simply adjust the polls to get results more to their liking, usually with a thin sheen of math-y words to make it all sound like rigorous analysis instead of magical thinking.
If any of this sounds familiar — and if I sound a little exasperated — it’s probably because we went through this four years ago. Remember UnSkewedPolls.com? (The website is defunct, but you can view an archived picture of it here.) ( UnSkewed Polls -- erasing the bias to show an accurate picture of politics )
The main contention of that site and others like it was that the polls had too many Democratic respondents in their samples. Dean Chambers, who ran the site, regularly wrote that the polls were vastly undercounting independents and should have used a higher proportion of Republicans in their samples. But in the end, the polls underestimated President Obama’s margin.
Now the unskewers are back, again insisting that pollsters are “using” more Democrats than they should...
Hillary Clinton 87.6% chance of wining versus Donald Trump 12.3% chance of winning
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo
The Polls Aren’t Skewed: Trump Really Is Losing Badly
We’ve reached that stage of the campaign. The back-to-school commercials are on the air, and the “unskewing” of polls has begun — the quadrennial exercise in which partisans simply adjust the polls to get results more to their liking, usually with a thin sheen of math-y words to make it all sound like rigorous analysis instead of magical thinking.
If any of this sounds familiar — and if I sound a little exasperated — it’s probably because we went through this four years ago. Remember UnSkewedPolls.com? (The website is defunct, but you can view an archived picture of it here.) ( UnSkewed Polls -- erasing the bias to show an accurate picture of politics )
The main contention of that site and others like it was that the polls had too many Democratic respondents in their samples. Dean Chambers, who ran the site, regularly wrote that the polls were vastly undercounting independents and should have used a higher proportion of Republicans in their samples. But in the end, the polls underestimated President Obama’s margin.
Now the unskewers are back, again insisting that pollsters are “using” more Democrats than they should...
