What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Polling data is mostly accurate, even in the 2016 election.

U2Edge

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2012
Messages
5,153
Reaction score
1,134
Points
130
Polling data is mostly accurate, even in the 2016 election.

In the 2016 election, the polls correctly predicted the winner of the popular vote, Hillary Clinton.
The polls were also correct in predicting the winner in 46 out of 50 states in 2016.

The only states where polling failed to correctly predict the winner in 2016 were the following:

Wisconsin
Michigan
Pennsylvania
Nevada

NEVADA: The average of the polls by Real Clear Politics on the eve the election in 2016 showed Trump winning by a small margin with a lead of 0.8% over Hillary Clinton. It turned out that Clinton won the state by 2.4% points. Not a surprise though because when polling data show that candidates are within 3 percentage points of each other, it shows the state is a TOSS UP and could go either way. So despite the polling failing to predict the winner, it was a essentially a close election in Nevada and in the TOSS UP category, so this was no surprise and the polling despite failing to pick the winner was essentially accurate given how close it was.


PENNSYLVANIA: Just like Nevada, the polling on the eve of the election showed a close race in Pennsylvania. Hillary was predicted by polling to win by a slim margin of 1.9% points and instead lost by 0.7% points. Again, the polling lead was less than 3 percentage points making it essentially a TOSS UP. So even here, the polling was actually pretty accurate despite not picking the winner since the polling showed it was very close.



MICHIGAN: Hillary Clinton had a 3.4% point lead in the polling on the eve of the election in 2016. Above 3%, this was more than just a TOSS UP or close and Hillary should have won based on the average of the polls. TRUMP won by a very small margin of 0.3% points. You could the say the polls were wrong here unlike the above two states, but it was not a terrible error. It was likely do more to low voter turnout by Democrats, then any sort of switch to support for Trump.

WISCONSIN: This is only state where the polling data was wildly off the mark compared to the election results. The polls on the eve of the election predicted that Hillary Clinton would win by 6.5% points. She instead lost by 0.7% points. But this may not be as bad as it looks. In 2012, Mitt Romney had won 1,408,000 votes in Wisconsin and lost the state by 7 percentage points. Trump won Wisconsin in 2016, but won with 1,405,000 votes, 3,000 less than Mitt Romney in 2012. So how did this happen. A large number of Democratic voters on election day, for whatever the reason, did not make it to to the voting booth. So it was low Democratic voter turnout, rather than a switch to Trump or a surge in voter turnout for Trump that allowed Trump to win the state. Polling shows who people want to be President, but it does not measure who is going to actually show up and vote on election day. At least not in this particular case. So it could be argued that the polling for Wisconsin was accurate, but that unusual low voter turnout on the Democratic site skewed the results of the actual election compared to what was found in polling.


The 2016 election overall was a close election. The polling was actually very accurate and only failed to pick the winner in four out of 50 states. Two of those four states showed that they were so close that they were essentially TOSS UPS, could go either way. In the most off the mark state , WISCONSIN, when it came to polling, it appears the polls got it right, but many Democrats simply failed to make it to the voting booth that particular day.

It should be mention that the REAL CLEAR POLITICS average of polls correctly predicted the winner of the national election in 2004, 2008, 2012, and 2016. It also correctly predicted the winner of the election in the above four states in 2004, 2008, and 2012.

So the polling is very accurate, and when you see one candidate ahead of the other in the AVERAGE of the latest polling data, its most likely what you will see on election day. The only time when the polling failed to predict the winner in 2016 was just in four states. Two of them the polling show were so close that they were toss ups. In the other two, the polling was still accurate for several reasons, and it only failed to predict the outcome because of unusual low voter turnout by Democrats in those states.

So on the eve of this election in 2020, when the polls show one candidate ahead of the other by at least 3 percentage points or more nationally or in a particular state, you can be pretty sure that candidate will win nationally or in that state. Wisconsin was an aberration in 2016 and is unlikely to occur in 2020.

Joe Biden's current lead in the average of the polls nationally, and in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan from Real Clear Politics:

UNITED STATES:
BIDEN - +6.9%

WISCONSIN:
BIDEN - +6.4%

PENNSYLVANIA:
BIDEN - +5.0%

MICHIGAN:
BIDEN - +6.3%
 

TNHarley

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
76,527
Reaction score
26,795
Points
2,250
Lol sure they were
 
OP
U2Edge

U2Edge

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2012
Messages
5,153
Reaction score
1,134
Points
130
Lol sure they were

REAL CLEAR POLITICS takes the average of the latest polls.

In the REAL CLEAR POLITICS average of the latest polls, the polling predicted the winner of the state in 46 states out of 50 states correctly. It also correctly predicted the winner of the national popular vote.

The only states where the average of the polls, failed to correctly predict the winner was in these four states:

Nevada
Wisconsin
Michigan
Pennsylvania

Polling in Nevada and Pennsylvania showed a very close race, in the TOSS UP range. So it was not a surprise to see marginal victories for Hillary in Nevada and Trump in Pennsylvania. Its what the polling was essentially predicting.

The only states where polling was really off the mark was in Michigan and Wisconsin. The only reason it was off the mark was because Democrat voter turnout in these states was down heavily from 2012. It was not because more potential voters supported Trump. Trump actually got less votes than Romney in Wisconsin in 2012 and Romney lost Wisconsin by 7 percentage points.
 

TNHarley

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2012
Messages
76,527
Reaction score
26,795
Points
2,250
Lol sure they were

REAL CLEAR POLITICS takes the average of the latest polls.

In the REAL CLEAR POLITICS average of the latest polls, the polling predicted the winner of the state in 46 states out of 50 states correctly. It also correctly predicted the winner of the national popular vote.

The only states where the average of the polls, failed to correctly predict the winner was in these four states:

Nevada
Wisconsin
Michigan
Pennsylvania

Polling in Nevada and Pennsylvania showed a very close race, in the TOSS UP range. So it was not a surprise to see marginal victories for Hillary in Nevada and Trump in Pennsylvania. Its what the polling was essentially predicting.

The only states where polling was really off the mark was in Michigan and Wisconsin. The only reason it was off the mark was because Democrat voter turnout in these states was down heavily from 2012. It was not because more potential voters supported Trump. Trump actually got less votes than Romney in Wisconsin in 2012 and Romney lost Wisconsin by 7 percentage points.
As I said, sure those polls were "mostly accurate"
Thatd why the major ones were all wrong :lol:
 

rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
230,147
Reaction score
55,189
Points
2,190
The problem is that major polling concentrates mostly on useless national polls rather than the critical state polls.
Most state polls were halted two weeks prior to the election and missed the Comey generated shift.

They also have small sample sizes with large statistical ranges
 
OP
U2Edge

U2Edge

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2012
Messages
5,153
Reaction score
1,134
Points
130
Lol sure they were

REAL CLEAR POLITICS takes the average of the latest polls.

In the REAL CLEAR POLITICS average of the latest polls, the polling predicted the winner of the state in 46 states out of 50 states correctly. It also correctly predicted the winner of the national popular vote.

The only states where the average of the polls, failed to correctly predict the winner was in these four states:

Nevada
Wisconsin
Michigan
Pennsylvania

Polling in Nevada and Pennsylvania showed a very close race, in the TOSS UP range. So it was not a surprise to see marginal victories for Hillary in Nevada and Trump in Pennsylvania. Its what the polling was essentially predicting.

The only states where polling was really off the mark was in Michigan and Wisconsin. The only reason it was off the mark was because Democrat voter turnout in these states was down heavily from 2012. It was not because more potential voters supported Trump. Trump actually got less votes than Romney in Wisconsin in 2012 and Romney lost Wisconsin by 7 percentage points.
As I said, sure those polls were "mostly accurate"
Thatd why the major ones were all wrong :lol:

Your not looking at the actual data I posted. I'm not talking about INDIVIDUAL POLLS either for the nation or states. I'm talking about the AVERAGE of the latest polls on the eve of the election. Your simply citing individual polls. Its the AVERAGE of the latest polls, which shows how accurate or not they are.

Again, nationally, polling was correct in determining the winner. State polling was correct in 46 out 50 states in determining the winner.

The only place where polling got it wrong was in four states of Nevada, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Polling in Nevada and Pennsylvania showed the races there were very close. The fact that Trump won by a small number in Pennsylvania and Hillary won by a small number in Nevada was not a surprise based on polling.

The only real surprise was Wisconsin.

Polling was 100% accurate in determining the winner of the national popular vote.

Polling was 92% accurate in determining who the winner would be in each state.
 
OP
U2Edge

U2Edge

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2012
Messages
5,153
Reaction score
1,134
Points
130
The problem is that major polling concentrates mostly on useless national polls rather than the critical state polls.
Most state polls were halted two weeks prior to the election and missed the Comey generated shift.

They also have small sample sizes with large statistical ranges

The polling correctly predicted the winner in 46 out of 50 states in 2016. Polling also continued right up to election day in the individual states.






If BIDEN is ahead by at least 3 percentage points in the AVERAGE of the latest polling data on the eve of the election in any state, you can be sure that BIDEN will win that state. What happened in Wisconsin in 2016 was unusual, an aberration.

Also the average of state and national polling in 2004, 2008, and 2012 was very accurate as well at predicting the winner.
 

bendog

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
40,202
Reaction score
6,966
Points
1,840
Location
Dog House in back yard
Polling data is mostly accurate, even in the 2016 election.

In the 2016 election, the polls correctly predicted the winner of the popular vote, Hillary Clinton.
The polls were also correct in predicting the winner in 46 out of 50 states in 2016.

The only states where polling failed to correctly predict the winner in 2016 were the following:

Wisconsin
Michigan
Pennsylvania
Nevada

NEVADA: The average of the polls by Real Clear Politics on the eve the election in 2016 showed Trump winning by a small margin with a lead of 0.8% over Hillary Clinton. It turned out that Clinton won the state by 2.4% points. Not a surprise though because when polling data show that candidates are within 3 percentage points of each other, it shows the state is a TOSS UP and could go either way. So despite the polling failing to predict the winner, it was a essentially a close election in Nevada and in the TOSS UP category, so this was no surprise and the polling despite failing to pick the winner was essentially accurate given how close it was.


PENNSYLVANIA: Just like Nevada, the polling on the eve of the election showed a close race in Pennsylvania. Hillary was predicted by polling to win by a slim margin of 1.9% points and instead lost by 0.7% points. Again, the polling lead was less than 3 percentage points making it essentially a TOSS UP. So even here, the polling was actually pretty accurate despite not picking the winner since the polling showed it was very close.



MICHIGAN: Hillary Clinton had a 3.4% point lead in the polling on the eve of the election in 2016. Above 3%, this was more than just a TOSS UP or close and Hillary should have won based on the average of the polls. TRUMP won by a very small margin of 0.3% points. You could the say the polls were wrong here unlike the above two states, but it was not a terrible error. It was likely do more to low voter turnout by Democrats, then any sort of switch to support for Trump.

WISCONSIN: This is only state where the polling data was wildly off the mark compared to the election results. The polls on the eve of the election predicted that Hillary Clinton would win by 6.5% points. She instead lost by 0.7% points. But this may not be as bad as it looks. In 2012, Mitt Romney had won 1,408,000 votes in Wisconsin and lost the state by 7 percentage points. Trump won Wisconsin in 2016, but won with 1,405,000 votes, 3,000 less than Mitt Romney in 2012. So how did this happen. A large number of Democratic voters on election day, for whatever the reason, did not make it to to the voting booth. So it was low Democratic voter turnout, rather than a switch to Trump or a surge in voter turnout for Trump that allowed Trump to win the state. Polling shows who people want to be President, but it does not measure who is going to actually show up and vote on election day. At least not in this particular case. So it could be argued that the polling for Wisconsin was accurate, but that unusual low voter turnout on the Democratic site skewed the results of the actual election compared to what was found in polling.


The 2016 election overall was a close election. The polling was actually very accurate and only failed to pick the winner in four out of 50 states. Two of those four states showed that they were so close that they were essentially TOSS UPS, could go either way. In the most off the mark state , WISCONSIN, when it came to polling, it appears the polls got it right, but many Democrats simply failed to make it to the voting booth that particular day.

It should be mention that the REAL CLEAR POLITICS average of polls correctly predicted the winner of the national election in 2004, 2008, 2012, and 2016. It also correctly predicted the winner of the election in the above four states in 2004, 2008, and 2012.

So the polling is very accurate, and when you see one candidate ahead of the other in the AVERAGE of the latest polling data, its most likely what you will see on election day. The only time when the polling failed to predict the winner in 2016 was just in four states. Two of them the polling show were so close that they were toss ups. In the other two, the polling was still accurate for several reasons, and it only failed to predict the outcome because of unusual low voter turnout by Democrats in those states.

So on the eve of this election in 2020, when the polls show one candidate ahead of the other by at least 3 percentage points or more nationally or in a particular state, you can be pretty sure that candidate will win nationally or in that state. Wisconsin was an aberration in 2016 and is unlikely to occur in 2020.

Joe Biden's current lead in the average of the polls nationally, and in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan from Real Clear Politics:

UNITED STATES:
BIDEN - +6.9%

WISCONSIN:
BIDEN - +6.4%

PENNSYLVANIA:
BIDEN - +5.0%

MICHIGAN:
BIDEN - +6.3%
Accurate mostly, but only for the moment in which the poll was taken. Sort of like a woman's affections. Always fickle and subject to change, and the best one can hope for is to detect a lingering trend. (-:
 

Nostra

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
30,618
Reaction score
26,012
Points
2,915
OP
U2Edge

U2Edge

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2012
Messages
5,153
Reaction score
1,134
Points
130

That is one person saying that, and not an average of all polls done nationally or in a particular state. When you look at that, national polling was 100% right in predicting the winner of the popular vote and 92% correct in predicting the winner in each of the 50 states in 2016.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$70.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top