Polling Perils

[The Rabbi]

Results from the British election show one clear loser: POllsters. Every pollster virtually had the parties in a dead heat. But in the end it was a slaughter for the Torys. Even Nate Silver, favorite of the libs here, was way off, offering an explanation
What We Got Wrong In Our 2015 U.K. General Election Model FiveThirtyEight

But the truth, which no oe has brought out, is that people tend to lie to pollsters because to admit being for the conservatives is to be perceived as "mean." The same thing probably operates here: people claim to like Hillary or whatever Dem but then vote GOP. This will play out on the coming election for sure.

 

[Statistikhengst]

No.

British pollsters generally have absolutely nothing to do with US-American pollsters.

You really are a stupid son of a *****.

But we already knew that.

 

[Toro]

Results from the British election show one clear loser: POllsters. Every pollster virtually had the parties in a dead heat. But in the end it was a slaughter for the Torys. Even Nate Silver, favorite of the libs here, was way off, offering an explanation
What We Got Wrong In Our 2015 U.K. General Election Model FiveThirtyEight

But the truth, which no oe has brought out, is that people tend to lie to pollsters because to admit being for the conservatives is to be perceived as "mean." The same thing probably operates here: people claim to like Hillary or whatever Dem but then vote GOP. This will play out on the coming election for sure.

There may be a bit of truth in that in the US, but not much. For example, when asked in telephone polls, 40% of Americans have generally identified themselves as conservatives. However, in exit polls, conservatives are around 35% of the electorate. This means that, if true, only 10%-15% of conservatives, and 1 in 20 Americans, fibbed about being a conservative in the exit poll. That Republicans have lost the popular vote in 5 of the past 6 Presidential elections suggests this isn't an issue in the United States.

The last time I remember watching a British election where the exit polls were wrong was in 1992, when the BBC, based on exit polls, called a majority government for Neil Kinnock when in fact, John Major wound up winning. When the BBC did an analysis after the election, they found that a sizable minority voted for the Tories but then said they voted for Labour when asked by an exit pollster after they left the polling booth.

Polls in the last Canadian election were also wrong. All of the polling firms had the Tories around 34% going into election voting, which probably would have meant a Conservative minority government, but the Tories wound up winning 38% and a majority government.

But people misunderstand polling. Polling isn't infallible. A poll is an attempt to get a snapshot of the electorate at large. It is a probability assessment, not a certainty.

The polls were pretty much spot on during the last two Presidential elections. In fact, in 2012, the polls underestimated Obama's strength. It was conservatives who were wrong in 2012, and embarrassingly so, with all these "skewed polls" and such nonsense. For example, Republicans genuinely believed that they would win Pennsylvania. But in the 45 state polls prior to the election, Obama led in 44 and Romney was tied with Obama in 1. Clear-headed analysis would have suggested the Republicans would have had a very long shot in PA, but they were so blinded by their hatred for Obama that they created all these fantasies that they were going to win.

 

[FA_Q2]

Results from the British election show one clear loser: POllsters. Every pollster virtually had the parties in a dead heat. But in the end it was a slaughter for the Torys. Even Nate Silver, favorite of the libs here, was way off, offering an explanation
What We Got Wrong In Our 2015 U.K. General Election Model FiveThirtyEight

But the truth, which no one has brought out, is that people tend to lie to pollsters because to admit being for the conservatives is to be perceived as "mean." The same thing probably operates here: people claim to like Hillary or whatever Dem but then vote GOP. This will play out on the coming election for sure.

How do you square that with the incredible accuracy the polls have for predicting the elections here? They are very accurate right before the election occurs.

 

[The Rabbi]

Results from the British election show one clear loser: POllsters. Every pollster virtually had the parties in a dead heat. But in the end it was a slaughter for the Torys. Even Nate Silver, favorite of the libs here, was way off, offering an explanation
What We Got Wrong In Our 2015 U.K. General Election Model FiveThirtyEight

But the truth, which no oe has brought out, is that people tend to lie to pollsters because to admit being for the conservatives is to be perceived as "mean." The same thing probably operates here: people claim to like Hillary or whatever Dem but then vote GOP. This will play out on the coming election for sure.

There may be a bit of truth in that in the US, but not much. For example, when asked in telephone polls, 40% of Americans have generally identified themselves as conservatives. However, in exit polls, conservatives are around 35% of the electorate. This means that, if true, only 10%-15% of conservatives, and 1 in 20 Americans, fibbed about being a conservative in the exit poll. That Republicans have lost the popular vote in 5 of the past 6 Presidential elections suggests this isn't an issue in the United States.

The last time I remember watching a British election where the exit polls were wrong was in 1992, when the BBC, based on exit polls, called a majority government for Neil Kinnock when in fact, John Major wound up winning. When the BBC did an analysis after the election, they found that a sizable minority voted for the Tories but then said they voted for Labour when asked by an exit pollster after they left the polling booth.

Polls in the last Canadian election were also wrong. All of the polling firms had the Tories around 34% going into election voting, which probably would have meant a Conservative minority government, but the Tories wound up winning 38% and a majority government.

But people misunderstand polling. Polling isn't infallible. A poll is an attempt to get a snapshot of the electorate at large. It is a probability assessment, not a certainty.

The polls were pretty much spot on during the last two Presidential elections. In fact, in 2012, the polls underestimated Obama's strength. It was conservatives who were wrong in 2012, and embarrassingly so, with all these "skewed polls" and such nonsense. For example, Republicans genuinely believed that they would win Pennsylvania. But in the 45 state polls prior to the election, Obama led in 44 and Romney was tied with Obama in 1. Clear-headed analysis would have suggested the Republicans would have had a very long shot in PA, but they were so blinded by their hatred for Obama that they created all these fantasies that they were going to win.

Most people predicted a Romney win. They did not count on the huge turnout of black and illegal voters in key states.

 

[FA_Q2]

?

No, they did not. Not even close.

 

[The Rabbi]

?

No, they did not. Not even close.

 

[FA_Q2]

Dick Morrison?

You realize there are a lot of pollsters out there and you stated that 'most' of them were predicting a Romney win. I distinctly remember the polls in general predicting an Obama win. What Dick Morrison predicted is irrelevant.

 

[The Rabbi]

Dick Morrison?

You realize there are a lot of pollsters out there and you stated that 'most' of them were predicting a Romney win. I distinctly remember the polls in general predicting an Obama win. What Dick Morrison predicted is irrelevant.

Its Dick Morris.
Anyway, no president had ever been re-elected with economic numbers as bad as Obama's.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Wonder how much their indifference to the rape jihad they helped perp factored in their defeat

 

[blackhawk]

Polling is an inexact science and has also become more partisan. In election years especially you see polls either oversampling Republicans or Democrats giving people a false impression of the way the public is truly leaning.

 

[Rexx Taylor]

I just dont believe that 55% of anyone in purple states have an IQ of 35 or under (the Hillary symposizers)

 

[FA_Q2]

Dick Morrison?

You realize there are a lot of pollsters out there and you stated that 'most' of them were predicting a Romney win. I distinctly remember the polls in general predicting an Obama win. What Dick Morrison predicted is irrelevant.

Its Dick Morris.
Anyway, no president had ever been re-elected with economic numbers as bad as Obama's.

That is correct but your thread mentioned pollsters - not those making predictions based on past metrics which obviously does not work all that well.

The polls were pretty accurate - particularly looking at the aggregate. They were not predicting a Romney win. There were a shit load of threads here telling us all how the polls were so inaccurate and biased because tons of reasons and that they were incorrect predicting Obama winning the election. In the end, those posting so were blind to the reality. The polls are accurate and Romney was not going to win.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[
Most people predicted a Romney win. They did not count on the huge turnout of black and illegal voters in key states.

No they didn't. You're an idiot.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2012 - General Election Romney vs. Obama

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Results from the British election show one clear loser: POllsters. Every pollster virtually had the parties in a dead heat. But in the end it was a slaughter for the Torys. Even Nate Silver, favorite of the libs here, was way off, offering an explanation
What We Got Wrong In Our 2015 U.K. General Election Model FiveThirtyEight

But the truth, which no oe has brought out, is that people tend to lie to pollsters because to admit being for the conservatives is to be perceived as "mean." The same thing probably operates here: people claim to like Hillary or whatever Dem but then vote GOP. This will play out on the coming election for sure.

There may be a bit of truth in that in the US, but not much. For example, when asked in telephone polls, 40% of Americans have generally identified themselves as conservatives. However, in exit polls, conservatives are around 35% of the electorate. This means that, if true, only 10%-15% of conservatives, and 1 in 20 Americans, fibbed about being a conservative in the exit poll. That Republicans have lost the popular vote in 5 of the past 6 Presidential elections suggests this isn't an issue in the United States.

The last time I remember watching a British election where the exit polls were wrong was in 1992, when the BBC, based on exit polls, called a majority government for Neil Kinnock when in fact, John Major wound up winning. When the BBC did an analysis after the election, they found that a sizable minority voted for the Tories but then said they voted for Labour when asked by an exit pollster after they left the polling booth.

Polls in the last Canadian election were also wrong. All of the polling firms had the Tories around 34% going into election voting, which probably would have meant a Conservative minority government, but the Tories wound up winning 38% and a majority government.

But people misunderstand polling. Polling isn't infallible. A poll is an attempt to get a snapshot of the electorate at large. It is a probability assessment, not a certainty.

The polls were pretty much spot on during the last two Presidential elections. In fact, in 2012, the polls underestimated Obama's strength. It was conservatives who were wrong in 2012, and embarrassingly so, with all these "skewed polls" and such nonsense. For example, Republicans genuinely believed that they would win Pennsylvania. But in the 45 state polls prior to the election, Obama led in 44 and Romney was tied with Obama in 1. Clear-headed analysis would have suggested the Republicans would have had a very long shot in PA, but they were so blinded by their hatred for Obama that they created all these fantasies that they were going to win.

Most people predicted a Romney win. They did not count on the huge turnout of black and illegal voters in key states.

I love it when you guys start trying to speak for "most people".

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Dick Morrison?

You realize there are a lot of pollsters out there and you stated that 'most' of them were predicting a Romney win. I distinctly remember the polls in general predicting an Obama win. What Dick Morrison predicted is irrelevant.

Dick Morris isn't a "pollster", either. He's a pundit.

 

[G.T.]

Most people predicted a Romney win. They did not count on the huge turnout of black and illegal voters in key states.

There he goes, making shit up again

 

[nodoginnafight]

Dick Morrison?

You realize there are a lot of pollsters out there and you stated that 'most' of them were predicting a Romney win. I distinctly remember the polls in general predicting an Obama win. What Dick Morrison predicted is irrelevant.

Its Dick Morris.
Anyway, no president had ever been re-elected with economic numbers as bad as Obama's.

And polls STILL got it right. (Except the "unskewed" ones - LOL)

 

[LoneLaugher]

Results from the British election show one clear loser: POllsters. Every pollster virtually had the parties in a dead heat. But in the end it was a slaughter for the Torys. Even Nate Silver, favorite of the libs here, was way off, offering an explanation
What We Got Wrong In Our 2015 U.K. General Election Model FiveThirtyEight

But the truth, which no oe has brought out, is that people tend to lie to pollsters because to admit being for the conservatives is to be perceived as "mean." The same thing probably operates here: people claim to like Hillary or whatever Dem but then vote GOP. This will play out on the coming election for sure.

What is "mean" about a British conservative? Why would they have that perception? Do you think American conservatives are perceived to be "mean"? Does degree of conservatism indicate degree of meanness?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Results from the British election show one clear loser: POllsters. Every pollster virtually had the parties in a dead heat. But in the end it was a slaughter for the Torys. Even Nate Silver, favorite of the libs here, was way off, offering an explanation
What We Got Wrong In Our 2015 U.K. General Election Model FiveThirtyEight

But the truth, which no oe has brought out, is that people tend to lie to pollsters because to admit being for the conservatives is to be perceived as "mean." The same thing probably operates here: people claim to like Hillary or whatever Dem but then vote GOP. This will play out on the coming election for sure.

There may be a bit of truth in that in the US, but not much. For example, when asked in telephone polls, 40% of Americans have generally identified themselves as conservatives. However, in exit polls, conservatives are around 35% of the electorate. This means that, if true, only 10%-15% of conservatives, and 1 in 20 Americans, fibbed about being a conservative in the exit poll. That Republicans have lost the popular vote in 5 of the past 6 Presidential elections suggests this isn't an issue in the United States.

The last time I remember watching a British election where the exit polls were wrong was in 1992, when the BBC, based on exit polls, called a majority government for Neil Kinnock when in fact, John Major wound up winning. When the BBC did an analysis after the election, they found that a sizable minority voted for the Tories but then said they voted for Labour when asked by an exit pollster after they left the polling booth.

Polls in the last Canadian election were also wrong. All of the polling firms had the Tories around 34% going into election voting, which probably would have meant a Conservative minority government, but the Tories wound up winning 38% and a majority government.

But people misunderstand polling. Polling isn't infallible. A poll is an attempt to get a snapshot of the electorate at large. It is a probability assessment, not a certainty.

The polls were pretty much spot on during the last two Presidential elections. In fact, in 2012, the polls underestimated Obama's strength. It was conservatives who were wrong in 2012, and embarrassingly so, with all these "skewed polls" and such nonsense. For example, Republicans genuinely believed that they would win Pennsylvania. But in the 45 state polls prior to the election, Obama led in 44 and Romney was tied with Obama in 1. Clear-headed analysis would have suggested the Republicans would have had a very long shot in PA, but they were so blinded by their hatred for Obama that they created all these fantasies that they were going to win.

Most people predicted a Romney win. They did not count on the huge turnout of black and illegal voters in key states.

No. That is not correct. Not a single word of that post was correct.