Pumpkin Eater Posted September 30, 2016 Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 Let's start with this, what exactly were you hoping to get out of the link? What exactly did you want to prove? I'm pretty sure you just want an out to ignore all Data you disagree with, no matter how legitimate it is The only data I've commented on in this thread was the CNN post debate poll, which I said was flawed, biased, and not scientific. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin Eater Posted September 30, 2016 Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 RCP averages have Trump ahead in NV, CO, NC, OH, and IA And the LA Times tracking poll shows a Trump post-debate surge, the UPI tracking poll showed a -1/2% for Trump. Reuters had the biggest Dem oversampling of any poll I've seen this election, +10% - not surprising from a Rothschild rag He needs to win FL or its all for nothing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted September 30, 2016 Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 BuzzFeed Hilariously Edits Its Own Poll Showing Huge Support For Trump BuzzFeed recently published a presidential preference poll for their readership to take part in. A day or so later, they felt the need to “update” it because they felt the results “no longer accurately reflects the opinions of real people.” Take three guesses as to what the results were showing. Polls are something that many media outlets do. They're a quick thing that will catch people’s attention during a heated presidential cycle and will hopefully get the public to click on the outlet's website. Undoubtedly, BuzzFeed also did this figuring that the “poll” would have a strong showing for Hillary Clinton, showing given the site's tendency to openly criticize her opponent. That, however, didn’t turn out to be the case. Here are the results: As you can plainly see, Republican nominee Donald Trump is dominating in the “poll” with 11.5 million votes, followed up by “Other” at 161,000 votes, “I still haven’t decided” at 152,500 votes, and finally Clinton in dead last at 70,300 votes. Now to be very, very clear to all the liberals already pounding away at their keyboards, I’m in no way insinuating that this is a scientific poll by any stretch of the imagination. It’s clearly just a gimmick that is used by BuzzFeed and plenty of other outlets to get their readership more engaged and drive more clicks to their website. It is funny, though, that BuzzFeed felt it was totally necessary to put an update right above the “poll," saying it "no longer accurately reflects the opinions of real people." I suppose I probably shouldn’t be too critical of the website that is most known for asking stupid clickbait quizzes, like this one where you can find out what your inner potato is. You know, in case you’ve just been really curious all your life. Or maybe you’ve always wanted to know which ousted Arab Spring ruler you are. The more I look these up, the more I wonder why I’m even bothering to write a story about these guys anyway. But, hey, if you wanted to go check out that “poll” for yourself, you can go cast your pretend vote right here! http://www.mrctv.org/blog/buzzfeed-hilariously-updates-own-online-poll-due-huge-trump-showing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrb12711 Posted September 30, 2016 Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 ^^^You do understand the idea of internet trolls correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted September 30, 2016 Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 ^^^You do understand the idea of internet trolls correct? It's still hillaryous And buzzfeed's addition makes it sound like the poll was ever an accurate reflection of anything. You can bet if it was 97/1 Hillary they would not have added that note. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrb12711 Posted September 30, 2016 Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 It's still hillaryous And buzzfeed's addition makes it sound like the poll was ever an accurate reflection of anything. You can bet if it was 97/1 Hillary they would not have added that note. We aren't disagreeing here, but what scares me is that people on this forum would take as evidence of a cover-up. The same internet who named a serious vessel boaty McBoatface when given the chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted September 30, 2016 Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 boaty mcboatface was pretty funny, but idk if anything tops dub the dew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted September 30, 2016 Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 ^^^You do understand the idea of internet trolls correct? Here are the two takeaways from the post: 1: Polls are something that many media outlets do. They're a quick thing that will catch people’s attention during a heated presidential cycle and will hopefully get the public to click on the outlet's website. Undoubtedly, BuzzFeed also did this figuring that the “poll” would have a strong showing for Hillary Clinton, given the site's tendency to openly criticize her opponent. That, however, didn’t turn out to be the case. 2: It is funny, though, that BuzzFeed felt it was totally necessary to put an update right above the “poll," saying it "no longer accurately reflects the opinions of real people." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin Eater Posted September 30, 2016 Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 polls can be heavily influenced by the way the question is written or asked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 30, 2016 Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 ^^^You do understand the idea of internet trolls correct? You mean Trump supporters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted September 30, 2016 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 You mean Trump supporters? MAGA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 30, 2016 Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 boaty mcboatface was pretty funny, but idk if anything tops dub the dew That's a classic. Like Microsoft's AI from earlier this year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 30, 2016 Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted September 30, 2016 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 jrb an woody have a point, that being said, I don't think the given polls show a clear election winner. And as scientifically rigorous as the polls are, I'm quite a bit more skeptical of them this year than in years past. Anecdotally, there's a pretty damn clear enthusiasm gap between Hillary supporters and Trump supporters as a whole. The Brexit vote (n=1, I know) shows that most of their polling didn't take into account the silent conservative vote (or the idiots who voted for it as a joke). Now I have no data to support this, but I feel that with Trump, the proportion of silent supporter is going to be bigger than in the Brexit vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin Eater Posted September 30, 2016 Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 It really seems that this election cycle, polling agencies (Reuters at least) are getting paid to find ways to get a desired result instead of the real result. Why else would they keep changing their formula? Their formula first got rid of the undecided vote, and counted them to Hildebeast. Now they are vastly oversampling democrats (by 11%...44 to 33, when registered democrats only outnumber republicans 33 to 29%). Someone said a properly weighted sample would give Trump a 2.5% lead, but I don't know if that is or isn't true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 30, 2016 Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 There are plenty of examples of polls being very wrong. I have never cared about them, myself. It's not much of a point to diss polls when they aren't in your favor, but to laud them when they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrb12711 Posted September 30, 2016 Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 jrb an woody have a point, that being said, I don't think the given polls show a clear election winner. And as scientifically rigorous as the polls are, I'm quite a bit more skeptical of them this year than in years past. Anecdotally, there's a pretty damn clear enthusiasm gap between Hillary supporters and Trump supporters as a whole. The Brexit vote (n=1, I know) shows that most of their polling didn't take into account the silent conservative vote (or the idiots who voted for it as a joke). Now I have no data to support this, but I feel that with Trump, the proportion of silent supporter is going to be bigger than in the Brexit vote. And trust me, I understand and hear what you are saying. All I've said from the start of this is that I'm going to trust these polls more than others no matter what the result ended up being, even if the results could potentially be more dubious than previous years. If these same polls stated Trump "won" the debate, I would go with that as well. We are just going to disagree on the latter point, but one of us is bound to be proven wrong in about a month's time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted September 30, 2016 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 And trust me, I understand and hear what you are saying. All I've said from the start of this is that I'm going to trust these polls more than others no matter what the result ended up being, even if the results could potentially be more dubious than previous years. If these same polls stated Trump "won" the debate, I would go with that as well. We are just going to disagree on the latter point, but one of us is bound to be proven wrong in about a month's time. Oh yeah, don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing that Trump won the debate. But I've gotta say that I'm surprised the polls haven't shifted for Hillary as much as I expected them to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted September 30, 2016 Report Share Posted September 30, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin Eater Posted October 1, 2016 Report Share Posted October 1, 2016 so when can we expect to see some of those on TV? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted October 1, 2016 Report Share Posted October 1, 2016 so when can we expect to see some of those on TV? They are on TV I've seen a good amount here in Cleveland anyway. Not that ad, but other ones including one about "deplorables" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.