Author Topic: The Press and Pollsters Are Putting Too Much Cornstarch in the Cherry Pie  (Read 920 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

rangerrebew

  • Guest
August 7, 2016
The Press and Pollsters Are Putting Too Much Cornstarch in the Cherry Pie
By Clarice Feldman

That’s the short take of my friend Thomas Lipscomb and I have to agree with him.

Contrary to most of the media-sponsored polls (The LA Times stands alone now calling the race a tie at last view), I agree with this one: Trump will draw in millions of voters who didn’t show up to the polls before and he will beat Hillary Clinton.

I don’t pretend to be a polling expert but note others who claim to be have said much the same thing using different statistical methodologies, including Yale Professor Ray Fair (economic models) and Emory University President Alan Abramowitz (presidential approval ratings), Politik.com predicts a landslide, noting in recent years the number of people voting for Democrats has dipped while the number of those voting for Republicans has risen.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/08/the_press_and_pollsters_are_putting_too_much_cornstarch_in_the_cherry_pie.html
« Last Edit: August 07, 2016, 12:43:26 pm by rangerrebew »

Oceander

  • Guest
Quote
Trump will draw in millions of voters who didn’t show up to the polls before and he will beat Hillary Clinton.

Grasping at straws.

Offline Fishrrman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,932
  • Gender: Male
  • Dumbest member of the forum
From the original article:
There are methods for projecting and allocating undecided voters based on complex attitude structures, based on many questions that tell the pollster that this person is in movement to support someone, he said. “Sometimes, they are hiding. That happens. Particularly in the past, or in racially-sensitive cases.”

I posted about this a few days ago, but I'll reiterate.

There's another factor why the polls could be "less predictive" of the results this time around.

That's because there is an increasing percentage of the electorate that refuses to deal with pollsters. And the lion's share of this cohort are tradtionally-minded Americans, many older, mostly white.

It's more than simply "attitude", it's technology as well that is making it increasingly difficult to sample "the old white guy vote". (Disclaimer -- I -am- an "old white guy").

Caller ID in paticular has helped.
I simply don't answer the phone anymore. I wait for callerID to pop up the info on who's calling. If the call is coming from someone I can easily identify and know, I -might- answer the phone. Otherwise it "goes to the machine". Even then, I rarely give a callback.

Truth be told, I just don't want to talk to you, and that means YOU.

But now there are ever-more-easily-accessible means to thwart unwanted calls before they even get to callerID.

I recently signed up with a service (free at the consumer level) called "nomorobo".
How you get it working depends on which ISP/VOIP provider you're with. In my case, I had to activate the "voicemail" features of my internet VOIP account, and set up a "simultaneous ring" feature that rings nomorobo whenever my own phone rings.
Nomorobo "catches" the call at the first ring and compares the incoming number against a database of known robocallers and spammers. If the number matches, the call is immediately cut off (no second ring) and the callerID is displayed.

I was impressed at how well this works.
Now, I gather than -some- calls can get through, such as "politically-based" calls (i.e., from campaign boiler rooms, etc.).
I'm not sure how "polling calls" are handled.

But in any case, I wouldn't answer them, so I never talk to pollsters.

The other "old white guys" I know probably act similarly.

And I'll reckon that there are many more of us "out there" -- perhaps millions.

I predict that this is going to skewer the results come Election day...

Wingnut

  • Guest
Grasping at straws.

Quote
Trump will draw in millions of voters who didn’t show up to the polls before and he will beat Hillary Clinton.
I did not know there where that many Klansmen and white separatists  just chomping at the bit to vote for the Man in the Orange tan with the pointy hat?

Learn something new everyday.


Offline sinkspur

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28,567
Articles like this aren't usually written until October.  I remember reading four years ago how wrong pollsters were, how they were missing all those Romney voters because they work or had cell phones.

Turns out the pollsters were right on target, especially Nate Silver, who predicted the exact winning percentage four days out.

Trumpsters don't like polls, unless they show their man leading (like the LA Times poll, the lone one that does).  Yes, the numbers are not as reliable now as they will be in October, but trends are what count in August.

And the trend is not favorable for Trump.
Roy Moore's "spiritual warfare" is driving past a junior high without stopping.