Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Helicondelta

It will boggle the minds of everyone who’s ever taken a statistics class, but nonprobability polling is the future. Conventional (probability) polling rests on the assumption that a representative sample can allow estimation of the population. Nnonprobability surveys, which do not rely on random sampling and instead recruit through ads, pop-up solicitations and other approaches.

In a simple sense, consider what we see when Donald Trump gets 80% of the vote on the Drudge Report debate polls. The enthusiasm we show in these “non scientific” suveys is still a valid indication of public opinion. As is the fact that Democrats do not vote for Hillary in anywhere near the same way.


4 posted on 10/16/2016 8:43:04 PM PDT by bigbob (The Hillary indictment will have to come from us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: bigbob

>Conventional (probability) polling rests on the assumption that a representative sample can allow estimation of the population

There’s nothing wrong with the math; the problem is that current polling, as this article shows, does not _get_ a representative sample! Current methods only get the people who own land lines; are near them when pollsters call (often mid-day); and are willing to endure the poll.

That’s on top of any polling bias wherein companies ‘adjust’ the results to match a prior turnout or defuse a result they’re not paid to obtain.


7 posted on 10/16/2016 9:07:23 PM PDT by No.6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: bigbob

There are ways to correct for that, but they are complex and you can add a lot of error to the result.


14 posted on 10/17/2016 6:16:52 AM PDT by dila813 (Voting for Trump to Punish Trumpets!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson