Reasons to bet the polls are still flawed

The New York Post ^ | November 6, 2018 | Leonid Bershidsky

[TBP]

A big political gambler I met in Las Vegas in 2016 is in London betting that the Republican Party will keep control of the US Congress. Robert Barnes is essentially wagering that US pollsters haven’t fixed any of the problems that led them astray during the 2016 presidential campaign.

Barnes, a trial lawyer, lives in Las Vegas, but he has to travel to the British Isles to wager on US politics since it’s not allowed in the US. The bookies know him as a high roller; the political betting team at Ladbrokes even tweeted his photo to mark his arrival and his 100,000 pound ($130,000) bet on the Republicans’ House majority. Given that the entire US primaries betting market is in the single millions in the UK and Ireland, that’s quite momentous.

Barnes told me he’d gotten “about 3-2” odds, which would mean winnings of 50,000 pounds on the 100,000 he staked, implying a 40 percent probability. Ladbrokes’s official odds of a Republican majority are 13-8 (38 percent probability). Paddy Power, a big bookmaker based in Ireland (where Barnes went to place his bets in 2016), gives 2-1 odds on a Republican House majority (33 percent probability).

Barnes wishes he could have gotten Silver’s odds, about 6-1, but, just like him, the UK bookies don’t quite trust US polls. The difference is in the degree of disbelief. Barnes, for his part, is as confident of winning as he was when he placed large bets on Brexit and Donald Trump’s election victory in 2016.

[TBP]

The problem with how polling is done have not been fixed. Much of the late money is on a Republican retention of Congress.

[PGR88]

I live in a contentious Congressional district. Have had 3 polling calls over the last month.

I lie to them on every single question.

[Buckeye McFrog]

Heavy turnout generally favors Democrats. As in ‘08 it usually means they’ve found a way to get their voters off the couch.

I think a lot of pollsters are detecting the heavy turnout and assuming it’s mostly Dem. They may be in for a shock.

[ClearCase_guy]

If polling were intended to be predictive, they would fix flaws and get better.
But it isn’t intended to be predictive.
It is intended to be persuasive — “most people are voting for the Democrat! That’s what the cool kids are doing! Look! 54% of them like Beto!! C’mon! You can be cool too!”
If they manage to persuade successfully, they can look like they were intended to be predictive, but that’s not their intent.

[dfwgator]

I think a lot of pollsters are detecting the heavy turnout and assuming it’s mostly Dem. They may be in for a shock.

I certainly hope that Trump's election proved that you can throw out the old conventional wisdom.

[rhinohunter]

Would be interesting if Rasmussen would conduct individual election polls. His Trump Approval and Generic Ballot are vastly different than all the pollsters.

[babble-on]

How do you fix the flaw of “nobody answers the phone”?

[FlingWingFlyer]

The jackasses at FNC are “reporting” that the “dems” have located “a narrow path” to win the Senate. Lots of “I’m with Her” billboards are posted all along it.

[MNJohnnie]

There is one thing I have noted that the Polling groups are not considering.

There was a pretty strong never Trump moment in 2016 amoung traditional GOPE voters. Saw that in a lot of races across the South. The GOP Senate candidate did much better in traditional Red areas then Trump did. The polling groups have built that into their models for 2018. I think the last two years have laid a lot of that “Never Trumpism” to rest.

We will find out tonight who is right.

[DaveA37]

And Hitlary was to the our next president...…….Didn’t happen did it?

[1Old Pro]

If polling were intended to be predictive, they would fix flaws and get better. But it isn’t intended to be predictive. It is intended to be persuasive

exactly

[Josa]

I live in a very red area of Georgia. Have ridden by four polling places. Cars circling the parking lots looking for parking. Cars parked on side of road. And they keep coming

[TBP]

Heavy turnout generally favors Democrats.

So does early voting, yet in most states, the Republicans have the edge in early voting this year. And in Texas, Arizona, and Nevada, the early voting has already exceeded the total vote in 2014.

[dfwgator]

I think in Trump, we have a President that NOBODY is neutral on. You either love him or hate him, there isn’t much middle ground there.

I’ve never seen anything like it.

[circlecity]

Media polls aren’t so much “flawed” as they are cooked.

[meadsjn]

Heavy turnout generally favors Democrats. As in ‘08 it usually means they’ve found a way to get their voters off the couch.

... or maybe not.

[Buckeye McFrog]

They can’t play mind games with you if you ignore them all and just go vote. I live in an area where Democrats have an 8:1 registration advantage. The GOP did not even bother to field candidates for 3 offices on the ballot. I voted straight “R” and wrote-in the rest. Probably won’t make any difference, but if we all do that, it will.

[bigbob]

They are still tools for manipulating voter behavior, no one can prove otherwise.

[Kozy]

Well Nate Silver, you know the pollster who doesn’t poll but read other pollsters’s polls has it 6-1 that Republicans lose the House. In England where you can bet on political events has it 7-5. Guess Nate won’t get bookmaker job when this year he flames out again.

[Gen.Blather]

“How do you fix the flaw of “nobody answers the phone”?”

You mail a letter with a dollar bill in it. Answer the enclosed poll and we’ll send you a five dollar bill. In the end that would not only get a bigger return, it would probably be cheaper than calling thousands of people and paying somebody to ask the questions of the .002 percent who answer.