[Truthoverpower]

They mostly just miss the fact that all us Trump supporters will lie to them to their face and tell them the opposite of what we believe

There is absolutely no accounting for that in polling. None

I’ll ask you FREEPERS out there right now - Pollster calls you and asked you who you support what would you say?

I tell them I support Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden

[eclectic]

Polls are garbage. They are only used to set the narrative and prepare ground for election fraud.

[mrsmith]

The “money” for pollsters is in marketing. That’s their “meat and potatoes”.
They give “potential product buyers” a larger influence than they have politically.

[Repeal 16-17]

Here’s another article regarding the BS that are polls: https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/political_commentary/commentary_by_brian_joondeph/presidential_polls_are_deja_vu_all_over_again

[TXnMA]

FTA: That is, no report of how many calls resulted in no contact, or “no thank you, not interested in NPR’s survey.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

And, I'm sure none of them counted responses like mine during the last 0b0z0 campaign -- when a Sweet-voiced Young Thing called and asked me to participate in a "nation-wide 'survey'":

SYT: "How do you feel things are going in our nation?"

TXnMA: "Well, considering that we have an alien Muslim communist usurper illegally squatting in the White Hut, and a criminal traitor as Secretary of State -- both doing their damndest to destroy everything that's right and good about the America that I served to protect -- I'd say that things are not going terribly well!
NEXT QUESTION?"

SYT: (Along about "White Hut", I heard a sharp gasp and an "Eeeep!")

TXnMA: And, when I asked, "NEXT QUESTION?"...

SYT -- HUNG UP ON ME!   '-)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Don't know what she filled in for the rest of my answers...

TXnMA
  

[SmokingJoe]

"With respect to age, only 26 percent of NPR’s respondents were aged 45 to 59. This may be a major flaw, as 35 percent of voters in 2016 were over 50, and NPR’s survey appears to wholly omit voters over 59. This is particularly meaningful, as 25 percent of all voters in 2016 were over 65."

[BlackAdderess]

“ Dig deeper. In the NPR sample, 38 percent are Democrats, only 31 percent Republicans, with 29 percent Independents. Does that overrepresent Democrats v. Republicans, and Independents v. both? What effect does that have on accuracy?”

According to the Washington Post this is an accurate breakdown (more or less) if you factor in only 31 states and DC.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/02/28/first-time-ever-there-are-fewer-registered-republicans-than-independents/%3FoutputType%3Damp

If you go according to Gallup, Independents sit at 40%, Democrats are 31%, Republicans are 25%
https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx

By applying the voter registration numbers of 31 states and DC to the rest of the country they do indeed appear to be oversampling Democrats and undersampling Independents, if these numbers hold.

[ReaganGeneration2]

“But Trump’s overall approval rating was 37 percent in March 2017 – five months after winning election“

From 49% (Nov 9) to 37% (during/after the honeymoon period)? No freakin way.

Proves presidential polls were off by 5-15% then, and probably add another 5-10% as rebellion against fake news polls since then.

[motor_racer]

I always lie to pollsters. It is my mission to make them useless.

That said, the most important thing revealed here, and common to nearly every poll, is the treatment of hangups, no answers, or refusal to participate.

They just ignore these and move on, as if they never happened. But in the real world of statistical sampling, they did happen, they are critically important, and they cannot be ignored.

Suppose a pollster is told he needs to sample 1000 people for his results to be “statistically significant”. He makes 1000 calls, but 400 of them don’t yield responses. He just continues until he has his 1000. But perhaps he has had to call 1600 or more in total to get 1000 responses. The fact is, those other 600 are samples, for which his response should be included as “UNKNOWN”.

Unknowns must be included in the sample for the statistical calculations about the “confidence interval”, which measures the expected range of variability due to the random sample, and is critical to estimating the “margin of error” that they love to quote. Unknowns can VASTLY reduce the confidence interval (increase the margin of error), when they are properly counted.

Second, when they attempt to sample X percent Democrats and 100-X percent Republicans, the same effect occurs. They will obviously need to sample some excess numbers to get the party bias they want. They just ignore the excess calls. But they don’t vanish. They were sampled. Again they are unknown.

So these statistical abuses ALWAYS have the effect of increasing the quoted “margin of error” by reducing the confidence in the result.

For the curious, “margin of error” means that in the process of taking many samples there will be variation from sample to sample just due to randomness. This is the nature of sampling. A confidence interval is chosen for the study, typically 90%. So a 3% margin of error should be stated “We anticipate that in 90% of the samples taken, the true result is within 3% of the sample. The other 10% of samples would fall outside this range.”

Throw in the Unknowns, and that confidence interval can quickly fall, so it could really mean something like “”We anticipate that in 60% of the samples taken, the true result is within 3% of the sample. The other 40% of samples would fall outside this range.”

Barely better than a coin toss.

[Deplorable American1776]

I got hung up on when I told them I am voting Trump...

[stanne]

In 2016 on Memorial Day, I was with some of my sisters and their families, BILs, nieces, nephews college age, impressionable, we were cruising on my BILs 50’ Pursuit. Nice day. Anchored, we were chatting.

“My sister Donald Trump!? When he says, ‘Make America great again’ he means, ‘Make America white again’.

No one argued. There was no discussion. She was reflecting her pretense that she is informed because of having CNN on in every room in her suburban Connecticut house, in the place of any religious symbol, she is not only informed, but she knows more than anyone who would dare to attempt a correction or a challenge. It would get foot stomp. It would get emotional. A scene for nothing. She would not change her mind. Marooned on her yacht in Sand City Cove. She had guilt to atone for. All of us do. The liberal white women will be the leaders of this morality taking the place of religion.

That’s one faction of this insanity.

I sipped on my drink and I shut my mouth. Any truth would be met with threat of a tantrum as opposed to thought provoking discussion, a different point of view.

I have never said a word to anyone. The ignorant, misinformed hatred is obvious. I don’t stoke that.

I was asked, one time only, by an in-law, a wacko liberal, an old friend, actually, ‘wait, you like Trump? We used to make fun of him in the eighties in NY.’

He asked inquisitively. So I did answer him, saying, “I have no problem with Trump being president.”

It shut him up. He knows I’m informed. But he is unusual. Most liberals pretend I am misinformed. They project.

I say nothing to anyone. That summer 2016, my bullying sister’s attitude let me know there would be a d ss I lent support of Trump. He would win and the bullies would be surprised. Their bullying would not change minds. They would simply shut people up

This year is the same with additional cheating as a factor. Tge tantrums are the same. Obviously they’re more demonstrated. The anger is being used by the powerful bullies. No surprise.