'Fraud': Mainstream polls use 29% more Democrats than Republicans

iguanaman said:

That is not what Hillary said at all.

Click to expand...

Speaking at a fundraiser in New York City on Friday, Hillary Clinton said half of Donald Trump’s supporters belong in a “basket of deplorables” characterized by “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic” views.

“You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right?” Clinton said. “The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic—you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up.”
Read Hillary Clinton's 'Basket of Deplorables' Remarks About Donald Trump Supporters

Click to expand...

Hmm. Seems like she IS calling 1/2 of Trump's supporters 'deplorables, characterized by “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic” views', in a "grossly generalistic" way (whatever that means).

That'd be a rather tall order to prove one way or the other that 1/2 of Trumps supporters held those views.

Campaign statements contorted and distortion, played large by the media on both counts, if you like.

Are you denying that the KKK and the Nazi party are filled with deplorables? But you are describing the "shy Trumpers" who quite likely were flipped by all the fake news from Russian trolls on social media. It only took a few % of
the millions of users that were targeted. Putin was quite adept at that targeting and one has to wonder how he did it.

Click to expand...

Are you counting the KKK and the Nazi party as part of Trump supporters that Trump was looking to get? Curry favor with? Really?

Don't think crappy FaceBook ads would be very effective at changing people's vote. I think it far more likely that people's voting decisions were made long, long before the election.

Do you really think that anyone in the US, constantly bombarded with professional level advertising would be taking in by amateurish Russian FaceBook ads? You sure hold a low opinion of others that simply don't agree with you, don't you?

iguanaman said:

That is not what Hillary said at all. Are you denying that the KKK and the Nazi party are filled with deplorables? But you are describing the "shy Trumpers" who quite likely were flipped by all the fake news from Russian trolls on social media. It only took a few % of
the millions of users that were targeted. Putin was quite adept at that targeting and one has to wonder how he did it.

Click to expand...

"russian trolls" Yeah...THAT'S why all those polls were bogus. THAT'S why Hillary gave up campaigning.

Hey...did you collaborate on that book? You know..."What Happened"? I'm sure the russian bots were one of her excuses.

Mycroft said:

"russian trolls" Yeah...THAT'S why all those polls were bogus. THAT'S why Hillary gave up campaigning.

Hey...did you collaborate on that book? You know..."What Happened"? I'm sure the russian bots were one of her excuses.

Click to expand...

Don't blame Hillary for electing that Benedict Arnold as President. You voted for him, blame yourself.

eohrnberger said:

That makes sense, but then, how'd the pollsters get it wrong so badly in the weeks before the election last November?
I mean I have my idea why, but using the logic you've outlined above, how'd they blow it so badly? And why?

Click to expand...

But what do you mean by getting it wrong? No legitimate poll said, “Hillary will will”. They say things like, “Hillary has a 60% chance of winning.” Someone who has a 60% chance of winning will still lose 40% of the time. You have to look at their methodology and track record over many years. If around 40% of the time the person they give a 40% of winning wins, then their methodology is solid.

The problem is the media and general public, to include me sometimes, forget that 60% isn’t that much better than a coin toss. We have all rolled dice hoping for a certain number and got it. The odds of that happening are far less than the odds the pollsters gave Trump to win. I know that you know this. I am just blabbing because I can’t get to sleep.

eohrnberger said:

Hmm. Seems like she IS calling 1/2 of Trump's supporters 'deplorables, characterized by “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic” views', in a "grossly generalistic" way (whatever that means).

That'd be a rather tall order to prove one way or the other that 1/2 of Trumps supporters held those views.

Campaign statements contorted and distortion, played large by the media on both counts, if you like.



Are you counting the KKK and the Nazi party as part of Trump supporters that Trump was looking to get? Curry favor with? Really?

Don't think crappy FaceBook ads would be very effective at changing people's vote. I think it far more likely that people's voting decisions were made long, long before the election.

Do you really think that anyone in the US, constantly bombarded with professional level advertising would be taking in by amateurish Russian FaceBook ads? You sure hold a low opinion of others that simply don't agree with you, don't you?

Click to expand...

Yeah, the only problem I had with the deplorables comment was she assigned a percentage to it. She should have just said “there is a portion of his supporters”. Though admittedly, she probably shouldn’t have said it at all because it just pissed people off and pissed off people are more motivated to go vote just to spite the person who pissed them off.

Skeptic Bob said:

Yeah, the only problem I had with the deplorables comment was she assigned a percentage to it. She should have just said “there is a portion of his supporters”. Though admittedly, she probably shouldn’t have said it at all because it just pissed people off and pissed off people are more motivated to go vote just to spite the person who pissed them off.

Click to expand...

Not to mention that so many Americans suck now, it is the leadership who brought us here, and we all know that CLINTON CORP has long been at the front.

Hawkeye10 said:

Not to mention that so many Americans suck now, it is the leadership who brought us here, and we all know that CLINTON CORP has long been at the front.

Click to expand...

I really want to believe that most people are decent, even when I disagree with their politics. It is a hard belief to hold onto when most of your interaction with people is online. But in face to face encounters my belief seems to hold up.

Skeptic Bob said:

I really want to believe that most people are decent, even when I disagree with their politics. It is a hard belief to hold onto when most of your interaction with people is online. But in face to face encounters my belief seems to hold up.

Click to expand...

Right......that's why we just passed a tax law that says straight up "We dont give a tinkers damn about the kids/grandkids/ unborn.......SCREW YOU!"

And now of course the D's are salivating about getting back in power and not giving a **** either...being able to spend as much as they want.

WE SUCK!

iguanaman said:

Don't blame Hillary for electing that Benedict Arnold as President. You voted for him, blame yourself.

Click to expand...

I don't blame Hillary for electing Trump. I blame her for losing to Trump. She ran a campaign...and gave it away.

Skeptic Bob said:

But what do you mean by getting it wrong? No legitimate poll said, “Hillary will will”. They say things like, “Hillary has a 60% chance of winning.” Someone who has a 60% chance of winning will still lose 40% of the time. You have to look at their methodology and track record over many years. If around 40% of the time the person they give a 40% of winning wins, then their methodology is solid.

The problem is the media and general public, to include me sometimes, forget that 60% isn’t that much better than a coin toss. We have all rolled dice hoping for a certain number and got it. The odds of that happening are far less than the odds the pollsters gave Trump to win. I know that you know this. I am just blabbing because I can’t get to sleep.

Click to expand...

"Isn't much better than a coin toss." That a valid point. Hope sleep finds you soon and that you sleep well.

Skeptic Bob said:

Yeah, the only problem I had with the deplorables comment was she assigned a percentage to it. She should have just said “there is a portion of his supporters”. Though admittedly, she probably shouldn’t have said it at all because it just pissed people off and pissed off people are more motivated to go vote just to spite the person who pissed them off.

Click to expand...

This campaign, more than any other in recent memory, was filled with ill considered statements that were made, it seems to me.

Phys251 said:

I wonder if the OP's writer knows how statistical sampling works.

Click to expand...

It doesn't matter. It pushes "their" favorite Liberal narrative.

Vetplus40 said:

It doesn't matter. It pushes "their" favorite Liberal narrative.

Click to expand...

Huh??

Anagram said:

They didn’t. Look at the final polls for the national vote and the battleground states. They are nearly all spot on or very close.

On the other hand there was this media narrative that Hillary would easily win. That turned out not to be true, but it wasn’t really reflected in the final polls.

Click to expand...

The local polls in battleground states actually showed trump practically ties with hillary in the states trump won, while the national polls shown hillary with a major lead. Granted wisconsin was the exception, their polling had major gaps and was nearly absent like pollsters were so sure hillary would win that state that they felt they did not need to do many polls at all.

On election day many forecasters gave hillary over 90% chance to win to 99% chance to win, while nate silver gave her around a 70% chance to win. of forecasters he came the closest probably because he weighed the polls and saw the polls showed trump could win.

dobieg said:

And liberals wonder why we don't trust polls.




'Fraud': Mainstream polls use 29% more Democrats than Republicans

Click to expand...

Just to be picky, using your numbers of 29% Republican and 37% Democrat would round up to 28%, not 29%. Among registered voters, 30% are Dems and 25% are Reps meaning Dems are 7% over-represented, according to the figures in your reference, not the 29% you imply.

Party Affiliation | Gallup Historical Trends

Another thing. Of Reps, in a December Gallup poll, 80% approve of Trump while 7% of Dems approve of Trump. That means, multiplied by the % registered voters, Reps contribute 20% to Trump’s approval rating while Dems contribute 2.1%. Add Independents, who make-up 42% of reg. voters and of who 33% approve of Trump, they contribute 13.9% to Trumps approval rating for a total of 36%:

Presidential Approval Ratings -- Donald Trump

I don’t know when the poll you show was taken, but your 38% overall job approval is pretty much the same as the Gallup 36%. And, the Dems being 30% of registered voters vs. 25% of Reps. is a 5% difference vs. your 8% difference (37% Dems minus 28% Reps).

Just for fun. Assuming 100% minus the approval rating of each party, which does not account for those with no opinion, of those who approve of Trump, 50% are Reps, 27.9% are Dems and 28.1% are Inds.

You should be as concerned with Inds as Dems.

But less compare your figures against what I’ve referenced. Your posted data shows 29% of those polled are Reps while my data shows Reps make up 25% of registered voters. In other words, Reps are over-represented by 4% in the poll you gave. Your data, 37% Dems vs. my data 30%, Dems over-represented by 7%. Your data, 34% Inds while my data shows 42% Inds for a difference of 8%. Just another tidbit. Going into election day, Hillary was at 45.9% and Trump 42.8%, within the typical 3.5% margin of error with Trump trending upward and Hillary flattening out:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/polls.html

And many people wonder why so many others don’t bother to do the work of research to find out the more pertinent facts of the matter.

bluesmoke said:

Just to be picky, using your numbers of 29% Republican and 37% Democrat would round up to 28%, not 29%. Among registered voters, 30% are Dems and 25% are Reps meaning Dems are 7% over-represented, according to the figures in your reference, not the 29% you imply.

Party Affiliation | Gallup Historical Trends

Another thing. Of Reps, in a December Gallup poll, 80% approve of Trump while 7% of Dems approve of Trump. That means, multiplied by the % registered voters, Reps contribute 20% to Trump’s approval rating while Dems contribute 2.1%. Add Independents, who make-up 42% of reg. voters and of who 33% approve of Trump, they contribute 13.9% to Trumps approval rating for a total of 36%:

Presidential Approval Ratings -- Donald Trump

I don’t know when the poll you show was taken, but your 38% overall job approval is pretty much the same as the Gallup 36%. And, the Dems being 30% of registered voters vs. 25% of Reps. is a 5% difference vs. your 8% difference (37% Dems minus 28% Reps).

Just for fun. Assuming 100% minus the approval rating of each party, which does not account for those with no opinion, of those who approve of Trump, 50% are Reps, 27.9% are Dems and 28.1% are Inds.

You should be as concerned with Inds as Dems.

But less compare your figures against what I’ve referenced. Your posted data shows 29% of those polled are Reps while my data shows Reps make up 25% of registered voters. In other words, Reps are over-represented by 4% in the poll you gave. Your data, 37% Dems vs. my data 30%, Dems over-represented by 7%. Your data, 34% Inds while my data shows 42% Inds for a difference of 8%. Just another tidbit. Going into election day, Hillary was at 45.9% and Trump 42.8%, within the typical 3.5% margin of error with Trump trending upward and Hillary flattening out:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/polls.html

And many people wonder why so many others don’t bother to do the work of research to find out the more pertinent facts of the matter.

Click to expand...

I don't believe you're doing the math correctly. The 29% oversampling is correct. Even using your number, that would still mean Dems are over sampled by 23%(37% polled vs 30% actual = 23% over sampled).