2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dracula said:
That link seems to suggest the TIPP poll was the most accurate.

This link also suggests they were the most accurate for the last three election.

http://www.investors.com/politics/ibd-tipp-presidential-election-poll/

So i dont get why people are so confident and ignore this one poll just because its do different when it was so different previously and the only one that was accurate...
Click to expand...

They engaged in herding. Putting out close, contradictory horse race number, with large number of undecideds, then miraculously break those undecideds heavily for Dems on the last few polls to move it in line with polling average.
 
fcbforever said:
It's abut the method.
Basically, TIPP uses a sample of people likely to vote. They will keep calling these people, always the same ones. While this can get remarkable results, it heavily depends on how accurate the initial sample correlates to the actual voterbase. If you have bad luck from hte beginning, with people leaining more republican, this bias will stay there throughout all of your polling process. Also, those polls are always favouring republicans since these are older and more likely to participate.
When such a poll goes so much against the average of other pollsters, it's rather likely the initial sample was wrong. Because of that, fivethirtyeight is as of now only considering trends (which will still show and are actually depicted like the national average of pollsters) from this poll.

Edit: a similarly conducted poll by ABC is currently showing Clinton being in front by 12 points. As you can see, while these are very accurate at showing trends, they are vulnerable to their own methods. No way in hell Clinton wil archieve a national +12.
Click to expand...

I get that, but you're making an assumption that this time the original group selection is faulty. With no evidence of that other than its consistently different to other polls (whilst at the same time being consistent). Yet they were consistently different to other polls in last three elections, and in fact as the link showed, other polls tend to 'herd' their polls to ensure they are closer to the average closer to election times, which the TIPP one does not. Which would further explain the disparity.

Also, if it did happen to have a group of people with an initial republican bias then you would still expect/hope for a significant swing to dems given what has happened, which just hasnt occurred in their group as it supposedly has with others.

Cant for the life of me see him winning, but i just think its going to be a lot closer than people think
 
Dracula said:
I get that, but you're making an assumption that this time the original group selection is faulty. With no evidence of that other than its consistently different to other polls (whilst at the same time being consistent). Yet they were consistently different to other polls in last three elections, and in fact as the link showed, other polls tend to 'herd' their polls to ensure they are closer to the average closer to election times, which the TIPP one does not. Which would further explain the disparity.

Also, if it did happen to have a group of people with an initial republican bias then you would still expect/hope for a significant swing to dems given what has happened, which just hasnt occurred in their group as it supposedly has with others.

Cant for the life of me see him winning, but i just think its going to be a lot closer than people think
Click to expand...

I will put money on it being a landslide.
 
Dracula said:
I get that, but you're making an assumption that this time the original group selection is faulty. With no evidence of that other than its consistently different to other polls (whilst at the same time being consistent). Yet they were consistently different to other polls in last three elections, and in fact as the link showed, other polls tend to 'herd' their polls to ensure they are closer to the average closer to election times, which the TIPP one does not. Which would further explain the disparity.

Also, if it did happen to have a group of people with an initial republican bias then you would still expect/hope for a significant swing to dems given what has happened, which just hasnt occurred in their group as it supposedly has with others.

Cant for the life of me see him winning, but i just think its going to be a lot closer than people think
Click to expand...

It may well be where it is today - a 5-6% Hillary win, which would be quite decisive in terms of being somewhere between Obama's win over McCain and his win over Romney. Should be enough to get the Dems the Senate back which would be massive. Otherwise Hillary will spend the first 2 years in complete gridlock.
 
unchanged_lineup said:
You might not want to read the youtube comments :(
Click to expand...

Picked out this gem:

The jews and the muslims have been intermarrying for 1400 years already. Abu Bakr, the first caliph of islam, and the father of the abused little girl Aisha, who was married off to mahomet, the false prophet, was a jew. Today, Abu Bakr al-baghdadi of ISIS in Babylon is re-enacting the legacy of this first caliph by cleansing the land of all muslims that are not muslim enough, and kaffirs, to establish the caliphate. many say he is a jew. Muslims and Jews have historically conspired together against the europeans and christians. Islam itself is judaism by another name, and was created by talmudic pharisees to use the arabs as their war machine against the christian byzantines, then in control of Jerusalem/Zion. Up until today, talmudic jews prefer muslims to christians, and are still collaborating with them to destroy western civilisation. Don't let the conflict in Israel fool you. Because although Israelis may understand that their main support comes from christians, many jews, like in Ukraine are in bed with the muslims and the EU is being run along the pharisee marxist principles which is the driving force behind the intake of muslim refugees, and immigrants in general. Many christians are also welcoming the poor refugees, for different reasons, to help them, out of compassion. The anti-fascists are none other than marxists and muslims and undeducated airheads who are using the Nazi complex to brand anyone who rejects islam as racist.
Click to expand...

How do people become that stupid? We really need to improve education in this country.
 
Dracula said:
That link seems to suggest the TIPP poll was the most accurate.

This link also suggests they were the most accurate for the last three election.

http://www.investors.com/politics/ibd-tipp-presidential-election-poll/

So i dont get why people are so confident and ignore this one poll just because its do different when it was so different previously and the only one that was accurate...
Click to expand...

I don't get it either. One thing I thought was telling was the streaming of the benefit dinner Trump and Clinton spoke at last week. They both spoke from prepared speeches that was basically a roast of the other. The interesting bit was that during the Trump segment, the likes, and smiley imojis were flowing with a few angry imojis. The comments in general were pro Trump. This was a Facebook stream so I have no idea if those things can be filtered but when Clinton made her speech, I counted 0, that Z-E-R-O likes and smiley's but a shit ton of angry imojis. In addition, 99% of the comments were against Clinton. Now, this is a small sample at around 100k viewers at the time but Zuckerberg is pro Clinton so I doubt Facebook had anything to do with filtering the reponses either way.

Personally I don't feel it is over or that it will be an easy win for Clinton. Paddy Power already paid out over a million on her winning it last week. Do they know something we don't? :rolleyes:
 
We're trusting polls of emojis over the bulk of scientific ones now?
 
peridigm said:
You missed my point. The Facebook stream was live and raw comments, not something presented to you by ABC, CNN, or FOX.
And how is it scientific when the pollsters are targeting a specific demographic?

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...em-playbook-rigging-polls-through-oversamples
Click to expand...
Do some reading about what "oversampling" actually means.

And most people avoid posting comments on livestreams because they tend to attract the dregs of the earth. Oh the surprise that they're Trump twats.
 
langster said:
I'm starting to get seriously worried about you mate, you have some serious issues! :lol:
Click to expand...

He and James Carville were awesome on Crossfire back in the day. Tucker makes me laugh and he is always dressed so nicely. Add in the fact that he's a raging alcoholic and he seems like someone I'd enjoy hanging out with.
 
Dwazza said:
He and James Carville were awesome on Crossfire back in the day. Tucker makes me laugh and he is always dressed so nicely. Add in the fact that he's a raging alcoholic and he seems like someone I'd enjoy hanging out with.
Click to expand...

:lol: I will have to watch him differently from now on then, maybe I will look at him in a different light if I think he's always wankered or on a massive WUM. Otherwise he usually comes across and hugely loathsome and arrogant, especially on the daytime Fox show he's always on. And the same when he's on The Five or Hannity. He does dress well though, so I agree with you there mate.

In other news, KellyAnne's past comments may be coming back to bite her on her skinny arse!

http://shareblue.com/trumps-campaign-manager-harshly-criticizes-her-candidate/

:lol:
 
langster said:
:lol: I will have to watch him differently from now on then, maybe I will look at him in a different light if I think he's always wankered or on a massive WUM. Otherwise he usually comes across and hugely loathsome and arrogant, especially on the daytime Fox show he's always on. And the same when he's on The Five or Hannity. He does dress well though, so I agree with you there mate.

In other news, KellyAnne's past comments may be coming back to bite her on her skinny arse!

http://shareblue.com/trumps-campaign-manager-harshly-criticizes-her-candidate/

:lol:
Click to expand...

He definitely plays it up for the cameras and is always drunk. He's quite brilliant, even if you don't agree with what he's saying. I've always felt that with anything, the strength of one's reaction to it is a good indicator of its quality.
 
Does anybody else want to punch the My Pillow guy because of his crucifix hanging out of his shirt? Shameless prick and his crap pillow.
 
Fener1907 said:
I feel like this would have been a much closer race if somebody had changed his Twitter password.
Click to expand...

He would have just made another account, @realrealDonaldTrump...


Ha! I've never thought about the absurdity of his twitter handle before. That he would imagine putting "real" in front of his name would really make people believe it was actually him :D

"There! Now THAT'LL distinguish me from the fakers!"
 
Rado_N said:
She was offered a $12m donation to the Clinton Foundation if she held a Clinton Global Initiative event in Morocco and agreed to speak. What's the problem?
Click to expand...

Call me cynical, but the way I see it she now owes a Moroccan king a favour. You don't donate £12million for a speech, that's pretty outrageous even for her usual prices.
 
Kaos said:
Call me cynical, but the way I see it she now owes a Moroccan king a favour. You don't donate £12million for a speech, that's pretty outrageous even for her usual prices.
Click to expand...

It wasn't just a speech though was it?
 
Kaos said:
Call me cynical, but the way I see it she now owes a Moroccan king a favour. You don't donate £12million for a speech, that's pretty outrageous even for her usual prices.
Click to expand...
You're cynical ;)

If it's any comfort, she didn't end up going, Bill and Chelsea did.
 
Kaos said:
Call me cynical, but the way I see it she now owes a Moroccan king a favour. You don't donate £12million for a speech, that's pretty outrageous even for her usual prices.
Click to expand...

The favour is holding the CGI annual meeting in Morocco. Think of it as World Cup of charities.
 
Dracula said:
I get that, but you're making an assumption that this time the original group selection is faulty. With no evidence of that other than its consistently different to other polls (whilst at the same time being consistent). Yet they were consistently different to other polls in last three elections, and in fact as the link showed, other polls tend to 'herd' their polls to ensure they are closer to the average closer to election times, which the TIPP one does not. Which would further explain the disparity.

Also, if it did happen to have a group of people with an initial republican bias then you would still expect/hope for a significant swing to dems given what has happened, which just hasnt occurred in their group as it supposedly has with others.

Cant for the life of me see him winning, but i just think its going to be a lot closer than people think
Click to expand...

Another thing you have to consider is that this is a national poll. As we both know, it's not about the national percentage of voters you get, but about the electoral college.
Even as the TIPP called the last one right on percentage, still 538 called every single state right because statewide polling is just as important, if not even more important. Right now, statewide polling suggests a landslide with Clinton getting every single swing state and possibly, even states like Arizona, Indiana and Georgia.
So for now, nobody should be worried.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.