It usually happened here in the past with Dansk Folkeparti (Danish People's Party or something like that). The polls always showed them lower than they ended up at the actual election.
2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
As with Brexit, voters may vote for Trump for varying reasons despite his racist rhetoric, as with Brexit they might think they need more border controls and a hardline on terrorism but they are also voting alongside the inbred racists for the same candidate.
This is the problem for polls with the mockery of Trumps supporters by SNL etc, it sends a lot them underground
Sleeper Trump cells if you will.
There are other reasons that could happen, at least in the US. For example, one candidate might have normal polling numbers but their party apparatus might have a better "turn out the vote" ground game - the ability to get potential voters to vote early or on voting day. Then that candidate will do better than their polling numbers previously implied. Similarly, if one candidate has more perceived momentum and voter enthusiasm going into voting day, then they will likely outperform their polling numbers. In either case, I doubt it ever has anything to do with voters being ashamed to admit they are for a particular candidate.
Anything can happen i suppose. The big difference between the US presidential elections and Brexit is the lack of statistical models on the latter. The perception that remain would win was based purely on individual polls as opposed to data analytics and the type of simulation based statistical models you see here, here, here, here or here.
I haven't really looked into it, it was just somewhat striking that it was always Dansk Folkeparti outperforming the polls. You're usually labelled as an uneducated, racist cnut if you vote for them, it's also rare you hear anyone say they voted for them (of course this isn't the case with Trump), yet they were the second largest party after the last election with 21.1% of the votes.
But yeah, the US probably works quite differently.
But if Trump wins the election was rigged, right? I mean he's said it repeatedly.
Don't forget Gavin Newsom, the Castro twins and Amy Klobeshar. The Dems have a lot of great people in the wings, the other side, not so much.When everyone says they will miss Obama, I think they should really be saying they miss Joe too. What a duo they have been. Biden has been the perfect sidekick for Obama and I honestly think they are both genuinely lovely people. I know you can't ever be really sure until you meet someone, but with those two I beg to differ. They both wear their hearts on their sleeves and are exactly what you see. Two of the finest gentlemen in world politics. America and Americans should feel extremely honoured and blessed to have had them in charge for 8 years. And with Liz Warren and Bernie, well, that's 4 of the greatest Democrats of modern times right there. I only wish we had 4 equivalents here in the UK at the moment.
Well Rick Wilson has been alluding to two huge stories for a while now, and it's not just him, others have said the same too. I just hope he's right and it's not just wishful thinking or a massive wum.
Is Trump seriously going to win? I'm getting worried!
Nah, polls are clearly favouring Clinton. A Trump win is pretty unrealistic at this point.
Which is bizarre considering that Trump doesn't have a religious bone in his body and Clinton is deeply religious.
It's more about the optics. You have to be at the very least pay regular lip service to those snake oil salesmen.
Even though I'm not involved in this vote, I'm quite prepared to just totally ignore politics for the rest of my life if Trump wins because what's the fecking point in caring?
He has a 25% chance as of this morning.
Because people like him tend to win when the majority stop caring?
Silver taking a swipe at Sam Wang
They always take a swipe at each other. Sam does it more frequently.
I also noticed they both follow other poll aggregators , but not each other.
Well yeah, but it's not going so well anyway so why waste energy caring? Ignorance is bliss and all that
Drumpf coming back to Phoenix on Saturday. Internal polling must show him down. 
http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/...rump-coming-back-to-phoenix-for-saturday.html
http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/...rump-coming-back-to-phoenix-for-saturday.html
Until the guy or woman you isn't bother voting against turns your country into an economically stagnant wasteland, destroys your ability to get healthcare and maybe starts a war or two.
Wait a sec, are people using computer simulations to try and forecast the election now?
You mean Brexit?
Yes, its whats done these days.
That's because for the "Christian" right - and also for many others who make non-atheism a key part of their politics - christianity and religion are just highly convenient fig-leafs to disguise their true interests and motivations, namely exercising control over other people.
Hence they want to (for example):
* Stop gay men and women from marrying, even tho' it doesn't stop them (the "Christians") from marrying who they want.
* Stop women from choosing to have an abortion, even tho' it doesn't affect their own choices concerning pregnancy.
* Stop any from of gun control ... because (subconsciously or not) they like the implicit threat of coercing and controlling others that possessing a gun brings with it.
The whole mind-set is about stopping, blocking, fencing-in, fencing-out, suppressing, controlling ...
Are you new to this Earth?
The last 10 years in general really.
The election should be scrapped and the next POTUS decided by Breitbart online poll.
He should at least acknowledge that it's his model that is more of an outlier to others currently, and has been the most volatile generally this cycle.
@Ubik
I have no real intention to re-ignite the primary debates, but I know this debate will crop up randomly in the future, so just wanted to get these out of the way:
Instinctively saying that disrespecting Hillary supporters = disrespecting minorities and women isn't true; it is infact disrespecting old people. Age was best correlated with voting choice in that contest, in fact she lost hugely among young (18-30) women and young latinos and marginally even among young blacks. Overall both candidates were rougly tied counting 18-60 and she won with the senior vote. So the analogy would be with Brexit voters instead, who are not exactly seen as paragons of virtue on the caf...
Further, about racial campaigning in 2008, these are words not from a surrogate but from herself:
I have no real intention to re-ignite the primary debates, but I know this debate will crop up randomly in the future, so just wanted to get these out of the way:
Instinctively saying that disrespecting Hillary supporters = disrespecting minorities and women isn't true; it is infact disrespecting old people. Age was best correlated with voting choice in that contest, in fact she lost hugely among young (18-30) women and young latinos and marginally even among young blacks. Overall both candidates were rougly tied counting 18-60 and she won with the senior vote. So the analogy would be with Brexit voters instead, who are not exactly seen as paragons of virtue on the caf...
Further, about racial campaigning in 2008, these are words not from a surrogate but from herself:
[my opponent's] support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me.
Nate is under a bit of pressure to drive traffic to his site. Sam meanwhile has always despised horse race punditry.
I don't remember any prior animosity, but this nerd fight did blow up a bit this cycle.
Yeah, Sam is a scientist after all. Natural to hate this media sensationalism.
I wish i can be as confident as he is as regards Trump's chances. I'm deeply worried now.
Well every country ends of getting the leader it deserves.
I may not like these opinions but the scariest things for me is that even into the 21st century, these opinions are still so widely held in the USA.
Not particularly. Most Republican voters are more interested in having a Republican in the Presidency at all costs to preserve the Supreme Court and undo things like Obamacare etc. They are voting to preserve their identity and what they perceive America to be, which in this case means taking things back to the 1980s when things were much whiter. The Trump candidacy as perceived by his supporters, is more so a nativist, white identity preservation scheme above all else, which is why none of Trump's previous escapades involving women, taxes, Russia etc aren't of any concern in contrast to someone like Hillary winning.
Sam talked about that and how it's all about regression to the mean ,and the mean this election season is Clinton +3 as far as i recall.
Thanks for the reassurance
. it helps when visualizedBookies are rarely wrong when it comes to elections. Clinton is at around 1.3, while trump is around 3.0 most places. Media hype it as "close and impossible to call", but the reality is that it's not as close as it might seem. Same story with Obama vs. Romney.
Alas, they can be very wrong...
Its interesting to me that bookies are even considered credible sources in contrast to say, mathematicians and statisticians who run polling models.
They're using mathematics to try and predict the election?
- Status