IMO, their methods are outdated and flawed. Randomly dialing up people just doesnt work anymore. I would not be surprised to find a correlation between people who are willing to answer the phone and their belief structure. For example, I could postulate conservatives tend to want to be left alone, so therefore they wont pick up a random call. More polling needs to be done across the board by different groups. After the election, hand the polling data and election results over to machine learning to extrapolate the data.
The reality is that pollsters call and mail thousands of people but only get 4 or 5 to respond. It's real difficult to get a fair representation among people who would spend 15-20 mins to talk politics or to answer socially loaded quiz questions.
Who are the people that actually take time out of their day to do polls? I’ve never done a poll in my life. Maybe they need to find a new way to accurately measure voter enthusiasm and likely turnout? Idk what that way would be.
"I dont agree with BLM. That doesn't make me racist." "What don't you agree with?" *this user has blocked you*
I think part of the problem is they they have been over-relying on likely voters vs registered voters. I do think there is a shy Trump voter effect which causes independent Trump voters to say they are undecided thus biasing the undecided group towards biden. And I think you can't underestimate enthusiasm and turnout efforts being superior for Trump vs Biden. Those 3 factors came into play.
Don't keep tabs on FNN but they probably crystallized that "shy trump voter" thought into something more subversive and misleading. Good for them. The media needs more accountability rather than feeding on its own manufactured garbage drama. They gorging on fat ratings for now and play a role in the ongoing emotional rollercoaster.
I do not know how they get the polls, but the method does not work. I have never picked up a phone call from polls, I received a few from them. There needs to be a better method to identify what voters really think.
I just dont think theyre ever prepared for a follow up. They troll then disappear when you ask for a meaningful retort. As racists tend to do.
Looking back the presidential polls were off but not too far off. Things happened to break for Trump very well on swing states like FL, IA And OH to win and it looks like he over performed in swing states of WI and MI but Biden still win them. what really looks off are the Senate polls. That Graham won by such a large margin when many polls showed it close, that Collins is holding on even though being down consistently, that Tillis is likely to hold on even though he was down double digits are embarrassing.
Why is it a surprise that Trump supporters lie? Their "prophet" has told around 25,000+ lies since he has been in office.
I don't think it's exactly the shy Trump voter. But I think there are a significant people so turned off by negative hype surrounding polling and the media. I heard someone say that when they get a call from someone saying they are conducting a poll from the NY Times or any other outlet, they just hang up. So the people the polls actually get to respond are people who are happy to give their opinion. That probably tends to skew more Democratic than the actual populace.
Just checked ... Biden 50.4% 72,140,321 Trump 48% 68,669,595 The final national pols had Biden at +5%. I guess the above results is in the margin of error. I suspect that in the final analysis the pollsters will conclude that Trump is a Force of Nature and will always outperform the most well thought out polls.
It seems like the proprietary polling that the Trump campaign used internally was more accurate than what we get in the public polls. He was saying it would be close but he had a shot. Judging from Biden's last campaign stops, he might have had better data too. So, if Trumpers lying is a problem, some pollster has managed to correct for it. If high turnout was a problem, some pollsters corrected for it. If Biden's lack of ground game was an issue, some pollster still knew. He just didn't put it on ABC. If that's true, that would mean that someone knows how to do the right polling analysis, but for whatever reason it's not being shared with the public in the public polling. No, I don't think it's a media conspiracy. But, they've screwed it up again somehow. I accepted in 2016 that the election was within the margin of error and Clinton just got a bad break. But there's an old saying in Tennessee -- I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee -- that says, fool me once, shame on -- shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again. I won't accept a margin of error explanation. That's like getting a once-in-a-hundred-years flood every year (like we've had) and chalking it up to bad luck. If they can look semi-respectable in 2024, I might believe them in 2028. I don't know what they need to do to fix their industry, but they have to fix something.
Not quite the same but what you wrote reminded me of brexit, the hedge funds with the good data were relying on exit polls. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ys-secret-hedge-fund-brexit-polling-a-scandal
@JuanValdez actually thinking about it a bit more, given the amount of early voting you have in the states, perhaps the campaigns were relying on exit polls as well.
This makes sense if you only poll a certain type or group of people you will get certain results. I also think it became vogue to lie to pollsters just to stick it to the libs. So how did these guys polling fair?
