I am aware that this is one of those things that is so radically out of step with the media narrative that people will come in my comments and say “lol pure copium” “what on earth are you smoking to say something so wrong” “what you are DELUDED how can you even say something that is so RADICALLY DIFFERENT from what the New York Times assured me of”

All I can say is, you are welcome to. We don’t discriminate. Feel free to cite other polls including the ones that ask Trump voters as well as Biden voters whether Biden is too old to be president and other entertaining things other than who they’re going to vote for.

Also, yes, the debate was a pure horrifying shit show. So is getting convicted of 24 felonies, or electing the guy who wants to kill protestors and abolish the Department of Education, and contraception, and the EPA and NOAA, and deploy the military against protestors, and a wide variety of other things that are literally too extreme to list without boring everyone and making me sounding like a crazy person.

  • phdepressed@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Yeah, supposedly pollsters changed their algorithms to be more accurate after 2016. And 2020 polls were pretty accurate. But leading a poll when you’re still within the margin of error where you can lose isn’t really worth anything (that’s what happened to HRC). You can lead the poll but the poll can still be accurate to you losing.

    • mozz@mbin.grits.devOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      The whole process of polling is a pile of shit.

      I analyzed some polls for recent elections, and they were off by an average of 16 percentage points. They only write that “margin of error 3%” thing because if they were honest about it, no one would listen to their poll, and they’d just use the ones from all the other people who still were lying about their MoE.

      The “changed their algorithms” thing is just adding random fudge factors to the dogshit methodology until the answers come out right, but it never makes them predictive at all of the next election, because the underlying methodology is still dogshit. Basically, they call people on the phone, 1-2% of them answer, and then they bark a bunch of questions and whoever stays on the line for the whole thing, they assume that’s a good sample for everyone else and won’t be correlated with any other factors. Which, when you start thinking about it, makes it make sense why it might be off by 16 points.

      There’s actually an argument to be made that a change in the polling is pretty reflective of a change in sentiment, even if the overall accuracy might be off by 10 or 20 points, is part of why I posted this. But mostly, I posted it to throw into sharp relief the dishonesty of the overall media narrative “Biden is fucked in polling cause debate,” which is created through a mixture of asking cunningly crafted questions to make it not an apples to apples comparison, mindless journalistic groupthink, and lying.