• Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I see polls are unreliable again. Until someone says Biden should step down, then you have polling on alternate candidates that is the word of God Almighty.

    • nondescripthandle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Selectively believing in data that proves your point and denying data that challenges is is republican level shit, and they wonder why people are fed up with mainstream Dems.

    • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Arguments can be wrong in multiple ways

      “The polls are not reliable, but even if they were, they don’t show what you say they show” is not two contradictory statements that invalidate one another

      (There’s a whole separate issue that confounding factors make the polls bad metrics of the overall reality, but you can still look at relative difference within the same poll from week to week or candidate to candidate and it’s useful to a certain extent)

      Pretty sure I have made both of those points multiple times in the last few days when talking about polling

      • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Couple days ago, you demanded to know who would be an alternate for Biden, and announced that for any answer, you would post some of the polls you selectively find credible when they confirm your existing biases. Here’s the alternates. Provide your garbage polls that aren’t any good because polls are worthless.

        Harris. Newsom. Franken. Buttigieg. Whitmer.

        • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          The chart is from this which was sent to me by one of your allies in an effort to prove that Biden was cooked.

            • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              Hey cool we’re back around to the very first comment you sent and the reply I made

              You can go back up there on your own, and imagine that I replied with what I said last time, and then you don’t have to reply because you already said what you had to say in response. Victory! It is the end of the conversation.

              • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                Hey cool we’re back around to the very first comment you sent and the reply I made

                Hey, you confirmed it to be true.

    • variaatio@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Well problem is most of the polls are general popular opinion votes, but US presidential election is not a straight popular vote. As such the general “who majority of the nation like” doesn’t really matter. Secure states are secure, so you might as well not ask their opinion and leave them out of opinion poll. Focus even on voting district levels in states the use electors to elect the electors and so on.

      Problem is such polls are really hard work… Almost no one does those and instead tries to read tea leaves out of general opinion polls. Polls which simply don’t have the granularity of data to make conclusions. You need to ask “what is mood in this swing district in this swing state”. After you have first added up the secure states, well with some looking of “are our old estimates of what are secure states for blue or red correct”. Not that opinion wise all states aren’t purple, but as far as election system results go there absolutely is blue and red states.

      As I understand even in USA maybe one of two whole nation granular polls are done, with the actual amount of data to actually conclude how the actual electoral votes split. Given as said, since in some cases it isn’t “you have to go down to state by state”. Nope “we have to go district by district since this state has weirdo way of electing electors or adding up the totals.”