Poll oversamples?
- Thread starter PriddyBoy
- Start date
He is a moron. You argue in circles about irrelevant topics, just like him. You own that.
Oversampling is a standard statistical technique used to get a better estimate of groups that make up a smaller percentage of the population. There is an entire polling industry that is usually quite good at predicting national elections correct but suddenly in 2016 it's all gone awry? Does that make sense?
You don't need 2016 polls to know that Trump is going to lose. The following four points is all you need to know.
1. In 2012, Romney beat Obama among whites 59-39%.
2. Despite #1, Romney lost the popular vote 51.1 to 47.2%.
3. Whatever margin greater than 59-39% Romney would have needed in 2012 to win the popular vote, a GOP candidate in 2016 would need an even larger margin since the country is slightly less white in 2016 than it was in 2012.
4. Trump is not going to do as well with non-whites in 2016 as Romney did in 2012.
That's it. And if that's not enough, I think we can safely assume that Trump won't do as well with women as Romney did in 2012. "Binders of women" is nothing compared to what Trump has given us.
One of two things is going to happen in the long term. Either the GOP will start winning a larger percentage of non-whites in national elections. Or else the GOP will continue losing national elections.
You don't need 2016 polls to know that Trump is going to lose. The following four points is all you need to know.
1. In 2012, Romney beat Obama among whites 59-39%.
2. Despite #1, Romney lost the popular vote 51.1 to 47.2%.
3. Whatever margin greater than 59-39% Romney would have needed in 2012 to win the popular vote, a GOP candidate in 2016 would need an even larger margin since the country is slightly less white in 2016 than it was in 2012.
4. Trump is not going to do as well with non-whites in 2016 as Romney did in 2012.
That's it. And if that's not enough, I think we can safely assume that Trump won't do as well with women as Romney did in 2012. "Binders of women" is nothing compared to what Trump has given us.
One of two things is going to happen in the long term. Either the GOP will start winning a larger percentage of non-whites in national elections. Or else the GOP will continue losing national elections.
Congratulations, you show us what a moron you are, again. You are not intelligent enough to realize how stupid you are.
![[laughing]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/laugh.r191677.gif "Laughing [laughing]")
These were internal polls to target ad spending ....... in 2008. Just because WikiLeaks posts something doesn't mean it's sinister.
You did state, "No matter how one feels about sampling and even if no pollster is taking Podestas advice the fact remains that he is telling the media how he wants the polls done and why." When in fact a) it wasn't Podesta and b) they were internal polls and had nothing to do with telling the media anything.
Also I don't think Trump is doing much worse with non-white votes. College educated whites are killing him.
That is pretty funny coming from you.Congratulations, you show us what a moron you are, again. You are not intelligent enough to realize how stupid you are.
If there was any "inroad" that might favor trump vs. romney it would be black voter turnout. Do they turn out to vote for Hillary. If so, she wins at least everywhere Obama won in 2012.
To change the subject for just a second, has anyone seen/read any psuedo-legitimate statistical data on how many traditional.....meaning, less/non-college educated white voters (male or female)......Democrats are crossing over to Trump ?? Whatever that is, I guess Hillary is thought to have more than offset that number with college-educated suburban women.
I'm not arguing with any of that; however, I don't get the impression anyone expects Hillary to do near as well with African-Americans as Obama. I thought I heard recently she's currently running around 80% while Obama was more like 90%. However, I also don't think too many figure/expect blacks to turn out in anywhere near the numbers this election versus 2008 and 2012.....which, I guess, offsets that liabilty a little bit.
Dave, I think you are stupid too - to pass up that opportunity. Do you mind if I take that Cuntryboy's $500 bet that he insists on? I think Vegas odds are at 4-1. If the brave boy is willing to put up $2000 to my $500, he has a bet. Let's work out a clearing house like sending security to V for safekeeping.
You are a stupid chicken shit too. Vegas is giving 6-1 and I offered 4-1, and you want a straight bet. Just how damned dumb are you?
I'm not the one claiming the polls and the election is rigged but turns around and won't put my money where my mouth is.
If you were really confident Trump was going to win you wouldn't need 4 to 1 odds.
And, you are too stupid to see the difference. I have not claimed that the polls are rigged. I am making flat out statement that the opportunity is there. We have seen a past history of it. I have zero doubt that the media is slanted. This year more than any year in the past memory. I have no doubt that Hillary is the biggest crook to have run for the office. Liar, just a little bigger than Bill, And he was world class.
Would you consider "put my money where my mouth is" (your quote) that suggests that you would wager on words you speak. You have been, are, and will be too much coward to wager on your lie that I am not a WVU grad. Now, chicken shit, put any amount you can afford to lose. You are still all mouth and no ass. Yellow coward. Either stand behind your words or stfu.
You claim Hillary is the biggest crook; what do you think about Trump University?
You claim Hillary is a liar; what do you think about all the lies Trump has been caught in (too many to count, but one example is him saying he was never in favor of the Iraq war but they had him on tape saying he supported it)?
You're a real internet tough guy with all that name calling. Decrepit old men shouldn't call younger men in good shape so many names.
No. You are the one who cant read so you instead twist what someone said because you are too stupid to have a conversation with adults.
Trump U - I assume that those who did not complain got the education they expected. Anyone can complain that they did not receive a proper education and file legal charges for recovery. Few win the argument because in most cases the problem was lack of effort on part of complainant.
Do you have a reliable source or a video of Iraq War claim? I have seen none. And, I know Hillary is a liar because of the credible people who have proven the case.
Smith and Wesson provides equalizer for the aged people out of shape. Nope, not a tough guy. Just never had patients to argue with an idiot who won't back away.
And you are still a chicken shit who does not have the backbone to support what "comes out of mouth) with a wager regarding my WVU degree.
Also, Dave is head and shoulders over you in all aspects. He kicks your ass unmercifully and you are so under-armed with facts that you go right back to get kicked again. That ain't bravery, that is just plain stupid.
Last edited:
Do you seriously believe Trump U is legit? My god, you're a moron. The trial begins on the 28th and it won't be pretty. You probably also believe some crooked judge will be involved.
Have you been living under a rock? Did you even watch any of the debates? Trump stood right there on stage in the debate and said he "never was for the Iraq war". Right after the debate, they played audio of him in an interview saying he supported the Iraq war. Again, you personify the typical idiot Trump supporter. You never believe facts and believe whatever Trump says. You probably think he actually stood and watched people cheer as the World Trade Center collapsed. The level of stupidity of Trump supporters is astounding. Only in your warped mind do you believe dumb dave can match intellect with me. I had to give him a lesson on design speed versus speed limit. And let me guess, you probably also think that you are as intelligent as I am. Your spelling and grammar are atrocious. You should demand a refund from WVU if you actually attended, which I don't believe you did. It is impossible for someone to attend WVU and be as dumb as you are.
If it's such a false narrative then Dave will gladly put his money where his mouth is, or do you want in on the action?
Never Forget!
The trouble is most of their "predictions" based on their endless sample polling were proven wrong. Very few polls if any got the actual results correct. I think this is where all the Russian hysteria emmanates. The Left simply refuses to believe all of their polling was wrong, and Trump actually won. So, there had to be a reason, a quirk, a scheme to upset what they all thought to be Truth.
The polls had to be correct...they all said Hillary would win and win big.
She lost.
Enter Russians.
The polls for the election were only "wrong" compared to how accurate they usually are. They usually are amazingly, fantastically accurate. In 2016 they were merely amazingly accurate.
Sure they were.
They all had Hillary winning. They all said it wasn't even going to be close. Even she believed them, that's why she skipped over PA, WI, MI and other Blue states that had her taking the elctoral College votes going away.
Yep, they nailed it all right.
Guess the Russians had better polling methods.
The polls were generally pretty close on popular vote margin of victory. They just were.
If I'm in a contest that says I need X number of electoral college votes to win, and you're giving me polling on popular votes which don't count in the W/L column...you're not giving me any valuable information.
You guys always claim Trump is so dumb...how come he figured out where the winning electoral college votes were and Hillary missed it relying instead on the heralded popular votes?
We (WVU) were generally better than most teams we played in basketball this year, but we still lost at the end when all the points were counted.
He said the polls were "amazingly accurate" but almost all of them except for one done by USC had Hillary the predicted winner in BOTH the popular vote and the electoral College.
They were amazingly wrong in terms of their final results!
No other way to spin it.
Aluminum Foil is for outdoor cooking, but here's some Lids for Libs you and alwayswrong89, et. al. may find fashionable while trying to navigate the real world.
Aluminum Foil is for outdoor cooking, but here's some Lids for Libs you and alwayswrong89, et. al. may find fashionable while trying to navigate the real world.
Lids for Libs!!!!!!!
![[roll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/roll.r191677.gif "roll [roll]")
Baloney. I don't know or care what the polls said a couple weeks before the election but by election day the poll predictions ended up being pretty close to reality.
There are 130,000,000 people of all different kinds voting. Considering that, yes, the polls were "amazingly accurate. The popular vote predictions were close and it only takes being off by a very small percentage of the popular vote to make a big difference in the electoral college projections.
The polls were great in 2016 compared to any alternative but just not great compared to polls in other elections.
Aside from polls I'd like to hear you tell my how any kinds of predictions could be done.
