Elections Clinton vs. Trump Polls thread, v2

[VivaRevolution]

I don't really watch cable news or anything so I wouldn't know. Point is they are not the demographics that win/lose you the GE unless there is a significant swing since previous elections or the turnout is significantly higher or lower than previous elections. His tweet showed neither of that and was a null tweet.

Fair enough again, I am curious what the poster who posted the tweet thought, because he seemed blown away that Trump would re-tweet that, not in the sense that it didn't make sense, but that he seemed offended by the idea that Trump would put that out.

 

[Deleted member 429137]

You know what would be cool (@Lead Salad): A Politifact-type thread. Like if two people are disputing something factual, an unrelated panel revolves it.

This would be fucking amazing. It could never possibly happen.

 

[Deleted member 429137]

Also this thread became sheer madness.

 

[Lead]

Fair enough again, I am curious what the poster who posted the tweet thought, because he seemed blown away that Trump would re-tweet that, not in the sense that it didn't make sense, but that he seemed offended by the idea that Trump would put that out.

I can't speak to his intentions but I thought it was because the previous discussion on that page or so was about Trump not talking about polls anymore. It easily could've been some type of outrage over a race thing but even if it were, it doesn't change how silly the tweet is from the perspective of how the election is playing out. Like I've mentioned, cherrypicking doesn't really do anything in informing people where the race is. Obviously it's in Trump's best interest not to be objective. He's a candidate.

 

[Lead]

Also this thread became sheer madness.

Yea, the poll thread and general discussion thread is starting to get blurred. Actually a lot of the threads are because of this HRG and JVS beef. I didn't know this would last as long as it did over multiple threads.

 

[Deleted member 429137]

Yea, the poll thread and general discussion thread is starting to get blurred. Actually a lot of the threads are because of this HRG and JVS beef. I didn't know this would last as long as it did over multiple threads.

Maybe you could give them their own thread to battle each other. We could vote on a poll who won that week's arguing.

 

[Lead]

Maybe you could give them their own thread to battle each other. We could vote on a poll who won that week's arguing.

The bet thread literally was made because of this whole thing. Even the rules were inspired by details of them arguing over a bet. I don't really want call out threads in the WR. They definitely should make one in the OT just cause it would be hilarious to see all the random "fuck off" posts from OT posters not knowing where this came from.

 

[Deleted member 429137]

The bet thread literally was made because of this whole thing.

lol that's amazing. I did not know that.

Even the rules were inspired by details of them arguing over a bet. I don't really want call out threads in the WR. They definitely should make one in the OT just cause it would be hilarious to see all the random "fuck off" posts from OT posters not knowing where this came from.

lmao that would be the only thread I'd go into OT for

 

[Limbo Pete]

HendoRuaGoat is gonna need a hail mary KO. JVS has run away with it on the score cards.

 

[K1levelgrappler]

Fair enough again, I am curious what the poster who posted the tweet thought, because he seemed blown away that Trump would re-tweet that, not in the sense that it didn't make sense, but that he seemed offended by the idea that Trump would put that out.

I responded to you about half way down page 50 but I think you were too busy shitposting to notice.

 

[VivaRevolution]

I responded to you about half way down page 50 but I think you were too busy shitposting to notice.

Hard for me to keep track when I'm fending off attacks from 4 different posters.

 

[Quipling]

This would be fucking amazing. It could never possibly happen.

Also, there are maybe a dozen people on this board who I trust to have the requisite ability to judge the strength of arguments.

Spoiler

and almost all of them have gotten accused of being some sort of shill recently

 

[carlos cadona]

If anyone wants to get back to talking about polls then I've noticed that Trump is gaining in tracking polls that poll the same people over and over but is generally on the down swing in the normal polls.

 

[m52nickerson]

OK, so now you want to call me a coward, and claim that I did accuse him.

Who is being dishonest here now?

You.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Cool, don't care if you think so. I am being stalked by Jack from thread to thread., and now his buddies have joined in as well.

Remember when jack and Anung would track their dispute from thread to thread, well Jack is trying to do that now with me.

Dude, you seriously should get professional help.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Yea, the poll thread and general discussion thread is starting to get blurred. Actually a lot of the threads are because of this HRG and JVS beef. I didn't know this would last as long as it did over multiple threads.

He seems deranged to me. Tell me what I can do to avoid his crazy accusations and general rage, and I'll do it.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Also, there are maybe a dozen people on this board who I trust to have the requisite ability to judge the strength of arguments.

Spoiler

and almost all of them have gotten accused of being some sort of shill recently

I think Pan (who actually was an elected official and so is closer to being some kind of operative than anyone else) as the token smart, well-educated conservative would have to be there. Lead seems to be broadly respected on a personal level and is also right-leaning. I think everyone would be cool with Zank. Personally, I'd trust Upa a lot (maybe more than anyone for something like this), but like me, he might have pissed off too many crazies to be accepted. Rup would have the same assets and liabilities. Ghandi might pass.

It's much easier to find right-leaning posters who would be acceptable to the left than vice versa, even though there are way fewer good ones. Probably because, for whatever reason, left-leaning posters here are way less likely to accuse people who don't agree with them of being shills or hacks.

If anyone wants to get back to talking about polls then I've noticed that Trump is gaining in tracking polls that poll the same people over and over but is generally on the down swing in the normal polls.

Update from Nate Silver:

Trump odds (8/30):
538 polls-plus—26%
Daily Kos Elections—26%
Betfair—23%
538 polls-only—21%
NYT/Upshot—12%
Princeton Election Consortium—5%

And then:

What causes differences between the models? Basically 3 things (corrected slide):

 

[UpaLoompa]

Update from Nate Silver:

And then:

What I've found interesting is that what intuitively I'd consider the more conservative approaches (i.e. no "fundamentals", slower) give Trump even lower odds. However, that's probably driven by residual skepticism from when Silver first trotted out his fundamental polls in 2010 (?). I was rather apprehensive with incorporating economic predictors etc. With these numbers what I suspect is being revealed is that polling is indicating that Trump is strongly, strongly under performing what his baseline party outcome expectations would be.

 

[Jack V Savage]

What I've found interesting is that what intuitively I'd consider the more conservative approaches (i.e. no "fundamentals", slower) give Trump even lower odds. However, that's probably driven by residual skepticism from when Silver first trotted out his fundamental polls in 2010 (?). I was rather apprehensive with incorporating economic predictors etc. With these numbers what I suspect is being revealed is that polling is indicating that Trump is strongly, strongly under performing what his baseline party outcome expectations would be.

Yeah, Silver's "polls plus" model includes an economic index that suggests the race should be a tossup (this year) so it's going to show the favorite having a smaller chance than the polls do if there's a big difference.

Not directly related but appropriate for this thread, Noah Smith had a good criticism of Silver in Bloomberg:

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-08-09/an-economics-lesson-for-political-pollsters

Hard to find a specific bit to quote. The basic point is that Silver's models' predictions are too volatile.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

Poll: Clinton Unpopularity at New High, on Par With Trump

Clinton Holds Lead Amid Record High Dislike of Both Nominees