That's nothing! Pravda has him up twelve points and predicts he will receive 100% of the vote when it's all over.

It is not incorrect for pollsters to poll more democrats. Where it would be incorrect would be for them to sample Ds or Rs beyond their representation as a percentage of the populace.

48% of Americans identify as Democrats
39% that identify as Republican.
11% identify as Independents
2% Libertarian, Green Party or other

Any poll that over samples Democrat (>48%) would be suspect for bias just as any poll that oversamples Republicans (>39% would be suspect for bias. But a poll that samples more democrats than republicans is not biased based on polling more Ds than Rs at face value.

(10-22-2016 10:48 AM)Max Power Wrote:  

ok. that was funny.

(10-22-2016 06:50 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  It is not incorrect for pollsters to poll more democrats. Where it would be incorrect would be for them to sample Ds or Rs beyond their representation as a percentage of the populace.

48% of Americans identify as Democrats
39% that identify as Republican.
11% identify as Independents
2% Libertarian, Green Party or other

Any poll that over samples Democrat (>48%) would be suspect for bias just as any poll that oversamples Republicans (>39% would be suspect for bias. But a poll that samples more democrats than republicans is not biased based on polling more Ds than Rs at face value.

Also party ID is very fluid.

(10-22-2016 07:50 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 06:50 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  It is not incorrect for pollsters to poll more democrats. Where it would be incorrect would be for them to sample Ds or Rs beyond their representation as a percentage of the populace.

48% of Americans identify as Democrats
39% that identify as Republican.
11% identify as Independents
2% Libertarian, Green Party or other

Any poll that over samples Democrat (>48%) would be suspect for bias just as any poll that oversamples Republicans (>39% would be suspect for bias. But a poll that samples more democrats than republicans is not biased based on polling more Ds than Rs at face value.

Also party ID is very fluid.

But for polling purposes some measures of the norm for each party as percentage of the overall population is necessary to try and have the sample be representative.

Between 2004 - 2016 the percentage of D to R to Is has stayed within 2-4% +/- so party affiliation doesn't seem to fluctuate wildly on a population wide basis.

(10-22-2016 07:50 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 06:50 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  It is not incorrect for pollsters to poll more democrats. Where it would be incorrect would be for them to sample Ds or Rs beyond their representation as a percentage of the populace.

48% of Americans identify as Democrats
39% that identify as Republican.
11% identify as Independents
2% Libertarian, Green Party or other

Any poll that over samples Democrat (>48%) would be suspect for bias just as any poll that oversamples Republicans (>39% would be suspect for bias. But a poll that samples more democrats than republicans is not biased based on polling more Ds than Rs at face value.

Also party ID is very fluid.

party ID matters less in this election than any since ross peeerot elected the billdo for us.

(10-22-2016 08:27 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 07:50 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 06:50 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  It is not incorrect for pollsters to poll more democrats. Where it would be incorrect would be for them to sample Ds or Rs beyond their representation as a percentage of the populace.

48% of Americans identify as Democrats
39% that identify as Republican.
11% identify as Independents
2% Libertarian, Green Party or other

Any poll that over samples Democrat (>48%) would be suspect for bias just as any poll that oversamples Republicans (>39% would be suspect for bias. But a poll that samples more democrats than republicans is not biased based on polling more Ds than Rs at face value.

Also party ID is very fluid.

party ID matters less in this election than any since ross peeerot elected the billdo for us.

Maybe but we won't know for sure until the final poll as to how many switched parties and which way indies ultimately went.

(10-22-2016 08:29 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 08:27 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 07:50 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 06:50 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  It is not incorrect for pollsters to poll more democrats. Where it would be incorrect would be for them to sample Ds or Rs beyond their representation as a percentage of the populace.

48% of Americans identify as Democrats
39% that identify as Republican.
11% identify as Independents
2% Libertarian, Green Party or other

Any poll that over samples Democrat (>48%) would be suspect for bias just as any poll that oversamples Republicans (>39% would be suspect for bias. But a poll that samples more democrats than republicans is not biased based on polling more Ds than Rs at face value.

Also party ID is very fluid.

party ID matters less in this election than any since ross peeerot elected the billdo for us.

Maybe but we won't know for sure until the final poll as to how many switched parties and which way indies ultimately went.

we won't know until the day after election day, and then it's only a maybe. the exit polls could be indiscernible. this whole thing is flying under the radar. we are on totally unplowed ground.

part of the GOP establishment is saying they will defect to hillary, although I don't know if they can bring themselves to actually do it. the progressives and millenials will probably stay home. african americans probably won't turn out for hilldawg like they did for BHO. trump has drug in a **** ton of new voters, and has some mysterious crossover appeal to blue collars that I have yet to figure out. and there is much anger in the electorate. anger, being an emotion, is somewhat immune to logic. thus, it's pretty hard to tell where this thing is going to wind up, and much more difficult to figure out why once it gets there.

as a student of politics, this is the most fascinating thing I have ever seen. as a republican, it's nearly suicide inducing. as an american, it's terrifying.

(10-22-2016 08:40 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 08:29 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 08:27 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 07:50 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 06:50 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  It is not incorrect for pollsters to poll more democrats. Where it would be incorrect would be for them to sample Ds or Rs beyond their representation as a percentage of the populace.

48% of Americans identify as Democrats
39% that identify as Republican.
11% identify as Independents
2% Libertarian, Green Party or other

Any poll that over samples Democrat (>48%) would be suspect for bias just as any poll that oversamples Republicans (>39% would be suspect for bias. But a poll that samples more democrats than republicans is not biased based on polling more Ds than Rs at face value.

Also party ID is very fluid.

party ID matters less in this election than any since ross peeerot elected the billdo for us.

Maybe but we won't know for sure until the final poll as to how many switched parties and which way indies ultimately went.

we won't know until the day after election day, and then it's only a maybe. the exit polls could be indiscernible. this whole thing is flying under the radar. we are on totally unplowed ground.

part of the GOP establishment is saying they will defect to hillary, although I don't know if they can bring themselves to actually do it. the progressives and millenials will probably stay home. african americans probably won't turn out for hilldawg like they did for BHO. trump has drug in a **** ton of new voters, and has some mysterious crossover appeal to blue collars that I have yet to figure out. and there is much anger in the electorate. anger, being an emotion, is somewhat immune to logic. thus, it's pretty hard to tell where this thing is going to wind up, and much more difficult to figure out why once it gets there.

as a student of politics, this is the most fascinating thing I have ever seen. as a republican, it's nearly suicide inducing. as an american, it's terrifying.

Are we sure about that?

(10-22-2016 09:04 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 08:40 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 08:29 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 08:27 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 07:50 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  Also party ID is very fluid.

party ID matters less in this election than any since ross peeerot elected the billdo for us.

Maybe but we won't know for sure until the final poll as to how many switched parties and which way indies ultimately went.

we won't know until the day after election day, and then it's only a maybe. the exit polls could be indiscernible. this whole thing is flying under the radar. we are on totally unplowed ground.

part of the GOP establishment is saying they will defect to hillary, although I don't know if they can bring themselves to actually do it. the progressives and millenials will probably stay home. african americans probably won't turn out for hilldawg like they did for BHO. trump has drug in a **** ton of new voters, and has some mysterious crossover appeal to blue collars that I have yet to figure out. and there is much anger in the electorate. anger, being an emotion, is somewhat immune to logic. thus, it's pretty hard to tell where this thing is going to wind up, and much more difficult to figure out why once it gets there.

as a student of politics, this is the most fascinating thing I have ever seen. as a republican, it's nearly suicide inducing. as an american, it's terrifying.

Are we sure about that?

He broke a lot of records in the primaries, so yeah. If he was a dem, you would definitely see that as bringing in new voters.

Primary turnout for the republicans was much higher then in the past. How that plays in the general is uncertain.

http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-mig...ers-2016-5

(10-22-2016 09:21 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 09:04 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 08:40 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 08:29 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 08:27 PM)EagleX Wrote:  party ID matters less in this election than any since ross peeerot elected the billdo for us.

Maybe but we won't know for sure until the final poll as to how many switched parties and which way indies ultimately went.

we won't know until the day after election day, and then it's only a maybe. the exit polls could be indiscernible. this whole thing is flying under the radar. we are on totally unplowed ground.

part of the GOP establishment is saying they will defect to hillary, although I don't know if they can bring themselves to actually do it. the progressives and millenials will probably stay home. african americans probably won't turn out for hilldawg like they did for BHO. trump has drug in a **** ton of new voters, and has some mysterious crossover appeal to blue collars that I have yet to figure out. and there is much anger in the electorate. anger, being an emotion, is somewhat immune to logic. thus, it's pretty hard to tell where this thing is going to wind up, and much more difficult to figure out why once it gets there.

as a student of politics, this is the most fascinating thing I have ever seen. as a republican, it's nearly suicide inducing. as an american, it's terrifying.

Are we sure about that?

He broke a lot of records in the primaries, so yeah. If he was a dem, you would definitely see that as bringing in new voters.

it's absolutely true. but then the question becomes, "who nominated this guy, if it wasn't republicans?"

(10-22-2016 08:29 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 08:27 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 07:50 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 06:50 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  It is not incorrect for pollsters to poll more democrats. Where it would be incorrect would be for them to sample Ds or Rs beyond their representation as a percentage of the populace.

48% of Americans identify as Democrats
39% that identify as Republican.
11% identify as Independents
2% Libertarian, Green Party or other

Any poll that over samples Democrat (>48%) would be suspect for bias just as any poll that oversamples Republicans (>39% would be suspect for bias. But a poll that samples more democrats than republicans is not biased based on polling more Ds than Rs at face value.

Also party ID is very fluid.

party ID matters less in this election than any since ross peeerot elected the billdo for us.

Maybe but we won't know for sure until the final poll as to how many switched parties and which way indies ultimately went.

Romney won unaffiliated in NC by about 15%, indications are that Clinton and Trump are about even with them.

(10-23-2016 11:38 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 08:29 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 08:27 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 07:50 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 06:50 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  It is not incorrect for pollsters to poll more democrats. Where it would be incorrect would be for them to sample Ds or Rs beyond their representation as a percentage of the populace.

48% of Americans identify as Democrats
39% that identify as Republican.
11% identify as Independents
2% Libertarian, Green Party or other

Any poll that over samples Democrat (>48%) would be suspect for bias just as any poll that oversamples Republicans (>39% would be suspect for bias. But a poll that samples more democrats than republicans is not biased based on polling more Ds than Rs at face value.

Also party ID is very fluid.

party ID matters less in this election than any since ross peeerot elected the billdo for us.

Maybe but we won't know for sure until the final poll as to how many switched parties and which way indies ultimately went.

Romney won unaffiliated in NC by about 15%, indications are that Clinton and Trump are about even with them.

I wonder why?. (See the below NC voter affiliation map.

(10-23-2016 11:38 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 08:29 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 08:27 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 07:50 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 06:50 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  It is not incorrect for pollsters to poll more democrats. Where it would be incorrect would be for them to sample Ds or Rs beyond their representation as a percentage of the populace.

48% of Americans identify as Democrats
39% that identify as Republican.
11% identify as Independents
2% Libertarian, Green Party or other

Any poll that over samples Democrat (>48%) would be suspect for bias just as any poll that oversamples Republicans (>39% would be suspect for bias. But a poll that samples more democrats than republicans is not biased based on polling more Ds than Rs at face value.

Also party ID is very fluid.

party ID matters less in this election than any since ross peeerot elected the billdo for us.

Maybe but we won't know for sure until the final poll as to how many switched parties and which way indies ultimately went.

Romney won unaffiliated in NC by about 15%, indications are that Clinton and Trump are about even with them.

you also insisted that 535 million people signed up for ACA.

(10-23-2016 11:45 AM)EagleX Wrote:  

(10-23-2016 11:38 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 08:29 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 08:27 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 07:50 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  Also party ID is very fluid.

party ID matters less in this election than any since ross peeerot elected the billdo for us.

Maybe but we won't know for sure until the final poll as to how many switched parties and which way indies ultimately went.

Romney won unaffiliated in NC by about 15%, indications are that Clinton and Trump are about even with them.

you also insisted that 535 million people signed up for ACA.

No I didn't.
We are trying to have a discussion about voting here. I've offered some information. Can you add anything relevant to the topic?

(10-23-2016 11:44 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-23-2016 11:38 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 08:29 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 08:27 PM)EagleX Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 07:50 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  Also party ID is very fluid.

party ID matters less in this election than any since ross peeerot elected the billdo for us.

Maybe but we won't know for sure until the final poll as to how many switched parties and which way indies ultimately went.

Romney won unaffiliated in NC by about 15%, indications are that Clinton and Trump are about even with them.

I wonder why?. (See the below NC voter affiliation map.

I'm not following you. What does the chart reveal that would explain the difference between the Romney 2012 advantage with unaffiliated and indications that the current race is about even with unaffiliated?

Pretty frank interview by Trump campaign spokesman. Their path is pretty narrow. They aren't counting Arizona and Georgia yet.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2...ction.html

Quote from the article:

"....So the fact that it's been three points, four points, six points, is what can turn around in these next two weeks.

Our path is Florida, Ohio, Iowa, North Carolina. You add Nevada there, you protect Arizona and Georgia, you look at New Hampshire and Maine-two, where the congressional districts there are split in the way they award their electoral votes.

We're also going to continue to visit Colorado, Virginia, Pennsylvania.

So there are several different [paths]. A poll came out yesterday showing us six down in Michigan. We haven't even been there. We're not up on the air there....."

Evidently the DNC sent polling recommendations out to media as to their preferred methodology for sampling. It includes Wikileaks emails from Podesta. It's a very interesting read.

It might explain the wild variation in the margin on national and state polls.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-23...versamples