itbaddude wrote:
eric a blair wrote:noted that not one trumper will ever admit that the national polling was absolutely correct.
I'll freely admit that in a few instances state by state polling wasn't accurate (although it rarely is).
the rcp average is 42.5, up from a low of 39.8. I have no problem with the rcp average, although I like what 538 does - weighting polls by how rigorous they are. They have it at 41.7.
I'll dumb it down for you a little more. You keep bringing up the national polling was correct. I have to tell you that you don't understand what those numbers mean. The fact that HRC got more votes than Trump nationally and the polling data was close does not mean anything more than HRC got more votes than Trump. It is just one data point that is fed into models.
The pollsters collect current data (polls) and use this data plus historical data to predict the outcome of elections. They do this to make money by selling their prediction to anyone that is willing to pay for it.
All the polling data is fed into models (which are secret) and the models are used to predict the election. In the most simplistic model, you can poll the nation and determine who will win just based on the national poll. However, the presidential election is not based on national votes so the models tend to be more complicated.
The pollsters had access to all the data, national, local and historical. They used the data to predict HRC would win with an 85 to 99 % probability. So yes, all the pollsters were wrong. You can even say that using the data point that HRC got more votes than Trump in total is was not a good predictor of who will win the election.
Please stop twisting the numbers. If the presidency was decided by national vote totals, the numbers would probably be different. Trump would probably have gone to California, spent some money, promised the world to everyone in order to get more votes.
I'm not twisting the numbers.
The national polling was correct, within a point or two. Some state polling was wrong. I think we agree on that.
Since approval polls are ALSO national, I think it is absurd and groundless to say 'based on the 2016 polling, I believe approval polls are worthless and biased.' Since the national presidential polls were right, there is every reason to believe that the national approval polls are ALSO right. I have no idea how you can deny that. Other than sheer, factless partisanship.
If you want to start talking about statisticians and their interpretation of the polls in 2016 - that's a different question and deals with questions of probabliity. And of course probability has little to do with approval polls.