• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Do polls underestimate Trumps support?

angrysoba said:
Bwaaahah!

Holy crap! I am really sorry to see Trump win, but the consolation is seeing all the overconfident dick-swinging "skeptics" making ridiculously over-the-top predictions which turned out to be wrong. There should be a lesson in humility here about how certain we should allow ourselves to be, but if Trump winning the Republican nomination didn't work I doubt this will. It seems to me that the cautiousness with which fivethirtyeight forecast a likely victory for Clinton was a result of the Republican nomination process.
Click to expand...


this
 
The Don said:
Those of us who kept bringing it up were accused of all kinds of things :(

Ironically, this will be bad news for Brexit because Trump will want any future trade deals to be heavily weighted in favour of the U.S. Any hope that the U.S. will fill any void in UK exports will be dashed.
Click to expand...

I certainly noticed that you made this point and that you were repeatedly ridiculed for it. "538's an outlier!" etc...
 
I think there were similarities between this and Brexit in the sense that many of Trump's critics are as clueless as Farage's critics in what strikes a chord with voters. When people criticized Trump and Farage for being hypocritical in taking advantage of the things they criticized they allowed Trump and Farage to say, sure, we take advantage of the corrupt system, but it is corrupt and you are part of the corrupt system. Remainders and Clintonites had nothing but a negative narrative, in saying that things were bad but they plan to muddle along and hope it gets better, but don't vote for Trump or Farage because that way lies Crazy Town. But they had nothing positive to offer.
 
angrysoba said:
Bwaaahah!

Holy crap! I am really sorry to see Trump win, but the consolation is seeing all the overconfident dick-swinging "skeptics" making ridiculously over-the-top predictions which turned out to be wrong. There should be a lesson in humility here about how certain we should allow ourselves to be, but if Trump winning the Republican nomination didn't work I doubt this will. It seems to me that the cautiousness with which fivethirtyeight forecast a likely victory for Clinton was a result of the Republican nomination process.
Click to expand...

Those prediction where only guesstimate from people having read a few article. None of us did calculation on past voting habits. As such, we will continue our guesstimate , and learn nothing, because those guessitimate were not *serious* in nature. More like wishfull thinking or throwing a coin.

This is the usual forum banter. That you mistake those "overconfident dick-swinging "skeptics"" for something sketpical and serious shows your mistake : politic is far from it, and polling prediction even less so.
 
BobTheCoward said:
I have been skeptical of this point.

First, let me preface this by saying these invisible voters can be true, but we have no evidence to suspect they exist.

Why do we think there is an underground well of Trump supporters? This isn't the first election the losing candidate called on a silent majority. That doesn't materialize. There are a large percentage of non voters. Getting them to vote was a Sanders strategy and it didn't work. Occasionally, an idiot says they can win as a third party to get that 40% missing to vote for them.

I think people worry about it because they think Trump is unique. I wouldn't bet on it.
Click to expand...


Was last night evidence?
 
Aepervius said:
Those prediction where only guesstimate from people having read a few article. None of us did calculation on past voting habits. As such, we will continue our guesstimate , and learn nothing, because those guessitimate were not *serious* in nature. More like wishfull thinking or throwing a coin.

This is the usual forum banter. That you mistake those "overconfident dick-swinging "skeptics"" for something sketpical and serious shows your mistake : politic is far from it, and polling prediction even less so.
Click to expand...

That is certainly the case with political punditry as has been shown by people like Philip Tetlock. But there are attempts to make ever more accurate forecasts (rather than predictions), and I think 538 which some people were dismissing made a reasonable forecast this time around. People like Huffington Post were so laughably inaccurate as to be not worth listening to again. There is a meaningful distinction between the two.
 
angrysoba said:
That is certainly the case with political punditry as has been shown by people like Philip Tetlock. But there are attempts to make ever more accurate forecasts (rather than predictions), and I think 538 which some people were dismissing made a reasonable forecast this time around. People like Huffington Post were so laughably inaccurate as to be not worth listening to again. There is a meaningful distinction between the two.
Click to expand...

Sure I agree with you with respect , for example of poller and pundit. But there is the perception that this sketpic forum is more serious. Not so much. I say it is on the same floor level as any other forum. And I am pretty sure people are aware that their "prediction" are as worth as the electron which carrier them over : not much.
 
Caper said:
Brexit was the canary in the coal mine for tonight. It should have been noticed.
Click to expand...

For me, it was when the Cubs won the World Series. That tells you anything can happen.

(Seriously, the superstitious part of me thought that the Cub's win was a sign that very unexpected things could happen. I don't normally listen to the superstitious thought relics in my brain, but by coincidence, they were right this time.)
 
Last edited:
I feel chastened and ashamed that I gave up my conviction of a Trump win after the "Hollywood Access" tapes.
But in many ways, we could have skipped from the nomination straight to the election: none of the debates, none of the scandals mattered.
 
Too much identity politics in this one.
I don't recall an election that attacked voters and their motivations as intensely as this one. Essentially, the message was "If you vote for Trump, you are a bigoted, racist, misogynist, islamophobic, homophobic hateful cretin." Those do exist, and they are vocal, but the broad brush of disrespect was applied to all.

Accuse voters of being "deplorable", then try to get an accurate poll from them. Perhaps people lied but I suspect Clinton voters were more likely to participate at all.

It's the same reason atheists are underrepresented in polls. The oft-repeated connotation is that atheists are bad people who just want to live a lawlessly evil life. Most just arent going to give themselves a misrepresented label.

Brexit 'leave' voters were underrepresented when they were all deemed racist simpletons who bought into an irrational fear of migrants.
 
The Don said:
Those of us who kept bringing it up were accused of all kinds of things :(

Ironically, this will be bad news for Brexit because Trump will want any future trade deals to be heavily weighted in favour of the U.S. Any hope that the U.S. will fill any void in UK exports will be dashed.
Click to expand...

That's the thing I noticed. Like I've said before. I have never seen such a circle jerk then I've seen on here. And not just here. 538 got trashed for even suggesting Trump had a chance. I was thinking to myself, the kind of pressure these prediction industry is under, just to conform to a pro-Hilary narrative is amazing. I was shocked that wasn't noticed.
 
The media lied and the pollsters lied and deliberately skewed by oversampling dems and a million other little tricks.

Who knows how much of it was conscious vs. their subconscious biases playing out?

Either way, the end result was them lying in the hopes that they'd depress his turnout by black pilling his supporters.

It didn't work.

The liberal media is DONE.
 
crescent said:
For me, it was when the Cubs won the World Series. That tells you anything can happen.

(Seriously, the superstitious part of me thought that the Cub's win was a sign that very unexpected things could happen. I don't normally listen to the superstitious thought relics in my brain, but by coincidence, they were right this time.)
Click to expand...

I now feel empowered to blame you for pointing this out.
 
angrysoba said:
Bwaaahah!

Holy crap! I am really sorry to see Trump win, but the consolation is seeing all the overconfident dick-swinging "skeptics" making ridiculously over-the-top predictions which turned out to be wrong. There should be a lesson in humility here about how certain we should allow ourselves to be, but if Trump winning the Republican nomination didn't work I doubt this will. It seems to me that the cautiousness with which fivethirtyeight forecast a likely victory for Clinton was a result of the Republican nomination process.
Click to expand...
Lol

I got that slightly wrong
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom