I mean, yes, it’s true as far as it goes, and I would have thought that my point #3 would have sorta encompassed that idea and given a hint that I am aware on some level that it’s more complex than “whose line is higher in the most recent national poll = who’s going to win”.
I have more I could say on it including what other recent swing state polls besides this one are saying, and underlying problems with the methodology including e.g. the absolute insanity of reporting polls of all registered voters as if likelihood to vote was not correlated with political affiliation when we already know that it is… but mostly I was just pointing out here, (a) keep in mind what the sudden shift of narrative here is implying about the bias of the poster (b) no fate, please vote.
But now I have a more interesting question. If I look back in your history, will I find indications that you thought national level polls were important when Biden was behind, and now all of a sudden don’t care about them when Biden is ahead? ‘Cause that would be a super interesting (and to me unexpected) finding.
I have been warning against national polls for years now, even pre-Lemmy. There are OTHER problems with polling, don’t even get me started on “likely” voters.
But following these polls over time allows you to establish a trend line and right now, it’s trending Trump.
That will change coming out of the Democratic convention, but then the question becomes “is it enough?” 🤷♂️ Guess we’ll find out!
National polls are meaningless because we don’t have national elections.
If Trump is up in all 7 swing states, it doesn’t matter what 4 out of the 10 polled who happen to be in California or New York think.
This is why the state by state polls are important .
The “given” states, we already know.
Washington, Oregon, California, etc. are all going to Biden, full stop.
Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, etc. are all going to Trump, full stop.
So knowing that, you poll the states that are in flux.
Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, Georgia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota.
Well that’s an interesting comment
I mean, yes, it’s true as far as it goes, and I would have thought that my point #3 would have sorta encompassed that idea and given a hint that I am aware on some level that it’s more complex than “whose line is higher in the most recent national poll = who’s going to win”.
I have more I could say on it including what other recent swing state polls besides this one are saying, and underlying problems with the methodology including e.g. the absolute insanity of reporting polls of all registered voters as if likelihood to vote was not correlated with political affiliation when we already know that it is… but mostly I was just pointing out here, (a) keep in mind what the sudden shift of narrative here is implying about the bias of the poster (b) no fate, please vote.
But now I have a more interesting question. If I look back in your history, will I find indications that you thought national level polls were important when Biden was behind, and now all of a sudden don’t care about them when Biden is ahead? ‘Cause that would be a super interesting (and to me unexpected) finding.
I have been warning against national polls for years now, even pre-Lemmy. There are OTHER problems with polling, don’t even get me started on “likely” voters.
But following these polls over time allows you to establish a trend line and right now, it’s trending Trump.
That will change coming out of the Democratic convention, but then the question becomes “is it enough?” 🤷♂️ Guess we’ll find out!
Yeah, polls are crap but relative polling is like their one useful application. On that we agree