Where is Hillary?

[Always in His Presence]

Which one's?

That's the hard part isn't it? None of them show the same results.

 

[bhsmte]

That's the hard part isn't it? None of them show the same results.

Would you expect all polls to have the same results? How long have you been following presidential polls?

Looking at a summary of all polls, tends to give one a balanced picture.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/pres_general/

 

[Always in His Presence]

Would you expect all polls to have the same results?

If you cannot duplicate results of a poll taken at the same time. You can't vouch for any kind of accurate predictor.

Adding all the results together then dividing them by the number of sources is hardly an accurate method.

In addition, you have no clue whatsoever how the first debate is going to effect predictors. It could completely change things.

 

[bhsmte]

If you cannot duplicate results of a poll taken at the same time. You can't vouch for any kind of accurate predictor.

Adding all the results together then dividing them by the number of sources is hardly an accurate method.

In addition, you have no clue whatsoever how the first debate is going to effect predictors. It could completely change things.

I would read up a bit on polling.

 

[Always in His Presence]

I would read up a bit on polling.

I have. It is not an exacting science. There are too many variables, from the sampling demographics to the phraseology of the questions.

 

[bhsmte]

I have. It is not an exacting science. There are too many variables, from the sampling demographics to the phraseology of the questions.

I can't help but think, if the current polls indicated the opposite (Trump leading), you would have a completely different take on this.

 

[Always in His Presence]

The most famous gaff.

1948 - Truman runs against Thomas E. Dewey, the Republican nominee in the 1948 presidential election. The scientific pollsters, including George Gallup, all predicted that Dewey would beat Truman. (Gallup had won a dramatic bet by correctly predicting the outcome of the 1936 election.) Newspapers were so sure the pollsters were right that they printed the headline, "Dewey Beats Truman." But they were wrong.

Truman beat Dewey and the race wasn't even that close (Truman won by 3.5 percentage points). What had gone wrong? The pollsters had stopped polling a week before the election. They thought that people's votes would not change before the election.

At this point of their election, the pollsters had Dewy by a landslide. And it was that way until a week before the elections.

 

[Always in His Presence]

I can't help but think, if the current polls indicated the opposite (Trump leading), you would have a completely different take on this.

That is most likely because you have no idea who I am, nor how I think.

 

[bhsmte]

That is most likely because you have no idea who I am, nor how I think.

Well, the content of your posts can provide clues as to how you think.

 

[bhsmte]

The most famous gaff.

1948 - Truman runs against Thomas E. Dewey, the Republican nominee in the 1948 presidential election. The scientific pollsters, including George Gallup, all predicted that Dewey would beat Truman. (Gallup had won a dramatic bet by correctly predicting the outcome of the 1936 election.) Newspapers were so sure the pollsters were right that they printed the headline, "Dewey Beats Truman." But they were wrong.

Truman beat Dewey and the race wasn't even that close (Truman won by 3.5 percentage points). What had gone wrong? The pollsters had stopped polling a week before the election. They thought that people's votes would not change before the election.

At this point of their election, the pollsters had Dewy by a landslide. And it was that way until a week before the elections.

How many polls did they have in 1948, compared to today? Have they been able to refine the science of polling, since 1948?

 

[Always in His Presence]

Well, the content of your posts can provide clues as to how you think.

True, then you will note the number of times I have said I am not a fan of Trump. He happens to be the one running against Hillary. The person I was supporting did not get the nomination.

I am however dead set against Hillary ever entering the White House. That being said, doesn't negate what I have written about polls.

 

[bhsmte]

True, then you will note the number of times I have said I am not a fan of Trump. He happens to be the one running against Hillary. The person I was supporting did not get the nomination.

I am however dead set against Hillary ever entering the White House. That being said, doesn't negate what I have written about polls.

You didn't answer my question. Are the polls from 1948, as refined as they are today? Did they have as many different polls in 1948, as they have today?

Polls can be wrong, no question. In today's world, they are typically wrong when the polls show a close race, not when virtually every poll shows one side up by a wide margin.

In 2012, the Rasmussen poll showed Romney beating Obama, but most other polls showed Obama winning. Of course, the Rasmussen poll has always been known to have a conservative lean.

 

[Always in His Presence]

You didn't answer my question. Are the polls from 1948, as refined as they are today? Did they have as many different polls in 1948, as they have today?

Here is the answer to your question:

I don't know, and I don't have the time nor inclination to do the research for you. Regardless, it doesn't change the fact that It is not an exacting science. There are too many variables, from the sampling demographics to the phraseology of the questions.

Case in point the number of polls that showed Trump was the loser in preliminary races that he won handily. You can find those stats from cites you already cited.

 

[bhsmte]

Here is the answer to your question:

I don't know, and I don't have the time nor inclination to do the research for you. Regardless, it doesn't change the fact that It is not an exacting science. There are too many variables, from the sampling demographics to the phraseology of the questions.

Case in point the number of polls that showed Trump was the loser in preliminary races that he won handily. You can find those stats from cites you already cited.

Primary races, with so many candidates, are much more difficult to predict with polls. Once you get down to two candidates and the public has observed them for as long as they have, the polls tend to be more accurate.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

She does not have to carry that burden anymore now that Trump is back in the lead. She only has 5 appearances between now and the election. Trump does that much in a week. She simply can not keep up with him.

Another way of looking at it is, Trump has to make 5 appearances a week just to keep up with Hillary.

 

[joshua 1 9]

She can't keep up with Trump's ability to alienate people, no question.

From the very beginning Trump has made it abundantly clear that he is running to get rid of corruption. So of course the corrupt political system people are not going to like him. Corrupt people like Hillary are the reason he is running for office. If there was someone anywhere that could get the job done then he would not need to be doing this. He is happy and content running his business. He is just unhappy with the way corruption has taken over this country and he feels that he has to do what he can to fix the problem.

 

[bhsmte]

Another way of looking at it is, Trump has to make 5 appearances a week just to keep up with Hillary.

This is the way I look at it.

Hilary is the equivalent of a football team up by 4 touchdowns and the 4th qtr is about to start. The team up by 4 touchdowns, is not going to pass the ball and risk interception. They are going to play conservative and run out the clock.

 

[bhsmte]

From the very beginning Trump has made it abundantly clear that he is running to get rid of corruption. So of course the corrupt political system people are not going to like him. Corrupt people like Hillary are the reason he is running for office. If there was someone anywhere that could get the job done then he would not need to be doing this. He is happy and content running his business. He is just unhappy with the way corruption has taken over this country and he feels that he has to do what he can to fix the problem.

Good reasons to run against Hilary. Problem is, Trump has his own baggage.

 

[joshua 1 9]

What is this opinion based on?

In the new tracking poll, through Thursday night, Trump led Clinton 43% to 40%.
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-usc-lat-tracking-poll-20160705-snap-story.html

 

[bhsmte]

In the new tracking poll, through Thursday night, Trump led Clinton 43% to 40%.
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-usc-lat-tracking-poll-20160705-snap-story.html

Have you seen the rest of the polls? Why do you place your trust in this one poll, when over ten others show something completely different?