Rasmussen poll 5/2: Trump 41%, Clinton 39%

[buckshot24]

yuck

So out of those three options, which one would you pick? You have to pick one.

 

[Victorian Gray]

So out of those three options, which one would you pick? You have to pick one.

No I don't.

Your games, they are boring.

 

[soundforbjt]

Dude, that poll had Trump up 10 points.

It's one poll so don't take this as me thinking this is how the electorate really is. Just talking about a poll, that's it.

A poll by a very conservative site that is not known for its polls. No record of accuracy, but they did tell you something you wanted to hear.

 

[buckshot24]

A poll by a very conservative site that is not known for its polls. No record of accuracy, but they did tell you something you wanted to hear.

They didn't conduct the poll, did you miss that part?

 

[soundforbjt]

They didn't conduct the poll, did you miss that part?

Yes, I don't watch YouTube links. Doesn't matter who conducted the poll since it goes against every other poll. If it stated that he beats Hillary among republican Latinos then I would believe it.

Did some checking on the poll, only ten 10% of those polled were Latino, not representative at all. It also showed Clinton beating Trump overall.

Here's a story about the pollster:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/15/1144688/-Gravis-Marketing-Exposed-AND-Eviscerated

 

[buckshot24]

Yes, I don't watch YouTube links. Doesn't matter who conducted the poll since it goes against every other poll. If it stated that he beats Hillary among republican Latinos then I would believe it.

I'm not asking you to believe it. I didn't say it was true.

Did some checking on the poll, only ten 10% of those polled were Latino, not representative at all. It also showed Clinton beating Trump overall.

Lets not get into unskewing the polls. I wonder where ES is to tell you.

But that doesn't matter anyway.

Here's a story about the pollster:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/15/1144688/-Gravis-Marketing-Exposed-AND-Eviscerated

Silver ranks them a C and a +1.4 R bias.

So yes take this poll with as big of a grain of salt as you want. I'm not saying it is accurate or not accurate.

 

[soundforbjt]

It's also the pollster who caused republicans to think Romney was winning in the last election, you remember that...right? Lol.

 

[fskimospy]

I'm not asking you to believe it. I didn't say it was true.
Lets not get into unskewing the polls. I wonder where ES is to tell you.

But that doesn't matter anyway.

Pointing out a poll is an extreme outlier and is therefore questionable is in fact a smart thing to do and part of good analytic practice. What you were trying to do was the exact opposite. It seems like you still don't understand why your previous failure was entirely foreseeable.

 

[buckshot24]

It's also the pollster who caused republicans to think Romney was winning in the last election, you remember that...right? Lol.

I don't think it was them. Gallup and Rasmussen were way off, especially Gallup.

 

[buckshot24]

Pointing out a poll is an extreme outlier and is therefore questionable is in fact a smart thing to do and part of good analytic practice. What you were trying to do was the exact opposite. It seems like you still don't understand why your previous failure was entirely foreseeable.

Not sure if you've ever worked in a lab or not. You can't just throw out outliers because you don't like the data.

I don't believe the poll, I just made mention of the data because I was surprised by it. If you'd like to be an adult and discuss the data then please do so. If you want to be a little snot to get your barbs in on me then please shut up.

 

[soundforbjt]

I don't think it was them. Gallup and Rasmussen were way off, especially Gallup.

I should've said one of the pollsters, they were named in the article I read.

 

[fskimospy]

Not sure if you've ever worked in a lab or not. You can't just throw out outliers because you don't like the data.

Where did anyone say anything about throwing out data? The question in this case is something to the effect of 'what is the true proportion of people who would vote for Trump or Clinton'? If a poll delivers results that are dramatically divergent from other scientifically rigorous polls then the results should be looked upon as being unlikely to represent the true proportion unless more supporting data comes in. It could be right, but the most likely answer is that it differs in a methodological way, it has an unrepresentative sample, or in single outlier cases was the victim of bad luck.

I don't believe the poll, I just made mention of the data because I was surprised by it. If you'd like to be an adult and discuss the data then please do so. If you want to be a little snot to get your barbs in on me then please shut up.

If I thought you were competent enough to discuss that data or logical enough to draw rational conclusions on it I would be happy to do so. Until you show us that you're capable of those things though I'm going to stick with the current plan.

 

[Jhhnn]

I don't believe the poll, I just made mention of the data because I was surprised by it.

If so, you should have put it in those terms up front so as not to be misunderstood.

Live & learn, right?

 

[buckshot24]

Where did anyone say anything about throwing out data? The question in this case is something to the effect of 'what is the true proportion of people who would vote for Trump or Clinton'? If a poll delivers results that are dramatically divergent from other scientifically rigorous polls then the results should be looked upon as being unlikely to represent the true proportion unless more supporting data comes in. It could be right, but the most likely answer is that it differs in a methodological way, it has an unrepresentative sample, or in single outlier cases was the victim of bad luck.

As long as you know this is exactly my opinion of this data we should be fine.

If I thought you were competent enough to discuss that data or logical enough to draw rational conclusions on it I would be happy to do so. Until you show us that you're capable of those things though I'm going to stick with the current plan.

Ok, you remain childish and take pot shots at me while assuming things I don't believe.

 

[buckshot24]

If so, you should have put it in those terms up front so as not to be misunderstood.

Live & learn, right?

You could do the same. To be clear, I don't disbelieve it either. I would need more confirmation to move one way or the other.

 

[jackstar7]

As long as you know this is exactly my opinion of this data we should be fine.
Ok, you remain childish and take pot shots at me while assuming things I don't believe.

Don't ever look at how you present yourself or your thoughts.

 

[buckshot24]

New Fox Poll

Trump +3 over Hillary
Sanders +4 over Trump

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/05/18/fox-news-poll-clintons-negatives-surpass-trumps.html

Hillary is +37 with Latinos!

 

[Indus]

I full expect Trump to cry he got 10 million more votes but screwed by the electoral college.

That would really be neat since revenge is a dish best served cold after 2000!

 

[buckshot24]

Don't ever look at how you present yourself or your thoughts.

As far as ES is concerned? Not a chance. It wouldn't matter if I said water was wet he'd demand I prove what wet meant. He simply cannot be trusted to interpret my words accurately.

 

[buckshot24]

I full expect Trump to cry he got 10 million more votes but screwed by the electoral college.

That would really be neat since revenge is a dish best served cold after 2000!

If he got 10 million more votes and not enough EC votes then there is no screwing going on, those are the rules.

 

[Indus]

If he got 10 million more votes and not enough EC votes then there is no screwing going on, those are the rules.

 

[buckshot24]

He was wrong.

 

[ericlp]

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/hillary-clinton-favorable-rating

Damn, 40% and dropping (FAST), by the time november rolls around, she'll be so far off the chart she'll need to rigg every voting both just to get votes.

 

[Genx87]

Heh so will she match Trumps unfavorable rating? This is one effed up election cycle.

 

[fskimospy]

Heh so will she match Trumps unfavorable rating? This is one effed up election cycle.

I doubt it, at least long term. She is suffering from disillusioned Bernie supporters being angry that they lost the primary right now while Trump is benefitting from Republicans falling into line. I strongly suspect that will change in the next month or so.