Republican National Convention (1 Viewer)

Thread Attachment browser

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
    SaintForLife

    SaintForLife

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Oct 5, 2019
    Messages
    7,313
    Reaction score
    3,404
    Location
    Madisonville
    Offline
    RNC 2024 Milwaukee, Wisconsin

    1000005613.jpg
     
    el caliente said:
    Does anyone put much faith in polls after 2016?
    Click to expand...
    For me it's not an issue of faith. It's an issue of fact that an insurmountable problem occurred and then grew worse between 2012 and 2016, which has even grown worse since 2016 with folks going from landlines to cell phones. That ruins telephone polling. It was sort of OK when the number of folks using cell phones were under 5%, and most of them also maintained land lines as well.

    Once that factor grew to most people using a cell phone, with a very large portion not also having a landline the science behind it collapsed.

    Statistical random sample rules are being violated because those sample issues cannot be resolved well enough for the polls post 2012 to be worth considering.

    To Illustrate the problem. The other day I got a call from an area code which I answered. I answered that because I knew that area code and I wondered why someone from Colorado a 1.000 miles away was calling me. Were they kinfolk?

    No, it was a neighbor from down the road a couple miles away, who at one time had lived in Colorado, and a dozen years ago when he moved he brought his cell phone and it's number with him. All his college friends knew it so he kept it.

    We had quite a chat. But suppose a pollster had his number and their computer selected it for their sample, and were trying to poll a congressional seat race??? That doesn't work.

    For polls to work they must have every telephone number for that area, and then they use a computer to pull a small random sample from that complete list.

    They must know where a phone will ring, they must also know it's for a home, but ignore for whom that phone number is. They must know and remove all businesses, offices of any kind from their master phone list as well.

    They can't fix it it's been broken so thoroughly, so they obviously punt. Use a dart board, guess, I don't know.

    If I can't understand how a machine works I don't trust it. So faith doesn't enter into this, this doesn't even get to the point of not having faith. They're violating the well known and understood science parts.

    About half, or more than half of the old polling outfits there were back in 2012 are no more. The mainstay polling outfits now are either new, or were the skussy polling houses way back then.
     
    Incumbent said:
    Booker was my top preference in 2020. Guy has the sharp mind and charismatic traits Democrats wish they had in Biden now.
    Click to expand...
    I like him as well. I like his test, looking for the leader who loves the people they will lead. I can't use that because I can't tell who someone loves. Lies can hide that.

    However I can usually determine who has been faithful with their life long spouse, and I suppose that makes my test pretty much the same as his test.
     
    SamAndreas said:
    For me it's not an issue of faith. It's an issue of fact that an insurmountable problem occurred and then grew worse between 2012 and 2016, which has even grown worse since 2016 with folks going from landlines to cell phones. That ruins telephone polling. It was sort of OK when the number of folks using cell phones were under 5%, and most of them also maintained land lines as well.

    Once that factor grew to most people using a cell phone, with a very large portion not also having a landline the science behind it collapsed.

    Statistical random sample rules are being violated because those sample issues cannot be resolved well enough for the polls post 2012 to be worth considering.

    To Illustrate the problem. The other day I got a call from an area code which I answered. I answered that because I knew that area code and I wondered why someone from Colorado a 1.000 miles away was calling me. Were they kinfolk?

    No, it was a neighbor from down the road a couple miles away, who at one time had lived in Colorado, and a dozen years ago when he moved he brought his cell phone and it's number with him. All his college friends knew it so he kept it.

    We had quite a chat. But suppose a pollster had his number and their computer selected it for their sample, and were trying to poll a congressional seat race??? That doesn't work.

    For polls to work they must have every telephone number for that area, and then they use a computer to pull a small random sample from that complete list.

    They must know where a phone will ring, they must also know it's for a home, but ignore for whom that phone number is. They must know and remove all businesses, offices of any kind from their master phone list as well.

    They can't fix it it's been broken so thoroughly, so they obviously punt. Use a dart board, guess, I don't know.

    If I can't understand how a machine works I don't trust it. So faith doesn't enter into this, this doesn't even get to the point of not having faith. They're violating the well known and understood science parts.

    About half, or more than half of the old polling outfits there were back in 2012 are no more. The mainstay polling outfits now are either new, or were the skussy polling houses way back then.
    Click to expand...
    I only trust the facebook polls that can help me identify which kitchen appliance most closely represents me politically.

    Those are the only polls that get honest answers.
     
    Last edited:
    SamAndreas said:
    I like him as well. I like his test, looking for the leader who loves the people they will lead. I can't use that because I can't tell who someone loves. Lies can hide that.

    However I can usually determine who has been faithful with their life long spouse, and I suppose that makes my test pretty much the same as his test.
    Click to expand...

    True, but the policies that politicians support can give a lot of helpful insight, in combination with their words and actions.
     
    Incumbent said:
    True, but the policies that politicians support can give a lot of helpful insight, in combination with their words and actions.
    Click to expand...
    That's the first thing I do, it's a limpness test of sorts I guess. << No, I didn't misspell that word in there.

    As a quick test it failed me once, Bill Clinton's shall we say "tendencies," were not spotted by it.

    After that quick limpness test, I do continue to look, and to listen to their positions.
     
    The RNC is strange.

    They outline a bunch of legitmate issues.

    What's the answer? DONALD TRUMP

    They don't give a single policy position.
     
    Yeah, those eyebrows aren’t moving a millimeter, lol

     
    Not good news for Gaetz. Eddie Munster and Butthead are both trending on Twitter.
     
    KiwiSaint said:
    This is a perfect example of what’s wrong with American politics…yep, he may have fringe ideas that you don’t agree with, but he’s definitely not by definition an “idiot”! Harvard degree in Biology, Law degree from Yale, and a very successful entrepreneur.

    Hi Sam…I’m definitely no Trump supporter. I think he’s a sociopath and congenital liar; but, from a policy standpoint, I’m more moderate/conservative than liberal.
    I’m also glad to be away from Belgorod, but have to admit I miss being in the center of historical events!
    Click to expand...
    His degrees are irrelevant. His company was a scam. His comments are idiotic. Thus he is an idiot.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Register

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Share this page

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom