--or than the voter base? Probably why we were so wrong in campaign 2016.
-
-
Replying to @SharylAttkisson @RayGuy3
1/?? The polls weren’t wrong in 2016. Many forecasts were off because they misinterpreted the polls.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
2/ The nat’l polling average missed the final vote by 2 points in 2016. That’s a perfectly normal election year.http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-fivethirtyeight-gave-trump-a-better-chance-than-almost-anyone-else/ …
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
3/ State polls were a bigger problem, but that’s more a function of missing data. Not enough polls lead to bad forecasts.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
actually the case in population, you won't get a result that represents the population. Right?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SharylAttkisson @RayGuy3
1/ But how do you know what the “correct” breakdown of party is to weight for? You could do that for a registered voter poll, but...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
2/ for likely voters, there are much more predictive screens than party ID.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
3/ and then you’re expecting voters to accurately report party ID, unless you’re calling from voter rolls instead of random digit dialing.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Right. But why bother to ask (which they all do) if they assume there's no reliability or legitimacy?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SharylAttkisson @RayGuy3
Because the shifts in party ID are a very interesting *result* of the polling, not a valid way to weight the polling.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
necessarily agree...
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.