Quote (Pollster @ 15 Nov 2016 21:06)
Naturally I appreciate the laugh on this, but the reality is that I'm the one who never said that Trump couldn't win an election. Other users, including coincidentally IceMage, often remarked with surprise at various stages when I wouldn't declare this race "over." I refused to do that because I know how elections can go sometimes.
I assume you mean the public polls on that -- HfA/PUSA/DNC's private polling were largely accurate absent the couple of errors you expect to see across any large-scale project. There were a couple of problems with the public polls, a lot of them the same in 2014: the industry is facing long-term challenges and there aren't easy fixes for some. There were far fewer live-caller surveys in the states down the stretch this year, as a result a larger share of what people were seeing was made up of junk polls by amateur universities, or groups with no money, or online groups with unproven/flawed methodologies.
You also have the very real excuse of Comey's intervention(s) and how that'd upend the numbers. That's really hard for polls to pick up on because both of them happened so late, with 11 and 4 days left before Election Day. Clinton's polling picked up on it, they knew that both his original letter to Congress and even his "oh no big deal, nothing to see here, these are just emails we've read already" clarification were very beneficial to Trump, but public polling is of too low quality to adequately measure the effects of something like that in such little time.
Re: Trump, I don't feel any different than how I did when (I believe) thundercock asked me both this spring and last year a hypothetical "what if Trump won?" I obviously sympathize for the 10s/100 million whose lives will be much harder (if not ruined altogether) by him going after the ACA, Ryan going after Medicare and Medicaid, cutting assistance for working families who need it, everyone who's a part of a group/demographic he insulted or targeted during the campaign, but I think most people knew enough about what they were getting when they voted (the one exception is the millions of working-class people who voted for him but who will suffer greatly by his policies, but I still feel bad for them regardless).
For me professionally it's a good outcome because my clients will benefit from being the out-party, but that doesn't mean I don't feel bad for all the people who will suffer real pain from it.
lol at this post, summed up in one (1) word
wrong
you said huffpo was your go to aggregator, played it up like it was God's gift to mankind, and they had it at 98.1% chance of a Clinton victory.
http://forums.d2jsp.org/topic.php?t=75019096&f=119&p=507540303http://forums.d2jsp.org/topic.php?t=75019096&f=119&p=507541152http://forums.d2jsp.org/topic.php?t=75082103&f=119&p=508014572Quote (Pollster @ 13 Sep 2016 13:08)
If you're referring to Nate Silver then that's really a separate issue. People are free to trust his commentary, his modeling. I would even recommend him with some caveats. But what he provides is a model, and commentary based off of that model; the HuffPo Pollster and RCP averages are simple aggregates. They're directly comparable, and HuffPo simply has the far superior product. People have gotten use to RCP, I suspect it will eventually become outdated.
you had another 0-fer election, the 2nd in a row for you. 0-7 in the last 2 years, but keep telling us your firm is thriving. it's probably as lively as the DNC and Democrat party is right now.
Obligatory: thanks for the first of many fucking laughs!!!!!!!!!!
This post was edited by excellence on Nov 15 2016 07:21pm