Trump backlash continues to fail

[Openmind]

Then how was Rasmussen the most accurate and by a rather wide margin ?

What tells you that Rasmussen is the most accurate?

You mean, because they were the "most accurate" ONCE in 2016? Please note that both PEW and GALLUP made the decision NOT TO do a poll on the presidential race, but to concentrate instead on ISSUES involved.
And, Rasmussen was certainly NOT the most accurate in 2012, with a prediction of 48% for Obama and 49% for Romney!
Pew was the most accurate that time, with a prediction of 3% advantage for Obama. . .which was just a little short of reality!

 

[Aus22]

There is bias in polls. It is not just the number sample. Most people who answer poll questions are old and educated. These are those who did not vote for Trump. It is a lot harder to get the young and uneducated to take part in polls.

 

[dogtowner]

There is bias in polls. It is not just the number sample. Most people who answer poll questions are old and educated. These are those who did not vote for Trump. It is a lot harder to get the young and uneducated to take part in polls.

Depends on the polling outfit. Harder yes, but not impossible.

 

[Openmind]

There is bias in polls. It is not just the number sample. Most people who answer poll questions are old and educated. These are those who did not vote for Trump. It is a lot harder to get the young and uneducated to take part in polls.

Yes, there are ALWAYS some bias in polls. But the most common bias is the way the question(s) is/are asked. If a poll is well conducted, respondents are selected randomly, and there shouldn't be much age or education bias. However, you seem to believe that only older people are educated! In the US at least, there are more likelihood that younger people will have a college degree, even advance degree than older people. And, many older people do loose contact with reality. So I do not really believe that older people are necessarily more educated.

I do like to see polls list the % of age groups and education level for more specific polls. Then it is clear what the "future" olds because it is clear that, more often than not, younger people are more progressive and open minded.

 

[dogtowner]

Another swing, another miss for the donkeys who think DJT is unpopular. GA runoff election misses despite massive out of state spending.

 

[Old_Trapper70]

Another swing, another miss for the donkeys who think DJT is unpopular. GA runoff election misses despite massive out of state spending.

Source?

If it has then it once again proves just how stupid the right wing is, and will remain so. Remember Dawg, this is what you stand for:

https://thinkprogress.org/republicans-exploit-shooting-ossoff-handel-4d3765f2a6a8?gi=ccd2772bce4

"Carver’s comments come as a conservative group, PrincipledPAC, has launched an ad claiming “the unhinged left is endorsing and applauding shooting Republicans.” (There is no evidence to support this claim.) The ad goes on to argue that a vote for Ossoff is a vote for more mass shootings.

“When will it stop? It won’t if Jon Ossoff wins on Tuesday, because the same unhinged leftists cheering last week’s shooting are all backing Jon Ossoff. And if he wins, they win.”

 

[Aus22]

Yes, there are ALWAYS some bias in polls. But the most common bias is the way the question(s) is/are asked. If a poll is well conducted, respondents are selected randomly, and there shouldn't be much age or education bias. However, you seem to believe that only older people are educated! In the US at least, there are more likelihood that younger people will have a college degree, even advance degree than older people. And, many older people do loose contact with reality. So I do not really believe that older people are necessarily more educated.

I do like to see polls list the % of age groups and education level for more specific polls. Then it is clear what the "future" olds because it is clear that, more often than not, younger people are more progressive and open minded.

Openmind I did not say that the older people are educated. I was simply listing the two groups that voted for Trump, the young and the under educated..
I have taken part in many polls. The people who get me to fill in surveys know that I am old so have plenty of time to fill in the survey. They know as educated I can see the value in surveys.
I am sure that some polls do have random selection and a cross section of the population but not all. This is prove by the failure of polls to forecast Trump election.

 

[Openmind]

Openmind I did not say that the older people are educated. I was simply listing the two groups that voted for Trump, the young and the under educated..
I have taken part in many polls. The people who get me to fill in surveys know that I am old so have plenty of time to fill in the survey. They know as educated I can see the value in surveys.
I am sure that some polls do have random selection and a cross section of the population but not all. This is prove by the failure of polls to forecast Trump election.

I understand that. However, you are wrong in terms of the "young" voting for Trump. You are correct in terms of the "uneducated" voting for Trump. One element that enticed people in voting for Trump was the INCOME bracket. Those making more money probably thought they would get a better deal with Trump than with Hillary. Money speaks, once again, and I don't like what it says!

Here is a very clear picture by category of who voted for Trump and Hillary:

7 charts show who propelled Trump to victory - Business Insider
www.businessinsider.com/exit-polls-who-voted-for-trump-clinton-2016-11

 

[Aus22]

Opnmind I was confuse. It is true more young people voted for Hilary than Trump.
But it is also hard to get young people to answer polls truthfully. That why the more recent move to the left in Europe was underestimated in the polls.

 

[dogtowner]

And so the most expensive house race ever fails for the donkeys.
Hating Bush cost them the house and Senate and hating Trump is even less successful.
I see Gallop has Bush within 4 points of Obama favorability now.
Haters gonna hate and lose.

 

[The Scotsman]

Do folk take this seriously... I mean comparing one chap against another ex-chap? Seems rather pointless since the ex-chap is probably more interested in collecting stamps or gardening or other wholesome pursuits.

 

[dogtowner]

Do folk take this seriously... I mean comparing one chap against another ex-chap? Seems rather pointless since the ex-chap is probably more interested in collecting stamps or gardening or other wholesome pursuits.

Yes, of course. Public figures are always interested in their image/legacy. While they may have more time for hobbies they still earn money so favorables do equal $. W and bo left office fairly young so it makes a difference.

 

[Openmind]

Do folk take this seriously... I mean comparing one chap against another ex-chap? Seems rather pointless since the ex-chap is probably more interested in collecting stamps or gardening or other wholesome pursuits.

Yes, this is ridiculous.
Unless. . .you compare apple with apple!
As in the case of comparing Job Approval rating for the SAME PERIOD of the presidency between two (or more) presidents.

In fact, Gallup does offer that option: Between June 14 and June 18, 2009, President Obama had an approval rating of 61%
Between June 17 and June 21, Trump has an approval rating of 38%

Gallup Daily: Trump Job Approval | Gallup
www.gallup.com/poll/201617/gallup-daily-trump-job-approval.aspx

 

[Openmind]

Opnmind I was confuse. It is true more young people voted for Hilary than Trump.
But it is also hard to get young people to answer polls truthfully. That why the more recent move to the left in Europe was underestimated in the polls.

What really confused the polls is that Hillary was on the ticket at all. The greatest majority of young people would have voted for Bernie Sanders, and some of them pinched their nose and voted for Hillary because they didn't want Trump. But the other didn't want to compromise and didn't vote at all. If Bernie hadn't been cheated out of the nomination by the "super delegates" bought by the DNC elite, Bernie would have won with a landslide of young people's votes. . .and many "old" people's vote like myself and my husband!

 

[dogtowner]

While Sanders was the victim of far dirtier tricks than the party establishment voting against him, there is no guarantee he could have appealed to the mushy middle or gotten enough money to go national.
That said, he would not have thrown the working man under the bus. That will hurt the party for years to come. Never thought I would see unions lining up with the GOP.
Donkeys need to make some hard choices foremost of which is turning their back on Soros and his cabal. Ditch what passes for leadership and try to find a phoenix in ashes to hook onto. And hardest of all, tell BO to go build habitats for humanity as he is not welcome anymore.