• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

IBD Shows Trump's Support At New High

joko104 said:
No, that was not their prediction. It doesn't work when right before an election - after publishing dozens of false polls - they declare they were wrong and hedge their bet like they nearly all do.
Click to expand...
Totally clueless! First 538 doesn’t publish polls.

Their prediction on Election Day was a 71% chance of Clinton winning, a few days earlier it was 65%. Neither of these are inevitable as you claim. On 9/26 they had Clinton with a 54% chance of winning. Everything you said is wrong. You live in a fact free world, no wonder you like Trump.
 
trouble13 said:
Where it gets interesting with polling is right around now. All of a sudden the polls tighten because they modify their sampling data to more accurately reflect the ratios of the population. Then next cycle they will point to the polls right at the end of the last cycle to claim their polls are accurate.
The truth is that Trump is not surging in the polls like they saying. The race was always tight. They just wanted you to believe it wasn't. They are trying to discourage people from voting opposite of how they perferr. Its a bait and switch move and it goes on every election cycle.
Click to expand...

If this consistently happens can you provide any evidence in any election other than the 2016 presidential election and the 2014 elections? Those were both years where there is pretty strong evidence that there was a late shift to the Republicans, but if this is something that happens every cycle then there should be evidence for it every cycle, or at the very least more than two.

It certainly did not happen in 2008, where McCain was actually ahead in September before the polls shifted to a big Obama win. (And on average the polls performed very well). Source.

It certainly did not happen in 2012 where polls continuously oscillated from being about tied to having a slight Obama lead. (Polls actually overestimated Republicans at the end and never once did the RCP average after April did the RCP average reach what Obama actually got. How could the polls have been oversampling Democrats the whole time if they never even averaged Obama's actual result?). Source.

I cannot find any Senate election where it happened in 2010, 2012, 2016, or 2018. Source. Source. Source. Source.

If this were something legitimate that happens, then it should show up in the data. It's not something you can have an opinion on. Either the pollsters are consistently overestimating Democrats in the summer and then showing tightening at the end or they aren't. And from all the data I've seen, they aren't.

That's before even getting to all the horrible incentives polling companies would have for doing this. They get business based on how well they poll elections, and the public polls these firms do for media companies are not a huge part of their business, but are by far the most public. Intentionally manipulating their data in a way that would be obvious to someone on an internet forum would be such an insanely bad business strategy it would make no sense. It also doesn't make any sense from a strategic perspective if they secretly wanted Democrats to win. Oversampling Democrats in the summer gets Democrats nothing. Maybe at the end you would want to do that to depress the other side's turnout, but according to your scenario the pollsters would already have switched back to being accurate. I strongly, strongly disagree with your theory here.
 
Anagram said:
If this consistently happens can you provide any evidence in any election other than the 2016 presidential election and the 2014 elections? Those were both years where there is pretty strong evidence that there was a late shift to the Republicans, but if this is something that happens every cycle then there should be evidence for it every cycle, or at the very least more than two.

It certainly did not happen in 2008, where McCain was actually ahead in September before the polls shifted to a big Obama win. (And on average the polls performed very well). Source.

It certainly did not happen in 2012 where polls continuously oscillated from being about tied to having a slight Obama lead. (Polls actually overestimated Republicans at the end and never once did the RCP average after April did the RCP average reach what Obama actually got. How could the polls have been oversampling Democrats the whole time if they never even averaged Obama's actual result?). Source.

I cannot find any Senate election where it happened in 2010, 2012, 2016, or 2018. Source. Source. Source. Source.

If this were something legitimate that happens, then it should show up in the data. It's not something you can have an opinion on. Either the pollsters are consistently overestimating Democrats in the summer and then showing tightening at the end or they aren't. And from all the data I've seen, they aren't.

That's before even getting to all the horrible incentives polling companies would have for doing this. They get business based on how well they poll elections, and the public polls these firms do for media companies are not a huge part of their business, but are by far the most public. Intentionally manipulating their data in a way that would be obvious to someone on an internet forum would be such an insanely bad business strategy it would make no sense. It also doesn't make any sense from a strategic perspective if they secretly wanted Democrats to win. Oversampling Democrats in the summer gets Democrats nothing. Maybe at the end you would want to do that to depress the other side's turnout, but according to your scenario the pollsters would already have switched back to being accurate. I strongly, strongly disagree with your theory here.
Click to expand...
Its in the data and yes it consistently happens as.i described but no im not gonna go.digging it sll up to satisfy your curiosity. Nothing personal its just a lot of work that im not willing to put into convincing you.
 
trouble13 said:
Its in the data and yes it consistently happens as.i described but no im not gonna go.digging it sll up to satisfy your curiosity. Nothing personal its just a lot of work that im not willing to put into convincing you.
Click to expand...

I will take literally one other race than the ones described in 2014 and 2016. You can even tell me offhand one and I will go pull up the data.
 
Anagram said:
I will take literally one other race than the ones described in 2014 and 2016. You can even tell me offhand one and I will go pull up the data.
Click to expand...
Off hand i know the pollsters maybe the rouke cruz senate race looker closer than it was.
 
trouble13 said:
Off hand i know the pollsters maybe the rouke cruz senate race looker closer than it was.
Click to expand...

The opposite actually happened in that race. There were only two polls out of twenty-two that underestimated Cruz's 2.6% final margin in that race. (by 1.6% and .6% respectively for those two polls from August and July). Every single other poll from the beginning of the race to the end overestimated Cruz's margin. Trafalgar's poll, the only one in the last week, overestimated Cruz by about 6.5%.

Source.
 
trouble13 said:
Most polls link to the methodology used and its listed there. All you gotta do is look. Its pretty common knowledge to those of is who have followed the polling for awhile.
Pretend that there are only cons and progs and no independents. Also pretend its a 50/50 split between the two. Say a poll is rleased that says 1000 people were polled and 75% of them agree with the progressive position. Then you look at how the poll was weighted and you find out 750 progs and 250 cons were polled in the survey. Thats what they are doing but in a less exagerated way. That is what we refer to as over sampling. The progressive position is being over represented to convince people that the position they favor is the more popular one.
Where it gets interesting with polling is right around now. All of a sudden the polls tighten because they modify their sampling data to more accurately reflect the ratios of the population. Then next cycle they will point to the polls right at the end of the last cycle to claim their polls are accurate.
The truth is that Trump is not surging in the polls like they saying. The race was always tight. They just wanted you to believe it wasn't. They are trying to discourage people from voting opposite of how they perferr. Its a bait and switch move and it goes on every election cycle.
Click to expand...
Just another nonsense conspiracy theory. There may be some junk pollsters that do something like that, but not the legit ones. Most polls sample randomly to get progs and cons, that’s because the leaning changes frequently. They also do capture those who state they are independent and if they lean which way. Weighing is typically for demographics (age, sex, etc) which are known factors that do not change during an election.
 
Aletheia said:
All the major polls show Joe trending higher with a huge gap lead. Good to see you support those polls.
Click to expand...
What are you referring to as "major polls"?

As of today, IBD has Biden with a 2 point lead, Rasmussen has Biden with a 3 point lead, and The Hill has Biden with a 4 point lead. All of these are new polls, out today.

I have a feeling that by "major polls" you mean "polls affiliated with liberal news outlets and universities".

Keep in mind that Biden's own campaign manager came out and told voters that these polls, showing Biden with larger leads, were "inflated". Those were her words, not mine.
 
ReubenSherr said:
What are you referring to as "major polls"?

As of today, IBD has Biden with a 2 point lead, Rasmussen has Biden with a 3 point lead, and The Hill has Biden with a 4 point lead. All of these are new polls, out today.

I have a feeling that by "major polls" you mean "polls affiliated with liberal news outlets and universities".

Keep in mind that Biden's own campaign manager came out and told voters that these polls, showing Biden with larger leads, were "inflated". Those were her words, not mine.
Click to expand...
Of course, Biden’s campaign manager doesn’t want people to get complacent and not vote like many did last time. Telling everyone that it looks like Trump may win is a great motivator!
 
George50 said:
Of course, Biden’s campaign manager doesn’t want people to get complacent and not vote like many did last time. Telling everyone that it looks like Trump may win is a great motivator!
Click to expand...
So, the implication here is that Biden's campaign manager was lying?

In any case, the national polling gap has closed nearly 2 points in just the past week. Biden is now up by 7.6.

Cue CNN to release another poll quickly. Like I see that they have in PA and FL. Trying as hard as possible to get those last minute Biden campaign donations in.
 
ReubenSherr said:
So, the implication here is that Biden's campaign manager was lying?

In any case, the national polling gap has closed nearly 2 points in just the past week. Biden is now up by 7.6.

Cue CNN to release another poll quickly. Like I see that they have in PA and FL. Trying as hard as possible to get those last minute Biden campaign donations in.
Click to expand...
Of course she’s lying! Your PA and FL comment seems counterintuitive. The CNN polls look good for Biden, that should spur Trump donations, not Biden’s.
 
ReubenSherr said:
So, the implication here is that Biden's campaign manager was lying?

In any case, the national polling gap has closed nearly 2 points in just the past week. Biden is now up by 7.6.

Cue CNN to release another poll quickly. Like I see that they have in PA and FL. Trying as hard as possible to get those last minute Biden campaign donations in.
Click to expand...
Biden literally has more money than he knows what to do with. He’s outspending trump by multiples, because Trumps campaign blew (or grifted, which is more Trump’s style) all their money early on.

The polls generally are looking quite strong for Joe, and he’s essentially tied in Georgia and Texas, which is really bad for the downballot Senate and local races.

The GOP is gonna pay for the last four years, big time.
 
ReubenSherr said:
???

Trump is up 4 in Texas.

www.realclearpolitics.com

RealClearPolitics - Election 2020 - Texas: Trump vs. Biden

RealClearPolitics - Election 2020 - Texas: Trump vs. Biden
www.realclearpolitics.com www.realclearpolitics.com

If the polls were truly "generally strong for Joe," his own campaign manager wouldn't have publicly admitted that the polls were "inflated."
Click to expand...

Although I would not consider the Quinnipiac poll as enough evidence to say Texas is tied. I also don't think you can just look at the RCP average of such a sparsely polled state like that (no polls other than Quinnipiac's in the last two weeks), and say Trump's up 4% like that percentage is definitive
 
Anagram said:
Although I would not consider the Quinnipiac poll as enough evidence to say Texas is tied. I also don't think you can just look at the RCP average of such a sparsely polled state like that (no polls other than Quinnipiac's in the last two weeks), and say Trump's up 4% like that percentage is definitive
Click to expand...
Quinnipiac has been an outlier in nearly every single state poll.

There's no way Biden will win Texas.

On another topic, I can't believe what CNN appears to be doing with "likely voters." Well, I can believe it. But I think the polling industry has hit a new low.

CNN Poll of PA has Biden up 5 with Registered Voters, but Biden up 10 with Likely Voters

I won't make any direct accusations here, but it looks like liberal pollsters might be up to some more shenanigans... CNN polled PA, and Biden led by 5 points with Registered Voters. Then, mysteriously, Biden's lead doubled to 10 points when CNN extracted "likely voters" from the group. Same...
debatepolitics.com debatepolitics.com
 
ReubenSherr said:
What are you referring to as "major polls"?

As of today, IBD has Biden with a 2 point lead, Rasmussen has Biden with a 3 point lead, and The Hill has Biden with a 4 point lead. All of these are new polls, out today.

I have a feeling that by "major polls" you mean "polls affiliated with liberal news outlets and universities".

Keep in mind that Biden's own campaign manager came out and told voters that these polls, showing Biden with larger leads, were "inflated". Those were her words, not mine.
Click to expand...
Go look at RCP. In case you didn't know, the aggregate poll is comprised of many leading pollsters -- not one outlier.
 
ReubenSherr said:
www.investors.com

Biden Vs. Trump Poll Shows President's Support At New High In Tight Race: IBD/TIPP

Today's Biden vs Trump poll shows a tight race. Support for President Donald Trump hit an IBD/TIPP presidential poll high, just below his 2016 vote share.
www.investors.com www.investors.com

The IBD tracking poll predicted in 2016 that Clinton would win the popular vote by 1 point. She ended up winning by 2.1.

IBD now shows Biden with just a 1.8 point lead over Trump in a two-way race, and a 2.5 point lead in a four-way race.

"Today's Biden vs. Trump poll finds support for President Donald Trump hitting a new high, just a hair below his 2016 vote share. The race against former Vice President Joe Biden appears to have gotten much tighter since the Oct. 12 launch of IBD/TIPP's daily presidential poll. Republican voters have come home, while Democrats have strayed, but Biden retains an edge among independent voters, IBD/TIPP shows.

In a head-to-head Biden vs. Trump poll, the Democratic nominee leads by 1.8 points, 48.7%-46.9%, his smallest lead to date.

Biden's support has slipped 4 points since Oct. 12 in the one-on-one matchup, while Trump's support is up 4.6 points.

The latest Biden vs. Trump poll update shows the Democratic challenger leading the Republican incumbent by 2.5 points, 48.5%-46%, in a four-way presidential poll of likely voters."

Volume 0%
Click to expand...
In 2016, IBD did not predicted in 2016 that Clinton would win the popular vote by 1 point. It predicted Trump would win by 2 points. That was wrong. Hillary won the popular vote by 2%.

Since the winner is decided by the electoral college, it makes more sense to measure state-by-state.
 
Aletheia said:
Go look at RCP. In case you didn't know, the aggregate poll is comprised of many leading pollsters -- not one outlier.
Click to expand...
What point are you making?

IBD has Biden up 2 nationally, Rasmussen has Biden up 3, The Hill has Biden up 4.

None of these are "outliers."
 
MTAtech said:
In 2016, IBD did not predicted in 2016 that Clinton would win the popular vote by 1 point. It predicted Trump would win by 2 points. That was wrong. Hillary won the popular vote by 2%.
Click to expand...
???

IBD predicted that Clinton would win the popular vote by 1 point. There's an error in the article, IBD never had Trump ahead.

www.realclearpolitics.com

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Trump vs. Clinton

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Trump vs. Clinton
www.realclearpolitics.com www.realclearpolitics.com
 
ReubenSherr said:
Quinnipiac has been an outlier in nearly every single state poll.

There's no way Biden will win Texas.
Click to expand...

I agree Biden is very unlikely to win Texas. And I agree that Quinnipiac has generally leaned to the left this cycle, (though their previous poll of Texas was his best there that entire month with a Trump +5%). I just don't think it's accurate to look at an average of four polls, only one of which was done in the last two weeks, and say that's how far Trump is ahead in the state like its some kind of fact.

RCP averages are very helpful. But they need to be looked at with context and should never be flung around like that's exactly how far someone is ahead at any given time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom