|
one thing on my mind - is there like a correction factor in polling for This Person Might Be loving Lying On Purpose? Might it be going forward? or is that just rolled into margin of error lots of 'the polls were bad the polls were bad' and i'm just wondering how. how did they gently caress up numbers that badly without there being -- and i suspect this was the case -- an organized polling deception effort? any insight onto that would be a+
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 12:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 06:50 |
|
|
Pathos posted:Here's an outstanding question I have: Kaine had to be on the ticket for reasons like his support for amnesty, NAFTA, TPP, Obamacare, etc.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 12:44
|
|
|
what was a serious strategic mistake was trying to flip AZ and a bunch of other red state shitholes, based on polls, instead of playing defence
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 12:44
|
|
|
Jonny 290 posted:one thing on my mind - is there like a correction factor in polling for This Person Might Be loving Lying On Purpose? honestly, its hard to say. i know you posted something about a facebook meme about lying to the pollsters being passed around, but really, what was the penetration of that meme in the communities of interest? a few hundred? a few thousand? a few tens of thousand, in a population of a hundreds of thousands to millions? and what were the odds that a polling hit would land on someone actively deceiving the polls (remember, there are lots of other questions in a poll) i suspect a more likely answer is the people who answered they'd vote trump voted trump, the people who answered they'd vote hillary a few weeks before election day ended up staying at home
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 12:50
|
|
|
super sweet best pal posted:I heard unironic statements to the effect of "it's her turn" at the caucuses, mostly from old women who wanted to see a female President in their lifetimes and were willing to ignore everything about her. If they can live another 4 years they can probably vote for Warren
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 12:54
|
|
|
Warren's only a year younger than Clinton I don't think she's gonna be running for poo poo at 71 except running to take a poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 12:56
|
|
|
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...62d1_story.html Burn it all down They relied on a lovely vote algorithm, and wouldn't release details until after the election, and it was completely wrong. Mook a mook.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 12:57
|
|
|
Phobophilia posted:i suspect a more likely answer is the people who answered they'd vote trump voted trump, the people who answered they'd vote hillary a few weeks before election day ended up staying at home This, plus Republicans fell in line, while rust belt democrats... didn't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 12:56
|
|
|
Jonny 290 posted:one thing on my mind - is there like a correction factor in polling for This Person Might Be loving Lying On Purpose? Modern pollsters face an existential problem, in that they really don't have a clue how to model turnout (equivalently, they don't know how to predict the demographic breakdown of likely voters). This is on top of the difficulty of actually getting a representative sample now that landlines are becoming obsolete, young people screen calls etc. This particular election was particularly bad, it looks like there was an average systematic polling bias of ~+4% in favor of Clinton in swing states. It seems this bias was largely due to pollster's assuming Democrat turnout would be similar to the 2008+2012 elections, which it clearly wasn't. It's infuriating that they can perform so badly and retain any credibility. An organized polling deception effort is effectively impossible, pollsters contact people randomly and you'd have to get thousands of people to keep it secret. Incompetent pollsters is the much more likely reason. edit: Nonsense posted:https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...62d1_story.html That's even worse than I thought. However public pollsters were presenting much the same picture. Frankly Nate Silver was the only public figure who was critically evaluating the potential for large systematic bias in polling data. He was widely criticized for assuming unrealistically large uncertainties in poll results to make his predictions, but he was clearly right to do so. Nocturtle has issued a correction as of 13:06 on Nov 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:00
|
|
|
Speaking as an Australian, our polling is pretty much always spot on, because we have compulsory voting and therefore no need to guesstimate who's going to show up.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:02
|
|
|
Nocturtle posted:That's even worse than I thought. However public pollsters were presenting much the same picture. Frankly Nate Silver was the only public figure who was critically evaluating the potential for large systematic bias in polling data. He was widely criticized for assuming unrealistically large uncertainties in poll results to make his predictions, but he was clearly right to do so. The Vindication of Nate Silver by President-Elect Donald Trump Quasimango posted:Speaking as an Australian, our polling is pretty much always spot on, because we have compulsory voting and therefore no need to guesstimate who's going to show up. Does this mean that you got to find out that the Aussie people were going to vote in Tony Abbott ahead of time? That must have been fun, like finding out the day you are going to die
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:15
|
|
|
If we had Compulsory Voting then Harambe would be president right now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:15
|
|
|
Peanut President posted:If we had Compulsory Voting then Harambe would be president right now. Still a better outcome than Trump.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:17
|
|
|
People going "Geez why did the working poor identify with a NY billionaire?" are really stupid. He may be a billionaire, but he also went on WWE and took a stunner from Steve Austin and shaved Vince McMahon's head. No self respecting Manhattan socialite would even entertain the idea of that in a million years. That's why the working poor trusted him. He was basically them, but successful with a hot wife. How is this not self evident. This election was basically us proving every stereotype about liberals being out of touch being completely 100% right.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:19
|
|
|
Thundercracker posted:People going "Geez why did the working poor identify with a NY billionaire?" are really stupid. He may be a billionaire, but he also went on WWE and took a stunner from Steve Austin and shaved Vince McMahon's head. It's painful to even think about but yeah, if working people don't have representatives who are actually connecting to their interests then they'll vote for the first person who appears to, whether they actually give a gently caress about them or not.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:27
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...62d1_story.html This is the most Hillary thing possible. Thundercracker posted:People going "Geez why did the working poor identify with a NY billionaire?" are really stupid. He may be a billionaire, but he also went on WWE and took a stunner from Steve Austin and shaved Vince McMahon's head. Lena Dunham also hates him, and I guarantee every member of the working poor who can identify Lena Dunham hates her and therefore is well disposed to the things she hates Sub out 'Lena Dunham' for basically any Hollywood star who through their hat into Hillary's corner if you want
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:28
|
|
|
too bad that trump doesnt actually give a gently caress about them either, else he would have paid his contractors oh yeah, i just remembered, trump's gonna end net neutrality. now your rare pepes will load 10 times slower
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:29
|
|
|
I don't think anybody in the real world gives a poo poo about Lena Dunham, or even knows who she is, but people are definitely likely to get angry at the deluge of actual celebrities like Lady Gaga telling them who to vote for from fancy TV stages, dressed in expensive suits and covered in jewelry, especially these days. Clinton should have gone for some "common folk" celebrities, I wasn't really joking when I said get Willie Nelson on the phone. VVV Speak of the devil.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:32
|
|
|
how to win rural and working class whites: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kic1wyYI6k how not to win rural and working class whites: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YttscNOoAjA
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:32
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...62d1_story.html Perhaps we can hope that Mook will not be getting further employment for the democrats.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:39
|
|
|
Not a Step posted:This is the most Hillary thing possible. Wait, I take it back. Not making her concession speech while her supporters crashed and burned, then being two hours late the next day is the most Hillary thing possible But using a secret algorithm to predict voting outcomes and ignoring anything that ran counter to her inner circle (including her own two time president husband, lol) is easily the second most Hillary thing possible.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:38
|
|
|
I am so very glad to see criticism of this NPR-superstar crap starting to come from anyone besides conservatives, because it is all loving exhausting.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:40
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:They relied on a lovely vote algorithm, and wouldn't release details until after the election, and it was completely wrong. Mook a mook. Tay is at it again! 
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:40
|
|
|
Or maybe just have an economic message more substantial and appealing than "lol factories aren't coming back idiots. Maybe we can build some green energy? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯" The "good" news is that no one in a Trump admin is going to give a poo poo about workers, so there's a good chance of fixing this if Democrats can get their poo poo together in a couple yearaaahahahahaha 
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:45
|
|
|
yeah im pretty sure the trump admin is going to be one disaster after another and its the GOP is going to be in deep poo poo 2020 or who knows, reagan was an incompetent buffoon and well, 1984
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:47
|
|
|
mrmcd posted:Or maybe just have an economic message more substantial and appealing than "lol factories aren't coming back idiots. Maybe we can build some green energy? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯" The Democrats will have years of civil war before that happens.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:47
|
|
|
Quasimango posted:Speaking as an Australian, our polling is pretty much always spot on, because we have compulsory voting and therefore no need to guesstimate who's going to show up. If we tried to pass compulsory voting in the USA, the first thing conservatives would point to is that they have it in North Korea. Not to say that it's a bad thing...
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:49
|
|
|
Shao821 posted:The Democrats will have years of civil war before that happens. I'm not optimistic about too many things right now, but I think this loss is shocking enough that the DNC will have no legitimacy in the party anymore and the progressive coalition will take charge.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:49
|
|
|
CheesyDog posted:I am so very glad to see criticism of this NPR-superstar crap starting to come from anyone besides conservatives, because it is all loving exhausting. this poo poo is humiliating and awful and i was never proud of or stood behind anything like this  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YttscNOoAjA this poo poo i will light on fire the next time i see anybody try.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:51
|
|
|
Sheng-ji Yang posted:how to win rural and working class whites: neither of those won. how exactly was bernie going to help family farming? they're both terrible celebrity ads that don't say anything relatable. political ad firms are horrible and must be destroyed. trump barely ran any ads in the general and won because hillary ran ads attacking him for months on end. this is how you get money out of politics.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:51
|
|
|
Sheng-ji Yang posted:yeah im pretty sure the trump admin is going to be one disaster after another and its the GOP is going to be in deep poo poo 2020 I think the real take away from American politics over the last half century is that we should under no circumstances allow actors to run for president. It will always end in tears.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:51
|
|
|
Pathos posted:Here's an outstanding question I have: She would have lost VA too if she hasn't
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:52
|
|
|
So, Venom, or anyone else who might know - How can I, humble shitposter, get involved in the Democratic Party machinery to start working on fixing it and making it not poo poo? In NC.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:54
|
|
|
Venom Snake posted:She never talked about it because the staff were scared theyd alienate voters hahahahahaahahahahahahahaha kill me oh my god
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:55
|
|
|
exquisite tea posted:I'm not optimistic about too many things right now, but I think this loss is shocking enough that the DNC will have no legitimacy in the party anymore and the progressive coalition will take charge. Also pretty likely: Spending years arguing how much more racist and dumb we should act to win back "white working class" voters while ignoring the fact that a black guy named Barack Hussein Obama with tons of very visible elite celebrity friends already had them in our camp.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:55
|
|
|
Wyld Thang posted:neither of those won. how exactly was bernie going to help family farming? they're both terrible celebrity ads that don't say anything relatable. Clinton's ads against Trump were never all that effective because it allowed him to play up his "the system is rigged against me" rhetoric to a group of people who also felt like the system was rigged against them, and the constant deluge of negative ads only reinforced that message.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:56
|
|
|
Jonny 290 posted:this poo poo is humiliating and awful and i was never proud of or stood behind anything like this What is that image from? Is there some other incredibly cringey aspect of the election Ive never heard of before now?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:56
|
|
|
i mean, if you wanna https://www.wired.com/2016/07/hillary-clinton-really-does-love-hamilton/
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:57
|
|
|
Wyld Thang posted:neither of those won. how exactly was bernie going to help family farming? they're both terrible celebrity ads that don't say anything relatable. That Bernie one is from '06 when he won his senate seat.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 06:50 |
|
|
http://www.newyorker.com/news/benjamin-wallace-wells/hillary-clintons-powerful-concessionquote:The ferocity of the attachments between Clinton and her staffers has been part of the story of her campaign; at times it has made them more defensive and probably (in the case of her private e-mail server) helped to trap Clinton into some bad choices. Her concession speech suggested a reason for that intensity: she believed that she and her staff represented a movement, even if her opponents to her left and right never saw her that way. it's called being delusional. she was high on her own farts
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:59
|
|
