Politico: Kamala Harris drops out of presidential race

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

1 hour ago, MjC772 said:

I keep hearing about all these polls...then I take a look at https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html#polls

and laugh, wondering why the hell we believe any polls. Sadly, most people I know that are Trump supporters would not answer the question honestly to some stranger calling on the phone, so as not to be lambasted by a pollster.

Polls are highly unreliable as far as data is concerned (phone polls the media does are just a joke). The statistical analysis behind it is sound in polling data world, the same way climate models are sound in climate model world. In reality, however, it cannot remotely factor variability (e.g. latent constructs) sufficiently to be accurate, or rise above the biases/awful methodologies that arise primarily because of the financial cost of accurate data. This gap is where science meets religion.

 

Instead, polls are like qualitative lie detector tests. Why? Because lie detectors can't detect lies. Even though they may solicit data that might give one the impression that someone is lying, they're inadmissible in court for this very reason, they can't demonstrably detect lies, and are objectively defeated with ease. Rather, the usefulness of lie detectors is making people believe lie detectors detect lies, so that they elicit a confession, which is admissible in court. Polls (in this context) do not gauge how people will vote. Similarly, the applicability of polls in the real world is to make people believe others are going to vote a certain way. This facilitates an impression upon the viewer of those polls. When combining this with other methods, it utilizes people's social tendency toward herding. So they think that certain parties are popular, other methods cause the "wasted vote" viewpoint (to scare them off from other candidates), and the end result is steering behavior. In statistics, this is minimizing dispersion (variability of data points), as in, minimizing outliers (data points, as in, people, behaving in unpredictable ways). 

 

tl;dr-> The point of polls in this context is to direct behavior, not to gauge it. 

 

When polls are accurate (more empirical), as in, useful research, is when they directly represent the population as a whole, either by census or stratum. We all know the census, and we trust its accuracy because it is highly accurate, it represents populations big and small, its sent to virtually every house, and we can infer data from it because its very accurate on a micro and macro level. Stratifying also works, and this is how Trump did his analysis in certain states (or as the left call it, Russia), ascertaining people's viewpoints in certain strata, drilling down to counties and cities (districts), and how to galvanize them.

 

 

Another example of the above, when a state or local government has (or wants) a voter initiative/amendment, often times, they will use highly accurate polling methods, though, the main constraint it always money. If it's a statewide initiative, they must stratify, and they need higher sample sizes. This becomes costly. The point of this, however, can be before the actual initiative, to 1) gauge people's views, 2) employ focus groups to test how people react to certain wording (whether wording for a PR campaign, or wording for the initiative itself), 3) share the feedback with relevant stakeholders, because certain wording may not be doable (legalese). I remember when a county I used to live in wanted a 1% sales tax increase. They got it to the ballot, but failed like 65/35. Rather than take no for an answer, the county wasted money hiring a PR firm, using focus groups to test the wording of the initiative, but it turned out the wording would've been challenged in court because it misrepresented the use of funds. So, they used the exact same wording as before, but changed the campaign, to where they drummed up some emergency services cut threat, and made people believe that passing this tax increase would fund those services. Even though the local paper mentioned that the actual wording did not require these funds to go toward emergency services, the voters paid more attention to the campaigns. They got it to the ballots again and won like 55/45.

We think of statistical analysis in respect to market research by companies, but governments have increasingly used it to elicit the behavior they want.

 

Edited December 4, 2019 by Burnt Reynolds

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

2 hours ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

He is the sole reason she got into politics in San Francisco. 

When you say "in to"...

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

17 hours ago, 90DayFinancier said:

Whether that's fair or good is besides the point, to some only a victory will do and Biden is over Trump in most polls.

So was Hillary.

[90DayFinancier 910]

 

Joe Biden said 'of course' he would consider Kamala Harris as his Vice President pick

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2019/12/04/joe-biden-would-consider-kamala-harris-his-vice-president-pick/2611460001/

[Dashinka 24,504]

46 minutes ago, 90DayFinancier said:

 

Joe Biden said 'of course' he would consider Kamala Harris as his Vice President pick

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2019/12/04/joe-biden-would-consider-kamala-harris-his-vice-president-pick/2611460001/

I thought Stacey Abrams was top of the list?

[luckytxn 2,264]

34 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

I thought Stacey Abrams was top of the list?

Biden found out that Kamala is easy and puts out.

[90DayFinancier 910]

1 hour ago, luckytxn said:

Biden found out that Kamala is easy and puts out.

Republican family values!

[TBoneTX 45,293]

14 hours ago, MjC772 said:

Trump supporters would not answer the question honestly to some stranger calling on the phone, so as not to be lambasted by a pollster.

Only honest answer is, "Do you think I want my house to be firebombed if I answer that question?"

[Dashinka 24,504]

8 hours ago, 90DayFinancier said:

Republican family values!

Independent Family Values

[Ban Hammer 13,342]

[90DayFinancier 910]

4 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

Independent Family Values

Whosever values are represented, the shaming of womens sexuality is a sign that a person had lost respect for themselves. 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

10 minutes ago, 90DayFinancier said:

Whosever values are represented, the shaming of womens sexuality is a sign that a person had lost respect for themselves. 

Who is shaming women's sexuality here?

[Steeleballz 7,550]

21 hours ago, MjC772 said:

I keep hearing about all these polls...then I take a look at https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html#polls

and laugh, wondering why the hell we believe any polls. Sadly, most people I know that are Trump supporters would not answer the question honestly to some stranger calling on the phone, so as not to be lambasted by a pollster.

 

   People actually answer these phone calls? 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

14 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   People actually answer these phone calls? 

I'm still trying to figure out who GETS these phone calls?  So many years pretending to be an adult, and not ONE SINGLE polling call have I received.

[90DayFinancier 910]

27 minutes ago, ALFKAD said:

Who is shaming women's sexuality here?

 

....Kamala is easy and puts out.

 

Seriously.