“Red Wave” Redux: Are GOP Polls Rigging the Averages in Trump’s Favor?
“Red Wave” Redux: Are GOP Polls Rigging the Averages in Trump’s Favor?
newrepublic.com
“Red Wave” Redux: Are GOP Polls Rigging the Averages in Trump’s Favor?
41 comments
-
-
Yes, they absolutely are. It's coup 2, electric boogaloo. Foreign actors are also rigging the betting markets. They are creating another narrative they can use to justify stealing the election.
-
-
Every outcome since 2016 has been in favor of Democrats. More so since 2022. I'm not worried at all.
-
You should be, because there's more than a 0% chance it happens, and when it does, it's likely the end of America as we know it.
-
I'm not worried at all.
Why you gotta put that out into the universe?
-
I'm a little worried... My pants are dry, but I'm still a little worried.
-
When Trump gives his inauguration speech he's going to thank you because it was your jinx that put him over the line.
-
-
-
I don't think the polls are rigged.
I think they are straight up lying about the results.
-
Ya get more clicks if it's soooo close! Or make the headline vague to create uncertainty and anxiety. Clicks equals money.
Headline: "Poll says: One candidate is now losing in Pennsylvania!"
-
-
Don't care. Just vote.
-
Already did!
-
Yussssss
-
-
-
-
yes. next question.
all of these polling aggregation sites regardless of the quality of the the poll will include the data in their forecasts. how many poison pills do you have to put in the water supply before the entire thing is poisoned?
these operatives figured out well before the eggheads who refuse to question or change their methods that by flooding the zone with shit polls, they not only generate buzz for the results of the poll but they are poll by poll changing the reality that the lazy, access political media will breathlessly SCREAM IN ABSOLUTE TERROR that trump is gaining on harris. these junk polls are simply a method of simultaneous voter suppression and boosting on a race probably only really close in 3 states.
-
I know some of the aggregators put adjustments on right leaning pollsters. They've publicly talked about doing it. And it's not hard to see outliers when you look at all the polls released.
-
It also lays the ground work for election challenges
-
-
"The keepers of the averages insist that the impact is very minimal. Outfits like FiveThirtyEight; Split Ticket, the Times’ in-house polling tracker; and Nate Silver’s forecast all take methodological steps ostensibly to ensure that “garbage-in” polls don’t lead to “garbage-out” results. These include downgrading the “weight” of polls thought to be systematically biased so they have less influence on the averages than high-quality polls do. (FiveThirtyEight has detailed criteria for determining whether pollsters are high quality, including empirical accuracy and methodological transparency.) Another step is adjusting for a particular pollster’s “house effects” to downplay biases."
This has always been the thing that has me concerned. They may have fucked polls, but the aggregation methods have weights to shit pollsters so even if they did give shit polls, the overall result is still "accurate" (Kamala not doing well)
Another thing mentioned, I didn't actually consider, but is super fucked up:
They're trying to divert Democratic funding away from states by making them appear like a lost cause through shitty polling. Talk about absolute fucking scumbags...
The last thing mentioned is also infuriating in that Magoos will see a tight race that shows Trump slightly ahead, but if he loses they use that as evidence it was stolen!? So what the fuck happened with Hillarys 95% chance to win then!? Was that stolen? Oh sorry, silly me thinking similar logic should be used in similar situations... It's just whatever fits your narrative that is the only real valid thing, of course of course.... Ffs..
-
Consider this: given two options,
- 10 polls with no bias, weighted by only past performance
- 20 polls, half biased, weighted by an arbitrary secondary metric to remove bias (which only trends the data towards an average)
Which do you suppose would be more reliable?
-
This is the paradox of polling, there's no way to tell. Either could be better, both could be wrong, both could be right. There is no such thing as a poll with no bias, because the only way to take a tryly unbiased poll is to know the outcome of the race a priori.
-
-
Or maybe its Maybelline...
-
I would be very surprised if they were not.
-
Easier to claim election interference when he loses by a lot, but the polls should the race really close, it's all a setup for his loss
-
we danced in the street all day when he lost last time, and we'll probably do it again this time
41 comments
I hope they are, it'd be really nice if Trump dramatically underperformed the current polling.
I'd probably crack open a bottle of champagne, even.
You're missing the trick. The supposition here is that they're creating a false polling narrative to buttress their eventually allegations of election fraud. This will feed directly into another coup attempt.
I see the trick... but if all these polls are being falsely produced because Trump is actually ten points behind Harris and it's inconceivable that he could win... well, they'll still try and cheat the election but I'd much rather live in that universe rather than what seems to be our universe where the American people legitimately can't decide between a treasonous, narcissistic, felon and someone... not those things.
It'd really restore my faith in reality if most people actually saw Trump for what he is... I know they'll still try and steal the election even if Trump literally only gets five votes in the election and all of them are from people with the last name Trump but it's genuinely disturbing how close to fascism we are not even a century after giving the last batch of fascists a right trouncing.
They can try. They have fewer levers to get there this time. Biden won't just sit there without calling the National Guard.