|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Sept 2, 2016 17:17:02 GMT
tigercpa: "Exactly. Any poll could be the gold standard if its methodology is truly scientific and random"
Like the Internet polls you provide? Lol.
tigercpa: "...and its weighting shave some appropriate anchor into reality."
Huh? That is gobbledygook to the max.
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Sept 2, 2016 17:22:07 GMT
Bevo: "I love RCP. I go there often. Their average of polls is a great indication of where the polls were three weeks ago. I pay attention to the trends on them. That's really the only value."
Good point. The RCP is a lagging indicator. Polls are almost immediately outdated.
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Sept 2, 2016 17:25:46 GMT
tigercpa: "If Hillarys crowds get any smaller, they will seem like a Michelle Fields book signing."
At the risk of beating a dead dog, McGovern and Mondale drew large and enthusiastic crowds, and each lost 49 states.
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Sept 2, 2016 17:28:01 GMT
Hero: "I am not wrong."
You are wrong about not being wrong.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Sept 2, 2016 18:39:18 GMT
Bevo: "I love RCP. I go there often. Their average of polls is a great indication of where the polls were three weeks ago. I pay attention to the trends on them. That's really the only value." Good point. The RCP is a lagging indicator. Polls are almost immediately outdated. Yep, just what every candidate wants - tell me where I was 4 weeks ago.
A lagging indicator in a political race is about as useful as tits on a boar.
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Sept 2, 2016 19:19:04 GMT
Bevo: "I love RCP. I go there often. Their average of polls is a great indication of where the polls were three weeks ago. I pay attention to the trends on them. That's really the only value." Good point. The RCP is a lagging indicator. Polls are almost immediately outdated. Yep, just what every candidate wants - tell me where I was 4 weeks ago.
A lagging indicator in a political race is about as useful as tits on a boar.
Not true. The RCP is highly useful -- if you have the schmartz to know how to use it. Like it or not, that is why it is the gold standard.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Sept 2, 2016 19:24:43 GMT
Yep, just what every candidate wants - tell me where I was 4 weeks ago.
A lagging indicator in a political race is about as useful as tits on a boar.
Not true. The RCP is highly useful -- if you have the schmartz to know how to use it. Like it or not, that is why it is the gold standard. So back to the original, if the underlying polls are bunk, then the average is bunk. Doesn't matter if it leads, lags or is concurrent.
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Sept 2, 2016 19:52:48 GMT
So back to the original, if the underlying polls are bunk, then the average is bunk. Doesn't matter if it leads, lags or is concurrent. Correct. However, the underlying polls in the RCP are not "bunk".
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Sept 2, 2016 21:23:42 GMT
So back to the original, if the underlying polls are bunk, then the average is bunk. Doesn't matter if it leads, lags or is concurrent. Correct. However, the underlying polls in the RCP are not "bunk". So, you've looked at all of them?
How can a poll that oversamples at D+20 or 60F/40M be valid?
Or a poll that refuses to release the wording of its polling questions?
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Sept 2, 2016 21:37:07 GMT
Correct. However, the underlying polls in the RCP are not "bunk". So, you've looked at all of them?
How can a poll that oversamples at D+20 or 60F/40M be valid?
Or a poll that refuses to release the wording of its polling questions?
Now, there is an example of bunk.
|
|
|
Post by Hero on Sept 3, 2016 12:11:57 GMT
Hero: "I am not wrong." You are wrong about not being wrong. Nope
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Sept 3, 2016 14:23:06 GMT
Bevo: "Do you even know what assertion I was referring to?" Yes, the inane one. Correction: the most recent inane one.
I see... so, you're saying.. All evidence to the contrary, you expect our new poster, "fosterkeats" to be around here for a long time to come reminding us about how wrong I was about Trump?
Time will tell.
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Sept 3, 2016 14:27:53 GMT
Trump's trip to Mexico was a home run. Then, he reversed much of the gains with his immigration speech. Curious as to why you feel that way about the speech.
You have to look no further than members of Trump's own Hispanic advisors who withdrew their support. Trump solidified his base with his speech, which was unnecessary. He failed to expand his base, which is most important. Trump's lemmings would have remained enthusiastically supportive, no matter what. Ann Coulter is not a lemming. She is an outspoken Trump supporter, but she is an ideologue first. When she was told that Trump was softening his immigration plan, she said that her book tour might be the shortest in history. She was promoting her latest book, which is a ringing endorsement of Trump, Trump caved to the Ann Coulter types. Beyond that, his speech was geared to fire up a live audience of staunch supporters. He was virtually screaming. His trip to Mexico had all the hallmarks of Kellyanne Conway's influence. His immigration speech had all the hallmarks of Steve Bannon's influence.
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Sept 3, 2016 14:58:55 GMT
Hero: "I am not wrong." You are wrong about not being wrong. Nope Yep.
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Sept 3, 2016 15:00:20 GMT
Bevo: "Do you even know what assertion I was referring to?" Yes, the inane one. Correction: the most recent inane one.
I see... so, you're saying.. All evidence to the contrary, you expect our new poster, "fosterkeats" to be around here for a long time to come reminding us about how wrong I was about Trump?
Time will tell.
What evidence to the contrary?
|
|