| National
|
[
National ] [ Main Menu ] |
|
|
|
442138 |
|
|
Date: October 09, 2024 at 14:34:54
From: old timer, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Trump edges Harris by 2 points in Pennsylvania survey |
URL: Trump edges Harris by 2 points in Pennsylvania survey |
|
Trump edges Harris by 2 points in Pennsylvania survey
BY FILIP TIMOTIJA - 10/09/24 12:59 PM ET
The Hill's Headlines - October 9, 2024
Former President Trump edged out his general election opponent, Vice
President Harris, by 2 points in a new Pennsylvania survey.
Trump had a 2-point advantage, 49 percent support to 47 percent, among
likely Pennsylvania voters, according to an InsiderAdvantage state poll
released Tuesday. Some 2 percent of respondents picked another
candidate while the other 2 percent were undecided. The ex-president’s
lead was within the survey’s margin of error.
“Donald Trump appears to be gaining momentum in Pennsylvania with his
numbers among independent, senior, and African American voters
increasing or holding steady,” InsiderAdvantage pollster Matt Towery said
in his brief analysis. “It appears that Harris’s support from African
American males is actually deteriorating a bit.”
“This race continues to remain very close with turnout and enthusiasm
remaining important,” Towery added. “The Democrats enjoy a slight
advantage with regard to enthusiasm at this point, although the gap has
narrowed.”
The poll comes less than 30 days before Election Day and as both
candidates look to secure the Keystone State’s 19 Electoral College votes.
President Biden won the state in 2020 by just more than 1 percentage
point.
Last week’s poll from Emerson College Polling/RealClearPennsylvania
found the candidates tied at 48 percent support in Pennsylvania. An AARP
survey from last week found Harris with a 2-point lead, 49 percent
support to 47 percent, over the ex-president in Pennsylvania.
The vice president currently has a 0.3 percentage point lead, 48.8 percent
to 48.5 percent, over Trump in Pennsylvania, according to The
Hill/Decision Desk HQ’s state polling average.
The InsiderAdvantage survey was conducted Oct. 7-8 among 800 likely
Keystone State voters. The margin of error was 3.4
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[442141] [442144] [442148] [442150] [442158] [442151] [442140] [442146] [442147] [442149] [442157] [442162] [442175] [442171] [442183] [442188] [442185] [442189] [442159] |
|
442141 |
|
|
Date: October 09, 2024 at 14:47:32
From: ao, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Pollster Scorecard: InsiderAdvantage (Be Careful What You Wish For) |
URL: I hope that their polling improves (although it has been poor, it has at least been on an upward trajectory) |
|
UPDATE: InsiderAdvantage’s Matt Towery has apologized to me, both
privately and in the comments section at this website, which I sincerely
appreciate.
As you might imagine, I’ve had a long couple of days since our new pollster
ratings were released. I certainly don’t mind hearing from polling
professionals, and some of the criticisms were well considered.
Nevertheless, a disturbing situation has come to my attention.
The polling firm InsiderAdvantage implies on the front page of its website
that I consider them to be the among the “most accurate of all polling firms”
and that I “relied on InsiderAdvantage” during the 2008 campaign. A screen
capture of the front page appears below the fold.
In fact, I do not consider InsiderAdvantage to be one of the most accurate
polling firms. On the contrary, I consider them to be one of the least
accurate polling firms. Of the 63 firms to have released at least 10 polls into
the public domain, they rank 62nd — next to last — in my pollster ratings.
The claim stems from a lecture I delivered at Fordham University on
January, 22, 2009 during which I presented a PowerPoint presentation. A
copy of the PowerPoint, which is in Office 2007 (.pptx) format, can be found
here.
Fordham’s write-up of the presentation states that:
“Silver’s analysis showed that Zogby, AP-GFK and Insider Advantage were
the most accurate of all polling firms, although the percentages separating
them were small.”
This is evidently the basis for InsiderAdvantage’s claim, as to my knowledge
they did not have a representative present at the Fordham presentation. If
they had been at the presentation, or if they had contacted me at any point
thereafter, they would have been disabused of the notion that I find them to
be among the “most accurate of all polling firms”.
In the PowerPoint, I presented two versions of an “error analysis”. The first
was termed a “simple error analysis”. In that version, I looked at the last poll
from each firm with a median field date of 10/20/08 or later, for all
applicable Presidential and Senate elections in the 2008 general election
cycle. InsiderAdvantage placed third among the 17 firms that I listed in the
“simple error analysis”.
However, immediately after presenting the “simple error analysis”, I also
presented a “complex error analysis” that was “regression-derived” and
which accounted for “the degree of difficulty in forecasting different states”.
In that version, InsiderAnalysis placed eleventh of the 17 firms.
The “complex error analysis” is much closer to the method that we use in
calculating our pollster ratings. It showed InsiderAdvnatage’s position
dropping, among other reasons, because just one of the eight polls included
from InsiderAdvantage was from a Senate race, and Senate races are more
difficult to forecast than Presidential races. Once this was accounted for,
InsiderAdvantage’s position dropped to the middle-to-low end of the pack.
A far greater problem, however, is that eight polls is an insufficient number
to evaluate the performance of a polling firm. In fact, I stipulated this in the
PowerPoint, which said that it “may take several elections to determine [the]
best pollsters to [a] statistically significant degree”.
To give you some idea of how noisy the data is, and how little eight polls
might tell you, consider what would have happened if, rather than setting
the cut-off date at 10/20 in my analysis at Fordham, I had instead set it 24
hours earlier on 10/19. In that case, an InsiderAdvantage poll of Nevada
would have been included, which projected a tied race when, in fact, Barack
Obama won the state by 12.5 points. Had that poll been included in the
analysis, InsiderAdvantage’s score in the “simple error analysis” would have
dropped from 2.38 to 3.50, and they would have placed ninth of the 17
firms, rather than third.
More broadly, however, InsiderAdvantage’s problems do not stem from their
polling in general elections, which has been somewhat below average — but
unbiased and basically adequate. Instead, it stems from their polling in
primaries, as is apparent from their Pollster Scorecard:
Consider that InsiderAdvantage, which has just 74 polls in our database, has
10 cases in which they missed the final margin between the candidates by
15 or more points. SurveyUSA, by contrast, has 11 such misses — even
though they have 634 polls.
In fairness to InsiderAdvantage, we should note that this is not an entirely
apples-to-apples comparison. InsiderAdvantage focuses on primaries, and
moreover, Southern primaries, which are very difficult to forecast. However,
our method accounts to the extent possible for the degree-of-difficulty that
InsiderAdvantage faces, and nevertheless finds them to be significantly
below average.
Polling firms should not cite any characterization I have of their polling other
than words which I speak or write directly, and they should not cite any
analysis other than the most current version of the pollster ratings. The
current version of the pollster ratings are the sole official product that Nate
Silver and FiveThirtyEight use to evaluate the performance of different polls
in forecasting election outcomes.
I have no animus toward Matt Towery or InsiderAdvantage; I hope that their
polling improves (although it has been poor, it has at least been on an
upward trajectory), and I am sympathetic to them because Fordham
University’s account of my presentation was misleading. However, I reserve
every right to become less sympathetic, and would strongly advise them to
immediately “cease and desist” using my name in connection with their
marketing materials. I would also advise they and other polling firms be
more cautious in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[442144] [442148] [442150] [442158] [442151] |
|
442144 |
|
|
Date: October 09, 2024 at 15:57:17
From: old timer, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: a 14 year old article?? |
URL: https://www.natesilver.net/p/nate-silver-2024-president-election-polls-model |
|
instead of digging up a 2010 critique why didn’t you spend your time
considering how so of your fellow americans could be for trump when for
you there doesn’t seem to be a decision in the election? sure you can say
lots of stupid people or whatever to make yourself feel better, but what if
a lot of people are seeing something you don’t?
by the way, your 14 year old article is from nate silver and he also sees an
incredibly close election
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[442148] [442150] [442158] [442151] |
|
442148 |
|
|
Date: October 09, 2024 at 16:38:24
From: ao, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: a 14 year old article?? |
|
|
Yeah, OT, I see it differently. But then I ain’t clinging desperately to the
hope we can continue to rape the planet. But hey, good luck with that.
Though please understand if I express my disgust with people that
gleefully indulge in such barbarism now and again. Write it off as the
ravings of a madman if you must.. while I’ll continue to pray those that
carry on like that don’t have to be put in their place forcefully.
As it is you all are trashing this planet without consequence. I can’t
imagine that going on much longer.. at some point having every storm
being a once in a lifetime, once in a hundred years, once in five hundred
years weather event is going to get old and folks are going to start
looking to place the blame somewhere.. it’s just the nature of the beast.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[442150] [442158] [442151] |
|
442150 |
|
|
Date: October 09, 2024 at 16:46:35
From: old timer, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: a 14 year old article?? |
|
|
the whole save the planet thing rings hollow with you unwilling to criticize
kamala when she flip flopped on fracking. makes it appear as if getting a
democrat elected is more important than saving the planet
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[442158] [442151] |
|
442158 |
|
|
Date: October 10, 2024 at 09:46:41
From: Redhart, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: a 14 year old article?? |
|
|
"Drill baby, Drill" sound familiar?"Climate Change is a
Hoax" and Project 2025 that will make even the words
"climate change" illegal to say or print by the
government and turn NOAH and the weather service into a
lacky for the oil companies who say only what they want
them to day, and charge for the luxury of even checking
the weather.
That's your guy.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
None |
|
442151 |
|
|
Date: October 09, 2024 at 17:02:31
From: ao, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: a 14 year old article?? |
|
|
Fracking equals natural gas.. it’s an easy conversion to get large power
plants off of coal with it. Until there’s massive storage in place for cyclic
energy sources we have to have steady 24/7 sources. Although the
energy sector is moving past it already. As such there’s no need to make
a big deal out of it when the market place is going to take care of it.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
None |
|
442140 |
|
|
Date: October 09, 2024 at 14:45:32
From: shadow, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Trump edges Harris by 2 points in Pennsylvania survey |
|
|
Now, I'm not *taking issue with you* for having posted
this article, OT, celebrating a two-point advantage for
DJT in a temporary poll... (Are we clear there? Or will
you just say I'm lying...lol...)
But I WILL ask, because I can't help but do so: How in
the world are you going to vote for Donald Trump? With
all he stands for that is blatantly inhumane, racist and
fascist?
How? Are those your own personal values? Inhumanity,
racism, religious and financial-status domination? If
your values don't support those inhumane toxic stances,
how can you give DJT your vote?
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[442146] [442147] [442149] [442157] [442162] [442175] [442171] [442183] [442188] [442185] [442189] [442159] |
|
442146 |
|
|
Date: October 09, 2024 at 16:06:25
From: Redhart, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Trump edges Harris by 2 points in Pennsylvania survey |
|
|
It's an old game "Polls say you're losing! You might as
well stay home".
Thing is, there are "paid for" polls that actually try
to skew the actual results..get folded into averages to
bring them in line what they want to see, and are for
political advantage.
Some are always off like Rassmussen, who always is a
right sided outliar.
There there are some legitimate poll companies who have
not figured out how to make young people answer their
phones yet, or how to weight things properly.
Then there's the difference in being asked a question
by a pollster, and actually voting. Many people who ask
don't even bother to vote.
Then there are the ones that are irritated anyone's
asking them and just lie and give them false opinions.
All these things happen.
Polls have been off for years now and they don't have
it down yet.
a 2 pt advantage in a poll with a 5pt margin of error
is meaningless, and not indictive of someone
winning....even if you could trust it's correct, and
they actually have a good formula for weighting.
From what I see, Trump is losing and mostly by his own
hand. One too many lie to many, too many groups his
pissed off, too many abuses done, too much legal and
moral baggage, history will sort it out, but he's not
doing great.
Of course, the only poll that matters will happen on
Nov 5th.
And be ready, because we know he'll try to say it was
rigged, fixed and stolen so he can throw his legal
challenges at it and then call for his people to take
it by force.
It doesn't even look like he's trying very hard for
votes. I think he knows he's losing and will be putting
his efforts into sabotauging the election, challenging
everyone everywhere and where to send his mobs to take
it by force.
No, the polls really don't matter. They're a ruse right
now no one really trusts.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[442147] [442149] [442157] [442162] [442175] [442171] [442183] [442188] [442185] [442189] [442159] |
|
442147 |
|
|
Date: October 09, 2024 at 16:33:34
From: old timer, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Trump edges Harris by 2 points in Pennsylvania survey |
|
|
“It's an old game "Polls say you're losing! You might as well stay home".”
seriously? that is your response to an article on polls showing an
incredibly close race? lol
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[442149] [442157] [442162] [442175] [442171] [442183] [442188] [442185] [442189] [442159] |
|
442149 |
|
|
Date: October 09, 2024 at 16:38:42
From: shadow, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Trump edges Harris by 2 points in Pennsylvania survey |
|
|
And what were you looking for as a reply to that, Old
Timer?
Anything *other than* "Golly gee! That's an incredibly
close race!"
...lolololol...
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[442157] [442162] [442175] [442171] [442183] [442188] [442185] [442189] [442159] |
|
442157 |
|
|
Date: October 10, 2024 at 09:43:17
From: Redhart, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Trump edges Harris by 2 points in Pennsylvania survey |
|
|
OT's job is just to try to "trigger the libs", get them
scared or get them to stay home.
Again, an old strategy.
Got my ballot. It'll be mailed back today.
Too late, OT.
If you're mailing, mail early.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[442162] [442175] [442171] [442183] [442188] [442185] [442189] [442159] |
|
442162 |
|
|
Date: October 10, 2024 at 10:37:07
From: old timer, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Trump edges Harris by 2 points in Pennsylvania survey |
|
|
have you ever stopped to consider why you get so triggered by
mainstream media articles?
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[442175] [442171] [442183] [442188] [442185] [442189] |
|
442175 |
|
|
Date: October 10, 2024 at 11:05:31
From: shadow, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Trump edges Harris by 2 points in Pennsylvania survey |
|
|
Have you ever stopped to consider why you get so triggered
by those of us coming back hard in response to support for
fascism?
I don't...I already know...
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
None |
|
442171 |
|
|
Date: October 10, 2024 at 11:02:22
From: Redhart, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Trump edges Harris by 2 points in Pennsylvania survey |
|
|
Nope.
And it's not the "main stream" thing that bothers me.
It's shills that bother me.
Don't try to reframe this as a press thing.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[442183] [442188] [442185] [442189] |
|
442183 |
|
|
Date: October 10, 2024 at 11:31:31
From: old timer, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Trump edges Harris by 2 points in Pennsylvania survey |
|
|
reframe this as a press thing??
it is true you get triggered by mainstream media articles, that’s a fact.
most of these come from sources that the dumb website you use
approves of such as the hill, politico, bbc, nyt, and washington post. why
do you freak out and attack me over mainstream media articles? what
insecurity drives this behavior?
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[442188] [442185] [442189] |
|
442188 |
|
|
Date: October 10, 2024 at 12:42:38
From: Redhart, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Trump edges Harris by 2 points in Pennsylvania survey |
|
|
I object to obvious political cherry picked badly made
spin attempts like you use.
They're transparent attempts. You're not good at it.
Nothing wrong with mainstream news. It's the cherry
picked and types of things you choose which clearly
outline your shilling nature.
I smell manipulation.
It smells bad. It's amateur and seems to assume the
readers here are stupid, and we're not.
Being okay with a source does not necessarily mean I'll
agree with any particular article on those sites.
Again, you show your black and white thinking and bad
logic at "gotchaism".
That's what I object to. It's not the sources in this
case, it's how they're used by you in a clear agenda to
spin. And you have been spinning like a pulsar, my
dear.
But go ahead and keep trying to reframe the
conversation, or attempt to make pysche digs in hopes
that I'll bite. Those are clear, too.
Have a good day, OT.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
None |
|
442185 |
|
|
Date: October 10, 2024 at 11:38:40
From: shadow, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Trump edges Harris by 2 points in Pennsylvania survey |
|
|
!!!LOLOLOLOL!!!
*pppffff!!!* LOL Dude...your suggestion of Redhart "being
insecure" is, whoa, just what I needed this morning... ;D
;D ;D Ah that was good.
You're *really reaching there, pal*...lololololol
Framing pushback (whether to something voiced by your own
mouth or coming from an article from ANYwhere) as the
person pushing back "being triggered," or as "attacking
you" is nothing but deflective spinaway from every point
she makes...and no one but GOPers and akira miss that...
You guys are so predictable...lol...
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[442189] |
|
442189 |
|
|
Date: October 10, 2024 at 12:43:42
From: Redhart, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Trump edges Harris by 2 points in Pennsylvania survey |
|
|
He's trying to test and poke to see if he can elicit a
response (aka: bait trolling).
He's terrible at it, obviously.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
None |
|
442159 |
|
|
Date: October 10, 2024 at 09:49:20
From: shadow, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Trump edges Harris by 2 points in Pennsylvania survey |
|
|
No worries, girl, it'll be in the local box the same day I
get it...lol...
Ayep...the fascism supporters are squealing out of the
woodwork, bless their hearts...lol... Maybe someone can
sing to them until this is over... ;)
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
None |
|
[
National ] [ Main Menu ] |