Donald Trump would be on track to win a historic landslide in November ā if so many US voters didnāt find him personally repugnant.
Roughly 53 percent of Americans have anĀ unfavorable opinionĀ of the former president. And yet, when asked about Trumpās ability to handle key issues ā or the impact of hisĀ policiesĀ āĀ voters routinelyĀ giveĀ the Republican candidate higher marks thanĀ President Biden.
In aĀ YouGov surveyĀ released this month, Trump boasted an advantage over Biden on 10 of the 15 issues polled. On the three issues that votersĀ routinely nameĀ as top priorities ā theĀ economy, immigration, and inflation ā respondents said that Trump would do a better job by double-digit margins.
Meanwhile, in aĀ recent New York Times/Siena College poll,Ā 40 percent of voters said that Trumpās policies had helped them personally, while just 18 percent said the same of Biden. If Americans could elect a normal human being with Trumpās reputation for being ātoughā on immigration and good at economics, they would almost certainly do so.
Biden is fortunate that voters do not have that option. But to erase TrumpāsĀ small but stubborn leadĀ in the polls, the president needs to erode his GOP rivalās advantage on the issues.
Citation needed.
https://fortune.com/2022/11/16/pollsters-got-it-wrong-2018-2020-elections-statistical-sophistry-accuracy-sonnenfeld-tian/
Did you read that article? Their first example of a polling āmissā:
Pollsters were actually calling that race a toss up (also 538ās page ). There were several polls that predicted a slim Oz and several that predicted a slim Fetterman. Even the Republican leading pollster that was predicting a 1% the wrong way has a confidence interval of +/- 2.5 and had 4.9% other/undecided factor in the poll.
People are angry that they canāt read polls. Theyāre angry that a toss up is just that.
Did you read it? It goes on to describe larger polling errors(14%) that resulted consistently in multiple elections going the opposite way of the polls.
Polls are consistently inaccurate.
You can read the whole article instead of the first sentence.
This is the chunk youāre complaining about? They didnāt even refute the poll they just donāt like that data. And thatās after consistently complaining about polls that were marked as toss-ups.
Like please respond to the first one. Because the polls got Oz vs. Fetterman largely correct and itās the first example of a miss which should be the strongest one.
No, it isnāt, and i responded to your first reply four days ago when you originally replied.
If you are expecting every single pull to be inconsistent by the exact same amount, youāre going to be disappointed.
Some polls are off by 1% some are off by 15% some are off by more.
Theyāre not all from identical elections, and thereās not always an identical number of people voting or people being polled.
Polls are consistently inaccurate,is the point here.
If a pill has a Ā± of 5-7 percent with 90% confidence. And you have ten polls, You would expect at least one to be off by more that 5-7%. What your describing is expected.
Right, polls are consistently inaccurate and should not be counted on as foundational predictors of political conclusions.
If I tell you that a rocket is going to land withing a 20ft circle 90% of the time and land 9 rockets in the circle and 1 out of it; was I accurate or inaccurate in your mind?