if this plays out like the last few cycles, the late October poll will be a lot closer to the result than the September result

Pollsters think only a couple hundred people is the majority of people. I shall neither believe nor answer these surveys because election results should always be a surprise. A majority of Americans don't even answer these surveys and pollsters think they're always right. Pollsters are meant to gouge public opinion by making it look like only a crumb-size of the population is actually the majority of the public. Elections would be better off if pollsters blotted out of existence, from the very beginning to this very day, pollsters serve their own interest in gouging public opinion to make a crumb look like an entire cookie, the cookie being the general public.

I guess you're ignoring my comment. Statistics is a hard science which is mathematically proven. You're dismissing it because you don't understand it.

Has there been an election since 2016 that pollsters generally didn't ultimately underpoll Democrats? This doesn't seem like an outlier at all.

Pollsters have been and continue to be biased for a lot of things. Mostly due to Overpolling/Underpolling in a specific demographic etc. Which is why I think better polling is BETTER rather than simply 100% dismissing or actively trying to make pollsters LESS factual.

Has there been an election since 2016 that pollsters generally didn't ultimately underpoll Democrats? This doesn't seem like an outlier at all. In 2020 there were some polling errors in Trump's favor in Wichigania. Biden ultimately won but by a smaller margin than polls indicated.

Pollsters think only a couple hundred people is the majority of people. I shall neither believe nor answer these surveys because election results should always be a surprise. A majority of Americans don't even answer these surveys and pollsters think they're always right. Pollsters are meant to gouge public opinion by making it look like only a crumb-size of the population is actually the majority of the public. Elections would be better off if pollsters blotted out of existence, from the very beginning to this very day, pollsters serve their own interest in gouging public opinion to make a crumb look like an entire cookie, the cookie being the general public. This is an insane take, made even more insane by the fact this charge is going against THE BEST POLLSTER IN AMERICA.

I became skeptical of pollsters ever since I realized that it was only a crumb-size of the population that answers them. I prefer election results be a surprise, pollsters like to spoil things. Polls do have the power to predict election outcomes, and so do we the people who constantly follow certain key elections. Our ability to predict is as meaningful as their ability to predict. Election polls, fine, I believe some of them, but public-opinion polls, never.

I called Selzer not reliable because I have since become very skeptical of polling in general. Maybe it is.

There are far more important things to life than just caring about who wins elections and who holds onto power. Politics may be a force of change, but it's not relative to your personal life.

There are far more important things to life than just caring about who wins elections and who holds onto power. Politics may be a force of change, but it's not relative to your personal life. That is literally the most elitist privileged fucking horseshit I have EVER heard. Elections are super fucking important and dictate policies that are VERY much relative to your personal life

Those are the words of just an ordinary person. Yes, elections are very important, but I'm not going to center my life around them.

"Ordinary Person" I know what type of person you are ACTUALLY referring to, because there are literally millions of people who are being directly affected by who are "Ordinary". Literally so many elections had Direct Consequences to Ordinary people that I 100% believe u flunked Elementary School.

Iowa's a rural farm-state, this state used to have 11 congressional districts and 13 electoral votes, now it has 4 districts and 6 electoral votes, hence the 2010 census and every census as follows. 1930 down 2 1940 down 1 1960 down 1 1970 down 1 1990 down 1 2010 down 1 Is it really a good thing that the rural states has since lost political power at the federal level ?.

Yes, elections are very important, but I'm not going to center my life around them. The amount you post here seems to contradict that.

Putting partisan politics aside, if you are a numbers person the Selzer poll, a gold standard in polling, is very revealing. In 2020, the last Selzer poll in IA had Trump up by 7 and he won by 8. In 2016, the last Selzer poll had Trump up by 7 and he won by 9. In 2012, the last Selzer poll had Obama up by 5 and he won by 5. Of course all polls are snapshots in time and the race and this race could dramatically change in the next 50 days. Hard to deny this campaign has not been full of events. As a data nerd, I thought this analysis was interesting of the shifts polls are picking up since the 2020 election. https://x.com/Zprtr1/status/1835488190649819218

In 2020, the last Selzer poll in IA had Trump up by 7 and he won by 8. In 2016, the last Selzer poll had Trump up by 7 and he won by 9. In 2012, the last Selzer poll had Obama up by 5 and he won by 5. I's also like to point out something else I think people have been missing lately. The polling margin isn't the only thing to pay attention to. In 2020, the last Selzer poll had Trump up by 7 - 48% to 41% which means 12% undecided (or 3rd party) There is no guarantee the undecideds will split evenly or in the same proportion as the decideds. You must factor in how many undecideds there are. In 2016, the last Selzer poll had Trump up by 7 - 46% to 39% + 6% to Gary Johnson and 1% to Jill Stein which means 8% undecided Gary Johnson got 3.78% and Jill Stein got 0.73% on election day. 3rd party candidates almost always get less on election day than they poll and their supporters move to the main party candidates. In 2012, the last Selzer poll had Obama up by 5 - 47% to 42% which means 11% undecided It's surprising with so many undecideds Selzer gets that close.

There are far more important things to life than just caring about who wins elections and who holds onto power. Politics may be a force of change, but it's not relative to your personal life. I agree with that, politics is not the most important thing in life and as a Muslim, politics has never affected my life at a significant level. I have more important stuff to worry about in life than politics.

Putting partisan politics aside, if you are a numbers person the Selzer poll, a gold standard in polling, is very revealing. In 2020, the last Selzer poll in IA had Trump up by 7 and he won by 8. In 2016, the last Selzer poll had Trump up by 7 and he won by 9. In 2012, the last Selzer poll had Obama up by 5 and he won by 5. Of course all polls are snapshots in time and the race and this race could dramatically change in the next 50 days. Hard to deny this campaign has not been full of events. As a data nerd, I thought this analysis was interesting of the shifts polls are picking up since the 2020 election. https://x.com/Zprtr1/status/1835488190649819218 If you have X, you should see @MichaelPruser. He is a data scientist at DDHQ and he posts data about elections, daily.

https://x.com/MichaelPruser/status/1831014292151316837

Yeh. Follow Pruser. He did a great job tracking the votes from the WA Public Lands Comm race. But yeh...he's a numbers nerd too.

I personally think IA will go to Trump by 7.5% which is slight lower than his 2020 and 2016 margin.

Actually, what would have me concerned as a Democrat are voter registration numbers that Pruser is posting. Hardly any of them have good news for the Democrats. Certainly, no good news in the purple states.

Actually, what would have me concerned as a Democrat are voter registration numbers that Pruser is posting. Hardly any of them have good news for the Democrats. Certainly, no good news in the purple states. This is an understated element that I see a lot of Democrats glossing over. Some will rationalize it as people strategically voting for Nikki Haley earlier in the year but that sounds like copium.

This is an understated element that I see a lot of Democrats glossing over. Some will rationalize it as people strategically voting for Nikki Haley earlier in the year but that sounds like copium. Let's take example of PA, if you were true on this and you were too remove ALL of the voter registrations Republican got from 11/2023 - 04/2024 and 11/2021 - 05/2022, Republicans lead in PA by 100K. But it is very unlikely that ALL of voter registrations Republican got from 11/2023 - 04/2024 and 11/2021 - 05/2022 were Democrats registering as Republicans to vote for Mastriano and Haley.