Harris beating Trump in Iowa

[Anonymous]

The media and many of the pollsters are a payed, biased, embarrassment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, Selzer was way off. Yes, this is a massive indictment of her methodology which worked very well for decades. It was disappointing for me because I had really hoped she was right.

But to her credit, she put work out there honestly. There are other pollsters that did this as well (NYTimes/Siena for example) and did much better, but far too many pollsters are just manipulating their data to come up with the result that matches what the other polls are saying. Polls of 700-1,000 people aren't supposed to all be within 1-2 points of each other. At a certain point the polls just become educated guesses by the pollsters rather than actual data.

Selzer deserves credit for being honest and allowing her work to be held accountable. It's a message that her methodology (RDD) doesn't work anymore. And that's a good thing to know.

She should personally apologize to trump and ask for forgiveness. DOJ should investigate whether these pollsters are being paid by dark forces.

pollsters have a right to make mistakes. you need help.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe next cycle, Rasmussen, Atlas Intel and Trafalgar, who have been accurate for the last 3 presidential cycles can just be "pollsters" and every other group should get the partisan scarlet letter.

AtlasIntel is a reputable pollster that is rated highly by poll aggregators. The fact random people on DCUM don't like them is on those people. Some people are just dumb.

Trafalgar is a broken clock. They've gotten lucky during recent presidential elections but were among the worst pollsters in 2022. Rasmussen was slightly better but far from the best that year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, Selzer was way off. Yes, this is a massive indictment of her methodology which worked very well for decades. It was disappointing for me because I had really hoped she was right.

But to her credit, she put work out there honestly. There are other pollsters that did this as well (NYTimes/Siena for example) and did much better, but far too many pollsters are just manipulating their data to come up with the result that matches what the other polls are saying. Polls of 700-1,000 people aren't supposed to all be within 1-2 points of each other. At a certain point the polls just become educated guesses by the pollsters rather than actual data.

Selzer deserves credit for being honest and allowing her work to be held accountable. It's a message that her methodology (RDD) doesn't work anymore. And that's a good thing to know.

She should personally apologize to trump and ask for forgiveness. DOJ should investigate whether these pollsters are being paid by dark forces.

pollsters have a right to make mistakes. you need help.

Agree. But pollsters should be independent and not accept funding from parties- not accusing Selzer of this, because I don’t know if she did or didn’t. Media should also be unbiased when reporting polls (and news) which obv didn’t happen. This single poll got more hype than any others because the media wanted to push this narrative as somehow being more reliable and true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's not looking good. Hopefully the Republicans don't put me into some kind of conversion therapy camp. - Trans woman

Do your friends tell you that you engage in hyperbole sometimes?

You don't you're nucking futz.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, Selzer was way off. Yes, this is a massive indictment of her methodology which worked very well for decades. It was disappointing for me because I had really hoped she was right.

But to her credit, she put work out there honestly. There are other pollsters that did this as well (NYTimes/Siena for example) and did much better, but far too many pollsters are just manipulating their data to come up with the result that matches what the other polls are saying. Polls of 700-1,000 people aren't supposed to all be within 1-2 points of each other. At a certain point the polls just become educated guesses by the pollsters rather than actual data.

Selzer deserves credit for being honest and allowing her work to be held accountable. It's a message that her methodology (RDD) doesn't work anymore. And that's a good thing to know.

She should personally apologize to trump and ask for forgiveness. DOJ should investigate whether these pollsters are being paid by dark forces.

pollsters have a right to make mistakes. you need help.

Agree. But pollsters should be independent and not accept funding from parties- not accusing Selzer of this, because I don’t know if she did or didn’t. Media should also be unbiased when reporting polls (and news) which obv didn’t happen. This single poll got more hype than any others because the media wanted to push this narrative as somehow being more reliable and true.

ideally, yes. but polling costs money. everyone wants 10 fresh polls a day but nobody wants to pay for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, Selzer was way off. Yes, this is a massive indictment of her methodology which worked very well for decades. It was disappointing for me because I had really hoped she was right.

But to her credit, she put work out there honestly. There are other pollsters that did this as well (NYTimes/Siena for example) and did much better, but far too many pollsters are just manipulating their data to come up with the result that matches what the other polls are saying. Polls of 700-1,000 people aren't supposed to all be within 1-2 points of each other. At a certain point the polls just become educated guesses by the pollsters rather than actual data.

Selzer deserves credit for being honest and allowing her work to be held accountable. It's a message that her methodology (RDD) doesn't work anymore. And that's a good thing to know.

BS. She never released her cross tabs even when asked, given the attention this poll received.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The media and many of the pollsters are a payed, biased, embarrassment

Not knowing how to spell Paid is a bigger embarrassment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is happening people! Thank goodness.

Trump beat Biden in Iowa by 8 pts in 2020. Harris has overtaken him.

https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2024/11/02/iowa-poll-kamala-harris-leads-donald-trump-2024-presidential-race/75354033007/

Ya don't say!!

[Anonymous]

J. Ann Selzer - renowned for her predictions in The Hawkeye State - admitted her research was completely wrong and might have even emboldened MAGA nation.

'I told more than one news outlet that the findings from this last poll could actually energize and activate Republican voters who thought they would likely coast to victory,' she wrote Thursday. 'Maybe that's what happened.'

- Daily Mail today

Also the paper itself seems horrified by all this:
“The humiliation also led Register executive editor Carol Hunter to issue a statement to readers explaining why they published the poll.

'The Des Moines Register is closely reviewing the disparity between the results of the final Iowa Poll and the election results,' Hunter said in a statement.

'Throughout its 81 years, the mission of the Iowa Poll has been to reflect the unvarnished opinions of Iowans, without pressure or interpretation from politicians, media or others.

'With rare exceptions, the final Iowa Poll before elections has tracked closely with the actual vote.

'Register editors will work closely with pollster J. Ann Selzer to review all methodologies and other factors that may have impacted the difference.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is happening people! Thank goodness.

Trump beat Biden in Iowa by 8 pts in 2020. Harris has overtaken him.

https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/iowa-poll/2024/11/02/iowa-poll-kamala-harris-leads-donald-trump-2024-presidential-race/75354033007/

This aged well. Like everything about Harris, it was all fake.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:J. Ann Selzer - renowned for her predictions in The Hawkeye State - admitted her research was completely wrong and might have even emboldened MAGA nation.

'I told more than one news outlet that the findings from this last poll could actually energize and activate Republican voters who thought they would likely coast to victory,' she wrote Thursday. 'Maybe that's what happened.'

- Daily Mail today

Also the paper itself seems horrified by all this:
“The humiliation also led Register executive editor Carol Hunter to issue a statement to readers explaining why they published the poll.

'The Des Moines Register is closely reviewing the disparity between the results of the final Iowa Poll and the election results,' Hunter said in a statement.

'Throughout its 81 years, the mission of the Iowa Poll has been to reflect the unvarnished opinions of Iowans, without pressure or interpretation from politicians, media or others.

'With rare exceptions, the final Iowa Poll before elections has tracked closely with the actual vote.

'Register editors will work closely with pollster J. Ann Selzer to review all methodologies and other factors that may have impacted the difference.”

This comment by Ann has truly made me lose respect for her. Does she actually believe this... at all?

[Anonymous]

Selzer carried the water for the DNC twice this election season. Right before the early Trump/Biden debate that was likely designed to embarrass Biden & force him out, she published a poll showing Trump surging ahead of Biden and thus helping build the anti-Biden narrative. Then, when the DNC needed to break the negative sentiment pre-election, she releases a pro-Harris poll.

[Anonymous]

Ann Selzer Vows Changes After Iowa Poll Wrong by 16 Points

Pollster Ann Selzer has vowed to review the data after her weekend poll on the presidential race in Iowa turned out to be wrong by 16 points.

Though counting is still ongoing in the state after Tuesday's election, President-elect Donald Trump won the state's 6 Electoral College votes with 55.9 percent of the vote compared to Vice President Kamala Harris's 42.7 percent, per estimates from the Associated Press.

What Was Ann Selzer's Prediction?
The Iowa poll, conducted by Selzer & Company for The Des Moines Register/ Mediacom, found Harris had a three-point lead over Trump in the state, 47 percent to the Republican's 44 percent.

The poll surveyed 808 likely voters in Iowa between October 28 and 31 with its shock result falling within the poll's 3.4 percent margin of error.

Announcing her findings on Saturday, Selzer, previously described as "the best pollster in politics" by aggregator FiveThirtyEight, said Harris had "clearly leaped into a leading position."

However, the Iowa poll turned out to be wrong by 16 points following the results of Tuesday's election. The former president has won Iowa by 55.9 percent to Harris's 42.7 percent, a difference of 13.2 percent so far.

https://www.newsweek.com/ann-selzer-iowa-vows-changes-poll-wrong-1981297

How much of the $billion$ KH raised went in Selzer’s pocketses for this fake @ss poll?

[Anonymous]

I never believed this even though I have a super liberal friend from ia who did! You can't trust the media or polls clearly. This post didn't age well but speaks a lot about the state of media and social media in our country. Its a crying shame.