Anonymous wrote:I love this thread. Absolutely love it.

So much hope (and artificially induced credibility!) invested in the ONE obscure, outlier poll. It carried the hopes and fever dreams of so many here.

And it went down in flames like the Hindenburg.


I love this thread.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:haha, yes. they still haven't given up and now there is chat about AOC running for president in 2028. LOL

Which I don’t understand at all. Why is there talk of 2028? DCUM told us there WOULD NOT BE ANOTHER ELECTION if Trump won.

He won.

So why is DCUM now talking about 2028?


I can’t understand this.

Anonymous wrote:haha, yes. they still haven't given up and now there is chat about AOC running for president in 2028. LOL

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love this thread. Absolutely love it.

So much hope (and artificially induced credibility!) invested in the ONE obscure, outlier poll. It carried the hopes and fever dreams of so many here.

And it went down in flames like the Hindenburg.


I love this thread.

It’s easy to grasp at straws in the face of desperation. (And I say this as someone who was hopeful about the poll.)

Anonymous wrote:Dems are really hilarious and I voted for Harris! Enjoying this nobetheless

Anonymous wrote:I love this thread. Absolutely love it.

So much hope (and artificially induced credibility!) invested in the ONE obscure, outlier poll. It carried the hopes and fever dreams of so many here.

And it went down in flames like the Hindenburg.


I love this thread.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/columnists/2024/11/17/ann-selzer-conducts-iowa-poll-ending-election-polling-moving-to-other-opportunities/76334909007/

She is retiring from polling. Her reputation is destroyed now. I think she released that so-called “poll” because she is a partisan Democrat and wanted to boost Kamala Harris in the election. She must have only talked to voters who share her political view in order to get results that were so tremendously wrong.

I mentioned earlier that I was suspicious of this outlier poll *because* of her upcoming retirement. Her partisan comments after the fact have solidified my views.

I'm struggling to understand why a pollster would tank her reputation so Democrats could feel good for 3 days.

More likely her methods have stopped working in this day and age where most people don't pick up the phone if an unknown number calls.

If this was a purposeful act, because she thought she could create momentum for Harris, and didn’t think Trump would win by as much as he did even if he did win. (Most people thought this was a 50-50 race.)

Trump certainly won decisively. However, the results seem pretty consistent with the projected 50 50 race. Trump won by 1-2 points in each of Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. It was decisive, but it wasn't even close to being a landslide. It's certainly notable that Harris did pretty poorly compared with Biden in many blue states, but that's irrelevant to the Electoral College.

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/

Anonymous wrote:So are pollster not allowed to be wrong anymore? There will be no poll in sight for the next election. Polls are money losers. They are a part of marketing budget.

Anonymous wrote:[img]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/columnists/2024/11/17/ann-selzer-conducts-iowa-poll-ending-election-polling-moving-to-other-opportunities/76334909007/

She is retiring from polling. Her reputation is destroyed now. I think she released that so-called “poll” because she is a partisan Democrat and wanted to boost Kamala Harris in the election. She must have only talked to voters who share her political view in order to get results that were so tremendously wrong.

I mentioned earlier that I was suspicious of this outlier poll *because* of her upcoming retirement. Her partisan comments after the fact have solidified my views.

I'm struggling to understand why a pollster would tank her reputation so Democrats could feel good for 3 days.

More likely her methods have stopped working in this day and age where most people don't pick up the phone if an unknown number calls.

If this was a purposeful act, because she thought she could create momentum for Harris, and didn’t think Trump would win by as much as he did even if he did win. (Most people thought this was a 50-50 race.)

Trump certainly won decisively. However, the results seem pretty consistent with the projected 50 50 race. Trump won by 1-2 points in each of Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. It was decisive, but it wasn't even close to being a landslide. It's certainly notable that Harris did pretty poorly compared with Biden in many blue states, but that's irrelevant to the Electoral College.

This is all well and good at the national level, but it was an Iowa poll not a national poll and that poll was so badly wrong that the person who conducted it should be professionally humiliated and it leaves many asking how it could happen. Was she that one bad poll was the last of her career? The consensus is that she put her thumb on the scale to help Harris. I genuinely believe that she fell victim to this “flood the zone” nonsense going around and probably thought that her poll was somehow correcting an injustice and leveling the playing field. In the end, all those Republican pollsters accused by Democrats of being corrupt were the most accurate. And to this day I have yet to read a mea culpa from anyone who promoted this conspiracy theory.