If,you get a report... political or otherwise before all the facts are in ..You may not be getting the true picture..
The left has been touting all week that the Democrat convention was higher rated,then the RNC convention overall when the audience for all four days was tallied up..,
This is true in regards to just TV,,and although Nielsen reported, Democrats edged Republicans in total TV ratings for their respective conventions.,that was only on TV, on the cable news networks...not everyone who watched the conventions watched them on TV...many people (esp.younger people )watched the conventions online...
The Republican total viewership across TV and online for its event surpassed that of the Democratic convention...147.9 million people watched the four-day GOP convention, which culminated Thursday night with the president's speech on the South Lawn of the White House. By comparison, Biden's campaign said last week that the Democratic convention drew around only 122.0 million total viewers.
Trump's convention CRUSHED the Democrat convention in total viewers..and to add salt to the wound..Republicans also brought in $76 million for President Trump..Democrats only brought in $70 million for Joe last week..
To remove first post, remove entire topic.
If,you get a report... political or otherwise before all the facts are in ..You may not be getting the true picture..
The left has been touting all week that the Democrat convention was higher rated,then the RNC convention overall when the audience for all four days was tallied up..,
This is true in regards to just TV,,and although Nielsen reported, Democrats edged Republicans in total TV ratings for their respective conventions.,that was only on TV, on the cable news networks...not everyone who watched the conventions watched them on TV...many people (esp.younger people )watched the conventions online...
The Republican total viewership across TV and online for its event surpassed that of the Democratic convention...147.9 million people watched the four-day GOP convention, which culminated Thursday night with the president's speech on the South Lawn of the White House. By comparison, Biden's campaign said last week that the Democratic convention drew around only 122.0 million total viewers.
Trump's convention CRUSHED the Democrat convention in total viewers..and to add salt to the wound..Republicans also brought in $76 million for President Trump..Democrats only brought in $70 million for Joe last week..
In other news...President Trump’s support among black voters rose 9 % points amid the Republican National Convention, a new Hill-HarrisX poll finds...
24% of registered black voters in the Aug. 22-25 survey, which included the first two days of the convention, said they approve of the job Trump is doing as president. That is up 9 points from the previoussurvey conducted Aug.8-11, where the President received 15% support among this group..
If,President Trump gets 24% of the black vote Biden is toast..that his core base..
Though not by as much,but still a gain... the survey also found support among Hispanic voters also grew by 2% points, from 30% in the last poll to 32% in this most recent survey.
In other news...President Trump’s support among black voters rose 9 % points amid the Republican National Convention, a new Hill-HarrisX poll finds...
24% of registered black voters in the Aug. 22-25 survey, which included the first two days of the convention, said they approve of the job Trump is doing as president. That is up 9 points from the previoussurvey conducted Aug.8-11, where the President received 15% support among this group..
If,President Trump gets 24% of the black vote Biden is toast..that his core base..
Though not by as much,but still a gain... the survey also found support among Hispanic voters also grew by 2% points, from 30% in the last poll to 32% in this most recent survey.
President Trump will travel to Kenosha, Wisconsin on Tuesday....The President plans to meet with law enforcement and survey damage from the recent riots after the police shooting of Jacob Blake.
Praising the federal presence in Wisconsin the President said ..."We were finally able to get the go ahead from the local authorities to send in the National Guard," ..... "Within a few minutes of the guard, everybody cleared out and it became safe."
President Trump won Wisconsin by fewer than 23,000 votes in 2016. Trump was the first Republican to carry Kenosha County in 44 years......( Wisconsin the state Hillary ignored and didn't bother to campaign there)... .
President Trump will travel to Kenosha, Wisconsin on Tuesday....The President plans to meet with law enforcement and survey damage from the recent riots after the police shooting of Jacob Blake.
Praising the federal presence in Wisconsin the President said ..."We were finally able to get the go ahead from the local authorities to send in the National Guard," ..... "Within a few minutes of the guard, everybody cleared out and it became safe."
President Trump won Wisconsin by fewer than 23,000 votes in 2016. Trump was the first Republican to carry Kenosha County in 44 years......( Wisconsin the state Hillary ignored and didn't bother to campaign there)... .
Michael Moore who was one of few political observers to predict Trump’s victory over Hillary Clinton in 2016...
Now he's warning Democrats that President Trump appears to have momentum behind his reelection campaign in key battleground states, with the progressive activist saying enthusiasm for Trump is "OFF THE CHARTS" compared with Democratic nominee Joe Biden...
“The Biden campaign just announced he’ll be visiting a number of states – but not Michigan. Sound familiar?” Moore wrote, presumably indicating Hillary Clinton’s 2016 race when she made the error of avoiding some states that then swung to Trump.
“I’m warning you almost 10 weeks in advance. The enthusiasm level for the 60 million in Trump’s base is OFF THE CHARTS!.... For Joe, not so much,” Moore added.
Moore cited CNN polling of registered voters this month to assert that “Biden and Trump were in a virtual tie”,,,,( 3.7% MOE) including a poll that showed the pair tied at 47% in Minnesota. Moore said that Trump “has closed the gap to 4 points” in Michigan.
Michael Moore who was one of few political observers to predict Trump’s victory over Hillary Clinton in 2016...
Now he's warning Democrats that President Trump appears to have momentum behind his reelection campaign in key battleground states, with the progressive activist saying enthusiasm for Trump is "OFF THE CHARTS" compared with Democratic nominee Joe Biden...
“The Biden campaign just announced he’ll be visiting a number of states – but not Michigan. Sound familiar?” Moore wrote, presumably indicating Hillary Clinton’s 2016 race when she made the error of avoiding some states that then swung to Trump.
“I’m warning you almost 10 weeks in advance. The enthusiasm level for the 60 million in Trump’s base is OFF THE CHARTS!.... For Joe, not so much,” Moore added.
Moore cited CNN polling of registered voters this month to assert that “Biden and Trump were in a virtual tie”,,,,( 3.7% MOE) including a poll that showed the pair tied at 47% in Minnesota. Moore said that Trump “has closed the gap to 4 points” in Michigan.
this election is going to be an absolute blowout. All the dems had to do in my opinion was not go crazy and they win this election. They couldn't do that.
Trump huge on election day!
buy $BTC
this election is going to be an absolute blowout. All the dems had to do in my opinion was not go crazy and they win this election. They couldn't do that.
Exactly right^^^^^^ although trump could still lose due to his botching of Covid. If the Dems lose, it will go down as the most botched election in history and basically cuz they decided to hitch their wagon to these Antifa nut jobs
Exactly right^^^^^^ although trump could still lose due to his botching of Covid. If the Dems lose, it will go down as the most botched election in history and basically cuz they decided to hitch their wagon to these Antifa nut jobs
Support riots, denounce police funding, be in bed with blm, cheer for "summer of love", refuse fed help while innocent people suffer, encourage not to debate..... polls start showing Joe is sliding so now he talks about the violence and police. Polls more important than actual constitutants. Good platform?
Support riots, denounce police funding, be in bed with blm, cheer for "summer of love", refuse fed help while innocent people suffer, encourage not to debate..... polls start showing Joe is sliding so now he talks about the violence and police. Polls more important than actual constitutants. Good platform?
In the latest monthly Democracy Institute (DI)/Sunday Express poll President Trump has 48 % of the popular support over the former vice president's 45 %. In the key swing states the gap is even bigger, with 49 % for Trump to 42 % for Biden giving the President a seven-point lead. ...
For those who say the Democracy Institute ( based in Washington and London) is an outlier poll....Polling by the institute has previously accurately predicted both the 2016 US election and the results on Brexit. ...
Speaking of outliers at least they are taking post Convention polls..why are the regular pollsters hiding post convention polls?
These pollsters have not posted a post convention poll yet....
Fox News CNN ABC/WaPo NBC/WSJ NPR/Marist NYT/Siena USA Today/Suffolk Monmouth Qunnipiac..
Rasmussen needles his competition: “Where are your post-convention polls?”
In the latest monthly Democracy Institute (DI)/Sunday Express poll President Trump has 48 % of the popular support over the former vice president's 45 %. In the key swing states the gap is even bigger, with 49 % for Trump to 42 % for Biden giving the President a seven-point lead. ...
For those who say the Democracy Institute ( based in Washington and London) is an outlier poll....Polling by the institute has previously accurately predicted both the 2016 US election and the results on Brexit. ...
Speaking of outliers at least they are taking post Convention polls..why are the regular pollsters hiding post convention polls?
These pollsters have not posted a post convention poll yet....
Fox News CNN ABC/WaPo NBC/WSJ NPR/Marist NYT/Siena USA Today/Suffolk Monmouth Qunnipiac..
Rasmussen needles his competition: “Where are your post-convention polls?”
This is the piglets "feel good" tread. Carry on...
You just can't resist stalking my threads to start shiit, calling names ...and making it about you..
Have your fun now Midnight..because in 65 days it will lights out for you...that is unless you have another meltdown like the last one you had a month or so ago..
Quote Originally Posted by Midnight1:
This is the piglets "feel good" tread. Carry on...
You just can't resist stalking my threads to start shiit, calling names ...and making it about you..
Have your fun now Midnight..because in 65 days it will lights out for you...that is unless you have another meltdown like the last one you had a month or so ago..
Ever notice when you try to have a conversation with a Trump Hater that it ends with being called a racist if you disagree with their ideas? And now the Democrats in power tell us America is racist “systemic racism” because they know their policies are not good for America. And most Americans don’t agree with or want their policies.
Ever notice when you try to have a conversation with a Trump Hater that it ends with being called a racist if you disagree with their ideas? And now the Democrats in power tell us America is racist “systemic racism” because they know their policies are not good for America. And most Americans don’t agree with or want their policies.
Investors should position for the rising odds of President Donald Trump winning re-election, according to JPMorgan Chase & Co.
Betting odds that earlier had Trump well behind challenger Joe Biden are now nearly even -- largely due to the impact on public opinion of violence around protests, as well as potential bias in polls, said strategist Marko Kolanovic.
Kolanovic, who has been accurate on calls including the stock rally after Trump’s election and the rebound from Covid-19-fueled lows earlier this year
Based on past research, there could be a shift of five to 10 points in polls from Democrats to Republicans if the perception of protests turns from peaceful to violent, he said. People giving inaccurate answers could artificially skew polls in favor of Biden by 5%-6%, he added.
Investors should position for the rising odds of President Donald Trump winning re-election, according to JPMorgan Chase & Co.
Betting odds that earlier had Trump well behind challenger Joe Biden are now nearly even -- largely due to the impact on public opinion of violence around protests, as well as potential bias in polls, said strategist Marko Kolanovic.
Kolanovic, who has been accurate on calls including the stock rally after Trump’s election and the rebound from Covid-19-fueled lows earlier this year
Based on past research, there could be a shift of five to 10 points in polls from Democrats to Republicans if the perception of protests turns from peaceful to violent, he said. People giving inaccurate answers could artificially skew polls in favor of Biden by 5%-6%, he added.
Ever notice when you try to have a conversation with a Trump Hater that it ends with being called a racist if you disagree with their ideas? And now the Democrats in power tell us America is racist “systemic racism” because they know their policies are not good for America. And most Americans don’t agree with or want their policies.
Racist
Quote Originally Posted by chadebennett:
Ever notice when you try to have a conversation with a Trump Hater that it ends with being called a racist if you disagree with their ideas? And now the Democrats in power tell us America is racist “systemic racism” because they know their policies are not good for America. And most Americans don’t agree with or want their policies.
In the latest monthly Democracy Institute (DI)/Sunday Express poll President Trump has 48 % of the popular support over the former vice president's 45 %. In the key swing states the gap is even bigger, with 49 % for Trump to 42 % for Biden giving the President a seven-point lead. ... For those who say the Democracy Institute ( based in Washington and London) is an outlier poll....Polling by the institute has previously accurately predicted both the 2016 US election and the results on Brexit. ... Speaking of outliers at least they are taking post Convention polls..why are the regular pollsters hiding post convention polls? These pollsters have not posted a post convention poll yet.... Fox News CNN ABC/WaPo NBC/WSJ NPR/Marist NYT/Siena USA Today/Suffolk Monmouth Qunnipiac.. Rasmussen needles his competition: “Where are your post-convention polls?”
Democracy Institute rated as FAKE by 538. Not a C or D rating but considered FAKE. One look at those numbers caused me to look them up. The latest poll released this morning by Morning Consult (B/C rating) has Biden up 8 points nationally. That of course means very little. What really matters are Florida, Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Pennsylvania. Florida and PA appear to be moving closer for trump. Arizona has jumped for Biden.
I've always thought Florida would move Red, as I consider them as Red as redneck Ohio (Ohio now +5 trump). For Biden to win he must get 4 of those 6 states. If Biden gets 5 it's over and we will have to deal with trump claiming it was rigged and filing law suits, counting on SCOTUS to bail him out. Why not? They did it for mass murders Bush & Cheney. In the end I think trump will win either by vote, Russian aide, and his illegal control of judicial and government offices. We will then have a fight for control between a dictator trump and the Oligarchy/Corporate America. Either way, if trump stays in office any hint of democracy will be gone forever.
Quote Originally Posted by SarasotaSlim:
In the latest monthly Democracy Institute (DI)/Sunday Express poll President Trump has 48 % of the popular support over the former vice president's 45 %. In the key swing states the gap is even bigger, with 49 % for Trump to 42 % for Biden giving the President a seven-point lead. ... For those who say the Democracy Institute ( based in Washington and London) is an outlier poll....Polling by the institute has previously accurately predicted both the 2016 US election and the results on Brexit. ... Speaking of outliers at least they are taking post Convention polls..why are the regular pollsters hiding post convention polls? These pollsters have not posted a post convention poll yet.... Fox News CNN ABC/WaPo NBC/WSJ NPR/Marist NYT/Siena USA Today/Suffolk Monmouth Qunnipiac.. Rasmussen needles his competition: “Where are your post-convention polls?”
Democracy Institute rated as FAKE by 538. Not a C or D rating but considered FAKE. One look at those numbers caused me to look them up. The latest poll released this morning by Morning Consult (B/C rating) has Biden up 8 points nationally. That of course means very little. What really matters are Florida, Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Pennsylvania. Florida and PA appear to be moving closer for trump. Arizona has jumped for Biden.
I've always thought Florida would move Red, as I consider them as Red as redneck Ohio (Ohio now +5 trump). For Biden to win he must get 4 of those 6 states. If Biden gets 5 it's over and we will have to deal with trump claiming it was rigged and filing law suits, counting on SCOTUS to bail him out. Why not? They did it for mass murders Bush & Cheney. In the end I think trump will win either by vote, Russian aide, and his illegal control of judicial and government offices. We will then have a fight for control between a dictator trump and the Oligarchy/Corporate America. Either way, if trump stays in office any hint of democracy will be gone forever.
"Democracy Institute rated as FAKE by 538. Not a C or D rating but considered FAKE"
Does 538 put out a rating on 538 ?
On election day of the 2016 presidential election Nat Silvers 538 had Hillary Clinton's chances to win at 65%..that's on the morning of the election...So, if anything is fake it's 538's Political statistical analysis models....Nat needs to stick to MLB something he's has had good success at doing.. Clearly the political arena is not his forte..
"Democracy Institute rated as FAKE by 538. Not a C or D rating but considered FAKE"
Does 538 put out a rating on 538 ?
On election day of the 2016 presidential election Nat Silvers 538 had Hillary Clinton's chances to win at 65%..that's on the morning of the election...So, if anything is fake it's 538's Political statistical analysis models....Nat needs to stick to MLB something he's has had good success at doing.. Clearly the political arena is not his forte..
On election day of the 2016 presidential election Nat Silvers 538 had Hillary Clinton's chances to win at 65%..that's on the morning of the election...
So, if anything is fake it's 538's Political statistical analysis models....Nat needs to stick to MLB something he's has had good success at doing.. Clearly the political arena is not his forte..[/Quote]
===========
CLEARLY, someone doesn't understand what a "one-off" is ...... on a handicapping site no less!
VEGAS figured the -500 Baltimore Ravens had at least a 75% chance to win their home playoff game vs Titans.
So did many, if not most cappers.
They were NOT wrong that the heavy fav Ravens had a 75% chance to win SU.
Never said they WOULD win...only that they held a 75% chance to win. Perhaps even higher!
I say the chances of a coin flip coming up heads is 50%.
It comes up tails.
Does that mean it was WRONG to say the chances of coming up heads was 50% on a coin flip???
What dummy would even think 'yes??'
If a handicapper on Covers makes 10 "predicitions" and the first nine turn out accurate. but the last one missed the mark, does that mean he is "FAKE" - and therefore handicapping is "not his forte" ???
Skilled handicappers understand probability, and especially the meaning of a "one-off" ... let alone how much weighting one would give to a "one-off" in the stats for future capping.
But then of course, there are those other people...
[quote]
On election day of the 2016 presidential election Nat Silvers 538 had Hillary Clinton's chances to win at 65%..that's on the morning of the election...
So, if anything is fake it's 538's Political statistical analysis models....Nat needs to stick to MLB something he's has had good success at doing.. Clearly the political arena is not his forte..[/Quote]
===========
CLEARLY, someone doesn't understand what a "one-off" is ...... on a handicapping site no less!
VEGAS figured the -500 Baltimore Ravens had at least a 75% chance to win their home playoff game vs Titans.
So did many, if not most cappers.
They were NOT wrong that the heavy fav Ravens had a 75% chance to win SU.
Never said they WOULD win...only that they held a 75% chance to win. Perhaps even higher!
I say the chances of a coin flip coming up heads is 50%.
It comes up tails.
Does that mean it was WRONG to say the chances of coming up heads was 50% on a coin flip???
What dummy would even think 'yes??'
If a handicapper on Covers makes 10 "predicitions" and the first nine turn out accurate. but the last one missed the mark, does that mean he is "FAKE" - and therefore handicapping is "not his forte" ???
Skilled handicappers understand probability, and especially the meaning of a "one-off" ... let alone how much weighting one would give to a "one-off" in the stats for future capping.
But then of course, there are those other people...
[quote] On election day of the 2016 presidential election Nat Silvers 538 had Hillary Clinton's chances to win at 65%..that's on the morning of the election... So, if anything is fake it's 538's Political statistical analysis models....Nat needs to stick to MLB something he's has had good success at doing.. Clearly the political arena is not his forte..
=========== CLEARLY, someone doesn't understand what a "one-off" is ...... on a handicapping site no less! VEGAS figured the -500 Baltimore Ravens had at least a 75% chance to win their home playoff game vs Titans. So did many, if not most cappers. They were NOT wrong that the heavy fav Ravens had a 75% chance to win SU. Never said they WOULD win...only that they held a 75% chance to win. Perhaps even higher! I say the chances of a coin flip coming up heads is 50%. It comes up tails. Does that mean it was WRONG to say the chances of coming up heads was 50% on a coin flip??? What dummy would even think 'yes??' If a handicapper on Covers makes 10 "predicitions" and the first nine turn out accurate. but the last one missed the mark, does that mean he is "FAKE" - and therefore handicapping is "not his forte" ??? Skilled handicappers understand probability, and especially the meaning of a "one-off" ... let alone how much weighting one would give to a "one-off" in the stats for future capping. But then of course, there are those other people...
if a guy hopes to win with his predictions onsports he should familarize himself with flukes and oneoffs .
and your right about understanding probability . if the odds r 10 to 1 against that dosnt mean that one wont happen every now and then . of course it will
"I'm the MOST HONEST human being that GOD EVER created!" - Donald "the felon" Trump
Quote Originally Posted by fubah2:
[quote] On election day of the 2016 presidential election Nat Silvers 538 had Hillary Clinton's chances to win at 65%..that's on the morning of the election... So, if anything is fake it's 538's Political statistical analysis models....Nat needs to stick to MLB something he's has had good success at doing.. Clearly the political arena is not his forte..
=========== CLEARLY, someone doesn't understand what a "one-off" is ...... on a handicapping site no less! VEGAS figured the -500 Baltimore Ravens had at least a 75% chance to win their home playoff game vs Titans. So did many, if not most cappers. They were NOT wrong that the heavy fav Ravens had a 75% chance to win SU. Never said they WOULD win...only that they held a 75% chance to win. Perhaps even higher! I say the chances of a coin flip coming up heads is 50%. It comes up tails. Does that mean it was WRONG to say the chances of coming up heads was 50% on a coin flip??? What dummy would even think 'yes??' If a handicapper on Covers makes 10 "predicitions" and the first nine turn out accurate. but the last one missed the mark, does that mean he is "FAKE" - and therefore handicapping is "not his forte" ??? Skilled handicappers understand probability, and especially the meaning of a "one-off" ... let alone how much weighting one would give to a "one-off" in the stats for future capping. But then of course, there are those other people...
if a guy hopes to win with his predictions onsports he should familarize himself with flukes and oneoffs .
and your right about understanding probability . if the odds r 10 to 1 against that dosnt mean that one wont happen every now and then . of course it will
That example is in the sports world not political arena..plus in your example ..it was the high % team, that won and was true to the forecast.
In my example the high % person lost....beating a model that was ran 20,000 times ..
Sports models use known statistics ,,,whereas Political polls use opinions...big difference
538 was not the only one.........there was many e.g. HuffPost’s Natalie Jackson and Adam Hooper projected a 98% chance,and Sam Wang at Princeton Electoral Consortium is predicting a 99 % chance ...just a few.
With Nat Silver he used an aggregate of the latest polls results to make his prediction ,,however "garbage in,garbage out"
Here is how some polls predicted the electoral count:
L A Times
Clinton 352, Trump 186
Moody's Analytic
Clinton 332, Trump 206
Sabot
Clinton 322, Trump 216
Princeton
Clinton 228, Trump 164
FiveThirtyEight
Clinton 302, Trump 235
and the list goes on and on....similar to the daily poll results you post ...the results are only as good as the in put and those polls you are relying on are the same... because like in 2016 they are over weighted with Democrats and other people that are lying..
VEGAS figured the -500 Baltimore Ravens had at least a 75% chance to win their home playoff game vs Titans.
So did many, if not most cappers.
They were NOT wrong that the heavy fav Ravens had a 75% chance to win SU.
Never said they WOULD win...only that they held a 75% chance to win. Perhaps even higher!
That example is in the sports world not political arena..plus in your example ..it was the high % team, that won and was true to the forecast.
In my example the high % person lost....beating a model that was ran 20,000 times ..
Sports models use known statistics ,,,whereas Political polls use opinions...big difference
538 was not the only one.........there was many e.g. HuffPost’s Natalie Jackson and Adam Hooper projected a 98% chance,and Sam Wang at Princeton Electoral Consortium is predicting a 99 % chance ...just a few.
With Nat Silver he used an aggregate of the latest polls results to make his prediction ,,however "garbage in,garbage out"
Here is how some polls predicted the electoral count:
L A Times
Clinton 352, Trump 186
Moody's Analytic
Clinton 332, Trump 206
Sabot
Clinton 322, Trump 216
Princeton
Clinton 228, Trump 164
FiveThirtyEight
Clinton 302, Trump 235
and the list goes on and on....similar to the daily poll results you post ...the results are only as good as the in put and those polls you are relying on are the same... because like in 2016 they are over weighted with Democrats and other people that are lying..
VEGAS figured the -500 Baltimore Ravens had at least a 75% chance to win their home playoff game vs Titans. So did many, if not most cappers. They were NOT wrong that the heavy fav Ravens had a 75% chance to win SU. Never said they WOULD win...only that they held a 75% chance to win. Perhaps even higher! ---------------------------------------------------------------- That example is in the sports world not political arena..plus in your example ..it was the high % team, that won and was true to the forecast. In my example the high % person lost....beating a model that was ran 20,000 times .. Sports models use known statistics ,,,whereas Political polls use opinions...big difference 538 was not the only one.........there was many e.g. HuffPost’s Natalie Jackson and Adam Hooper projected a 98% chance,and Sam Wang at Princeton Electoral Consortium is predicting a 99 % chance ...just a few. With Nat Silver he used an aggregate of the latest polls results to make his prediction ,,however "garbage in,garbage out" Here is how some polls predicted the electoral count: L A Times Clinton 352, Trump 186 Moody's Analytic Clinton 332, Trump 206 Sabot Clinton 322, Trump 216 Princeton Clinton 228, Trump 164 FiveThirtyEight Clinton 302, Trump 235 and the list goes on and on....similar to the daily poll results you post ..
WOW!
slim is making the case PERFECTLY for what a "one-off" is
and yet somehow he doesn't understand what it is!!!
aaaaaaHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Quote Originally Posted by SarasotaSlim:
VEGAS figured the -500 Baltimore Ravens had at least a 75% chance to win their home playoff game vs Titans. So did many, if not most cappers. They were NOT wrong that the heavy fav Ravens had a 75% chance to win SU. Never said they WOULD win...only that they held a 75% chance to win. Perhaps even higher! ---------------------------------------------------------------- That example is in the sports world not political arena..plus in your example ..it was the high % team, that won and was true to the forecast. In my example the high % person lost....beating a model that was ran 20,000 times .. Sports models use known statistics ,,,whereas Political polls use opinions...big difference 538 was not the only one.........there was many e.g. HuffPost’s Natalie Jackson and Adam Hooper projected a 98% chance,and Sam Wang at Princeton Electoral Consortium is predicting a 99 % chance ...just a few. With Nat Silver he used an aggregate of the latest polls results to make his prediction ,,however "garbage in,garbage out" Here is how some polls predicted the electoral count: L A Times Clinton 352, Trump 186 Moody's Analytic Clinton 332, Trump 206 Sabot Clinton 322, Trump 216 Princeton Clinton 228, Trump 164 FiveThirtyEight Clinton 302, Trump 235 and the list goes on and on....similar to the daily poll results you post ..
WOW!
slim is making the case PERFECTLY for what a "one-off" is
and yet somehow he doesn't understand what it is!!!
The results are only as good as the in put and those polls you are relying on are the same... because like in 2016 they are over weighted with Democrats and other people that are lying..
The polls I posted above show Trump winning was the accurate opinions of the people ..and Trump winning was a one off'er from a gaggle of inaccurate and biais poll taking...Proving the one you call a one off'er is the position you want to be against the other many inaccurate pollsters
Very similar to the blown up bold lettering polls you post every day here in the politic forum..
However if you are going to post in my thread ..lay off the ahaha's it only shows your immaturity..and proves you are in a pinch in this debate..
The results are only as good as the in put and those polls you are relying on are the same... because like in 2016 they are over weighted with Democrats and other people that are lying..
The polls I posted above show Trump winning was the accurate opinions of the people ..and Trump winning was a one off'er from a gaggle of inaccurate and biais poll taking...Proving the one you call a one off'er is the position you want to be against the other many inaccurate pollsters
Very similar to the blown up bold lettering polls you post every day here in the politic forum..
However if you are going to post in my thread ..lay off the ahaha's it only shows your immaturity..and proves you are in a pinch in this debate..
The results are only as good as the in put and those polls you are relying on are the same... because like in 2016 they are over weighted with Democrats and other people that are lying.. The polls I posted above show Trump winning was the accurate opinions of the people ..and Trump winning was a one off'er from a gaggle of inaccurate and biais poll taking...Proving the one you call a one off'er is the position you want to be against the other many inaccurate pollsters Very similar to the blown up bold lettering polls you post every day here in the politic forum.. However if you are going to post in my thread ..lay off the ahaha's it only shows your immaturity..and proves you are in a pinch in this debate..
Classic straw man. Again.
When this particular trumpster LOST the debate about the significance of an obvious "one-off"
On a handicapping site, where such understanding SHOULD be paramount.
But for some, apparently not!
aaaaaaaaaHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Quote Originally Posted by SarasotaSlim:
The results are only as good as the in put and those polls you are relying on are the same... because like in 2016 they are over weighted with Democrats and other people that are lying.. The polls I posted above show Trump winning was the accurate opinions of the people ..and Trump winning was a one off'er from a gaggle of inaccurate and biais poll taking...Proving the one you call a one off'er is the position you want to be against the other many inaccurate pollsters Very similar to the blown up bold lettering polls you post every day here in the politic forum.. However if you are going to post in my thread ..lay off the ahaha's it only shows your immaturity..and proves you are in a pinch in this debate..
Classic straw man. Again.
When this particular trumpster LOST the debate about the significance of an obvious "one-off"
On a handicapping site, where such understanding SHOULD be paramount.
Skilled handicappers understand probability, and especially the meaning of a "one-off" ... let alone how much weighting one would give to a "one-off" in the stats for future capping. But then of course, there are those other people...
your right fubah2
skilled handicappers understand oneoffs . that dude clearly doesnt . why even bother with this guy
"I'm the MOST HONEST human being that GOD EVER created!" - Donald "the felon" Trump
Quote Originally Posted by fubah2:
Skilled handicappers understand probability, and especially the meaning of a "one-off" ... let alone how much weighting one would give to a "one-off" in the stats for future capping. But then of course, there are those other people...
your right fubah2
skilled handicappers understand oneoffs . that dude clearly doesnt . why even bother with this guy
Hot Forum Topics
