RED AG 98 said:

---

Has this been discussed elsewhere????

ETA: this is the CEO of Atlas, the most accurate pollster once again

Starting today, I will be posting every day a new piece of evidence of how under @gelliottmorris 538 polling averages were systematically manipulated throughout this election cycle to create the “right” narrative rather than reveal the actual truth about what the numbers were.

— Andrei Roman (@andrei__roman) November 6, 2024

---

Gee, I seem to recall letting everyone know I was part of Ispos polling for almost three years now and how in 2022 and in 2024 when Biden was still running I got TONS of election surveys. Once Kamala was installed I got ZERO all the way up until the Saturday before the election when I finally received my one and only election survey.

Obviously this is all anecdotal but they know I'm a Republican based on my responses in '22 and earlier this year so I think they purposefully avoided polling participants that would select Trump. It's also telling they waited until the weekend before the election once the bulk of the polling was done to finally circle back to me for a single survey.

It's almost like they decided at the end, "well, I guess we need to get one final realistic poll so we don't look like the partisan hacks we all are."

Rich Baris doing the post mortem on the polling this cycle. Just started.

Right.

A polling error is just a point or two outside the margin of error. And yea it happens and we saw it happen over and over again even in the better polls. We all accept that.

Missing by 18 or whatever it ended up being is not an error. I could probably do batter than that just going to Des Moines and knocking on doors for an afternoon

agsalaska said:

---

Right.

A polling error is just a point or two outside the margin of error. And yea it happens and we saw it happen over and over again even in the better polls. We all accept that.

Missing by 18 or whatever it ended up being is not an error. I could probably do batter than that just going to Des Moines and knocking on doors for an afternoon

---

Exactly...there really is no difference between the legacy pollsters and legacy media, they are both extensions of the DNC and they prove it time and time again.

Her big miss is the sample. She uses that to set her electorate assumption of R +2 instead of R +10 which accounts for half her error. Could be response bias, but she didn't see that issue in 2016 or 2020 or June 2024.

Most likely she had a skewed woman sample which skews her result more. Selzer had women over 65 breaking for Kamala at 2 to 1, or something like that. Nationally, Trump support went down from 53% to 49%, so maybe she found something just not to the extent she thought.

Oh FFS! Get a load of this:

Quote:

---

Today Selzer wrote a column for the Des Moines Register in which she said she was still trying to understand how "the team" got the results so wrong.

Quote:

---

What a big miss for The Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa Poll. It followed an unprecedented worldwide fascination with an outlier poll showing Kamala Harris leading Donald Trump by 3 percentage points.
The final poll followed a surprising September poll showing the vice president had closed Trump's lead over Biden in a June poll by 14 points. So, the October poll appeared the next step in an upward progression for Harris. Except that turned out not to be true.
The team at Selzer & Company has begun a review to raise any plausible question of what happened between Thursday night the previous week, when we finished interviewing, and when the votes were tallied on Tuesday night. That work has begun, but it will be awhile before it is complete.

---

---

This takes the cake.

Quote:

---

Selzer says she's been receiving a lot of phone calls and emails asking if she manipulated the data in some way. Her response has been to suggest that maybe her poll galvanized GOP voters.

Quote:

---

In response to a critique that I "manipulated" the data, or had been paid (by some anonymous source, presumably on the Democratic side), or that I was exercising psyops or some sort of voter suppression: 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. Maybe that's what happened.

---

---

Yeah right Ann.


Via Hot Air.

Haha. Yea right. Her pill made all the difference

Maybe it helped to galvanize the Republicans in IA a little bit, but not by 16 points.

Ann Selzer has one defense: As unprobable as it is, maybe she drew a complete outlying sample set.

It can happen.

Did it?

Don't care. Scoreboard!

SwigAg11 said:

---

Maybe it helped to galvanize the Republicans in IA a little bit, but not by 16 points.

---

In Critical Drinker's Voice: That is way outside even my standard deviation. Believe that!

Squadron7 said:

---

Ann Selzer has one defense: As unprobable as it is, maybe she drew a complete outlying sample set.

It can happen.

Did it?

Don't care. Scoreboard!

---

She told Halperin she hadn't changed her methodolgy in decades. Still uses landlines.

I bet I could do better than that in almost all 50 states by simply guessing. Certainly I could in Iowa.

aggiehawg said:

---

Squadron7 said:

---

Ann Selzer has one defense: As unprobable as it is, maybe she drew a complete outlying sample set.

It can happen.

Did it?

Don't care. Scoreboard!

---

She told Halperin she hadn't changed her methodolgy in decades. Still uses landlines.

---

This actually makes sense. She sampled Covid Violation and Suicide hotlines!

*Badump-bump*

The Iowa poll in 24 was very similar to the Wisconsin poll in 20. Gigantic outliers released two days before Election Day. They are infuriating. I'm up every weekday around 4:00 AM and watch CNBC. On Monday the anchor of the show, Frank Holland (who I actually like), mentioned the poll six times in the first 30 minutes. That's the purpose of the poll. For news outlets to 'start a conversation' that Kamala has the wind at her back.

Quote:

---

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. Maybe that's what happened.

---

Ann Selzer somehow takes credit for Trump win.

Bobaloo said:

---

The Iowa poll in 24 was very similar to the Wisconsin poll in 20. Gigantic outliers released two days before Election Day. They are infuriating. I'm up every weekday around 4:00 AM and watch CNBC. On Monday the anchor of the show, Frank Holland (who I actually like), mentioned the poll six times in the first 30 minutes. That's the purpose of the poll. For news outlets to 'start a conversation' that Kamala has the wind at her back.

---

There are just a few pollsters who can be trusted. The rest are noise and have proven to be inaccurate at best and democrat operatives at worst.

This is a big story. I hope one of the big podcasters picks up on it and shows how polls and media work jointly to manipulate the public. And once again, thanks to Elon again for making X a free speech platform again

dreyOO said:

---

This is a big story. I hope one of the big podcasters picks up on it and shows how polls and media work jointly to manipulate the public. And once again, thanks to Elon again for making X a free speech platform again

---

Rich Baris on People's Pundit and the head pollster at AI have been talking about this a lot.

Exhibits B and C here:

Exhibit C https://t.co/x5YYHKVlLA

— Andrei Roman (@andrei__roman) November 10, 2024

Quo Vadis? said:

---

Ann Selzer is the proof that you can in fact roll snake eyes 6 times in a row.

After seeing her explanation, she's an idiot who lucked into a bunch of good poll results by happenstance.

Her Kamala +3 poll showed that white men in Iowa over 65 years old had moved 32 points to the left since the 2020 election.

Her explanation: white men over 65 worried about abortion rights.

She's an idiot.

---

I said multiple times although I think it got deleted from the mods trying to keep us on topic. You have a state that is conservative enough to pass a 6 week abortion ban yet that same state is going to vote for Kamala +3 points.

Yeah, go sell crazy somewhere else.

Yep. I just want to see it on a big platform so that more Americans understand the bull**** manipulation they all had a hand in.

In what universe does Nate Silver live?

The polls did... fine? Even pretty good? Not great! But average to slightly above average by historical standards. No big upsets. They got a lot right about how the electorate was changing. And Democrats consistently ignored the clues they provided.https://t.co/UK4ElZJ68P

— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) November 19, 2024

aggiehawg said:

---

In what universe does Nate Silver live?

---

one where he has to deflect embarrassment and shame from himself to try to save his career and whatever is left of his reputation ?

Polls like this still happening is such a cope.

Net Favorables:

Harris: +5%

RFK Jr: -2%
Musk: -3%
Vance: -5%
Trump: -6%

Georgetown U. Civility Poll / Nov 17, 2024 / n=800

— Polling USA (@USA_Polling) November 22, 2024

other polls showing Trump favorable at 53 today

aggiehawg said:

---

In what universe does Nate Silver live?

The polls did... fine? Even pretty good? Not great! But average to slightly above average by historical standards. No big upsets. They got a lot right about how the electorate was changing. And Democrats consistently ignored the clues they provided.https://t.co/UK4ElZJ68P

— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) November 19, 2024

---

Of course he has to say this. It's his livelihood. Americans can't remember two days ago so we'll be right back here in 3 1/2 years watching polls every day.

He's on damage control to save his brand for his liberal cause.