It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Hillary's lead completely gone - Trump in lead

page: 3
27
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 13 2016 @ 06:40 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

Ah but hosing national security for the entire country,and killing off troops as we are IS TOTALLY fine with you ...




posted on Oct, 13 2016 @ 06:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: imjack

originally posted by: DupontDeux
a reply to: imjack
I regularly consult a professional statistician about American political polling and he ensures me that there usually is no need to go beyond around 1k respondents which gives you a +/- 3 margin of error.


Trump supporters will literally spin anything.

Think about what you just said. It's literally selective to only Trump.

Polls with less people are less accurate. It doesn't take a genius to know that.

This is also why Clinton's points go down, as polls add more people too.

How can you can blatantly ignore the +9 to +14 points Clinton, in numerous polls near 1,000 votes? The same way you ignore these Trump polls.

Either way, what you said is beyond dumb. 1,000 people is 20 people per state. That's not accurate. Don't even get me started on how they select them.


You don't know much about polling do you?



posted on Oct, 13 2016 @ 07:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: imjack

originally posted by: DupontDeux
a reply to: imjack
I regularly consult a professional statistician about American political polling and he ensures me that there usually is no need to go beyond around 1k respondents which gives you a +/- 3 margin of error.


Trump supporters will literally spin anything.

Think about what you just said. It's literally selective to only Trump.

Polls with less people are less accurate. It doesn't take a genius to know that.

This is also why Clinton's points go down, as polls add more people too.

How can you can blatantly ignore the +9 to +14 points Clinton, in numerous polls near 1,000 votes? The same way you ignore these Trump polls.

Either way, what you said is beyond dumb. 1,000 people is 20 people per state. That's not accurate. Don't even get me started on how they select them.


No, what I said is counterintuitive.

Yes, polls with less respondents are less accurate. But the difference is less than you would think - twice the number of respondents does not mean twice as accurate a poll. It does not work that way.

1000 respondents = Margin of Sampling Error, +/- 3 percentage points (with a 95% level of confidence).
1500 respondents = Margin of Sampling Error, +/- 2.5 percentage points (with a 95% level of confidence).

It does not really matter that the voting population is around 150 million in America and, say, around 8 million in Belgium, for the same accuracy you would need the same number of respondents.

I am not spinning anything.

There is no logical reason to have 24.000 respondents. That is why I found the curious.

It is totally counterintuitive, though, and that was the exact reason I talked to a statistician in the first place, so I get, where you are coming from. And I said exactly what you did; that it is like 20 people per state, that it is not a proper basis.

It is though.

edit on 13-10-2016 by DupontDeux because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2016 @ 07:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: DupontDeux


What do you guys think?




Looks to much like a movie about a guy challenging the system and the system coming at him with classic tear down tactics. Folks see right through it.



posted on Oct, 13 2016 @ 07:32 PM
link   
a reply to: DupontDeux

Listen, what you said about margin of error is moronic. Not only is that not true, it's pure bull####. I would almost assume you don't even know what a margin of error is given your response.

Mathematically it doesn't even compute when comparing Winning Clinton Polls to Winning Clinton Polls. (+14 points to +1) with standard error.

There is massive discrepancy between poll to poll, and you claim ANY POLL WITH 1,000 PEOPLE only has a 3 point error margin? EVEN FROM EACH OTHER? There is literally endless proof what you said is false, hundreds polls with the exact same amount of votes that aren't 'only' 3% apart. It's not like your 'statistician friends' opinion matters on this, it's completely incorrect on every level with already available data.


For example, a poll might state that there is a 98% confidence interval of 4.88 and 5.26. That means if the poll is repeated using the same techniques, 98% of the time the true population parameter (parameter vs. statistic) will fall within the interval estimates (i.e. 4.88 and 5.26) 98% of the time.


Basically it calculates how often a sample will produce an identical result. Something completely irrelevant when we already have multiple polls with the same Sample Size and massively different results.

The MOE would only be predominantly useful in detaining the results of another poll of 1,000 people. Just because you can scale it up doesn't make it accurate, it makes it 'more accurate', doesn't mean it's accurate.

Every poll Trump wins is a low vote count with a HIGH margin of error. How does this sound good in your mind?
Compare that to the 26k(+6) and 32k(+4) Clinton polls with LOW margin of error.

HIGH error margin, naturally would lead to skewed multiplied results.
edit on 13-10-2016 by imjack because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2016 @ 08:41 PM
link   
a reply to: DupontDeux

OH....do the polls matter again???

LOL, it's so funny.

The latest poll is actually a Fox News poll that has Hillary up by 7 points. The RCP average still has her up by 5.


So, I guess since the polls matter again...Hillary is still winning, and looks like Trump supporters are admitting it.



posted on Oct, 13 2016 @ 08:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: DupontDeux
Hillary's lead completely gone - Trump in lead

What do you guys think?

You have to be blind!
Trump doesn't stand a chance!
Every word from his mouth dooms him, and he's too ignorant and insane to realize it!
Only other insane fools, and like him, completely devoid of Virtues or Ethics, would still vote for him!
He's already lost, despite the lies (he's all about the lies), such as your 'polls'.



edit on 13-10-2016 by namelesss because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2016 @ 08:58 PM
link   
a reply to: WilburnRoach

FB has been found to promote anti-Trump articles while deleting anti Hillary news articles. Wikileaks links would have been censored already



posted on Oct, 13 2016 @ 08:59 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Oct, 13 2016 @ 09:15 PM
link   
a reply to: spiritualarchitect

What the type of argument that you put forth misses is that most Dems and Liberals that will vote Hillary don't like her or trust her, and have no enthusiasm, so they won't go out to rallies, or be on a street team handing out fliers, or be discussing or cheer-leading for Hill on social media. They'll still vote for Hillary however because she represents certain values or perspectives that Trump doesn't share, even if she is dishonest about it, they are just not excited about it like Trump's base is.

Bit the fear of Roe vs Wade bieng overturned will bring out all the liberals and Dems to the voting booths even if they have been quiet compared to Trump's base. And, forgive me if I'm wrong, there are more liberals per capita then conservatives in the US. Shoot, I'm a liberal. I don't post about Hillary about facebook and am still not sure how I will vote on election day. I really want Bernie or Kasich.
edit on 13-10-2016 by AudioOne because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 12:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheKnightofDoom
a reply to: Unity_99

Are you blind? he is finished.
How long will you all continue to delude yourselves? Oh I know when Clinton wins by thinking Trump was in the lead anyhow you can all bleat that they cheated.


Keep chanting your mantra as it may work on others as well as it worked on you as you parrot MSM BS.



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 12:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: kruphix
a reply to: DupontDeux

OH....do the polls matter again???

LOL, it's so funny.

The latest poll is actually a Fox News poll that has Hillary up by 7 points. The RCP average still has her up by 5.


So, I guess since the polls matter again...Hillary is still winning, and looks like Trump supporters are admitting it.


You mean those same polls that showed Clinton up 15 points and she supposedly had it all but "wrapped up" after the Khantoversy?

Polls are becoming more irrelevant than ever with the emergence of social media. The numbers attending their rallies and the online support for the candidates paints a far different picture concerning who is leading. This is a factor that can't be taken for granted but the left just brush those facts aside and scream irrelevant. This has become a Trump witch hunt from all directions and I think the average informed voters see it for what it clearly is: a total whitewashing of the entire electoral process.

edit on 14-10-2016 by Nucleardoom because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 04:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: projectvxn
Trump is getting a lot of free press right now.

Google Trends


Not the sort of press he needs.
edit on 14-10-2016 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 05:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: DJW001

Ah but hosing national security for the entire country,and killing off troops as we are IS TOTALLY fine with you ...


No, it is not. That's why we can't have a narcissistic, loudmouthed idiot as Commander In Chief. He boasted about raping women when he knew he was miked. Can you imagine what he might say if he didn't know he was bugged? Are you prepared to die in battle because Ji Xinping called the President "fat?"



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 08:45 AM
link   
a reply to: imjack

Of course that is what the margin of error relate to. No one is confused about that. Did you read my post at all?

I never never said that the margin of error relates to other polls. That would be ludicrous - No poller would ever have a basis for such claim. I have no idea why you introduce that.

So what, specifically, are you arguing I am wrong about?

My claim is that at a certain point the margin of error will not drop significantly by increasing the number of respondents. That is what I am saying about margin of error.

In any case, it makes no sense to argue that polls are showing vastly different results, when they are not done by the same pollers. Those differences are usually the result of bias, different ways of correcting the results and so on. It has little to do with the difference in number of respondents assuming the polls are done with a reasonable amount thereof.

But please, point out to me what I said that is moronic.



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 10:11 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

As I JUST said on another forum,LBJ was a bigger jerk than Trump will ever be.
We'll be FINE.

I am prepared to act as you would ,OBVIOUSLY if he stepped on his Johnson in such a fashion.
Against China We won't take land by boots,THAT would wreck the place,Nice SURGICAL with weapons that are last use,WE'VE never heard they had.
I would guess that is the X37Bs are up to servicing or loading probably.
I also know he is a master negotiator or he would be poor.
WE'LL SEE.

I know the left has exaggerated ,his anger yet MINIMIZED Hillary's



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 01:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: projectvxn
Trump is getting a lot of free press right now.

Google Trends


Not the sort of press he needs.


I'm starting to like your giant meteor 2016 idea...



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join