Live data from Hacker News

One pollster’s explanation for why the polls got it wrong

vox.com

161–170 of 565 posts

Re: One pollster’s explanation for why the polls got it wrong

#161
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Before 2016, polls were much more accurate. And paper ballots were the norm. So there's that.

So you don't trust the results of the 2016 election? You think Trump stole it? (As far as I can tell, actually, 2012 pre-election polling was off by a few percentage points too, and showed Romney leading for most of October...)

I'm merely quoting the article re pre/post 2016 polling accuracy.

I'm not implying and wouldn't guess Trump stole it. If it was rigged, my guess would be that Putin rigged it without even caring whether Trump wanted to be president or not.

Re: One pollster’s explanation for why the polls got it wrong

#162
post #24

I think no one really knows what the different parties represent any more. Most people I know voted Republican were low-wage working people, where my highly paid educated friends voted Democrat. Isn't it supposed to be other way around? No wonder everyone is confused.

The current arrangement is high and low vs the middle, or HLvM for short. The left is composed of two factions, not one. The left is the high within society aligned with the low in society to destroy the middle in society. [1] When the power of the upper class is not secure, or somehow threatened by a middle class, the upper class forms an alliance with the lower classes. Today, you see the highly capitalized media p…

It's quite interesting that I see the same things but opposite conclusions - to me, the "high and low vs the middle" aspect makes sense, but it obviously refers to the Republican party, lead by the interests of the wealthy elite on the backs of votes from lower class rural people and blue collar workers (predominantly the white workers, but as these elections showed, also black working men) against the middle class such as the college-educated skilled workers who range from people with income like teachers and to those who are well off but have no chance to get into the wealthy (0.1% not 1%) class ever.

Re: One pollster’s explanation for why the polls got it wrong

#163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is exit polling no longer working? All of the discussion I’ve seen seems to focus on polling in advance of the election.

Considering the trend for people to be socially canceled, scorned, and shamed for supporting the "wrong" candidate, yes I think exit polling (and all polling for that matter) are not working. People are much more likely to either decline to respond, or they will lie.

I think mail-in ballots are a much bigger problem for exit polling than fear of being cancelled.

I cite no sources, just a hunch.

Re: One pollster’s explanation for why the polls got it wrong

#164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Research has confirmed that people don't lie to pollsters in any meaningful way when asked their head to head preference. It's mentioned in the last graph of the article. The crux of this article is rather than 'shy trump voters' there is simply a large amount of these Trump voters who will refuse to take a survey flat out.

"Pollsters say people don't lie to pollsters" is a bad argument. I ended up on some list and lied to every caller out of spite. These people are effectively telemarketers for corrupt propaganda companies interrupting my family at dinner. They don't deserve my honest opinion.

The important thing isn't people lying to pollsters, its people lying to pollsters in a way that's coordinated with a particular demographic or voting block.

If 10% of people surveyed, at random, lie to the pollsters and choose the "opposite" candidate out of spite, you'll actually see a sort of reversion to the mean compared to the actual opinions.

Re: One pollster’s explanation for why the polls got it wrong

#165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Research has confirmed that people don't lie to pollsters in any meaningful way when asked their head to head preference. It's mentioned in the last graph of the article. The crux of this article is rather than 'shy trump voters' there is simply a large amount of these Trump voters who will refuse to take a survey flat out.

"Pollsters say people don't lie to pollsters" is a bad argument. I ended up on some list and lied to every caller out of spite. These people are effectively telemarketers for corrupt propaganda companies interrupting my family at dinner. They don't deserve my honest opinion.

Are you saying it’s a bad argument, and contradicts previous research because your personal experience differs? That sounds like anecdata, not argument.

Re: One pollster’s explanation for why the polls got it wrong

#166
post #149
post #104

Who replies honestly to political question to random strangers? I know I don't. What's the benefit of letting anyone know where you stand politically at this point? None. It's much more likely - no matter which side you're for - that the person asking could have an adverse reaction. Things are just way too polarized now, not sure how that can change, but that's how it is. I mean outside friends/family I simply take a…

>It's much more likely - no matter which side you're for - that the person asking could have an adverse reaction. Things are just way too polarized now, not sure how that can change, but that's how it is. What? When was the last time a pollster got upset because of your response? Or are you somehow worried that the results will leak out and you'll get canceled?

How do you know it's a pollster calling?

Re: One pollster’s explanation for why the polls got it wrong

#167
post #80

The book Thinking in Bets points out that predictions are given with a % of certainty. If I say X party will win at Y% and Z party wins, it doesn't mean the model is broken.

But elections aren’t single events, they are 50 different events. 5% of the time the results in Michigan will be outside the error bars. But if the results are outside the error bars in Michigan, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota, etc., and the polls all got it wrong in the same direction for each (overestimated Biden’s support) that’s actually statistically quite unlikely.

Re: One pollster’s explanation for why the polls got it wrong

#168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think that's actually the rub. Blacks and Hispanics are voting less and less for Democrats, and that is true more for this last election than 2016 Clinton won greater than 90% of the black vote in 2016, as did House Democrats in 2018; there's indications that Biden did a little worse this year. specifically among black men. > the Dems are becoming the party of rich white people. Good verified voter data for 2020…

> Good verified voter data for 2020 will take a while Agreed and my above source is (probably) using exit poll data, which we should be a bit suspicious about. This is early and it's going to take a few weeks to get and unpack data. > in 2016 Trump won 55-39 among whites with over $150K income; And he seems to have taken losses there in 2020 > even if they've lost some ground with some of these groups compared to som…

> my above source is (probably) using exit poll data, which we should be a bit suspicious about.

Normally, exit polling aren't too problematic, but exit polls in this election when "vote in person" vs. "vote by mail" has been a matter itself of intense partisan division, well... There's a fairly obvious built-in bias compared to the electorate at large.

> I was reading an analysis today that suggested Dems may continue to lose these groups - and they will be losing them to the Republicans ( [2] but note the source and that's it opinion and give the appropriate grain of salt). Given how uncomfortably close 2020 has been for the Dems, I would not rest on my laurels and assume we'll just continue to come out ahead in these groups.

I'm not sure there is a grain of salt large enough for "analysis" from the Editor-in-Chief of the Washington Examiner which rests on no apparent actual data. That said, I think complacency is never good, and I think the Democratic Party should be active asking how it can serve all kind of communities better, including black, hispanic, and other racial/ethnic minorities (and the working class generally, and...)

But there's a difference between that and believing that there is clear (or even strongly suggestive) evidence of a particular problem with certain particular communities (I think there is, but more with the working class than race/ethnic minorities, right now; but I think that means we need greater additional effort in the "working class" area, not an absence of it in the others.)

Re: One pollster’s explanation for why the polls got it wrong

#169

For no particular reason, I feel very strongly that you could achieve much more accurate results by asking people to estimate what _they_ think the final margin will be then average those results. I'm inclined to think that community members know their community well enough that given a large enough sample, this average will trend towards the true result. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisdom_of_the_crowd edit: A quic…

A good way to get a good prediction is to ask how they think their neighbor will vote.

A person who is ashamed of their selection will be much more willing to tell you what it is if they think you're asking about their neighbors.

Re: One pollster’s explanation for why the polls got it wrong

#170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Pollsters say people don't lie to pollsters" is a bad argument. I ended up on some list and lied to every caller out of spite. These people are effectively telemarketers for corrupt propaganda companies interrupting my family at dinner. They don't deserve my honest opinion.

Are you saying it’s a bad argument, and contradicts previous research because your personal experience differs? That sounds like anecdata, not argument.

There were two arguments made by parent. One was a variation on the silliness of "my data shows that my data is good".

The other was personal anecdata explaining that it doesn't have to be a political agenda driving the bad data.

Post reply on HN