Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 565 posts

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

#261

Post by DecoPerson »

“The kind of people who answer polls are really weird, and it’s ruining polling.”

This is true everywhere. I’ve been involved polling in for a popular AAA game, a small retail business, school events, online forums, and more; they all fail to account for the “who chooses to answer” bias (is there a name for this?).

I speculate that the “average 4.7 million viewers“ rating Firefly received when it aired was totally off. The Fox executives (who clearly didn’t care for the show, if you read the full story) used this as ammunition to have it cancelled. (see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nielsen_ratings for criticisms of the rating system used at the time).

The people who would take the time to answer a poll (or connect a device to their TV for some cash) are a small subset of people who will skew your data in unintuitive ways. If more business people understood this, our world would be a better place.

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

#262

Post by PeterisP »

free_rms wrote: post #243
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. What if you're both right? What if both parties are trying to use HLvM, and nobody represents the middle?

And when you consider that concessions to the lower class by both parties are entirely cultural, linguistic and non-material..

Yes, that's true, and because of that the lower class systematically vote for parties and policies that harm lower class to benefit the wealthy.

Actually, this - class consciousness / false consciousness; the understanding (or lack of it) of the role and interests of the class you're in - was one of key concepts of Marx writings, too bad that this association currently makes many people automatically discard these ideas even if they actually are quite relevant to their interests.

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

#263

Post by karpierz »

nl wrote: post #252
throwaway32849 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most people I know voted Republican were low-wage working people, where my highly paid educated friends voted Democrat Biden actively courted high-earning, educated voters with his free college and student loan forgiveness policies, which amount to a wealth transfer to people who already have higher lifetime average earnings and are at a competitive advantage in the employment marketplace. Not very progressive: htt…

While it's true that the average salary of people who complete a college degree is higher than those who don't there are large numbers who don't complete the degree (which ends up with little salary benefit), or who do degrees that don't provide great salary outcomes[1] [1] https://www.bls.gov/careeroutlook/2020/data-on-display/educa... - note the associate degree and "some college" levels. > He also pledged to fund…

> The stockmarket is a comparative market where higher profitability compared to other companies is what affects stock price.

Can you provide evidence for this? I was under the impression that price is dictated by long-term underlying company value. That is to say, time-discounted, risk-adjusted dividends, including buy-outs. Dividends are just paid out via stock-buybacks these days because the dividends are taxed more, despite them being functionally equivalent.

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

#264

Post by andybak »

bentcorner wrote: post #240
andybak wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess so but I loathe voicemail more than I loathe the occasional marketing call. It's easier to just answer given the overall chance of it being a waste of time.

This is getting really off topic but I also don't answer calls unless I know them. My mobile voicemail is redirected to my Google Voice # and the automatic transcription is good enough that I usually don't need to listen to the actual voicemail. You might want to give that a try.

No Google Voice outside the US and I've never found a satisfactory alternative.

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

#265

Post by krona »

flowerlad wrote: post #183
fastball wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"How did Trump get so many votes?" The same people that attacked Schor have undoubtedly also asked themselves this question, without an ounce of self-awareness. Except instead of recognizing their own culpability, the conclusion most such people are coming to seems to be "well, I guess nearly half of all Americans are bad people".

Not bad people, but gullible people. Anyone that believes QAnon conspiracy theories such as Hillary Clinton, Bill Gates, and Oprah Winfrey are raping and drinking the blood of kidnapped children in pursuit of the “fountain of youth” is gullible.

Looking from afar, paranoia seems to have been a mainstay of the American right since the 1950's. What's changed in the past 15-20 years is it appears to have become a mainstay of American politics in general.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Paranoid_Style_in_American...

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

#266

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #255
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. It's FAR too early for him to be writing about "why we got it wrong" because if they knew that now, they would have known that last week. Look, if it was 2 points in a couple states here or there, I get it! But... if the guy was claiming the possibility of a 400 vote Biden landslide? Nah man, that is either massive incompetence or it's intentionally misleading. Neither scenario do I trust this person.

> because if they knew that now, they would have known that last week. Last week he didn't have access to the results or exit polling data like he does now. > if the guy was claiming the possibility of a 400 vote Biden landslide? A polling error of this magnitude in the other direction would have been a massive landslide.

Which one of Cohn's swing state predictions are within "polling error"? If you can't even consider the possibility that the polls were pushed to demoralize, that's not on me.

Here... Let me give you a source of pollster who explains just how crazy Cohn, Silver, Wasserman's polls were and how drastically they overshot.

This guy is right leaning, but no fan of Republicans, but the view here is that he's pissed about how poorly everyone did this and how it's incompetence or malice.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLHe3u4zZfY7K1N04z6Xu_JbY...

Watch from 30min to 40min. That's 10 minutes that I think will make the point with numbers that I can not make here.

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

#267

Post by 01100011 »

ninkendo wrote: post #249
evo_9 wrote: 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…

Polls showed similar results for the presidential race whether they were online or over the phone, so the whole “too shy to admit your politics to a human” argument isn’t a very good one: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-supporters-arent-...

People who hold controversial ideas may also not trust a computerized system. It isn't just about the person on the other end of the phone judging you. It's that someone is recording what you believe, and you may not be as anonymous as you think.

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

#268

Post by hackinthebochs »

flowerlad wrote: post #192
kjeetgill wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think the bulk of voters for Trump believe one of these things? He won a considerable number of votes.

The bulk of Trump voters are from rural areas, and tend to be less (or un-)educated. I don't know what percentage of Trump voters believe QAnon conspiracy theories. But I do believe the bulk of Trump voters are voting against their self interests, because they are gullible. Why else would most Trump voters come from rural areas? If they had legit reasons to support Trump why aren't the voters spread equally among urb…

>Why else would most Trump voters come from rural areas?

Because the political and cultural interests of rural areas are different than the interests of urban areas? The economies of rural areas have crumbled. But 50% of the population live in cities and so economic policies that benefit the "majority" of the population will completely miss the issues rural areas face. Trump's support is because he at least pretends to care about them.

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

#269

Post by jojobas »

smabie wrote: post #248
jojobas wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very rich people can pretty much be ignored as there are under 1% of them anywhere you look.

You can say that about a lot of interest groups

And you'll be right, unless all these SIGs are somehow similarly aligned.

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

#270

Post by 6gvONxR4sf7o »

rootusrootus wrote: post #18

Maybe it doesn't really matter much. I mean, sure, we need some amount of polling because it informs decisions such as who gets to participate in televised debates, etc. But other than that, what does the general public get out of polling? It's a spectator sport. In the end, all that matters is the votes, and people should really be encouraged to remember this. I'd think 2016 and 2020 would be a healthy reminder of t…

A lot of the common answers seem to amount to "it helps politicians and activists figure out what to say." Because apparently say whatever tests well is paramount.
Post reply on HN