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

481–490 of 565 posts

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

#481

Post by MrBuddyCasino »

newswasboring wrote: post #475
MrBuddyCasino wrote: post #445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I understand lived experience and how it impacts a person's ability to speak on a matter. I don’t. „Lived experience“ is just experience, but woke.

Lived experience is different from experience. But I think its illdefined and widely misused term. The way I see it lived experience differentiates internal and external experiences. For example a white person, black person and an indian person all can have the same police encounter (external experience) but live it in very different ways. Its because the white person and to an extent Indian person do not carry the f…

There is no such thing as "external experience", this is just called reality.

Experience = reality + human filter (mood, prejudice, ...)

Experience is a human concept, therefore it is necessarily subjective. Humans are not machines. Thus "lived experience" is just an empty phrase, invented to give a virtuous appearance to prejudice.

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

#482

Post by raxxorrax »

Falling3 wrote: post #187
bra-ket wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

absolutely, Biden has a chance only thanks to constant brainwashing by the media, 'orange man bad evil racist' broadcasted 24/7 for 4 years to millions of people. If you repeat lies many times people start to believe in them even on subconscious level. Especially if you manipulate people emotions and subjective opinions. Try asking anyone supporting Biden why do they so firmly believe Trump is 'racist'. Their respons…

Everyone I know who claims Trump is racist can quickly and easily point to specific policies, quotes, and actions - both before and during his presidency. This meme that people don't have evidence for their issues with Trump is not only false, it's comedically ironic.

I don't think so. He is just generally offensive.

I use the classic and correct definition of racism that associates attributes to racial groups, or more precisely ethnicities and adds a value judgement to that. You are a racist if you think one ethnicity is intrinsically superior to others.

I don't think Trump has that belief, it is also improbable for his character in my opinion.

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

#483

Post by hanselot »

lanstin wrote: post #251
d1zzy wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh wow, I'm so happy I'm not the only one thinking this. I noticed this transition over the past few years on these forums and I even commented about it in the past.

It is the path of things on the internet that are interesting and then become popular. Same for Usenet :) Kuro5hin escaped by becoming uninteresting. Our descendants may find a solution.

the solution is 4chan. Moderate only the horrifying, appease nobody's personal belief that they have a right not to be offended, and make your voice heard. Everyone needs to learn to have a better bs filter in times of AI generated fake news. What use is trying to eradicate the things we disagree with? Clearly the answer is inoculation.

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

#484

Post by mastazi »

vkou wrote: post #459
mastazi wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But we no longer live in a sane world One way to deal with this type of dysphoria would be to spend some quality time with people who hold views different from the ones you have, and it would be much better if you didn't do that online, but in person - for reasons that I'm sure you understand well, since you are an HN reader. Or, you decide that everyone on the other side of the fence is completely bollocks. But wi…

I have two friends whose parents have gone down first the anti-vaxx, then the flat earth, and more recently the QAnon rabbit hole. They describe it like losing a family member to a drug addiction, or a cult. Quality time with their own family is no longer a thing that can happen, because how dare the children suggest that basic pandemic precautions be taken, or even think of supporting the vast pedophilic democratic…

I was talking about opposite side of the political spectrum but obviously not insane people.

It seems you are grossly mischaracterising people of a certain political orientation which brings me to think that maybe you never really attempted real contact and/or you didn’t try hard.

Some of those conspiracies you mentioned don’t even have any link with any specific position on the political spectrum e.g. here in Sydney some politically progressive suburbs are amongst those with the lowest vaccination rates and as you probably know this is also true in many other large cities across the world https://www.smh.com.au/healthcare/rich-suburbs-have-low-immu...

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

#485

Post by mastazi »

pydry wrote: post #462
mastazi wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But we no longer live in a sane world One way to deal with this type of dysphoria would be to spend some quality time with people who hold views different from the ones you have, and it would be much better if you didn't do that online, but in person - for reasons that I'm sure you understand well, since you are an HN reader. Or, you decide that everyone on the other side of the fence is completely bollocks. But wi…

I've done that. It doesn't really help because there's no effective, scalable antidote to enragement engagement, herd behavior and people who are susceptible to emotional manipulation. It's not like red state people have a monopoly on this behavior, but it seems to be a bit more common among them. Politically we seem to be in some sort of positive feedback loop of anger/fear/suffering -> lashing out -> more anger/fea…

Even in person? What you described is normal online but I would think it wouldn’t happen so often when you are face to face

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

#486

Post by Dumblydorr »

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #367
newswasboring wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My heart broke when reading your article. There are some very different kinds of accusations put on Shor. The most hilarious is definitely the "you are not black so shut up" argument. I understand lived experience and how it impacts a person's ability to speak on a matter. that I have never seen a person even attempt at explaining how the author's lived experience corrupted their chain of thought. Also the original p…

> I don't understand what exactly the people restricting speech in this way are trying to achieve. When your ideas can’t be sustained on their merits, your only option is to eliminate people who don’t share your world view. It’s a complete disaster and only breeds fragility.

I will attempt to speak their position, though I disagree with the left on identity politics.

They might respond that, as a nation, US slaves and native americans and their descendants were exploited brutally by white English colonists. Over generations, this disparity was solidified by white male laws like jim crow, voter disenfranchisement, and overtly racist and harmful attitudes.

Where they go wrong, IMO, is what you've stated. I'm a white male posting this, does that matter? Should it? Or is it merely the historical fact that matters? And how fair is our current society?

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

#487

Post by Dumblydorr »

0x53 wrote: post #3

One of the biggest issues I think is that the polling is still done by just randomly calling people. I think I agree that there is a large skew introduced by the simple fact of only reaching people willing to answer a call from an unknown number.

Exactly this. How many Cuban americans in Florida had phones that they answered? The polls clearly missed this demographic group and it's pure "malarkey" to say they were shy Trump voters. The amount of times I've tried to debunk this shy voter nonsense...its much more likely that random calls miss people than they are shy to admit their support anonymously.

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

#488

Post by zimablue »

Green_man wrote: post #325
nxmnxm99 wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? Trafalgar was one of the only polls calling a close race. In Trumps favour but close nonetheless. IIRC they were the only ones calling Florida going red. You’re being intentionally disingenuous saying they were equally as bad as the rest of the field predicting a blue wave.

Trafalgar almost certainly got more states wrong (counts aren't all finished, but we do know likely winners in all states). Other sites like 538 predicted all states correctly, except NC and FL (50.5%/48.8% and 50.9%/48.4% respectively, both predictions wrongly favoring Biden [1]). Meanwhile, Trafalgar's polls put Trump up in NV, GA, PA, AZ, and MI (from their website, all late Oct / early Nov polls [2]). Once counts…

Number of states that you get wrong isn’t a great measure though right? If I call if for trump at 51-49 and you call it for Biden at 75-25 and Biden wins by 51-49 I was more correct than you were, to count “states called” is the wrong way to evaluate analysis in the same way that fptp is unrepresentatove of the popular vote, ironically.

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

#489

Post by zimablue »

kjeetgill wrote: post #188
flowerlad wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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

It’s about 40%, look it up there’s polling on it, and that’s apparently probably over representing the more trusting/sane ones. Partly joking on the last part dunno how the populated those polls.

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

#490

Post by newswasboring »

MrBuddyCasino wrote: post #481
newswasboring wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lived experience is different from experience. But I think its illdefined and widely misused term. The way I see it lived experience differentiates internal and external experiences. For example a white person, black person and an indian person all can have the same police encounter (external experience) but live it in very different ways. Its because the white person and to an extent Indian person do not carry the f…

There is no such thing as "external experience", this is just called reality. Experience = reality + human filter (mood, prejudice, ...) Experience is a human concept, therefore it is necessarily subjective. Humans are not machines. Thus "lived experience" is just an empty phrase, invented to give a virtuous appearance to prejudice.

I see what you are saying but the connotative meaning of experience is not that. At least not in the media I consume. Usually experience means "I have been in that situation" but it does not take into account how the person arrived there. It's like trying to do a simulation without knowing any starting condition
Post reply on HN