ABC Joins Fake News!

F

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
Big_Lou said:
Annnndddddd speaking of projection, here is our very own food stamp-dependent 'purple' hater, pooey popsicle! Mention "racist impotent republicunts" and they come RUNNING on cue! LMAO!

You poor dear, davey sheskunk's incessant PMs are really riling you up, huh?
Click to expand...

I'm burrowing through your scalp. Once I'm in there you'll never get me out. You better work on it now, before it's too late.
 
S

SSHZ

Well-Known Member
cool2burn said:
I agree but i would see trying to influence the poll by a couple people but the numbers from the data set of those polls is just plain bad. When this fails Maybe they will try to blame the Zika Virus instead of themselves for the loss. The polls were so off this election is is laughable and we are supposed to believe them now when we know liberal media outlets have it out for him.
Click to expand...
EXACTLY!
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
spandy said:
Almost as retarded as...

Click to expand...
The nub of your argument is that there was error in a poll, the polling error was reported using a statistic you don't understand. You aren't alone. There are a lot of people who don't understand statistics. They shouldn't try to use them. They should fall back on an older way of forecasting using finger bones tossed from a skull. That way they will only be wrong half the time.
 
cool2burn

cool2burn

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
The nub of your argument is that there was error in a poll, the polling error was reported using a statistic you don't understand. You aren't alone. There are a lot of people who don't understand statistics. They shouldn't try to use them. They should fall back on an older way of forecasting using finger bones tossed from a skull. That way they will only be wrong half the time.
Click to expand...
Did you even look at the data in the link forget the oversampling how about unbalanced that is a better word I guess where they interviewed far more Democrats and independence and Republicans by not just a couple that to me is oversampling of certain data sorry
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
cool2burn said:
Did you even look at the data in the link forget the oversampling how about unbalanced that is a better word I guess where they interviewed far more Democrats and independence and Republicans by not just a couple that to me is oversampling of certain data sorry
Click to expand...
I looked at the "article" (snicker) and it's argument was shot full of holes from the outset.

For example, one complaint is the under-reporting of Republicans. This is used this to discredit the whole poll. The poll reported 24% Republicans responding out of 1000 people in the sample. The complaint is that the "real number is 29%" and so the poll is "obviously" biased. In actual numbers, the poll counted 240 people as Republicans when the expected value was 290.

What about so-called bias?

  • The poll reported 38% thought Trump treated the media fairly while 57% felt that Trump treated the media unfairly.
  • in raw numbers, 380 thought Trump was fair with the media and 570 felt Trump treated the media unfairly
  • There is a 190 person difference between those who think Trump is fair compared to those who think Trump is unfair.
  • Remember there were only 50 fewer Republicans -- the so-called undersample -- in the poll than expected.
To help a numbers challenged person, how about this:

50 is a much smaller number than 190. Even accounting for undersampling, most people polled think Trump treats the media unfairly.

The argument that the polling bias explains why the poll found so many people who think Trump treats the media like shit is false. Trump does treat the media like shit, by the way. You must have noticed. And so, the polls findings are in agreement with externally observable facts. I find the poll more likely to be honest than your fucking article.

The same goes for unfavorable/favorable ratings. The difference is much larger than the so-called undersample.
and so on.

You are an idiot

Trump shagged you.
 
Last edited:
F

fdd2blk

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
The nub of your argument is that there was error in a poll, the polling error was reported using a statistic you don't understand. You aren't alone. There are a lot of people who don't understand statistics. They shouldn't try to use them. They should fall back on an older way of forecasting using finger bones tossed from a skull. That way they will only be wrong half the time.
Click to expand...

You need to teach this to @UncleBuck. ;)
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
cool2burn said:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-17/new-abc-wapo-poll-shows-drop-trump-favorabilty-through-aggressive-oversamples

Yup Go Liberals!
Click to expand...
what about all the other polls showing his approval rating to be underwater too?

in 2012, obama outperformed the polsl by 3-5 points. in 2016, trum outperformed them by 1-4 points.

so let's say the polls aren't accurate and are off by 5 points to trum's detriment. what's his approval rating then?

42% or so?

congrats. obama is around 60%, and presidential approval ratings only ever go up once they leave office. trum is at the point where his approval rating should be at its highest.

CUCK.

nice avatar.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top