this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2024
4 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19107 readers
3565 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

There is no "lead" because there is no election going on. Polls are proven to be worthless. Can we stop all the useless poll posting? At the best its pointless at the worst its harmful.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Polls aren’t proven to be worthless, they just have error bars that people don’t pay attention to. They’re nothing crazy, just statistics. Problem is: most people do not understand statistics.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

The other important thing to consider: polls are a snapshot in time.

They are not a predictor. The only poll that matters is election day.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

No, modern polling is mostly useless. The respondents skew heavily in one direction (old people that answer the phone).

There is no sample size big enough to account for a complete cultural shift away from answering phone calls and text messages from people you don't know.

Most polls report a response rate of about 90%, as reported by a PEW analysis of available studies. However, that is a made up number which does not account for attrition (quitters) or non-response to panel recruitment (no answers). If you include those numbers the real response rate is about 3%. Which means between the initial contact and giving their opinion 97% of people asked don't participate in a given poll.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

This comment comes off as if you think the people working at Pew, one of the most respected orgs for surveys out there, are just plain stupid and are dumb enough to leave a giant hole in their data when concerning young people. What you’re pointing out is a challenge in modern surveys but this is stuff that Pew is actively working to correct and with the midterm polling, they were far more accurate.

That’s all due to incorrect weighting of the data but Pew notes that polls specifically like the ones referenced here when looking at national sentiment tend to be much more accurate.

If you’d like to read more about the problems with polling Pew has a whole write up on it

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

No, he's got a point. Saying Candidate X is in the "lead" over candidate Y right now is like saying some athlete is in the "lead" of an Olympics event... in May when the games haven't even started yet.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

There's a margin of error. They are not worthless. They can also work to create enthusiasm and optimism around a candidate, which, in turn, can prompt people to go vote or to volunteer. Some say it prompts people to say "then I don't have to go vote." I don't believe that.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 months ago

Agree completely.

The only exception is if someone wants to deep-dive into a poll to explore methodology and account for it in the analysis. Almost none of the articles we see posted do that though - they tend to state the (real or imagined) results and go outward from there.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

After 2016 I have no idea how this comment would be downvoted

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Several reasons. Some people weren't as plugged in to the media zeitgeist of 2016 as they are now, some are (shudder) mathematicians, and some just don't see the problem with polls.

And, sadly, some are social scientists who are on board with quantitative survey results. Hey - it happens.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 months ago

I mean, yeah, but even statisticians should understand that rando internet people would feel the way that the original commenter does. It makes perfect sense.