The poll industry seems to be full of anxious sheep. There was this Iowa poll that was a disaster. I suspected the polls were off because I could not imagine that it would be that close. It seemed to be way too close to 50/50. Barely anyone dared to publish a bold poll. However, I suspected they were off in this opposite direction. Lol.
-
Hey Guest,
We wanted to share a quick update with the community.
Our public expense ledger is now live, allowing anyone to see how donations are used to support the ongoing operation of the site.
👉 View the ledger hereOver the past year, increased regulatory pressure in multiple regions like UK OFCOM and Australia's eSafety has led to higher operational costs, including infrastructure, security, and the need to work with more specialized service providers to keep the site online and stable.
If you value the community and would like to help support its continued operation, donations are greatly appreciated. If you wish to donate via Bank Transfer or other options, please open a ticket.
Donate via cryptocurrency:
Bitcoin (BTC):Ethereum (ETH):Monero (XMR):
NumbItAll
expendable
- May 20, 2018
- 1,122
I doubt it, since there is financial incentive to be the most accurate and maintain credibility. I'm not sure what it would achieve to publish false results anyway. A 2-3 point point average polling miss is statistically quite normal. The issue that seems to be happening repeatedly is that pollsters are unable to capture low propensity voters who turn out for Trump. This possibility was explained pre-election by Nate Cohn: https://archive.ph/bZxB4
Yes, the Selzer Iowa poll was quite a shock. Turned out to be the worst miss of her career by far.Similar threads
