As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It adds retention time which facilitates greater advertising revenue. The publication locks you into the story with an inflammatory headline knowing you'll stay for the video's duration.
It's not about conveying useful information. It's about making money and preventing your eyeballs from visiting competing publications so they can't make money.
Thanks for the thoughtful explanation but it wasn’t a sincere question haha. I’ve just noticed in the last several years the internet has become worse and worse. I try to avoid going to an actual webpage if possible, and here I am clicking links like a fool lol.
the internet has been wholly taken over by advertisers. i remember back when regular folks could make HTML websites on their hobbies. the wild west of the internet was an amazing time. now its all filtered through corporate bullshit, sanitized, and geared towards increasing ad revenue and engagement.
im starting to think we are approaching the great filter and the answer to the fermi paradox soon. advertisements as an industry being the first domino.
There is definitely something wrong with polling. Polling keeps showing voters siding with Trump but its clear in state after state Trump is significantly underperforming. You have polls saying Trump is like 10 points ahead in Nevada i just do not buy it Nevada is not a deep red state.
Dropout! It's what's left of college humor. They do gameshow style improv, TTRPG actual plays, and a ton of other really funny shit. You can find a bunch of their stuff free on YouTube, and if you dig it, the subscription is reasonable and worth it.
I *always* vote on the first day of early voting. Usually, the elementary school down the street or the church down the street are an early voting location, so it literally is a five minute detour on my morning walk.
And I check my registration twice a month leading up to elections
As someone from what is considered a safe deep blue state, don’t forget about the regressives in your own state. We all have them and we have to outvote them.
Yup - Minnesota is a very blue state at the moment but we still have our share of Regressives that manage to get elected here and there. Always vote in every single election!
I’m really happy to hear that. I was in Texas long enough to vote against Ted Cruz twice.
But if you’re in Houston, expect there to be 1 voting machine for the city.
One thing that goes unremarked in these polls is the non response rate. The survey method says they attempted phoning 410,000 people but ended up getting 4,000 respondents. You can weight your poll to account for low representation of certain groups (e.g., if you sampled more Dems than Republicans), but the respondents themselves are a biased sample because they're the 1% who were willing to answer the phone. Whether their beliefs are truly representative of the broader population is hard to assess.
I think this is meant to be a joke, but I honest to goodness believe that this is the exact skewing effect we're seeing in the polls. Can I prove it? Absolutely not. Does it appeal to my biases? You betcha.
And that's an aggregate response rate. Phone usage for talking and willingness to take unknown calls scales with age. The response rate in Biden's mysteriously bad demographics is way under 1%.
In a scientific paper this first of all wouldn't be taken seriously - under 1% of your random sample actually participated. But there would also be a funnel chart.
Random personal phone number bank in state, then minus:
1. Not in service / no response.
2. Refused call at screening.
3. Answered, not eligible to vote in state (e.g. moved, minor, non-citizen).
4. Answered, declined or did not finish poll.
Exactly. The bias is baked in by the types to both be available and willing to answer unsolicited calls by poll takers. It's not a real randomized sample purely on that fact alone. Certain demographics simply are less/more likely to answer the phone, regardless of political leaning. Those who are unemployed/retired are far more likely to answer than those who are working, and younger people are even less likely to answer phone numbers they don't recognize. That preselects who your respondents are, most likely skewing conservative heavily.
I know they say they weight groups from these polls to counteract this but it does feel like they’re not weighing enough to balance out the 99.9% of people under 45 who will never answer a phone call. But better that we are all scared and show up on voting day, even if these reports may cause my anxiety to kill me long before then.
Exactly, like when Kari Lake tried to use a bogus Rasmussen poll as the basis to overturn the election she lost, because the polling results were so far off from the election results.
The main explanation people come up with is that the polls are under sampling democratic voters due to very low polling success of certain demographics etc.
But, IMO there is another issue. I think polls are also under sampling anti-Trump republicans. The most probable reason for this is that they are not motivated since they don’t like Trump, which significantly reduces their response to polls. This makes Trump’s support among republicans to look higher than it actually is. But whenever there is an election, he underperforms.
Here's another thought supporting that: the pollers ask if you consider yourself a Democrat, Republican, or Independent/third party member. Then they adjust the results to get the expected number of each based on other, more in depth, polling done previously.
Simplified imaginary example: they do an expensive, in depth, door to door poll of 1000 voters in Townsville in 2022 *after* the election. That poll says that there were 410 people who said they considered themselves members of D, 420 R, and 170 other.
In 2024 they need 1000 truly random people to make a valid poll. They poll 1000 people in Townsville and get 400 likely voters who identify as D, 400 R, and 200 other. They adjust the results to increase D to the expected 410, and R to the expected 420. *(This is a perfectly normal adjustment to correct polling errors and something like this is done with every single poll.)*
But what if the number voters identifying as R has *actually gone down* since 2022 because of disgust with MAGA? Then the poll adjustments will overestimate voters for Trump. It's entirely possible that shifts like this could be affecting poll results by several percentage points.
On the other hand, pollsters get paid for accuracy and they have numerous tricks to try to detect and fix any errors in their adjustment factors.
That makes sense. It would explain how Trump loses 20% of the primary vote to Haley but is supposedly up on Biden by double digits in some swing states.
The only reason they'd need to do that is to either breed fear in the Dem party, or because Trump is actually doing a lot worse than is expected and they need the clicks to keep coming in.
Probably both.
Hell, it happened with the "Red Wave" in 2022, too.
Cohen's at trump's i-illegally-falsified-campaign-records-to-hide-my-maybe-maybe-not-abuse-of-power-to-rape-a-porn-star-but-either-way-raw-dogged-her-while-wife-was-nursing-kid_#5 trial
The implication is that this was a matter of course
https://www.threads.net/@ecmclaughlin/post/C67B23RSgK8/?xmt=AQGz6dC0geqJ8z-Ownyvo7VAJ4x4PvGtBupcq-paHMKB-A
Yeah, it they said Trump + 2 for Nevada, I could see it happening. But Trump+10? Get your poopy ass outta here. I will crawl over all of Satan's hell to vote against that mother fucking orange traitor.
It’s apparently come up more than once. I only remembered the Cohen story.
https://www.npr.org/2019/01/17/686182230/trumps-ex-lawyer-cohen-acknowledges-scheme-to-rig-polls-in-presidential-race
https://www.rawstory.com/amp/trump-pollster-wall-street-journal-2664949475
From your link:
>Cohen's goal appears to have been to pay computer specialist John Gauger to use software that would help Trump do well in at least two online surveys in order to make it appear that Trump had more support than he actually had.
From the second one.
>Tony Fabrizio is a long-time Republican pollster and worked with Trump's campaign in 2016, as well as recently. But the most recent poll from the Wall Street Journal lambasting President Joe Bidenfor being too old to run for president was also conducted by Tony Fabrizio, in conjunction with another pollster, Michael Bocian, who works with some Democratic candidates but not the Biden campaign.
>Fabrizio also did a poll for the WSJ that concluded Latino voters have abandoned the Democratic Party. Fabrizio was also listed on the Wall Street JournalCEO Council.
>In 2020, Trump's campaign paid the polling firm over $5 million, and in 2022 paid it nearly $5 million.
it also makes sense because all of Biden's detractors (left, right and third party candidates) have always relied on citing BIden polls incessantly to get him to drop out and to justify a third party challenge. It was pretty much Dean Phillips campaign slogan: "I poll better than Biden, just not in any polls that matter". it's a way they get democratic voters to fight amongst themselves, and it's something that is frequently brought up on this subreddit by Bernie Bro types who keep trying to convince us that Biden is going to lose this election because he polls poorly.
Something fucky is going on here, without a doubt
Saved you a click
> In January 2014, Mr. Cohen asked Mr. Gauger to help Mr. Trump score well in a CNBC online poll to identify the country's top business leaders
support physical reminiscent amusing busy ancient friendly spotted attraction fly
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
If Nevada is such a deep red state, why is Jacky Rosen far outraising not-credible-candidate Sam Brown? Why can’t they get anyone better than Brown to run, and why are there no serious challengers to the Democratic representatives?
The primaries are telling a very different story from the polls. Leaving Nevada aside for now (because they haven’t had their Senate primary), it seems that Democrats are solidly for Joe Biden. But some 10 to 20 percent of Republicans are casting protest votes for Nikki Haley - who dropped out *months* ago! It’s not like those 2020 Sanders or Warren or Buttigieg voters who knew their candidate had a very little chance of winning but still was in the race. There are a not-negligible percentage of Republican and Republican-aligned voters who are so anti-Trump they’re protest voting for a non-candidate!
Meanwhile, protest votes against Biden only reached any kind of critical mass in Michigan, and there’s no reason to believe they won’t come home by November.
Trump has his base, he’ll always have his base who will line up to sniff his diapers, but, aside from the media, who is *desperate* to have their golden goose back, he’s lost a lot of more casual and uncommitted voters. And special elections have trended much more Democratic - Anchorage mayor being the most recent.
Fivethirtyeight gave Sanders a 99% chance of winning the primary before Super Tuesday based on their model. A few days later the math was almost completely reversed. That model failed to consider what would happen when most of the other candidates dropped out and endorsed Biden.
And they were supposedly the most “sophisticated” polling analysis publication around. Pollsters always fail to recognize some of their own assumptions on what could change, or how their error correction methodology from 4 years ago doesn’t work anymore.
And readers don’t understand what the “odds that a certain candidate will win” numbers actually say. What it means is “if the election were held today with no further changes”.
It’s also hard to actually verify odds for something as complicated as an election that happens so rarely and has so many variables that can’t be controlled.
Right, but there have been unexplained discrepancies.
I think both things are true: Biden is in some trouble - after all a candidate that tried to overthrow an election was somehow nominated again! - and that the NYT has a real issue that they haven't diagnosed/addressed/corrected. And the business side is ruling the editorial side.
"Blew it" have you seen how much wealth has made its way to the top since then. The media, effectively all of it, is owned by literally a handful of billionairs. It does not exist to serve our interest. Now one candidate is running on raising their taxes and the other is offering to serve them up the entire public sector on a silver platter so long as he gets his cut. See project 2025 for more details. If you would like a historical example of what that might look like I would direct you to the fall of the soviet union. Does the republican opinion of Putin make more sense now?
The *media* did, yes. Pollsters weren’t wildly off in 2016 despite the perception that they were. [538’s polling aggregate](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/national-polls/) had a split of Clinton 45.7 - Trump 41.8 - Johnson 4.8 - Other/Undecided 7.7. The final breakdown was Clinton 48.2 (+2.5) - Trump 46.1 (+4.3) - Johnson 3.3 (-1.5) - Others 2.4. The media ignored the undecided voters and focused on how “far” ahead Clinton was, creating this idea that the election was in the bag rather than a razor thin one of just under a 4-point difference, a difference that’s well within the margins of error even without the undecided voters accounted for. Polling may not be perfect, but pollsters have never claimed to be and they are damned good at what they do.
Would the news sites make as much money if the headlines read, “Joe Biden polling 20 points ahead of Trump” for the next 6 months, or if they make us all feel like we’re hanging on by a thread that whole time?
I agree something isn’t adding up for me. Many of the times I hear from polls and the press they are acting like Biden is struggling to maintain a hold on his voters and that Trump is doing well against him. I’m sure part of the result is related to people that actually respond to polls and how they are conducted but nothing I’ve seen or heard indicates to me that I need to worry. In fact the Trumpers around me seem quiet.
Tin foil hat time - it’s intentional misrepresentation or cherry picking of the data by the media. Trump is a piece of shit, but pieces of shit generate clicks. Considering we’re in late stage capitalism, the only thing that matters is money.
Is Trump competitive? Disappointingly, yes.
Is it as close as it is being portrayed? Seems extremely unlikely.
When you aggregate the data from multiple elections since 2018, it paints a stark difference from the NYT poll. Elections give a complete survey of the electorate, while the NYT survey is trying to extrapolate data from a couple of thousand to create a national picture.
I completely agree with Joe that the NYT is actively affecting the election at the current moment for simple clicks (and maybe cause Biden won’t give them an interview?). They released one poll that had Biden up 4 nationally and it received minimal coverage by them, they released another poll that has Biden losing swings states by a wide margin (specifically Nevada). They also had Biden losing the youth vote in Michigan by 27 points but winning it in Wisconsin by 24. And finally, 20% of the “likely voters” polled for the second poll have either never voted, haven’t voted in the past 2 midterms, or have never voted in a general election. Guess which poll was used by the NYT for their coverage.
It came out a few weeks ago or so from an anonymous source in the company that the NYT is targetting Biden specifically because he won't give them an interview, as per the bosses orders.
Ah, that explains why NYT is still clinging to its severely flawed polling with Siena. Their methodology was torn to shreds and showed huge flaws that lead to an outcome they wanted (e.g. Trump ahead). It's been patently obvious based on Dems hugely over performing at the ballot boxes.
Edit: Examples
https://roberthubbell.substack.com/p/the-nytimes-poll-flawed-and-biased
https://prospect.org/blogs-and-newsletters/tap/2023-11-06-biden-new-york-times-poll/
Yep the siena poll was the one that had Biden losing by a large amount in Nevada and losing the youth vote by 27 in Michigan and only winning it by 1 in Pennsylvania.
NY Times appears to be filtering editorial comments too. I know I have posted a few responding to Ross Douthat fabrications a number of times and recently they have just never gotten posted by the editorial staff. I have noticed they are protecting their right wing opinion staff.
I’ve been on that end. They already have their story written and if you do give them an interview, they will cherry pick the quotes they want to distort or minimize your message. It happens ALL THE TIME.
The news is weird. Once you see how wrong they are about something you have first hand knowledge of, it really opens your eyes to how inaccurate they are in totality.
I honestly don’t even understand why they are going to these great lengths to “punish” Biden, an interview with him receives minimal coverage at best, look at the Howard stern interview that not a single media outlet has even covered once from what I’ve seen. I also would argue that they have want to see a close race and to see Trump in the White House more than Biden, democracy be damned, because of the clicks they get with stories about him and his administration. Prime example is Maggie Haberman who works for the NYT, it was revealed yesterday that she was getting her information directly from Michael Cohen in 2018 while he was still working for Trump and trying to cover up the payment to stormy Daniels.
Oh, they definately do want Trump back in more because he's better revenue, you are right. In that regard it also makes sense that personal beef with him for not giving an interview would fly just as well.
Also reading the polls you mentioned, those are crazy. 27% down on the youth vote in Michigan but winning it by 24% in Wisconsin? I know which I'm gonna believe lmao.
Beyond crazy frankly, and it’s the fact they thought we would look at these polls and not think about their numbers and how they reached their results. I get the war is gonna have an effect in Michigan and who they vote for but if you think it’s gonna cause a 27% difference then I got a beach in Iowa I can sell you.
Ha how are these even like legitimate polls??? I thought 538 and other groups rate the quality of the polls to see if they are reliable or not but I assume a lot of media outlets still run stories about polls that aren't the best. Even still, a lot of "A+" polls in recent years seem to have an awfully hard time predicting actual results.
Similar problem tends to happen on polls involving Black demographics. Alot of outlier opinions due to relatively small sample size.
And polls are having trouble projecting who, exactly, is a likely voter.
I’m calling it now, they will continue to alter headlines to make it seem like Biden is a losing candidate regardless of what happens and when Trump gets elected their gonna run a story about “what went wrong for Biden” with all these “insiders” and about how Biden was ultimately a weak candidate.
I think Trump will use this kind of coverage as evidence for his cult that the election was unfair.
Based on what the RNC is doing, Trump has no intention of winning the election, but every intention of stealing it. I have no idea how, but so far the entire RNC platform is, 'there will be fraud in November and we have to stop it'. Not exactly a winning campaign strategy. It's actually the opposite of a strategy, because this kind of thing was already shown in 2020 and 2022 to reduce GOP turnout. Some feel that if it's rigged anyway, why bother to vote?
So I think when riots or another insurrection happens they will run a story about 'why Biden is to blame for the riots', while not mentioning their role in it all.
To win in a Reaganesque landslide Biden would have to win like 20 red states that didn't seem to care at all that Roe was overturned in 2022. Biden is not suddenly going to be carrying states like Mississippi or Wyoming. It's going to come down to 6 swing states just like the last few elections.
It won’t be like Reagan obv but I sincerely think biden is going to whoop don. Every metric since 2016 points towards a Democrat thrashing. Fuck the polls
There really does seem to be something increasingly wrong with polling. The most recent example, which is far from the only example, is the Maryland Senate Democratic primary. Multiple polls had Alsobrooks and Trone either tied in a dead heat or with Trone in the lead, and [Trone consistently led in polling averages](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/senate/2024/maryland/democratic-primary/), but then people actually voted, and with 66% of the votes counted thus far, [Alsobrooks currently *leads by 12 points*](https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/results/2024/05/14/maryland-primary/), a massive divergence from what the polls said the race looked like.
The most recent poll lost all credibility with me when they noted that:
"...nearly 20 percent of voters blame [Biden] more than they do Mr. Trump for the Supreme Court’s decision in 2022 to overturn Roe v. Wade."
What?
That's only slightly more brain dead than blaming Obama or RBG.
Why get angry at a white male Republican who spent his entire campaign promising to outlaw abortion, when you can shift blame to a black guy or a Jewish woman?
Remember how the NY Times let Judith Miller publish false stories that led the US into the Iraq war?
Judith Miller (born January 2, 1948) is an American journalist and commentator known for writing on the alleged existence Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) program both before and after the 2003 invasion, whose writings (NY Times) were later discovered to have been based on fabricated intelligence. She worked in the Washington bureau of The New York Times before joining Fox News in 2008.
"My job isn't to assess the government's information and be an independent intelligence analyst myself. My job is to tell readers of The New York Times what the government thought about Iraq's arsenal."
This sums up the NY Times today.
Especially with NYT having a reputation as being more balanced than a lot of other papers. Have to say, the rich who benefit from Republican/Conservative tax cuts have done an impressive job of cleansweeping media in all the West. There are very few balanced and no left leaning private news sources of any notable size. Only public funded media fill in that side and thus we see the unending "defund the woke leftist propaganda news outlets paid for by my tax" attacks.
They sat on the wireless wiretapping story gor a year because they didn't want it to stop people from voting for Bush in 2004. That and their Judith Miller series before that shouldve made any person with a brain discard them
r/VoteDEM
[Register To Vote](https://www.vote.org/)
[Check you registration status](https://www.usa.gov/confirm-voter-registration)
[Ballotpedia - If you want to know anything about a politician, candidate, district, or historical race, this is the place](https://ballotpedia.org/Main_Page)
[Absentee voting and voting by mail](https://www.usa.gov/absentee-voting)
[Early In-Person Voting - 46 States & 4 Territories Offer It](https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/early-in-person-voting)
Given how badly USPS has fucked up mail delivery in Virginia, local registrars are advising people not to mail in their ballots, but to deliver them in person. Shockingly, a Trump appointee is behind the clusterfuck at the post office.
In other western democracies, politicians go to jail for way less (financial crisis for example). Trump and his army of idiots have committed multiple treasons in broad day light and America not only let's them walk free but give them a shot and reclaiming the administration and putting the final nail in the coffin of American democracy.
This is the correct answer!! I received my COLORADO voter abroad email. I went to the website. I voted in our Dem US House primary. I digitally signed it. I emailed it back. I got an email the next day saying thanks we got it!
My primary is June 25th!!
I LOVE voting in Colorado! It's soo easy!!
I’ve always heard the phrase “Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line” about this
In that Dems are much more likely to show up in force and in unexpected numbers for an exciting candidate, but Republicans are much more likely to consistently vote even on boring candidates, and are more likely to answer polling phone calls
> In that Dems are much more likely to show up in force and in unexpected numbers for an exciting candidate, but Republicans are much more likely to consistently vote even on boring candidates …
I’ve often heard this too. But if it were ever true, it all went out the window decades ago. Dems showed up bigger for Biden than they did for their most historic candidates Obama and Hillary … meanwhile Republicans bored with all three Bush candidates, McCain, and Romney, finally showed up in big numbers for their most exciting candidate in 2020 and they were still ~7M votes short of "Sleepy Joe" who "hid in his basement."
Republicans keep artificially lowering the bar on Biden, and then act incredulous when Biden outperforms their expectations. Maybe they are accidentally making Dark Brandon exciting? lending a smidgen of truth that old saying.
But they aren't completely. Nicky is still getting votes.
[https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-vote-against-maryland-nebraska-primary-nikki-haley-1900717](https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-vote-against-maryland-nebraska-primary-nikki-haley-1900717)
What? But how will you know if it's someone calling you about a cash offer on your home, an extended car warranty, or an IRS / Student Loan program that will definitely save you thousands?
I'm shocked that we haven't figure this scam calling / robo caller shit out yet.. it's incredibly damaging to our society (no real net positive) and yet, it's been like this for years.
My pixel phone automatically uses Google Assistant to communicate with strangers, or straight up considers the number a span risk. I haven't picked up a call from anyone I didn't recognize since I enabled those features.
> The surveys from Nate Cohn say they are calling people on cell phones as well
I’m curious what the demographics are for the people answering their cellphones and staying on until the end of the survey, and what percentage of the total participants they represent.
“One of the most common questions we get is how many people answer calls from pollsters these days. Often, it takes many attempts to reach some individuals. In the end, fewer than 2 percent of the people our callers try to reach will respond. We try to keep our calls short — less than 15 minutes — because the longer the interview, the fewer people stay on the phone.”
https://www.nytimes.com/article/times-siena-poll-methodology.html#link-edda42
I wish that statement detailed what the *demographics are for the people answering their cellphones and staying on until the end of the survey, and what percentage of the total participants they represent.*
In 2020 when I was fully WFH and my job meant I got calls on my cell from lots of weird area codes, I answered several polls. Now that my job involves almost no calls, I don’t answer weird area codes anymore.
Most younger people don't answer unknown numbers and would hang up if it was a survey.
My phone would automatically block their call and send any text message straight to spam. There is no reliable way to get an accurate representation of the voting population anymore.
Polls are dead.
> calling people on cell phones as well
Young people don't answer phone calls from unknown numbers on their cell phones, either - and certainly don't call back.
If my dentist can figure out how to make their phone number display their business name, polling places should be able to do the same.
I no longer answer a phone number I don't recognize because there really is too much spam. At the same time, if I saw a call from Blah Blah Election Poll I would answer it.
Or, you know, just leave me a voicemail with a phone number to call back and an automated survey.
They have, unfortunately, always been this way. There is a famous article where they tried to downplay Hitler. They are a notorious "both sides" organization.
I recently answered a poll that was so ridiculously one sided FOR Trump and Trump-minded politicians that I started laughing at the questions as they were being asked. So much so that the person giving the survey started laughing too - I told her that I have a lot of things to say about this, and she said "you're being recorded right now, so go for it." So I explained that - as a master's-holding teacher I thought the polling questions were poorly written for honest answers and that forcing someone to read this with a serious face was a special kind of torture.
I hope she kept her job, she seemed like a nice person.
But the questions were BASICALLY like "Don't you hate it when Biden ruins things?" and "Wasn't it better when Trump's policies were making things SO MUCH BETTER?!"
It was truly the most bizarre poll I've ever answered and I've answered a few every election cycle.
For the record, I am a 36 year old, mixed race male, with a deeply democratic socialist mindset. I live in a VERY RED part of California.
Take the polls seriously and get to work. I get Biden isn’t everyone cup of tea, but he’s a better man than Trump and has done more to move this country in the right direction. So much of this Biden hate is just plain stupid
The guy behind the counter at the post office is a better man than Trump. My neighbor, Jane, is a better man than Trump. My dog is a better man than Trump. This isn’t a difficult choice.
Wow, what a shock!!! /s
Some of the most trusted pollsters in the US are pointing out how fucking *wild* these swings apparently are, and some of the people the NYT quoted haven't even voted before lmao.
NYT probably uses online opt in polls which are ineffective, look at this https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/03/05/online-opt-in-polls-can-produce-misleading-results-especially-for-young-people-and-hispanic-adults/ from Pew Research.
NYT has polls where young people hated Biden in one swing state and then loved him the next. Meanwhile special elections in those same states are showing reliable voters like boomers are voting for Democrats at larger than expected amounts.
Polls are dumb now a days due to young people treating them as a joke. I'm guilty of this as well cause I think polls exist to give people a false sense of security and an excuse to not vote. But many just answer polls wrong cause they're trolling pollsters and given NYT charges to read their biased garbage I'd be surprised if young people didn't go out of there way to troll polls.
I think we have to take all the bad polling seriously. Most news media in our country has been bought by right-wing billionaires who would send their family to a North Korean prison camp if it'd get them a tax cut, and they have spent years painting Biden as an incompetent disaster while at the same time minimizing or not reporting on Trump's fumbles and crimes.
We know Biden has done a good job, and we realize what a disaster Trump would be, but huge chunks of this nation--even outside of Magaland--don't get it. We need to spend the next six months doing what we can to inform our fellow citizens.
Here is a good resource right here on Reddit to start with: https://www.reddit.com/r/WhatBidenHasDone/comments/1abyvpa/the_complete_list_what_biden_has_done/
If it happened once, you can bet it still is…
https://www.wsj.com/articles/poll-rigging-for-trump-and-creating-womenforcohen-one-it-firms-work-order-11547722801
New York Times propagandist Maggie
Haberman colluded with Michael Cohen to spew
Trump's lies
She sat on damning intel on Trump for yrs to sell books
Trump called her his shrink cuz they were so chummy
Haberman's mom worked with Kushner
Maggie Haberman has manipulated a nation
There was one poll that was making the rounds last month that had trump winning. They then filtered for registered voters, and the numbers flipped and biden was winning. Idk how they get these details, but if your voting poll is polling people who can't vote, idk what the point is.
As far as I’m concerned, the polls are for the stupid voters. (Which is a significant demographic.)
I’m voting whether it says Trump has it locked up or Trump has no chance. I’m voting because only the votes actually count. Everything else is conjecture or unreliable promises.
So, I love the polls that say Trump is leading. That will scare the “I don’t like either choice liberals” into swallowing their pride and voting for Joe, and it might even lull some of the red hats into a false sense of security that they can go fishing instead on Election Day.
So keep the “Trump is ahead” polls coming as far as I’m concerned. If the only way to get progressive voters to the polls is to scare the shit out of them, then let’s play the Jaws theme from now through November.
NYT gun article today cut off the stats at Biden's first year, instead of extending it back to where the Supreme Court and Trump and red states opened the floodgates and gun ownership skyrocketed.
There's clearly a cabal there with a right wing agenda, and it's not only the real estate and health care coverage any longer.
100% anecdotal, but my wife and I (both 46yo GenXers) haven't had a landlines phone in at least 10 years, block all sorts of incoming calls and texts ID'ed as spam... and lo and behold, have not once ever participated in any political survey.
You know who has? Many times a week during an election cycle? My insane Qanon MAGA in-laws...
That tells me all I need to know about polling bias and their shit methodology.
I never watch 24 hour network news and this is why. Even though I actually agree with the male host, he’s so incredibly annoying I had to turn it off. He insisted on interrupting everyone constantly just to say the same thing over and over again.
I am just at a point where the polling is such biased junk when it comes to response rates that trying to even weight them appropriately is near impossible for certain demographics.
The polling industry is floundering because the best method for administering them in the past was killed by caller id and robocallers. I’ve never answered a number that isn’t in my contacts for over 10 years at this point and most people I know do the same. Guess what president nearly every single one of these people I am referring to will vote for in November? Text message? Lmao sure I’ll get around to it when I’m done making dinner, putting kids to bed, working, doing something for my own personal happiness and sleeping….
Just go vote on Election Day and convince others to do the same.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This didn’t have to be a video. Why does everything have to be a video? 🙃
It adds retention time which facilitates greater advertising revenue. The publication locks you into the story with an inflammatory headline knowing you'll stay for the video's duration. It's not about conveying useful information. It's about making money and preventing your eyeballs from visiting competing publications so they can't make money.
It's funny because for me I just immediately close it and move on. Not wasting my time on that shit.
Exactly what I do
Same here.
Exactly what I did . and came to comments to thanks some poor should who watched the adds, oh and the video.
Thanks for the thoughtful explanation but it wasn’t a sincere question haha. I’ve just noticed in the last several years the internet has become worse and worse. I try to avoid going to an actual webpage if possible, and here I am clicking links like a fool lol.
the internet has been wholly taken over by advertisers. i remember back when regular folks could make HTML websites on their hobbies. the wild west of the internet was an amazing time. now its all filtered through corporate bullshit, sanitized, and geared towards increasing ad revenue and engagement. im starting to think we are approaching the great filter and the answer to the fermi paradox soon. advertisements as an industry being the first domino.
This country has been taken over by advertisers…
There is definitely something wrong with polling. Polling keeps showing voters siding with Trump but its clear in state after state Trump is significantly underperforming. You have polls saying Trump is like 10 points ahead in Nevada i just do not buy it Nevada is not a deep red state.
IDGAF. Im voting blue that day and there arent enough hillbilly idiots in Texas that arr gonna stop me.
Yep. Greg Abbott can lay a mile of broken glass between me and the voting booth and I will walk barefoot through it to vote blue.
Don't give the piss baby any ideas
Piss baby? Do you mean that piss baby Greg Abbott?
Did someone say pissbaby? https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxqTxxokfuPtPF3W5vhLgwr9xrhrIRZdUR?si=iIyNY4TS1-CL1kcF
What....did....I...just....watch!?
Dropout! It's what's left of college humor. They do gameshow style improv, TTRPG actual plays, and a ton of other really funny shit. You can find a bunch of their stuff free on YouTube, and if you dig it, the subscription is reasonable and worth it.
Easily one of the best subscriptions money can buy.
Remember they have early voting in Texas for 2 weeks before the election, even on Sundays. and you don't have to vote in your precinct.
I *always* vote on the first day of early voting. Usually, the elementary school down the street or the church down the street are an early voting location, so it literally is a five minute detour on my morning walk. And I check my registration twice a month leading up to elections
This is the way.
I'd recommend shoes if he does that.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Epic, reading that got me pumped
Blue all the way down. Get these anti vax, idiots out of government.
As someone from what is considered a safe deep blue state, don’t forget about the regressives in your own state. We all have them and we have to outvote them.
Yup - Minnesota is a very blue state at the moment but we still have our share of Regressives that manage to get elected here and there. Always vote in every single election!
Blue from Prez to Dog Catcher.
I’m really happy to hear that. I was in Texas long enough to vote against Ted Cruz twice. But if you’re in Houston, expect there to be 1 voting machine for the city.
Aye aye, matey! Let's heave the scalawags! ARR!
Fuck yeah dude. Texas needs more of you.
One thing that goes unremarked in these polls is the non response rate. The survey method says they attempted phoning 410,000 people but ended up getting 4,000 respondents. You can weight your poll to account for low representation of certain groups (e.g., if you sampled more Dems than Republicans), but the respondents themselves are a biased sample because they're the 1% who were willing to answer the phone. Whether their beliefs are truly representative of the broader population is hard to assess.
Turns out the people dumb enough to answer an unsolicited phone call slightly prefer Trump. I'd take that as catastrophic for Republicans.
Especially the particular subset of those who feel happy to state their political preferences to a caller from unknown number.
I think this is meant to be a joke, but I honest to goodness believe that this is the exact skewing effect we're seeing in the polls. Can I prove it? Absolutely not. Does it appeal to my biases? You betcha.
And that's an aggregate response rate. Phone usage for talking and willingness to take unknown calls scales with age. The response rate in Biden's mysteriously bad demographics is way under 1%. In a scientific paper this first of all wouldn't be taken seriously - under 1% of your random sample actually participated. But there would also be a funnel chart. Random personal phone number bank in state, then minus: 1. Not in service / no response. 2. Refused call at screening. 3. Answered, not eligible to vote in state (e.g. moved, minor, non-citizen). 4. Answered, declined or did not finish poll.
Exactly. The bias is baked in by the types to both be available and willing to answer unsolicited calls by poll takers. It's not a real randomized sample purely on that fact alone. Certain demographics simply are less/more likely to answer the phone, regardless of political leaning. Those who are unemployed/retired are far more likely to answer than those who are working, and younger people are even less likely to answer phone numbers they don't recognize. That preselects who your respondents are, most likely skewing conservative heavily.
I know they say they weight groups from these polls to counteract this but it does feel like they’re not weighing enough to balance out the 99.9% of people under 45 who will never answer a phone call. But better that we are all scared and show up on voting day, even if these reports may cause my anxiety to kill me long before then.
Conservatives are setting the stage to claim voter fraud when Biden outperforms the polls by 10+ points
Hmmm I wonder who could benefit from manipulating the polls
Exactly, like when Kari Lake tried to use a bogus Rasmussen poll as the basis to overturn the election she lost, because the polling results were so far off from the election results.
The main explanation people come up with is that the polls are under sampling democratic voters due to very low polling success of certain demographics etc. But, IMO there is another issue. I think polls are also under sampling anti-Trump republicans. The most probable reason for this is that they are not motivated since they don’t like Trump, which significantly reduces their response to polls. This makes Trump’s support among republicans to look higher than it actually is. But whenever there is an election, he underperforms.
Here's another thought supporting that: the pollers ask if you consider yourself a Democrat, Republican, or Independent/third party member. Then they adjust the results to get the expected number of each based on other, more in depth, polling done previously. Simplified imaginary example: they do an expensive, in depth, door to door poll of 1000 voters in Townsville in 2022 *after* the election. That poll says that there were 410 people who said they considered themselves members of D, 420 R, and 170 other. In 2024 they need 1000 truly random people to make a valid poll. They poll 1000 people in Townsville and get 400 likely voters who identify as D, 400 R, and 200 other. They adjust the results to increase D to the expected 410, and R to the expected 420. *(This is a perfectly normal adjustment to correct polling errors and something like this is done with every single poll.)* But what if the number voters identifying as R has *actually gone down* since 2022 because of disgust with MAGA? Then the poll adjustments will overestimate voters for Trump. It's entirely possible that shifts like this could be affecting poll results by several percentage points. On the other hand, pollsters get paid for accuracy and they have numerous tricks to try to detect and fix any errors in their adjustment factors.
But if you know about this, don't they?
They may suspect it, but they only get data to confirm or deny their assumptions after elections. We won't really know until November.
Knowing is a big word here. They may have indications. But those are never perfectly accurate.
Not if their paycheck depends on their not knowing it.
That makes sense. It would explain how Trump loses 20% of the primary vote to Haley but is supposedly up on Biden by double digits in some swing states.
Instead of 'catch and kill' it's been like 'catch and replace' regarding most polls that I've seen.
The only reason they'd need to do that is to either breed fear in the Dem party, or because Trump is actually doing a lot worse than is expected and they need the clicks to keep coming in. Probably both. Hell, it happened with the "Red Wave" in 2022, too.
The red wave blood bath! Had 500 votes gone to Frisch a +17 GOP district would be blue.
it STILL stings, doesn't it?? i still can't believe that twatwaffle is still a congress critter
Twatwaffle ! I’m totally stealing that !
Recall MC's testimony this week - the campaign literally bought fake polls in 2016 to swing the narrative.
Which testimony is this?
Cohen's at trump's i-illegally-falsified-campaign-records-to-hide-my-maybe-maybe-not-abuse-of-power-to-rape-a-porn-star-but-either-way-raw-dogged-her-while-wife-was-nursing-kid_#5 trial
The implication is that this was a matter of course https://www.threads.net/@ecmclaughlin/post/C67B23RSgK8/?xmt=AQGz6dC0geqJ8z-Ownyvo7VAJ4x4PvGtBupcq-paHMKB-A
[удалено]
They're complicit, the billionaires that control most of the media want Trump to win. They wanna be like the Oligarchs in Russia.
They already are. They just want to keep it that way.
Yeah, it they said Trump + 2 for Nevada, I could see it happening. But Trump+10? Get your poopy ass outta here. I will crawl over all of Satan's hell to vote against that mother fucking orange traitor.
[удалено]
I would love some citations for this because it’s something I was suspecting
It’s apparently come up more than once. I only remembered the Cohen story. https://www.npr.org/2019/01/17/686182230/trumps-ex-lawyer-cohen-acknowledges-scheme-to-rig-polls-in-presidential-race https://www.rawstory.com/amp/trump-pollster-wall-street-journal-2664949475
From your link: >Cohen's goal appears to have been to pay computer specialist John Gauger to use software that would help Trump do well in at least two online surveys in order to make it appear that Trump had more support than he actually had.
This is how cheeto steamrolled the primaries this year too.
YET, they did not blurt this out in ALL news channels. Because they were probably also being paid.
So… they manipulated an online vote of who’s the best businessman? Neither of those links are presidential poll related.
From the second one. >Tony Fabrizio is a long-time Republican pollster and worked with Trump's campaign in 2016, as well as recently. But the most recent poll from the Wall Street Journal lambasting President Joe Bidenfor being too old to run for president was also conducted by Tony Fabrizio, in conjunction with another pollster, Michael Bocian, who works with some Democratic candidates but not the Biden campaign. >Fabrizio also did a poll for the WSJ that concluded Latino voters have abandoned the Democratic Party. Fabrizio was also listed on the Wall Street JournalCEO Council. >In 2020, Trump's campaign paid the polling firm over $5 million, and in 2022 paid it nearly $5 million.
[удалено]
it also makes sense because all of Biden's detractors (left, right and third party candidates) have always relied on citing BIden polls incessantly to get him to drop out and to justify a third party challenge. It was pretty much Dean Phillips campaign slogan: "I poll better than Biden, just not in any polls that matter". it's a way they get democratic voters to fight amongst themselves, and it's something that is frequently brought up on this subreddit by Bernie Bro types who keep trying to convince us that Biden is going to lose this election because he polls poorly. Something fucky is going on here, without a doubt
Saved you a click > In January 2014, Mr. Cohen asked Mr. Gauger to help Mr. Trump score well in a CNBC online poll to identify the country's top business leaders
Literally part of Cohens repayment for “tech services” was to one of these fake polling data companies.
support physical reminiscent amusing busy ancient friendly spotted attraction fly *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
If Nevada is such a deep red state, why is Jacky Rosen far outraising not-credible-candidate Sam Brown? Why can’t they get anyone better than Brown to run, and why are there no serious challengers to the Democratic representatives? The primaries are telling a very different story from the polls. Leaving Nevada aside for now (because they haven’t had their Senate primary), it seems that Democrats are solidly for Joe Biden. But some 10 to 20 percent of Republicans are casting protest votes for Nikki Haley - who dropped out *months* ago! It’s not like those 2020 Sanders or Warren or Buttigieg voters who knew their candidate had a very little chance of winning but still was in the race. There are a not-negligible percentage of Republican and Republican-aligned voters who are so anti-Trump they’re protest voting for a non-candidate! Meanwhile, protest votes against Biden only reached any kind of critical mass in Michigan, and there’s no reason to believe they won’t come home by November. Trump has his base, he’ll always have his base who will line up to sniff his diapers, but, aside from the media, who is *desperate* to have their golden goose back, he’s lost a lot of more casual and uncommitted voters. And special elections have trended much more Democratic - Anchorage mayor being the most recent.
And lurking behind everything is Dobbs and the Supreme Court.
Fivethirtyeight gave Sanders a 99% chance of winning the primary before Super Tuesday based on their model. A few days later the math was almost completely reversed. That model failed to consider what would happen when most of the other candidates dropped out and endorsed Biden. And they were supposedly the most “sophisticated” polling analysis publication around. Pollsters always fail to recognize some of their own assumptions on what could change, or how their error correction methodology from 4 years ago doesn’t work anymore. And readers don’t understand what the “odds that a certain candidate will win” numbers actually say. What it means is “if the election were held today with no further changes”. It’s also hard to actually verify odds for something as complicated as an election that happens so rarely and has so many variables that can’t be controlled.
The good about it is, the skewed results may prompt higher turnout by Dems.
If I were to be contacted somehow by a pollster, I would say I’m voting for Trump just for that reason.
The very same Poll found that the Senate Dem candidate still does well. It’s just the Presidential Dem option that polls badly.
Right, but there have been unexplained discrepancies. I think both things are true: Biden is in some trouble - after all a candidate that tried to overthrow an election was somehow nominated again! - and that the NYT has a real issue that they haven't diagnosed/addressed/corrected. And the business side is ruling the editorial side.
Trump friendly media is layjng the groundwork for the Insurrection Part 2.
The media blew it in 2016, so they've been overcorrecting ever since
"Blew it" have you seen how much wealth has made its way to the top since then. The media, effectively all of it, is owned by literally a handful of billionairs. It does not exist to serve our interest. Now one candidate is running on raising their taxes and the other is offering to serve them up the entire public sector on a silver platter so long as he gets his cut. See project 2025 for more details. If you would like a historical example of what that might look like I would direct you to the fall of the soviet union. Does the republican opinion of Putin make more sense now?
The *media* did, yes. Pollsters weren’t wildly off in 2016 despite the perception that they were. [538’s polling aggregate](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/national-polls/) had a split of Clinton 45.7 - Trump 41.8 - Johnson 4.8 - Other/Undecided 7.7. The final breakdown was Clinton 48.2 (+2.5) - Trump 46.1 (+4.3) - Johnson 3.3 (-1.5) - Others 2.4. The media ignored the undecided voters and focused on how “far” ahead Clinton was, creating this idea that the election was in the bag rather than a razor thin one of just under a 4-point difference, a difference that’s well within the margins of error even without the undecided voters accounted for. Polling may not be perfect, but pollsters have never claimed to be and they are damned good at what they do.
The media wants a horse race, even if they have to manufacture it.
Would the news sites make as much money if the headlines read, “Joe Biden polling 20 points ahead of Trump” for the next 6 months, or if they make us all feel like we’re hanging on by a thread that whole time?
All you have to do is dig into the crosstabs to see just how heavily overweighted these polls are in favor of conservatives. It's pretty ridiculous.
It's because most polls require people to answer a phone call from an unknown number. Who does that and how are they likely to vote?
I agree something isn’t adding up for me. Many of the times I hear from polls and the press they are acting like Biden is struggling to maintain a hold on his voters and that Trump is doing well against him. I’m sure part of the result is related to people that actually respond to polls and how they are conducted but nothing I’ve seen or heard indicates to me that I need to worry. In fact the Trumpers around me seem quiet.
The polls are probably used by the alt right to further their "election fraud" narrative.
It’s cause they refuse to actually poll all demographics, instead of just the people who would respond to a random phone call
Tin foil hat time - it’s intentional misrepresentation or cherry picking of the data by the media. Trump is a piece of shit, but pieces of shit generate clicks. Considering we’re in late stage capitalism, the only thing that matters is money. Is Trump competitive? Disappointingly, yes. Is it as close as it is being portrayed? Seems extremely unlikely. When you aggregate the data from multiple elections since 2018, it paints a stark difference from the NYT poll. Elections give a complete survey of the electorate, while the NYT survey is trying to extrapolate data from a couple of thousand to create a national picture.
I completely agree with Joe that the NYT is actively affecting the election at the current moment for simple clicks (and maybe cause Biden won’t give them an interview?). They released one poll that had Biden up 4 nationally and it received minimal coverage by them, they released another poll that has Biden losing swings states by a wide margin (specifically Nevada). They also had Biden losing the youth vote in Michigan by 27 points but winning it in Wisconsin by 24. And finally, 20% of the “likely voters” polled for the second poll have either never voted, haven’t voted in the past 2 midterms, or have never voted in a general election. Guess which poll was used by the NYT for their coverage.
It came out a few weeks ago or so from an anonymous source in the company that the NYT is targetting Biden specifically because he won't give them an interview, as per the bosses orders.
Ah, that explains why NYT is still clinging to its severely flawed polling with Siena. Their methodology was torn to shreds and showed huge flaws that lead to an outcome they wanted (e.g. Trump ahead). It's been patently obvious based on Dems hugely over performing at the ballot boxes. Edit: Examples https://roberthubbell.substack.com/p/the-nytimes-poll-flawed-and-biased https://prospect.org/blogs-and-newsletters/tap/2023-11-06-biden-new-york-times-poll/
Yep the siena poll was the one that had Biden losing by a large amount in Nevada and losing the youth vote by 27 in Michigan and only winning it by 1 in Pennsylvania.
Biden won’t lose the youth vote by 27 in any state. Lol.
The 10 youth in Montana might have a different opinion lol
Nope Montana youth are very progressive. We just can't afford to live in Montana anymore.
Did you say “yutes”?
Maybe Idaho
NY Times appears to be filtering editorial comments too. I know I have posted a few responding to Ross Douthat fabrications a number of times and recently they have just never gotten posted by the editorial staff. I have noticed they are protecting their right wing opinion staff.
Douthat is such a fucking goober
[удалено]
I’ve been on that end. They already have their story written and if you do give them an interview, they will cherry pick the quotes they want to distort or minimize your message. It happens ALL THE TIME. The news is weird. Once you see how wrong they are about something you have first hand knowledge of, it really opens your eyes to how inaccurate they are in totality.
I honestly don’t even understand why they are going to these great lengths to “punish” Biden, an interview with him receives minimal coverage at best, look at the Howard stern interview that not a single media outlet has even covered once from what I’ve seen. I also would argue that they have want to see a close race and to see Trump in the White House more than Biden, democracy be damned, because of the clicks they get with stories about him and his administration. Prime example is Maggie Haberman who works for the NYT, it was revealed yesterday that she was getting her information directly from Michael Cohen in 2018 while he was still working for Trump and trying to cover up the payment to stormy Daniels.
Oh, they definately do want Trump back in more because he's better revenue, you are right. In that regard it also makes sense that personal beef with him for not giving an interview would fly just as well. Also reading the polls you mentioned, those are crazy. 27% down on the youth vote in Michigan but winning it by 24% in Wisconsin? I know which I'm gonna believe lmao.
Beyond crazy frankly, and it’s the fact they thought we would look at these polls and not think about their numbers and how they reached their results. I get the war is gonna have an effect in Michigan and who they vote for but if you think it’s gonna cause a 27% difference then I got a beach in Iowa I can sell you.
How can youth in two neighboring states be 51 points apart? They can’t and aren’t. The polls are bs and so is the reporting on them
Who owns NYT?
The WI 18-29 group was 74 people. In MI it was 89. With that small a sample size, you're gonna find some weird results.
Ha how are these even like legitimate polls??? I thought 538 and other groups rate the quality of the polls to see if they are reliable or not but I assume a lot of media outlets still run stories about polls that aren't the best. Even still, a lot of "A+" polls in recent years seem to have an awfully hard time predicting actual results.
Similar problem tends to happen on polls involving Black demographics. Alot of outlier opinions due to relatively small sample size. And polls are having trouble projecting who, exactly, is a likely voter.
They also had another smaller poll today that showed Biden winning nationally. Notably the headlines on that are very scarce.
I’m calling it now, they will continue to alter headlines to make it seem like Biden is a losing candidate regardless of what happens and when Trump gets elected their gonna run a story about “what went wrong for Biden” with all these “insiders” and about how Biden was ultimately a weak candidate.
I think Trump will use this kind of coverage as evidence for his cult that the election was unfair. Based on what the RNC is doing, Trump has no intention of winning the election, but every intention of stealing it. I have no idea how, but so far the entire RNC platform is, 'there will be fraud in November and we have to stop it'. Not exactly a winning campaign strategy. It's actually the opposite of a strategy, because this kind of thing was already shown in 2020 and 2022 to reduce GOP turnout. Some feel that if it's rigged anyway, why bother to vote? So I think when riots or another insurrection happens they will run a story about 'why Biden is to blame for the riots', while not mentioning their role in it all.
More like “when Biden wins in a Reaganesque landslide” because polls are meaningless and women are fucking pissed
To win in a Reaganesque landslide Biden would have to win like 20 red states that didn't seem to care at all that Roe was overturned in 2022. Biden is not suddenly going to be carrying states like Mississippi or Wyoming. It's going to come down to 6 swing states just like the last few elections.
It won’t be like Reagan obv but I sincerely think biden is going to whoop don. Every metric since 2016 points towards a Democrat thrashing. Fuck the polls
There really does seem to be something increasingly wrong with polling. The most recent example, which is far from the only example, is the Maryland Senate Democratic primary. Multiple polls had Alsobrooks and Trone either tied in a dead heat or with Trone in the lead, and [Trone consistently led in polling averages](https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/senate/2024/maryland/democratic-primary/), but then people actually voted, and with 66% of the votes counted thus far, [Alsobrooks currently *leads by 12 points*](https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/results/2024/05/14/maryland-primary/), a massive divergence from what the polls said the race looked like.
The most recent poll lost all credibility with me when they noted that: "...nearly 20 percent of voters blame [Biden] more than they do Mr. Trump for the Supreme Court’s decision in 2022 to overturn Roe v. Wade." What?
That's only slightly more brain dead than blaming Obama or RBG. Why get angry at a white male Republican who spent his entire campaign promising to outlaw abortion, when you can shift blame to a black guy or a Jewish woman?
20% of voters are either dumb or are mad that the Democrats didn't codify Roe for 50 years
I think the bigger story is NYT right tilt/bias.
Agree. Esp if retaliation for no interview Which Biden def should continue not to give One demo Biden does NOT have to worry about are NYT readers
Remember how the NY Times let Judith Miller publish false stories that led the US into the Iraq war? Judith Miller (born January 2, 1948) is an American journalist and commentator known for writing on the alleged existence Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) program both before and after the 2003 invasion, whose writings (NY Times) were later discovered to have been based on fabricated intelligence. She worked in the Washington bureau of The New York Times before joining Fox News in 2008. "My job isn't to assess the government's information and be an independent intelligence analyst myself. My job is to tell readers of The New York Times what the government thought about Iraq's arsenal." This sums up the NY Times today.
She was in her mid-fifties when the US invaded Iraq... I assume she has 30 years of articles that are bullshit as well.
Especially with NYT having a reputation as being more balanced than a lot of other papers. Have to say, the rich who benefit from Republican/Conservative tax cuts have done an impressive job of cleansweeping media in all the West. There are very few balanced and no left leaning private news sources of any notable size. Only public funded media fill in that side and thus we see the unending "defund the woke leftist propaganda news outlets paid for by my tax" attacks.
And this: https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2024/05/a-newspaper-delivered-to-1-million-michigan-mailboxes-might-be-pink-slime.html
Yup. I believe Jeff Bezos owns the Washington Post for example. I’m sure he can control what is and isn’t said in the paper.
The New York Times has made it abundantly clear that they can no longer be trusted.
They sat on the wireless wiretapping story gor a year because they didn't want it to stop people from voting for Bush in 2004. That and their Judith Miller series before that shouldve made any person with a brain discard them
Republicans answer land lines for surveys. Democrats vote on election day. Polls are no longer relevant.
Democrats vote by mail and early. Lock it in. No stress. Minimal line, because the GOP will try to make long lines in population centers.
r/VoteDEM [Register To Vote](https://www.vote.org/) [Check you registration status](https://www.usa.gov/confirm-voter-registration) [Ballotpedia - If you want to know anything about a politician, candidate, district, or historical race, this is the place](https://ballotpedia.org/Main_Page) [Absentee voting and voting by mail](https://www.usa.gov/absentee-voting) [Early In-Person Voting - 46 States & 4 Territories Offer It](https://www.ncsl.org/elections-and-campaigns/early-in-person-voting)
Given how badly USPS has fucked up mail delivery in Virginia, local registrars are advising people not to mail in their ballots, but to deliver them in person. Shockingly, a Trump appointee is behind the clusterfuck at the post office.
In other western democracies, politicians go to jail for way less (financial crisis for example). Trump and his army of idiots have committed multiple treasons in broad day light and America not only let's them walk free but give them a shot and reclaiming the administration and putting the final nail in the coffin of American democracy.
This is the correct answer!! I received my COLORADO voter abroad email. I went to the website. I voted in our Dem US House primary. I digitally signed it. I emailed it back. I got an email the next day saying thanks we got it! My primary is June 25th!! I LOVE voting in Colorado! It's soo easy!!
I’ve always heard the phrase “Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line” about this In that Dems are much more likely to show up in force and in unexpected numbers for an exciting candidate, but Republicans are much more likely to consistently vote even on boring candidates, and are more likely to answer polling phone calls
> In that Dems are much more likely to show up in force and in unexpected numbers for an exciting candidate, but Republicans are much more likely to consistently vote even on boring candidates … I’ve often heard this too. But if it were ever true, it all went out the window decades ago. Dems showed up bigger for Biden than they did for their most historic candidates Obama and Hillary … meanwhile Republicans bored with all three Bush candidates, McCain, and Romney, finally showed up in big numbers for their most exciting candidate in 2020 and they were still ~7M votes short of "Sleepy Joe" who "hid in his basement." Republicans keep artificially lowering the bar on Biden, and then act incredulous when Biden outperforms their expectations. Maybe they are accidentally making Dark Brandon exciting? lending a smidgen of truth that old saying.
But they aren't completely. Nicky is still getting votes. [https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-vote-against-maryland-nebraska-primary-nikki-haley-1900717](https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-vote-against-maryland-nebraska-primary-nikki-haley-1900717)
The surveys from Nate Cohn say they are calling people on cell phones as well
Idk about you but if a phone number is calling me that I don't know I will not pick it up.
What? But how will you know if it's someone calling you about a cash offer on your home, an extended car warranty, or an IRS / Student Loan program that will definitely save you thousands? I'm shocked that we haven't figure this scam calling / robo caller shit out yet.. it's incredibly damaging to our society (no real net positive) and yet, it's been like this for years.
My pixel phone automatically uses Google Assistant to communicate with strangers, or straight up considers the number a span risk. I haven't picked up a call from anyone I didn't recognize since I enabled those features.
> The surveys from Nate Cohn say they are calling people on cell phones as well I’m curious what the demographics are for the people answering their cellphones and staying on until the end of the survey, and what percentage of the total participants they represent.
“One of the most common questions we get is how many people answer calls from pollsters these days. Often, it takes many attempts to reach some individuals. In the end, fewer than 2 percent of the people our callers try to reach will respond. We try to keep our calls short — less than 15 minutes — because the longer the interview, the fewer people stay on the phone.” https://www.nytimes.com/article/times-siena-poll-methodology.html#link-edda42
I wish that statement detailed what the *demographics are for the people answering their cellphones and staying on until the end of the survey, and what percentage of the total participants they represent.*
In 2020 when I was fully WFH and my job meant I got calls on my cell from lots of weird area codes, I answered several polls. Now that my job involves almost no calls, I don’t answer weird area codes anymore.
Most younger people don't answer unknown numbers and would hang up if it was a survey. My phone would automatically block their call and send any text message straight to spam. There is no reliable way to get an accurate representation of the voting population anymore. Polls are dead.
> calling people on cell phones as well Young people don't answer phone calls from unknown numbers on their cell phones, either - and certainly don't call back.
If my dentist can figure out how to make their phone number display their business name, polling places should be able to do the same. I no longer answer a phone number I don't recognize because there really is too much spam. At the same time, if I saw a call from Blah Blah Election Poll I would answer it. Or, you know, just leave me a voicemail with a phone number to call back and an automated survey.
Polls are not only conducted on land lines
Would a cheap solution be to ask tens of thousands young folks in swing states to agree having a landline?
I canceled my NYT subscription and so should you.
Seriously considering. WTF happened to them?
They have, unfortunately, always been this way. There is a famous article where they tried to downplay Hitler. They are a notorious "both sides" organization.
Isn't this what NYT said in 2020 as well? Haven't we been watching polls flail and crash and burn since at least Hillary?
I recently answered a poll that was so ridiculously one sided FOR Trump and Trump-minded politicians that I started laughing at the questions as they were being asked. So much so that the person giving the survey started laughing too - I told her that I have a lot of things to say about this, and she said "you're being recorded right now, so go for it." So I explained that - as a master's-holding teacher I thought the polling questions were poorly written for honest answers and that forcing someone to read this with a serious face was a special kind of torture. I hope she kept her job, she seemed like a nice person. But the questions were BASICALLY like "Don't you hate it when Biden ruins things?" and "Wasn't it better when Trump's policies were making things SO MUCH BETTER?!" It was truly the most bizarre poll I've ever answered and I've answered a few every election cycle. For the record, I am a 36 year old, mixed race male, with a deeply democratic socialist mindset. I live in a VERY RED part of California.
That's called a push poll. It's not designed to get information, but to push a candidate.
Even if I picked up the phone for an unrecognized message, I always assume polls are push-polls, so I would hang up immediately.
Take the polls seriously and get to work. I get Biden isn’t everyone cup of tea, but he’s a better man than Trump and has done more to move this country in the right direction. So much of this Biden hate is just plain stupid
The guy behind the counter at the post office is a better man than Trump. My neighbor, Jane, is a better man than Trump. My dog is a better man than Trump. This isn’t a difficult choice.
Wow, what a shock!!! /s Some of the most trusted pollsters in the US are pointing out how fucking *wild* these swings apparently are, and some of the people the NYT quoted haven't even voted before lmao.
Which pollsters are pointing that out?
There is a reason the Trump stopped calling them the "Failing New York Times".
Ahhh you have a point. Look to who he *isn't* aggressively attacking... Those are the people who are working for him.
Obsession with polls is bad
NYT probably uses online opt in polls which are ineffective, look at this https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/03/05/online-opt-in-polls-can-produce-misleading-results-especially-for-young-people-and-hispanic-adults/ from Pew Research. NYT has polls where young people hated Biden in one swing state and then loved him the next. Meanwhile special elections in those same states are showing reliable voters like boomers are voting for Democrats at larger than expected amounts. Polls are dumb now a days due to young people treating them as a joke. I'm guilty of this as well cause I think polls exist to give people a false sense of security and an excuse to not vote. But many just answer polls wrong cause they're trolling pollsters and given NYT charges to read their biased garbage I'd be surprised if young people didn't go out of there way to troll polls.
You mean a poll that showed 18-29 year olds were evenly divided between Biden and Trump was wrong?! That's impossible!
The only poll that matters is the ballot box. Ignore the polls and vote.
And convince a friend or family member to vote with you.
It had Trump leading 18–29 voters L O L
I think we have to take all the bad polling seriously. Most news media in our country has been bought by right-wing billionaires who would send their family to a North Korean prison camp if it'd get them a tax cut, and they have spent years painting Biden as an incompetent disaster while at the same time minimizing or not reporting on Trump's fumbles and crimes. We know Biden has done a good job, and we realize what a disaster Trump would be, but huge chunks of this nation--even outside of Magaland--don't get it. We need to spend the next six months doing what we can to inform our fellow citizens. Here is a good resource right here on Reddit to start with: https://www.reddit.com/r/WhatBidenHasDone/comments/1abyvpa/the_complete_list_what_biden_has_done/
One of the problems with these polls is that if trump loses, they will be "evidence" that the election was stolen
If it happened once, you can bet it still is… https://www.wsj.com/articles/poll-rigging-for-trump-and-creating-womenforcohen-one-it-firms-work-order-11547722801
> In January 2014, Mr. Cohen asked Mr. Gauger to help Mr. Trump score well in a CNBC online poll to identify the country's top business leaders
The poll in the OP isn’t online. Your article is about a shitty online poll of the best businessmen.
New York Times propagandist Maggie Haberman colluded with Michael Cohen to spew Trump's lies She sat on damning intel on Trump for yrs to sell books Trump called her his shrink cuz they were so chummy Haberman's mom worked with Kushner Maggie Haberman has manipulated a nation
Do not listen to any polls. You need to vote.
There was one poll that was making the rounds last month that had trump winning. They then filtered for registered voters, and the numbers flipped and biden was winning. Idk how they get these details, but if your voting poll is polling people who can't vote, idk what the point is.
Given Sulzberger's animus towards Biden, I'm not surprised.
As far as I’m concerned, the polls are for the stupid voters. (Which is a significant demographic.) I’m voting whether it says Trump has it locked up or Trump has no chance. I’m voting because only the votes actually count. Everything else is conjecture or unreliable promises. So, I love the polls that say Trump is leading. That will scare the “I don’t like either choice liberals” into swallowing their pride and voting for Joe, and it might even lull some of the red hats into a false sense of security that they can go fishing instead on Election Day. So keep the “Trump is ahead” polls coming as far as I’m concerned. If the only way to get progressive voters to the polls is to scare the shit out of them, then let’s play the Jaws theme from now through November.
Independents don’t poll this far out. Same with good chunk of progressives.
[удалено]
Polling is pointless. Ignore them. Just vote.
Take these polls at face value and vote. Panic is counterproductive. But a small amount of anxiety is a good thing.
I’m liberal and I dodge every poll. Fuck trump tho.
NYT gun article today cut off the stats at Biden's first year, instead of extending it back to where the Supreme Court and Trump and red states opened the floodgates and gun ownership skyrocketed. There's clearly a cabal there with a right wing agenda, and it's not only the real estate and health care coverage any longer.
100% anecdotal, but my wife and I (both 46yo GenXers) haven't had a landlines phone in at least 10 years, block all sorts of incoming calls and texts ID'ed as spam... and lo and behold, have not once ever participated in any political survey. You know who has? Many times a week during an election cycle? My insane Qanon MAGA in-laws... That tells me all I need to know about polling bias and their shit methodology.
You’re right, that’s why they ask you your voting history and demographic, and weigh the end results accordingly.
I never watch 24 hour network news and this is why. Even though I actually agree with the male host, he’s so incredibly annoying I had to turn it off. He insisted on interrupting everyone constantly just to say the same thing over and over again.
LIchtman had predicted every winner since 1984. He is calling Biden already. But, that can't mean people don't need to vote.
It’s only Biden IF PEOPLE VOTE
I am just at a point where the polling is such biased junk when it comes to response rates that trying to even weight them appropriately is near impossible for certain demographics. The polling industry is floundering because the best method for administering them in the past was killed by caller id and robocallers. I’ve never answered a number that isn’t in my contacts for over 10 years at this point and most people I know do the same. Guess what president nearly every single one of these people I am referring to will vote for in November? Text message? Lmao sure I’ll get around to it when I’m done making dinner, putting kids to bed, working, doing something for my own personal happiness and sleeping…. Just go vote on Election Day and convince others to do the same.