What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

GOP frets about Trump's poll numbers (1 Viewer)

Sinn Fein

Footballguy
GOP frets about Trump's poll numbers - The Hill

As Trump kicks off reelection, his party worries he’s an anchor.

President Trump formally kicked off his re-election campaign Tuesday in front of thousands of fans at a boisterous rally in the heart of battleground Florida, even as top strategists in his own party worry that his weak political standing threatens the rest of the Republican ticket.

Trump reacted angrily last week to leaked internal surveys conducted by his own campaign that showed him trailing in virtually every swing state on the map. He fired several pollsters, and his campaign manager insisted that Trump’s numbers had improved.

But public polls conducted more recently mirror some of the troubling indicators that Trump’s own polling found. What’s more, in interviews, half a dozen prominent Republican pollsters working on campaigns around the country said their own results showed a president who starts his reelection bid from behind.

“His numbers are problematic,” said one top Republican pollster, who asked for anonymity to describe private survey data. “Folks are nervous, but no one is surprised.”

The Republican National Committee and the Trump campaign have begun holding conference calls with Senate campaigns in some of those states, sharing polling and data analytics studies assessing their chances next November.

In the last month, several public polls have showed Trump trailing former Vice President Joe Biden and other Democratic contenders by double digits in Michigan, and by wide margins in North Carolina and Pennsylvania.

Three consecutive polls have showed Trump trailing Biden in deep-red Texas, though he led other Democratic rivals. And a survey from Quinnipiac University Poll of Florida voters released Tuesday showed Trump trailing six of his Democratic rivals.

A survey released Tuesdayby Firehouse Strategies, a Republican firm run by veterans of Sen. Marco Rubio’s (R-Fla.) campaign team, and the data analytics firm Optimus found Trump trailing Biden in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania, the lynchpins of his 2016 victory.

The common threads through all of those surveys, analysts said, are Trump’s dismally low approval rating and the inelasticity in those numbers. Voters have formed hard opinions about Trump, whether favorably or unfavorably, and few seem willing or able to move off those feelings.

“Trump’s numbers are really sticky,” said Alex Conant, a partner at Firehouse Strategies. “It’s just going to be really hard for him to move his numbers up, and similarly it’s going to be hard for the Democrats to move his numbers down.”

What is Trump going to do to improve these numbers?  

Or, do you believe, like Trumps campaign manager, Brad Parscale, that these numbers are all inaccurate?

 
After what was said in 2016 I don't trust any of these poll numbers.  Trump supporters will vote.  The folks that don't want Trump in the WH anymore need to vote this time.  Simple as that.

 
After what was said in 2016 I don't trust any of these poll numbers.  Trump supporters will vote.  The folks that don't want Trump in the WH anymore need to vote this time.  Simple as that.
The polling was pretty accurate as far as nationwide polling.  

 
General election polls don't matter much this far out.

The approval stuff on the other hand -- that matters a lot.  He won't win at -11 unless the Dems implode.

 
Admittedly I didn't look at the accuracy.  I just seem to remember the jist being that Trump probably wasn't going to beat Hillary and then he did.
you should.  Wisconsin and Michigan were obviously off quite a bit.  national was pretty close.

and the midterm polling and projections were dead-on-balls accurate.

 
Admittedly I didn't look at the accuracy.  I just seem to remember the jist being that Trump probably wasn't going to beat Hillary and then he did.
I think the composite poll prior to the election was Hillary Clinton +3.6%

I think the final tally on the overall vote was Hillary Clinton +3.1%

National polling was pretty damn accurate.

Interpretations of that polling...well, lets just say many people still don't know how to interpret the data.

 
The polling was pretty accurate as far as nationwide polling.  
Admittedly I didn't look at the accuracy.  I just seem to remember the jist being that Trump probably wasn't going to beat Hillary and then he did.
Nationwide polling was fairly accurate. Most of the state polls were within the margins of error, although the fact that they almost all broke towards Trump is a sign of concern in terms of methodology.

 
Admittedly I didn't look at the accuracy.  I just seem to remember the jist being that Trump probably wasn't going to beat Hillary and then he did.
you should.  Wisconsin and Michigan were obviously off quite a bit.  national was pretty close.

and the midterm polling and projections were dead-on-balls accurate.
Most of the Wisconsin polls were pretty far off -- Clinton had an average lead of 6.5 (and she led in almost every poll), and a typical margin of error (3-5 points) would still give her a win.

The Michigan polls weren't quite as bad -- Clinton had an average lead of 3.6, and Trump had a lead in the most recent poll. The final result was just outside the expected margin of error.

 
Trump good, polls bad.

Seriously, the guy has a horseshoe up his butt and the nightmare scenario exists again: a six million win in the popular vote for the Dems, Donald holds Wisconsin and wins by a hair, and spends four more years crowing about his yuge victory. But if the Dems rally around the eventual nominee and the young voters turn out like some are predicting (Dem voters don't lie to pollsters like Trump voters do), then Don is toast. He does not have the numbers to draw from that Dems do; he's got to hope that they don't come out.

 
Sorry guys.  You can all arm chair quarterback the polls now but you all look absolutely ridiculous when you do it.  Just about everyone was looking at the polls and saying Hillary would win, and in many cases, by a landslide.

Now so many of you come out, cause someone somewhere told you to say this, that  "Oh the polls were actually close, especially nationally. la la la la"  stop it..

Yeah by the way polls are nonsense.  

 
Has anyone here participated in any official polling?

Is it still done by phone?

Who actually answers these calls?

Why haven't I been called?

Are the pollsters limited to landlines?

Do people who participate give truthful answers?

What determines a likely voter?

Is "likely voter" determined by taking the person at their word that they intend to vote?

Who the eff still uses a payphone? 

So many questions.

 
Sorry guys.  You can all arm chair quarterback the polls now but you all look absolutely ridiculous when you do it.  Just about everyone was looking at the polls and saying Hillary would win, and in many cases, by a landslide.

Now so many of you come out, cause someone somewhere told you to say this, that  "Oh the polls were actually close, especially nationally. la la la la"  stop it..

Yeah by the way polls are nonsense.  
Every time you post this, you show a complete lack of understanding of polls vs analysis of polls. 

Polls are not now, nor have they been nonsense.

 
supermike80 said:
Sorry guys.  You can all arm chair quarterback the polls now but you all look absolutely ridiculous when you do it.  Just about everyone was looking at the polls and saying Hillary would win, and in many cases, by a landslide.

Now so many of you come out, cause someone somewhere told you to say this, that  "Oh the polls were actually close, especially nationally. la la la la"  stop it..

Yeah by the way polls are nonsense.  
:sigh:

 
sho nuff said:
Every time you post this, you show a complete lack of understanding of polls vs analysis of polls. 

Polls are not now, nor have they been nonsense.
They absolutely are.  

 
Mr Anonymous said:
Has anyone here participated in any official polling?

Is it still done by phone?

Who actually answers these calls?

Why haven't I been called?

Are the pollsters limited to landlines?

Do people who participate give truthful answers?

What determines a likely voter?

Is "likely voter" determined by taking the person at their word that they intend to vote?

Who the eff still uses a payphone? 

So many questions.
I got a call last fall on my cellphone. As far as I can tell there isn’t anything I did to receive the call, ie register somewhere or something like that, it was random. I took the time to participate, and gave truthful answers. IIRC I was asked if I voted in 2016, and if I intend to vote in 2018, so I assume that makes me likely to vote since I answered yes to both. It was a bunch of yes/no and strongly/mostly/agree/disagree/mostly/strongly if that makes sense. 6-7 options (maybe there was a “neutral” or n/a type option, don’t remember.) It was a live person asking me each question. They wouldn’t really say anything other than the question- I asked it they could clarify what they meant on 1-2 questions and they offer to read it again. It took about 1/2 hour. 

 
I got a call last fall on my cellphone. As far as I can tell there isn’t anything I did to receive the call, ie register somewhere or something like that, it was random. I took the time to participate, and gave truthful answers. IIRC I was asked if I voted in 2016, and if I intend to vote in 2018, so I assume that makes me likely to vote since I answered yes to both. It was a bunch of yes/no and strongly/mostly/agree/disagree/mostly/strongly if that makes sense. 6-7 options (maybe there was a “neutral” or n/a type option, don’t remember.) It was a live person asking me each question. They wouldn’t really say anything other than the question- I asked it they could clarify what they meant on 1-2 questions and they offer to read it again. It took about 1/2 hour. 
Thank you, that was very insightful. The bolded made my jaw drop. Props to you for taking that much time. After what you just described I don't know whether to further doubt modern polling or give it more validity. 

 
roadkill1292 said:
Trump good, polls bad.

Seriously, the guy has a horseshoe up his butt and the nightmare scenario exists again: a six million win in the popular vote for the Dems, Donald holds Wisconsin and wins by a hair, and spends four more years crowing about his yuge victory. But if the Dems rally around the eventual nominee and the young voters turn out like some are predicting (Dem voters don't lie to pollsters like Trump voters do), then Don is toast. He does not have the numbers to draw from that Dems do; he's got to hope that they don't come out.
I'm curious about the bolded. Would appreciate a link if possible. TIA

 
I got a call last fall on my cellphone. As far as I can tell there isn’t anything I did to receive the call, ie register somewhere or something like that, it was random. I took the time to participate, and gave truthful answers. IIRC I was asked if I voted in 2016, and if I intend to vote in 2018, so I assume that makes me likely to vote since I answered yes to both. It was a bunch of yes/no and strongly/mostly/agree/disagree/mostly/strongly if that makes sense. 6-7 options (maybe there was a “neutral” or n/a type option, don’t remember.) It was a live person asking me each question. They wouldn’t really say anything other than the question- I asked it they could clarify what they meant on 1-2 questions and they offer to read it again. It took about 1/2 hour. 
I've done this several times. I was initially surprised how long it took, and have turned down a few pollsters because I didn't have time for it.

I do still have a "landline" number and I think that's where I got most (or maybe all) the poll requests.

 
I'm curious about the bolded. Would appreciate a link if possible. TIA
I don’t think you can really influence a poll by lying. To what end? Even a coordinated effort wouldn’t really effect much of anything. A political type poll like the one I took might be able to sort the info as “most rep. voters feel strongly about abortion” or “most dem voters somewhat agree that we need to fund the military.”

 
We disagree. Totally fine.  I'm really good with that
I think it’s fine to disagree about the importance of polling.  But bringing up that people may lie as a reason ignores that it’s built into the margin of error.  That’s isnt about disagreement, that’s about the understanding of statistics.

 
I think it’s fine to disagree about the importance of polling.  But bringing up that people may lie as a reason ignores that it’s built into the margin of error.  That’s isnt about disagreement, that’s about the understanding of statistics.
Dude. I get it.  We disagree.  Can we move on?

 
Hence a margin of error.  As I said, you are showing a lack of understanding of polling and statistics.
Wrong.  Margin of error accounts for the difference that may be expected due to taking a random sample of the population instead of sampling the entire population.  That's it, it doesn't address a number of other things that could go wrong.  That's statistics 101.  Maybe you should take a refresher course.

 
Yeah.  It really is.  I have an opinion, therefore by definition, it's a matter of opinion 
But we are talking about the facts of things. How polling actually works including the margin of error.  It being your opinion doesn’t mean it can’t be factually wrong.

If I said “it’s my opinion that 2+2 = 7”...it would still be incorrect.

 
But we are talking about the facts of things. How polling actually works including the margin of error.  It being your opinion doesn’t mean it can’t be factually wrong.

If I said “it’s my opinion that 2+2 = 7”...it would still be incorrect.
Correct, just like when you said margin of error accounted for people lying you were wrong.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top