The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Trump And Netanyahu: embracing illusions, ignoring reality > Comments

Trump And Netanyahu: embracing illusions, ignoring reality : Comments

By Alon Ben-Meir, published 24/2/2017

Netanyahu went back home feeling triumphant, as he seemingly managed to sway Trump from the idea of two states, while Trump presented himself as a statesman thinking out of the box.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All
SR,

I had a little bet with myself that you'd assert Rasmussen to be not reputable. I could give you the full run down on why you're wrong there but you're not really interested in that. You don't want their result to be true so,in your mind that means they aren't true. Its the same lack of thought which caused so many to get the US election forecasts wrong not to mention Brexit.

Only two polls came out of the election with their reputations intact - Rasmussen and the LA Times poll.

But the others tell you what you want to hear so you'll go on believing them and therefore go on being surprised when reality smacks you in the face. Hope that works for you.

Me? I'd prefer to go with those who have a record of accuracy as opposed to those who get the results that are confirmatory. Which is why I was always confident of a Trump win.

" these guys consistently rank outside the top 20 of polling organisations for accuracy."

What a dill. As per above that's demonstrably rubbish. In fact Rasmussen's final poll was closer than any other. But again you don't want that to be true, so it isn't.

As to Israel, I can see that you are irrationally anti-Israel. that's OK, you're not alone. But you won't get me to make moral judgements about them. Moral outrage is for those who haven't got any skin in the game. When the Arab armies sought to destroy Israel in 1967 and 1973, I'm not sure the morality of either side was paramount in anyone's thinking.
Posted by mhaze, Tuesday, 28 February 2017 11:00:03 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear mhaze,

Well that was some self-projection my friend.

Here is a very extensive ranking of pollster companies done by fivethirtyeight;

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/pollster-ratings/

If you go to the far left and click mean-reverted bias you will see Rasmussen is the fourth most bias toward Republicans.

If you have a similar ranking assessment with the same breath of research please link to it and I will have a look. Otherwise you may live in your own bubble.
Posted by SteeleRedux, Tuesday, 28 February 2017 12:08:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sorry that should have been, rather appropriately it would seem, to the far right.
Posted by SteeleRedux, Tuesday, 28 February 2017 12:58:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
SR,

Really? You're using Nate Silver as a guide. Anyone who'll say what you want to hear, eh? How accurate was Silver/538 in 2016? Perhaps you should check before relying on them. Hint: silver consistent picked Clinton to win BIG and consistently predicted Trump's defeat first by other Republicans and then by Hill herself. Perhaps you should read some of Nate's mea culpas trying to explain why he was so wrong. Still if he tells you what you want to hear, then he's not really wrong, eh?

Did you check the data the list you supplied relies on? Did you notice it relates to 2014? Still it comes up with the right answer so it doesn't matter how out of date it is, does it?

In 2016, the LA times was the only poll that consistently predicted Trump. Rasmussen was next in that they sometimes predicted Trump AND in their final poll they were the closest to the final popular vote percentages. Since all other polls consistently unrated Trump by over 2%, perhaps rather than Rasmussen favouring the GOP the others favoured the Dems. That's definitely so for CBC/Nbc who you now take as the paragons of accuracy.

Its easy to understand why this occurs. Voting Trump (and Brexit for that matter) was unfashionable and some weren't open to telling the truth to pollsters. The way the LA Times and Rasmussen collects the data obviates this problem. Hence they are shown to be more accurate.

But they come up with the wrong answer so some will decide to not learn from history.
Posted by mhaze, Wednesday, 1 March 2017 10:51:04 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Silence came the stern reply.
Posted by mhaze, Thursday, 2 March 2017 11:21:04 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear mhaze,

You do know the difference between predictive polling and assessing the accuracy of polling companies based on historical data?

The contention is that Rasmussen consistently bias' toward the Republican side.

FiveThirtyEight has researched the historical data better than anyone else that I am aware of. He provides a link to his data set and as far as I know there has not been anyone find fault with any of it.

It found Rasmussen is one of the top offenders for Republican bias. Just because they got close in one election does not negate that fact.

Trump does not have an over 50% approval rating. Never has and unlikely to ever have.
Posted by SteeleRedux, Thursday, 2 March 2017 3:03:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy