this post was submitted on 11 May 2024
2202 points (98.0% liked)
Science Memes
11161 readers
1660 users here now
Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!
A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.
Rules
- Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
- Keep it rooted (on topic).
- No spam.
- Infographics welcome, get schooled.
This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.
Research Committee
Other Mander Communities
Science and Research
Biology and Life Sciences
- !abiogenesis@mander.xyz
- !animal-behavior@mander.xyz
- !anthropology@mander.xyz
- !arachnology@mander.xyz
- !balconygardening@slrpnk.net
- !biodiversity@mander.xyz
- !biology@mander.xyz
- !biophysics@mander.xyz
- !botany@mander.xyz
- !ecology@mander.xyz
- !entomology@mander.xyz
- !fermentation@mander.xyz
- !herpetology@mander.xyz
- !houseplants@mander.xyz
- !medicine@mander.xyz
- !microscopy@mander.xyz
- !mycology@mander.xyz
- !nudibranchs@mander.xyz
- !nutrition@mander.xyz
- !palaeoecology@mander.xyz
- !palaeontology@mander.xyz
- !photosynthesis@mander.xyz
- !plantid@mander.xyz
- !plants@mander.xyz
- !reptiles and amphibians@mander.xyz
Physical Sciences
- !astronomy@mander.xyz
- !chemistry@mander.xyz
- !earthscience@mander.xyz
- !geography@mander.xyz
- !geospatial@mander.xyz
- !nuclear@mander.xyz
- !physics@mander.xyz
- !quantum-computing@mander.xyz
- !spectroscopy@mander.xyz
Humanities and Social Sciences
Practical and Applied Sciences
- !exercise-and sports-science@mander.xyz
- !gardening@mander.xyz
- !self sufficiency@mander.xyz
- !soilscience@slrpnk.net
- !terrariums@mander.xyz
- !timelapse@mander.xyz
Memes
Miscellaneous
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The front runner? Really?
I'm not being sarcastic. Im genuinely interested, but can't be arsed to start going through polls because it'd mean going through the biases of the pollers.
Really it’s too close to call but he does appear to have a slight edge if you had to pick a favorite.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2024/national/
it's not really.that close.whem you compare it to 2016/2020
Trump underpolls significantly,.by 5-8%, and did for both 2016 and 2020.
Bidens hasn't led trump in polling in 500 days
You're wrong about a lot and you're presenting your opinions as fact. Trump doesn't underpoll by that amount now.
There was a phenomenon in 2016 where people were reluctant to tell pollsters they were voting for him, because they were embarrassed. Now Trump supporters are the loud minority of voters. And Biden is the boring safe choice. Biden voters are less likely to stay on the phone and answer questions.
Also, national polls mean very little. You have to actually look at the swing state polls to find out who's winning. And there's not much data this far from the election.
Finally, we can tell there's something wrong with current polling just because "Mr. Brainworms" RFK Jr polls around 10% right now. No one is going to vote for him, and definitely not 10% of the population. People are just fucking with the pollsters right now. Do you know anyone seriously considering voting for RFK Jr?
You can project whatever narrative you want into the data but what is I'm saying is fundamentally the case.
Trump outperforms his polling. He did so in 2016 by a wide margin, and he did so again in 2020. You can just go look at the week prior polling. This isn't some grandiose fiction it's a statement of fact, that you seem to be ignorant to.
Your interest in a particular narrative doesn't change what is. What matters is that Biden needs around an 8% lead on Trump nationally to be secure, and has been trailing, basically the entire time.
If the election were tomorrow, and we believe the offsets observed in the two previous national elections, and we should because those were real events made from real data, then Biden would lose in a landslide today.
Because I can't stand all of your group think naivete:
I went and pulled the 2020 data. The above is the relative error in polling from polls during the months of October and November 2020, calculated against the real votes cast in 2020. Biden underperforms his polling by about 4% and Trump overperforms his polling by about 8%. You can argue with why this is the case, but you can-not pretend that this isn't the case. You should be adjusting how you see polls with this in mind. When you see Biden trailing Trump in national polling (and he has been for 400 days in a row), you should see that as a CLEAR Trump lead considering that Trump CONSISTENTLY overperforms on election day relative to his polling.
Sources: https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/42MVDX
https://electionlab.mit.edu/data
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/data/president_polls_historical.csv
You didn't answer the question:
Do you know anyone who is voting for RFK Jr? He is polling at 10% right now, so if it's real then statistically you should know someone.
It’s almost certainly true the RFK’s support will decline as we get closer to the election. This is a common trend with third party candidates.
However, it’s not totally clear which candidate those voters will choose. My sense is that RFK is not particularly popular but is a stand-in for the rejection of both candidates at the moment. However, most of these voters will switch over as the reality of RFK’s loss becomes more real. Often, last minute voting decisions will be based on the conditions and media narratives happening immediately around the time of the election. So the implications of what you’re saying on who will win are not certain currently.
Yes, that's right. Basically you can't rely on polls this far from the election.
The question says "if the election were held today, who would you vote for". But the election isn't today, and the person answering the question knows that. So you see more people answer with third party candidates then would actually vote that way.
Not only that, but candidates' GOTV efforts do not happen until the election is approaching soon. That's what actually wins elections, not polls from 6 months before.
That’s… not how statistics work there, friend. If there’s a 10% chance of something happening per person and I have ten people in a room, that doesn’t guarantee that one of them will have the thing happen. In fact, my sample could have 10/10 happenings or absolutely nothing happen and the statistic value would stay the same, because it’s an average of the entire population.
Trying to apply anecdotal evidence to statistics and then calling the statistic false when it doesn’t align with your anecdote is kinda doing things arse-backwards.
I'm not interested in your questions because your views aren't aligned with reality or supported by the data..
Maybe. Maybe not. Pollsters typically adjust methodology between elections so this type of analysis is questionable.
He hasn’t led in the average but is currently within the margin of error. The available evidence suggests a toss up but we won’t know for sure until after the election, as always.
I mean..
No. It's not margin of error right now. It's a clear Trump W. Not once you account for Trump's consistent over performance and Bidens consistent underperformance relative to polling aggregates. Everyone with eyes has been seeing it for better than a year.
Consistent in two elections? That’s not consistent. That’s not even data, let alone a trend.
As I said, pollsters adjust the demographic weighting based on election results. It is possible they will again underestimate Trump’s performance. It’s also possible they will overestimate it. Only time will tell.
But regardless of that issue, it is within the margin of error—that is a statistical reality irrelevant to your speculation about polling errors.
None of what I'm saying is speculation, and you are a buffoon.
Just remember polls gave Hillary almost a guaranteed win. For all intents and purposes, Trump is the front runner regardless of what any polling says
And the result were statistically within what they predicted. She did get the popular vote but lost in key states where the margins were small.
No, they did not. That's not what happened.
Polling probably has taken a dive in accuracy since then, though. Uptake in cell phone use in younger generations has been lingering over the industry for a long time, and it's finally caught up with them.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/
72% chance from here. Probably high enough that swing state voters opted to stay home. This was the vibe practically all October. The FBI felt confident enough in her win to announce they were investigating her to appear unbiased.
Polling being inaccurate for whatever reason doesn't change the article after article assuring everyone Hillary had it in the bag.
72% chance means Trump needed to flip two coins and have them both come up heads. It's not that ridiculous.
From the nearly all the polls I see, yes. But like you said, bias of pollers. I've seen a few that go more in depth to try and figure out the "responds to polls" bias, but I still only see biden ahead by a margin. With those small numbers of concentrated effort vs the wide reach general polls, trump is. It does not instill any level of confidence in me that the "general" polls don't reflect the "general" voting bias. Even without all of this analysis, just a few million voting for trump is unbelievably concerning to not just the future of the US, but the world that this single country dominates. These fascists are campaigning on the cut your nose to spite your face philosophy.
Bro he's been the front runner the entire time.
This is why people's sycophantica for Biden are so problematic. !data_vizualisations@lemmy.world
Trump also seems to understand poll at about 8%
Which means Biden needs to be leading by that amount to win.