At this point do you trust the political polls ANY POLLS?

[Doctor Amadeus]

At this point do you trust the polls ANY POLLS if not why not?

My answer is fuck and NO, most of these political pundits and pollsters don't know shit, at best they all or most demonstrate that this is not fucking science, at least not in it's purest form. This is a at best a template and a thermometer very much relative to where you stick it.

Most people will fucking LIE if asked point blank, the reason, because even despite what peoples true intentions are, most people especially in general have a fear about what it is and why it is that are asked a question and of course what is being expected.

It isn't because people are especially evil however in general we are inherently, however we simply are generally dishonest, because the world we live in doesn't make most people feel safe to say what they really think.


I put depends as an option and a request to give a source, yes 538 even 538, has IMO and I've gotten hell for this, has shit the bed big time in 2016, I am not not just them are fooling themselves.

I don't think it's on purpose, however their as reliable as Jimmy Kimmels asking random people on the street about if they has sex last night. Most people will answer with what they think others expect of them.

[Thee ANCOM]

my answer is yes. becasue how polling data is collected and jumping random people on the street with a camera in their face are two different things.

[cors8]

You do know they cherry-pick the funniest answers for these comedy segments right?

[Doctor Amadeus]

my answer is yes. becasue how polling data is collected and jumping random people on the street with a camera in their face are two different things.

Not really, I mean they are in technical reference but not over all outcome. Ever been approached at a mall to give a review, shit is the same thing. How about at a show where a Magician or Hypnotist ask for a volunteer.


Hell David Blaine and Criss Angel have made entire careers out of audience participation and basically collectively lying for little or no incentive. WHY?


Because at the core of most people is what, I said, a fear of what they are expected to say or do, and partly it has to do with wanting to believe something even if it's not true. It's how Con Artist always find their mark.

- - - Updated - - -

You do know they cherry-pick the funniest answers for these comedy segments right?

True, I am also pretty sure, it isn't the only time answers have been cherry picked, some do the same thing with Data, which often gets over looked.

[s_bushido]

Polls aren't "walking up to someone and shoving a camera and microphone in their face." Obviously.

If that's how reality worked, Ray Comfort would have converted everyone to young-earth creationism a decade ago.

[Thee ANCOM]

Not really, I mean they are in technical reference but not over all outcome. Ever been approached at a mall to give a review, shit is the same thing. How about at a show where a Magician or Hypnotist ask for a volunteer.


Hell David Blaine and Criss Angel have made entire careers out of audience participation and basically collectively lying for little or no incentive. WHY?


Because at the core of most people is what, I said, a fear of what they are expected to say or do, and partly it has to do with wanting to believe something even if it's not true. It's how Con Artist always find their mark.

what the fuck are you talking about? where is the evidence for any of these things you're claiming?

[beanman12345]

Im confused, you actually think pollsters are con artists, or are in a similar vein as street magicians?

[Toppy]

Please go back to qanon or pol or whatever conspiracy bullshit place you came from

[Doctor Amadeus]

what the fuck are you talking about? where is the evidence for any of these things you're claiming?

The evidence is in personal experience, and the results and testimony of millions of people throughout history. Countless hours of research and libraries filled with ways to manipulate markets, and drive human desire and wants.

So badly now we live in a fucking age of super shitty science, and do you want to know why it's so much worse than it ever has been. It isn't because anything I am saying is new or unknown.

It's mostly because of bullshit like those believing that are doing science and seeking truth fooling themselves, and those who are bad actors paying attention polishing off the details.

When people see the numbers, regardless to how confident you are about them, they don't mean the same thing to two different people anymore. Which is why I am saying I don't trust Political Polls for the reasons I have stated, and because of bullshit where some people not all think they are being scientific and NOT, and those who are truly just full of shit, trying to manipulate information for their own personal benefit.


Points

I don't trust the polls because People are prone to lie, especially now.

I don't trust polls because people doing them, either are bias or lie.

I don't trust the polls because traditionally especially now more than ever they shit the bed and have not only been wrong they been way off.

[Kaleredar]

Do you have any notion of how polling or surveys are conducted, OP?


That some talk show host or stage magician's (like, honestly? That's your comparison?) "methodology" is scattershot is not an indictment of scientific or statistical research.

I swear, a lot of people have "mistrust" in the bodies of science and research because they just assume that their understanding of how things are done and work must be how things people went through years of college, postgraduate work, and discipline do those same things.

"This talk show host guy goes around doing random interviews and it's clear that the people he put on the spot aren't always honest... therefore, can we trust any polls? They're probably just done all the same way!"

"If I make a bad call at work I get punished for it... therefore, researchers must get punished if it turns out they were wrong about something... so they must have a vested interest in lying if it makes them appear correct."

"Well I know that I only get out of bed in the morning to earn money, so obviously scientists must have monetary interests involved. Can we trust their research if we know they're just doing it for the money?"

"Well if all scientists have is theories, then you can't trust them, right? Because when I have a theory, it's just a hunch... can we really trust scientists if they're just going on hunches?"


This is why there's so much distrust in science. People not understanding how anything's fucking done.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Please go back to qanon or pol or whatever conspiracy bullshit place you came from

What's the conspiracy, that the evidence collected, isn't reliable based on the last few major ones they been pretty well off Election 16/18 are pretty good examples. Your counter argument is what?

[cubby]

/snip stupid youtube video (hint: they are all stupid)

At this point do you trust the polls ANY POLLS if not why not?

My answer is fuck and NO, most of these political pundits and pollsters don't know shit, at best they all or most demonstrate that this is not fucking science, at least not in it's purest form. This is a at best a template and a thermometer very much relative to where you stick it.

Most people will fucking LIE if asked point blank, the reason, because even despite what peoples true intentions are, most people especially in general have a fear about what it is and why it is that are asked a question and of course what is being expected.

It isn't because people are especially evil however in general we are inherently, however we simply are generally dishonest, because the world we live in doesn't make most people feel safe to say what they really think.


I put depends as an option and a request to give a source, yes 538 even 538, has IMO and I've gotten hell for this, has shit the bed big time in 2016, I am not not just them are fooling themselves.

I don't think it's on purpose, however their as reliable as Jimmy Kimmels asking random people on the street about if they has sex last night. Most people will answer with what they think others expect of them.

I don't trust every poll - but I trust the ones that I know their methodology. And then, I only trust polls for what they claim to be - a statistical sampling - nothing more.

(there is some serious irony here in you putting a youtube video in a thread discussing trust and sources)

[Ghostpanther]

Depends on who is doing the polling. Some, are biased for certain. Oversampling of one political side is not unheard of. But we should know from 2016, they can be far off in some cases. But one can get a general overall feeling of the political trends from them. But are they above 90%+ accurate? Not even close to that good.

Brings up the recent event in the Alabama Republican Senate primary, where the winner was favored to win by 6 points and he won by 31.

[Thee ANCOM]

The evidence is in personal experience.

this means less than nothing to me.

[draynay]

Not really, I mean they are in technical reference

So... OK, I guess the thread is pointless then.

[Thee ANCOM]

I'd bother to ask for some sort of source or study or anything besides your word but I'm done with the ranting.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Do you have any notion of how polling or surveys are conducted, OP?


That some talk show host or stage magician's (like, honestly? That's your comparison?) "methodology" is scattershot is not an indictment of scientific or statistical research.

I swear, a lot of people have "mistrust" in the bodies of science and research because they just assume that their understanding of how things are done and work must be how

"This talk show host guy goes around doing random interviews and it's clear that the people he put on the spot aren't always honest... therefore, can we trust any polls? They're probably just done all the same way!"

"If I make a bad call at work I get punished for it... therefore, researchers must get punished if it turns out they were wrong about something... so they must have a vested interest in lying if it makes them appear correct."

"Well I know that I only get out of bed in the morning to earn money, so obviously scientists must have monetary interests involved. Can we trust their research if we know they're just doing it for the money?"

"Well if all scientists have is theories, then you can't trust them, right? Because when I have a theory, it's just a hunch... can we really trust scientists if they're just going on hunches?"


This is why there's so much distrust in science. People not understanding how anything's fucking done.

Yep, I am well aware of how polling is conducted, and I am well aware of all the elements and room for bias there is. However you are more than welcome to explain how there is no way the Polls could be wrong or way off as they proven to be.

I am not claiming there is any magic, I am saying that people when asked, will lie it's part of human need.


Need more examples how about The New Republic, or The New York times, they are institutions of trust as well, guess what, they both had reporters busted for flat out lying and exploiting a system for truth. Not Scientific enough for you

How about news organizations like Sinclair who have been proven to bury reviews and reports they don't like for political reasons.

Polls may or may not be scientific, some more than others, but as long as humans are involved bias creeps in, and the examples I given are my argument.

- - - Updated - - -

this means less than nothing to me.

Right because you have a bias, you are involved with as much magic thinking as anyone else if not more.

- - - Updated - - -

So... OK, I guess the thread is pointless then.

No a thread asking people their opinions on polls as to whether they trust them or not isn't pointless, it's just a good indication of how much faith in their reliability people have based on their experiences and information, not mine.

[beanman12345]

I don't trust every poll - but I trust the ones that I know their methodology. And then, I only trust polls for what they claim to be - a statistical sampling - nothing more.

(there is some serious irony here in you putting a youtube video in a thread discussing trust and sources)

This is how I feel. And certainly outliers exist as well, but I don't believe what OP is saying that pollsters are trying to coerce or trick people into giving answers. And when the average is telling you the same thing over a certain period of time, say a week, or a month, from multiple distinct sources, I think there is some conspiracy theory mental gymnastics to just refute all of it.

[Thee ANCOM]

Right because you have a bias, you are involved with as much magic thinking as anyone else if not more.

the sin of having a bias in favor of empirical evidence to change my mind on something....

- - - Updated - - -

"magic thinking" dude just admit you have no idea how polls work.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Depends on who is doing the polling. Some, are biased for certain. Oversampling of one political side is not unheard of. But we should know from 2016, they can be far off in some cases. But one can get a general overall feeling of the political trends from them. But are they above 90%+ accurate? Not even close to that good.

Brings up the recent event in the Alabama Republican Senate primary, where the winner was favored to win by 6 points and he won by 31.

Yeah, suggesting some people have bias, even if it's not intentional or their faith in data could be wrong disturbs a lot of apple carts, and honestly I think has a lot to do with why we live in a time where people who believe in shit like Demon Seeds being an actual think afflicting humanity, have weight.

But no no, lets get upset, at those pointing out those shitty at science, are more responsible than con artist, who use pseudoscience for such nonsense, as bleach curing corona virus.