Lol, you flip flop a lot don't you? Weren't you just a few posts ago espousing on how accurate opinion polls are, especially at political outcomes? Speaking specifically to presidential elections.
If you can't maintain intellectual integrity in your debate you are a worthless shill here.
If you actually believe this you are a deeply stupid person... and I mean that.
Not one person in this thread that I've seen argued that opinion polls predicted US Senate vote outcomes. I know I didn't. That's an utterly illogical argument to make in the first place as
the people being polled weren't the ones voting. If you can provide a single quote of someone making this argument, please provide it.
The argument you then tried to bring up was against the ability of scientific polling to predict electoral outcomes. Do you actually not understand why a poll directly measuring the people voting would have predictive power and one measuring people not voting would not?
Not only that, but lets look at your arguments against the one poll you decided was bad.
- You said 1,000 people was too small a sample size, instead arguing for a sample size of 100,000. (LOL)
- You then tried to attack predictive modeling by linking to an article about a guy who bet against predictive modeling and lost horribly.
- You said that the proportion of Democrats was too high as compared to the national average. This was wrong.
- Then you claimed they weighted based on party ID. This was wrong.
- You said the proportion of people from regions of the country were incorrect. This was wrong.
- You said they didn't provide methodology on how the poll was conducted. This was wrong.
And all as you tried to pass yourself off as some sort of expert because you worked a campaign phone bank. Do us all a favor and quit while you're less far behind.
If you genuinely can't figure out why polls of voters would be predictive for elections they vote in and polls of voters aren't predictive for elections they don't vote in, there's no helping you.