What went wrong in this year's presidential polls?

[webfact]

What went wrong in this year's presidential polls?

By EMILY SWANSON and THOMAS BEAUMONT

 

 

 

WASHINGTON (AP) — Donald Trump's victory came as a surprise to many Americans, the nation's pollsters most of all.

Heading into Election Day, most national surveys overstated what will likely be a narrow popular vote advantage for Hillary Clinton and led many to believe she was a shoo-in to win the Electoral College.

"The polls clearly got it wrong this time," the American Association for Public Opinion Research said Wednesday in a statement. The association traditionally assesses the state of public polling after each election cycle, and already has a committee in place to do so again this year.

 

"I think it was an important polling miss. It would really be glossing over it to say that it was a typical year," said Courtney Kennedy, director of survey research at the Pew Research Center.

For now, it's impossible to know for certain what exactly went wrong for pollsters this year — and, as votes are still being counted, exactly how far off they were. Some factors pollsters will examine:

___

HOW BIG A MISS?

Although most polls throughout the 2016 campaign showed Clinton running ahead of Trump, in the final two weeks of the campaign her advantage narrowed in many national surveys, as well as in states such as Pennsylvania and Michigan. Her apparent lead fell within many surveys' margins of sampling error.

Kennedy said pollsters may ultimately not have had a historically large miss on the national popular vote, but thinks there was a systematic overrepresentation of Clinton's support and underrepresentation for Trump's.

She says people sometimes expect too much of election polls, which "are not designed to provide extremely accurate results."

Lee Miringoff, director of the Marist College Institute for Public Opinion, says that averages of publicly available polls sometimes give a false sense of certainty in a candidate's lead.

"You're taking imprecise estimates and throwing them all together with the hope of eliminating error," he says.

___

SHY TRUMP VOTERS?

Trump's campaign frequently pointed to the possibility that public polls were missing some of his base of support, and some pollsters say that might have played a role in the polling miss.

"One of the biggest problems that polls face nowadays is that people don't want to participate in them at all," said Patrick Murray, director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute. He plans to use voter data to find out if certain types of people were less likely to participate in his surveys.

At Pew, Kennedy said it appears that there was a segment of Trump's support base that was not responding to polls, which she called "fundamentally a difficult challenge to fight." But, she said, it's unlikely voters were lying about their support.

___

TURNOUT

Harold Clarke, a political scientist at the University of Texas at Dallas who regularly conducts polling, said one of the shortfalls in the presidential prediction was a problem that has plagued survey science for decades.

"We've got to filter our surveys as we try to pick out those people that are really going to vote," he said. "We all have the problem of not getting likely voters right."

Murray said pollsters are using likely voter models that might have worked in the past, but may no longer. He suggested that public pollsters should take a lesson from campaigns and consider putting out a range of numbers reflecting different turnout scenarios instead of a single number that suggests too much certainty in where the horse race stands.

___

TIGHTENING RACE

Republican pollster Whit Ayres suggests that many observers — himself included — assumed that since Trump had never held a lead, he wouldn't get the benefit of the doubt from voters in the end. But he says that in races where an incumbent is stuck below 50 percent in the polls, late deciders often break toward the challenger.

"There were a number of us who should have raised that possibility before the election," Ayres said. "If you think about it, Hillary Clinton is about as close as you can get to an incumbent."

Nationally and in key states such as Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, Trump prevailed among voters who said they decided which candidate to support in the last week before voting, according to exit polls conducted for The Associated Press and television networks by Edison Research.

In retrospect, Republican pollster Ed Goeas says that he saw a sign he now believes was a clue of Trump's advantage. In his national polling, he saw an 8 percentage point edge for Trump in voter intensity and enthusiasm among his supporters.

"But the assumption on our part was that Clinton's ground game would overcome or neutralize that intensity," Goeas said. "It just didn't."

___

NOT ENOUGH POLLS?

In several key states, including Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, there were few polls conducted in the final week before the election.

"In some of those unexpected states in the Rust Belt — Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin — you didn't see some of the more rigorous polls being conducted," said Kennedy.

Goeas confesses to failing to see some late movements, in part because his polling ended four days before the election.

"So basically we were looking at numbers thinking where he might end up," Goeas said of Trump's chances in Wisconsin, where he believed the Republican would benefit from Republican Sen. Ron Johnson's get-out-the-vote operation. "Did we have any comfort he would do it? No."

"It would have been nice to have a couple more Michigan and Wisconsin polls to adjust that perception" that Clinton was leading, Miringoff said. "The campaigns don't stop because the pollsters do their final poll."

___

Associated Press writer Matt Sedensky contributed to this report.

 

-- © Associated Press 2016-11-11

[daveAustin]

Posit a combination of massaged polling figures to further a desired agenda and the fact that people that want to vote 'the other way' keep quiet for fear of being ridiculed and labeled racist, bigot blah blah... just as with the Brexit vote.

[LannaGuy]

they asked the wrong people

[wxpwzrd]

"What went wrong?" -- Nothing...

[Mosha]

A lot of people who felt disenfranchised, were voting for the 1st in years. These people were not on the pollsters radar.

Sent from my SMART_4G_Speedy_5inch using Tapatalk

[NeverSure]

It was "The Monster Vote" and it was the reason I always knew Trump would win and said so on this forum even back during the primaries. Polls can't measure The Monster Vote. It's what won Brexit and won for Reagan in 1980 despite the polls both times.

 

This was written about 6 months ago and is a quick read. It tells it all.  The Monster Vote

 

Oh, and the MSM, pollsters and pundits don't live and work with real people and they tend to pool their ignorance about the real world and real people. They don't mix with common people and pick up their vibes.

 

Cheers.

 

 

[i claudius]

The real people are starting to fight back ,we are sick of being told by the left , the tree hugers  the luvvies and the crooks at the top what we should think or do , just wait for the elections in Europe when the likes of Merkal and co are shown the door , we started it with Brexit , the American people have done it with Trump, watch out your next EU leaders .

[Dtrump]

Why were the Brexit polls wrong?  Why was CNN doing the subliminal advertising that no one talks about.  Why was TV so Trump negative?  The liberal, global media tried to fix it and believed their own hype.   They are still doing it in the riot coverage.  They aren't giving up.  Look on here for examples.  They can't admit they don't have a clue about politics and the future of America and the world. 

[Usernames]

If you turn on CNN, you will see a constant parade of Trump haters being interviewed: Michael Moore, Dan Rather, Maria Cardova, the naacp, BLMers, illegal aliens, David Axelrod, and all of Trump's Republican opponents. The polls were nothing more than a continuation of what is a Big Media campaign to defeat Trump in the election and, now, try to undermine him before he is even inaugurated.  The polls were not intended to be "correct," they were intended to discourage and defeat Trump supporters before and after they voted. Big Media and their polls are more sinister than Pravda under the USSR.  At least under Communist regimes, those citizens knew they were being lied to about everything.  In America, the Big Media poses as the fount of unbiased wisdom.  The need to be destroyed. All of them.

Edited November 11, 2016 by Usernames

[Strange]

1 hour ago, webfact said:

but thinks there was a systematic overrepresentation of Clinton's support and underrepresentation for Trump's.

 

Ya think?

[dick dasterdly]

15 minutes ago, i claudius said:

The real people are starting to fight back ,we are sick of being told by the left , the tree hugers  the luvvies and the crooks at the top what we should think or do , just wait for the elections in Europe when the likes of Merkal and co are shown the door , we started it with Brexit , the American people have done it with Trump, watch out your next EU leaders .

Can we stop with the 'labels' e.g. " the left , the tree hugers  the luvvies"?

 

IMO many 'ordinary' people whose concerns have been ignored by politicians and the wealthy - have finally given vent to their anger which, resulted in the Brexit vote and the Trump vote.

[Peterw42]

Depends who put the polls out. Fox news had Trump winning a month ago. As an outsider (Australian) I have been watching the 24 hour trump support/fan club channel, Fox entertainment (not news). At one time, they at least pretended not to be biased, the last few months and that has gone out the window. If that is your source of information to make an informed choice, very easy to get a false view on the polls, trends.

Americans have voted and chosen Trump, but how many voted based on biased opinion, commentary, polls etc, 

 

Edited November 11, 2016 by Peterw42

[dick dasterdly]

The polls possibly helped Trump as when voters think their party/candidate will win, they'll not make as much effort to vote.  Whereas those that think 'we're losing - every vote counts' will make more effort - I would have thought?

[Peterw42]

5 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

The polls possibly helped Trump as when voters think their party/candidate will win, they'll not make as much effort to vote.  Whereas those that think 'we're losing - every vote counts' will make more effort - I would have thought?

 

I agree,

There is also the aspect that people want to join the winning team, not be seen as a looser. 

When the election is presented like a football match, people dont care who wins, but want to be associated with the winning team, then they feel like winners.

[ClutchClark]

17 minutes ago, Peterw42 said:

 

I agree,

There is also the aspect that people want to join the winning team, not be seen as a looser. 

When the election is presented like a football match, people dont care who wins, but want to be associated with the winning team, then they feel like winners.

 

I would have to disagree with this entire post.

 

I supported the Republican platform jn this election and I would have bet money that hillary was going to win right up until the moment Trump cleared 270.

 

so if anyone was voting for a winner to be on the winning side then they would hve voted hillary.

 

Secondly, a person can say they voted for whomever they please and it has nothing to do with who they actually cast a vote for. Do you really think millions of American voters are so simple as to vote for whomever looks to be winning? 

 

As for the sports team mentality, I think it exists most definitely but not in the way you describe.

 

An Indians fan does not become a Cubs fan in the 10th inning of game 7 because the Cubs are winning. 

 

Sports fans stick by their team no matter whether they win or lose or even cheat to win. Just like they blindly support hillary throughout her exposed corruption and lies.

 

Sorry but the reason hillary lost is real simple--Americans are tired of obama's new vision for America which hillary promised to ckntinue. An American Welfare State.

 

I know its tough for Liberals to accept that not everyone marches lockstep with them and we are seeing this lack of understanding now with the riots and violence by hillary supporters on the streets of America. Democrats genuinely fooled themselves into thinking Trump was evil so its difficult for them to comprehend the reasonable minded Americans who saw clearly that the GOP platform is better for their future.

 

These reasonable minded voters voted GOP and are not part of that mass of liberal tantrum throwers who like poutjng children are running through the streets refusing to accept the American way of selecting a President.

 

They are an embarrassment and worse.

Edited November 11, 2016 by ClutchClark

[Peterw42]

2 minutes ago, ClutchClark said:

 

I would have to disagree with this entire post.

 

I supported the Republican platform jn this election and I would have bet money that hillary was going to win right up until the moment Trump cleared 270.

 

so if anyone was voting for a winner to be on the winning side then they would hve voted hillary.

 

Secondly, a person can say they voted for whomever they please and it has nothing to do with who they actually cast a vote for. Do you really think millions of American voters are so simple as to vote for whomever looks to be winning? 

 

As for the sports team mentality, I think it exists most definitely but not in the way you describe.

 

An Indians fan does not become a Cubs fan in the 10th inning of game 7 because the Cubs are winning. 

 

Sports fans stick by their team no matter whether they cheat to win. Just like they blindly support hillary throughout her exposed corruption and lies.

 

Sorry but the reason hillary lost is real simple--Americans are tired of obama's new vision for America which hillary promised to ckntinue. An American Welfare State.

 

I know its tough for Liberals to accept that not everyone marches lockstep with them and we are seeing this lack of understanding now with the riots and violence by hillary supporters on the streets of America. Democrats genuinely fooled themselves into thinking Trump was evil so its difficult for them to comprehend the reasonable minded Americans who saw clearly.

 

I am completely neutral as I am not American. I was watching Fox news on the day, and they had the champagne on ice after the results from a few eastern states. I coudnt help but wonder how much this commentary influenced those yet to vote. I saw many interviews and polls in recent weeks were people were still undecided even up until polling day..

 

 

 

[ClutchClark]

1 minute ago, Peterw42 said:

 

I am completely neutral as I am not American. I was watching Fox news on the day, and they had the champagne on ice after the results from a few eastern states. I coudnt help but wonder how much this commentary influenced those yet to vote. I saw many interviews and polls in recent weeks were people were still undecided even up until polling day..

 

 

 

 

Fair enough but any American can tell you that only die-hard conservatives watch Fox News...well, and a few ultra liberals here on TVF.

 

An undecided voter just does not watch Fox News. I am a conservative and I cannot even stomach it. In fact, if it wasn't for all those large breasted commentators I would never even tune in.

[JLCrab]

I didn't realize Trump would win as I have not lived full-time in the USA for 12+ years and did not realize just how many mad, angry, disaffected and disgruntled persons there were in the USA. Now that I realize how many mad, angry, disaffected and disgruntled persons there are in the USA, I guess I'll continue to live full-time in Thailand

Edited November 11, 2016 by JLCrab

[Steely Dan]

The polls deliberately over sampled Democrats and groups likely to vote Democrat. They were paid to do so in some cases by the DNC. The pollsters are as completely discredited as the MSM, unfit for purpose.

P.s I was so confident the polls were wrong that I bet my friends beforehand that if Trump was within 4% of Clinton on Election Day he would win.


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

[boooker]

And demo kids of democrats whom are voters and less likely patriot of America rather couple of paid CNN hackers....and they run like Mickey Mouse behind and are followers.But when you ask these idiots why we have the 4th of July they dont even know the declaration of indepentence but wannaby on the demo streets.So uneducated sniffies

[weegee]

Now it's over, i would like to make a comment...Not being American, I didn't feel it was appropriate to comment during the run -ups.

 

I have watched every thing for the last 12 months, and a friend in the US told me that Trump would win, many months ago. I am glad for all the people in the USA, that they have had a chance to vote and try to do whats right for them and not the rest of the world, for once, (some who burn their flag at the slightest excuse).

Congratulations for getting the outcome the majority wanted....That's Democracy at it's best.

Rgds

weegee

[thaibeachlovers]

3 hours ago, Peterw42 said:

Depends who put the polls out. Fox news had Trump winning a month ago. As an outsider (Australian) I have been watching the 24 hour trump support/fan club channel, Fox entertainment (not news). At one time, they at least pretended not to be biased, the last few months and that has gone out the window. If that is your source of information to make an informed choice, very easy to get a false view on the polls, trends.

Americans have voted and chosen Trump, but how many voted based on biased opinion, commentary, polls etc, 

 

Most people vote on what they see and experience in their lives, not what a bunch of talking heads on the idiot box tell them, unless they are very stupid. Most people I know realize that the media is mostly BS.

If one candidate is telling them that they will get 4 more years of the same bad stuff they had the last 8, sane people will vote for the candidate that tells them he can make their lives better.

Sane people don't vote based on 'it's a woman's turn", unless the woman is actually going to improve their lives and put more money in their pocket.

 

What went wrong? Democracy worked.

Edited November 11, 2016 by thaibeachlovers

[otherstuff1957]

Actually, most of the polls weren't that far off.  Trump won all of the states that polls showed him leading in.  He also won half of the states that were 'too close to call'.  Individual polls are only accurate to within about 5 percent at best.  Aggregate polls should increase the accuracy to about 2 or 3 percent.  Florida, North Carolina, Maine and New Hampshire were all polling in that range and two went to Trump and two went to Clinton.

 

The only surprise were Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin.  Polls showed Clinton leading those three by about 4 - 8%, but she ended up losing all three states by very small margins (1% or less).  The 46 electoral votes in these states gave Trump the election.

 

So, instead of burning effigies (however enjoyable that might be!)  we should be asking ourselves 'Why did the US's post-industrial heartland vote for Trump?'  

 

If the Democrats want to return to power in 4 or 8 years, I think they need to take a good hard look at what the mid-western parts of the US want and need.

Edited November 11, 2016 by otherstuff1957

[SamJohn]

Nothing went wrong!! instead you should explain how things went right for the Americans for the first time in years..

Edited November 11, 2016 by SamJohn

[williamgeorgeallen]

we were talking about this last night. some people were saying that the establishment including the media wanted clinton to win so they only showed polls with results in her favor. this may have backfired when many voters who liked her just assumed she was going to win based on what was show by these polls, and did not bother going to vote.

[Mosha]

Actually, most of the polls weren't that far off.  Trump won all of the states that polls showed him leading in.  He also won half of the states that were 'too close to call'.  Individual polls are only accurate to within about 5 percent at best.  Aggregate polls should increase the accuracy to about 2 or 3 percent.  Florida, North Carolina, Maine and New Hampshire were all polling in that range and two went to Trump and two went to Clinton.
 
The only surprise were Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin.  Polls showed Clinton leading those three by about 4 - 8%, but she ended up losing all three states by very small margins (1% or less).  The 46 electoral votes in these states gave Trump the election.
 
So, instead of burning effigies (however enjoyable that might be!)  we should be asking ourselves 'Why did the US's post-industrial heartland vote for Trump?'  
 
If the Democrats want to return to power in 4 or 8 years, I think they need to take a good hard look at what the mid-western parts of the US want and need.

What do they want and need? Jobs that provide a living wage for their families might work. Food handouts in 2016 smh.


Sent from my SMART_4G_Speedy_5inch using Tapatalk

[Kabula]

Evil raised it's ugly, sick, manipulative, self destructive talking points and heads!

[JLCrab]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

<snip>.

If one candidate is telling them that they will get 4 more years of the same bad stuff they had the last 8, sane people will vote for the candidate that tells them he can make their lives better.

<snip2>

Sure -- he told them that he can make their lives better and it seems enough voters believed him. Just HOW he is going to make their lives better? Trust me. It's going to be beautiful. Great Potential.

[Basil B]

 

Human nature people know they should not press the button but they still do so.

[thaibeachlovers]

36 minutes ago, JLCrab said:

Sure -- he told them that he can make their lives better and it seems enough voters believed him. Just HOW he is going to make their lives better? Trust me. It's going to be beautiful. Great Potential.

it's called HOPE and ( hope for ) CHANGE. If people are desperate enough, they will always go to the one that promises better. Under Obama, people have become very desperate indeed.

Obama didn't deliver, but that does not mean Trump won't. Ask me again in 4 years if it got better or not, just don't tell me you know what is going to happen. NO ONE on here is psychic.