Is anyone investigating why the polls were so wrong?

[cynatnite]

Majority of the polls were in favor of Hillary just prior to the election. On election day it all was flipped on it's head.

No one is talking about this!

Corporate media was like, "oh, well, we got this one wrong" and moved on without looking back.

The reasons offered don't seem to add up to such a massive mistake.

Is it because the pundits are embarrassed by their complicity?

As I said, no one is talking about this. No one is hunting for the reasons for the disparity between the polls and the results.

I get that in this business being wrong happens...but on such a huge scale?

I'm not a tin-foil hat person.

But...fuck...what the hell! Why is the media acting like this was just another election and not investigating the whys and wherefores?

[cilla4progress]

1. Both the NSA Director and

Republican Senator Lindsay Graham have voiced suspicions of Russian hacking of the election but that's as far as it's gone. I sure as hell hope our national security apparatus is investigating this behind the scenes before 12/19

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

29. I have no doubt the Russians are behind the rigged election... tho I know it'll never happen, Obama needs to suspend the inauguration until a full investigation is complete.

[elleng]

2. Dunno. Would like to see what Sam Wang has to say.

[exboyfil]

3. Living in Iowa we went 10% for Trump

The last Des Moines Register poll had Trump at 7%. I have to say, knowing the number of educated individuals vocally supporting Trump, that I am not surprised by the results. I couldn't convince my mother to not vote for Trump (let alone vote for Clinton). Same with my brother and his wife in Ohio (who have generally supported Democrats in the past).

[cynatnite]

4. Four states.

Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Florida

[exboyfil]

5. I wonder if they can get a hand audit

in the optical scan states?

[Coyotl]

14. North Carolina too. n/t

[SickOfTheOnePct]

6. The only state I've seen that was waaayyy off was Wisconsin

The others (FL, OH, PA, MI, NC) all seemed to be within or very close to the margin of error.

As for the claims that the NSA chief said that the Russians "hacked the election", that's not what he said at all. When speaking of the hacked DNC and Podesta emails, he said:

"There shouldn't be any doubt in anybody's mind," Rogers said. "This was not something that was done casually. This was not something that was done by chance. This was not a target that was selected purely arbitrarily. This was a conscious effort by a nation-state to attempt to achieve a specific effect."

The DNC hack and subsequent release of emails? Most likely Russia.

The Podesta hack and subsequent release of emails? Most likely Russia.

Did the hacked/released info help Trump? Most certainly.

Is it wrong, and should we investigate how they were able to do so in an effort to lower the chances of it happening again? Absolutely.

Is that the same as hacking an election, changing vote counts, etc? No.

[cynatnite]

8. I thought Florida's was close enough to require a recount...

Actually, I think there needs to be recounts and a closer scrutiny in those states that had Hillary solidly blue.

There are disparities, IMO. How can we trust future elections when this one was called so badly?

[SickOfTheOnePct]

11. No, not even close for Florida

An recount is automatically triggered if the gap is .5% or less. Trump won FL by 1.3% (49.1% to 47.8%).

Looking at the polls leading up to election day, the only state I've seen that had Hillary "solidly blue" that she later lost was Wisconsin.

**edited to fix .05% to .5%

[pstokely]

15. what were the polls in MN?

Last edited Fri Nov 18, 2016, 08:13 PM - Edit history (1)

HRC only won it by 2%, but this is the same state that elected a pro wrestler as governor

[SickOfTheOnePct]

16. I didn't look at MN

as she didn't lose that one.

[pstokely]

18. it was too close for comfort

nt

[Buckeye_Democrat]

19. Exit polls in Ohio only showed Trump ahead by 0.1%, yet...

... he somehow won by over 8%???? That was FAR outside the margin of error.

There were also some Ohio polls before the election that indicated it was now a toss-up.

Nate Silver likes to bring up the large number of undecided voters compared to previous elections and how it was dangerous to be too confident for that reason. However, it's not like people were still undecided in the exit polls because they already voted! It appeared that Clinton did better in early voting too.

If there's an "innocent explanation" for it, I'd like to know. Surely there were enough exit pollsters in the rural areas too, right? I find it hard to believe that statisticians would screw up enough to not sample them enough. I suppose it's possible that a significant number of Trump voters simply lied about how they voted or they avoided those pollsters more frequently, but why? Were they worried they might be "lizard people" or something?

[SickOfTheOnePct]

20. The OP was about polls leading up to the election

rather than exit polls, so that's what I was speaking to.

I don't pay any attention whatsoever to exit polls.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

21. Fair enough, but why don't you pay attention to exit polls?

Are they considered unreliable now despite being relatively accurate in years past?

To be honest, I'd prefer to think the election wasn't tampered in some way. That's actually more troublesome to me than accepting the results and trying to swing voters back to the Democratic party.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

23. I don't believe the sampling size is adequate for what they're trying to show n/t

[Buckeye_Democrat]

24. Okay.

Many polls have low sampling size compared to the population. As long as it's "big enough" and representaive of the population as a whole, the margin of error will be pretty low.

Republican voters are more "spread out" across the country in low-population areas, so that's where I think under-sampling MIGHT happen. Again, I would hope that statisticians wouldn't be so inept to overlook them.

[tomp]

32. your opinion on the validity of exit polls...

is at variance with worldwide consensus. what do you know that the overwhelming majority of experts don't?

[SickOfTheOnePct]

33. I don't know anything that they don't know

It's simply an opinion, and like assholes, everyone has their own.

[tomp]

30. why don't you pay attention to exit polls?

they are considered the worldwide gold standard of a fair election.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

31. See post #23 n/t

[Blanks]

7. There were discrepancies between exit polls...

In Latino communities

http://www.latinodecisions.com/blog/2016/11/10/lies-damn-lies-and-exit-polls/

Of course, I can't verify the source, but it's interesting that liberal/progressive issues on the ballots kicked ass while conservative candidates won.

In Arkansas the medical marijuana initiative passed while the republicans over-won. The republican governor (elected by a large margin 2 years ago) publicly opposed it. That's not proof of anything, but it seems odd.

Greg Pallast is pursuing irregularities, but I'm not holding out much hope for any investigation of vote hacking which seems like a very real possibility.

http://www.gregpalast.com/election-stolen-heres/

[DFW]

9. Or maybe they weren't?

As if we'll ever find out.

[Hoyt]

10. Lots of white wingers wouldn't admit they were for Trump, but voted for him in secret.

[yallerdawg]

17. Judging from the comments of Bernie supporters here....

a lot of weft wingers never fessed up, either.

[librechik]

12. exactly--no consensus on spoiled election, despite the evidence.

Weimar Republic it is.

Works every time!

[Coyotl]

13. the Election Integrity Public Posting group.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/electionintegrity

[FrenchieCat]

25. Thank you!

Looks like I have a lot of reading to do…

[red dog 1]

22. One person is investigating "why the polls were so wrong"

His name is Norm, and his reply to a Hartmann Report story is extremely interesting.

The story he was replying to had nothing to do with "poll results"

It was a story from Common Dreams that Louise Hartmann submitted yesterday titled
"Sanders Warns President-Elect Trump: 'We Are Not Going backwards'"


Norm's comment (the only comment) starts out:
"The following is a cause for concern regarding the adjustment of exit poll results and call into question recent media reporting.

North Carolina Exit Polls Comparison (chosen for example)

If anyone cares to do the math to compare the exit polls published by CNN near to the close with those published later, you will notice considerable discrepancies that cannot be mathematically explained.
The later publication conforms to the published vote count.
But this is impossible.
The 330 additional respondents included in the later poll figures cannot be reconciled with the figures and percentages published earlier.
Below is a summary"

More:
http://hartmannreport.com/link/sanders-warns-president-elect-trump-we-are-not-going-backwards

[MFM008]

26. They lied

Easy. Your to embarrassed to say your voting maggot but then you do. See?
61 million people living in this country are frightened, moronic liars. Fits the maggot perfectly.

[JI7]

27. were they that wrong ? she still won the popular vote

[Coyotl]

34. When the polls and the voting don't match, something is wrong.

"... compare 2004 and 2016 exit polling in the 20 contested Senate race states with polling. The same Senate seats were contested. Presidential results minus exit polls equals a + shift for the percentage more Republican votes than exit polling reports. The 2004 mean was +1.9% and normally distributed, the 2016 mean was +4.7% and the trendline increases in red states. States sorted red to blue from left to right."

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/electionintegrity/CKgvhwJ6Src

[Lithos]

28. Greg Palast did

Found out that the polls were not wrong if you ignored the voter purge...