i**********k
发帖数: 5274 | 1 On Friday June 24th there was an on-line MSN voting (1) Donald Trump for
president (2) Hillary Clinton for president (3) Other candidate . There were
more than 1 million VOTES. The result was:
- Trump: 49%
- Hillary: 31%
- Other candidate: 20%
Many pollers out there are being paid by special interests, who want their
particular candidate to win the election, so the pollers can skew the
polling results to influence the undecided voters to vote for the polling
winner in November. Many pro-Clinton pollers are giving out fake results. I
strongly believe Trump will win this presidential election. Americans are
tired of this crooked, lying, immoral and corrupt Hillary who was a terrible
and corrupt Secretary of State.
Crooked Hillary is a criminal and should go to jail. How could you vote a
criminal to be the US President ???? This b**** has no morals, is world-
class liar and corrupt to the bone. The Clintons are evil people. Look at
what the Clintons DID not what they said about religion. American citizens
are angry of USA has been in a wrong track of economic and military
disadvantage being done by crooked PROFESSIONAL politicians. |
S******8
发帖数: 24594 | |
g******a
发帖数: 778 | 3 法律在左臂眼里就是一坨屎。
【在 S******8 的大作中提到】
: 媒体修改数据，出假结果，会不会承担法律责任？
|
b*******h
发帖数: 1833 | |
r**********f
发帖数: 2808 | 5 MSNBC还有一个poll。“Do you plan on voting for Hillary Clinton for president
in 2016?”
答“No"的多达84%.
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/poll-hillary-2016 |
M*******5
发帖数: 494 | 6 为了证明自己不喜欢的民调多么biased，达克列举了一种最为biased的poll作为论据：
self selection poll。。。。。。
he web is filled with sites inviting you to participate by posting your
opinion. This amounts to creation of samples via self-selection. That
trashes the principle of random selection, where everyone in a target
population has the same likelihood of being in the sample.
http://cstl-cla.semo.edu/rdrenka/Renka_papers/polls.htm#Ugly_Polls |
t*******d
发帖数: 12895 | 7 MSNBC算很左的媒体了，21万投票, 居然 yes:no:maybe=13:84:3
有意思
president
【在 r**********f 的大作中提到】
: MSNBC还有一个poll。“Do you plan on voting for Hillary Clinton for president
: in 2016?”
: 答“No"的多达84%.
: http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/poll-hillary-2016
|
m**********t
发帖数: 20 | 8 这个poll可信不可信不好说，不过你这傻逼引用的那些poll应该算是最biased的吧？
【在 M*******5 的大作中提到】
: 为了证明自己不喜欢的民调多么biased，达克列举了一种最为biased的poll作为论据：
: self selection poll。。。。。。
: he web is filled with sites inviting you to participate by posting your
: opinion. This amounts to creation of samples via self-selection. That
: trashes the principle of random selection, where everyone in a target
: population has the same likelihood of being in the sample.
: http://cstl-cla.semo.edu/rdrenka/Renka_papers/polls.htm#Ugly_Polls
|
M*******5
发帖数: 494 | 9
啧啧~还不好说~真是掩耳盗铃
别的poll有没有biased我不知道，咱不是做这一行的，无论随机抽样（而不是self
selection）poll的结果是自己喜欢还是不喜欢的，都没有必要不懂装懂
你如果说人家biased的原因是D的百分比比R多，那我只能说你没有common sense
1. registered D比R客观至少多3%-6%，这个是选举届的常识，common sense。至于为
什么，可以单独讨论，我猜想的一个原因可能是政治激情不同，也就是传统的common
sense投票率高对D有利投票率低对R有利，所以可能一些R懒得主动注册，隐藏在I中间
了。无论原因是什么，但和民调是否biased没有一点关系
2. 民调中D比R多x%，是民调的结果，不是民调的原因。随机抽样本身就是正态分布存
在outliner。你能唯一攻击的点是，全天下的民调机构不是在随机抽样，否则RCP就不
会一片天蓝。这样低级的
阴谋论，自己自high可以，说出来只能说证明没有common sense
【在 m**********t 的大作中提到】
: 这个poll可信不可信不好说，不过你这傻逼引用的那些poll应该算是最biased的吧？
|
r***i
发帖数: 9780 | 10 婊子媒体们不怕的
只要手里有数据，哪怕是筛选过的，你都拿它没办法的
没人能证明你收到哪些数据
【在 S******8 的大作中提到】
: 媒体修改数据，出假结果，会不会承担法律责任？
|
|
|
i**********k
发帖数: 5274 | 11 A new Reuters poll has many Republicans worried about the outcome of the
2016 presidential race--and many on the Democratic side ready to pop the
champagne corks.
The poll shows presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton leading by a
shocking 14 percent over her Republican rival Donald Trump: 47 percent to 33
percent.
Unfortunately there’s one problem with the poll. It is heavily skewed.
The Gateway Pundit reports that of Reuters’ 1,201 respondents, 626 were
Democrats and only 423 were Republicans.
In other words, 52 percent of Reuter’s respondents were Democrats and only
35 percent were Republican--a huge 33% advantage for Democrats!
According to AllenBWest.com, Reuters isn’t the only misleading presidential
poll. A new ABC News/ Washington Post survey found voters preferred Hillary
51 percent to 39 percent. In that sample, 36 percent of respondents were
Democrats and only 24 percent were Republicans.
The skewed polls are made less believable by the fact that Republican
turnout in 2016 is likely to be higher than in previous years. As NPR noted
in March, Republicans far outstripped Democrats in primary turnout, due in
part to the insurgent nature of of the Donald Trump candidacy.
It's time for the mainstream media to rethink their skewed polling samples. |
M*******5
发帖数: 494 | 12
33
only
随机抽样的结果有outliner不奇怪，没有Outliner才奇怪了。所以才有rcp average.
Rcp 那群家伙搞了那么多年，哪个民调长期不准权重怎么调整，我不质疑他们家的专业
，你外行人要用conspiracy theory质疑，那就要拿出证据
其次，你要说明这个outliner是民调的原因，而不是随机抽样的结果，也要拿出证据。
Bad poll必然有bad number,但有bad number的未必就是bad poll, 谁主张谁举证，否
则就用common sense看看rcp 上一片深蓝
【在 i**********k 的大作中提到】
: A new Reuters poll has many Republicans worried about the outcome of the
: 2016 presidential race--and many on the Democratic side ready to pop the
: champagne corks.
: The poll shows presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton leading by a
: shocking 14 percent over her Republican rival Donald Trump: 47 percent to 33
: percent.
: Unfortunately there’s one problem with the poll. It is heavily skewed.
: The Gateway Pundit reports that of Reuters’ 1,201 respondents, 626 were
: Democrats and only 423 were Republicans.
: In other words, 52 percent of Reuter’s respondents were Democrats and only
|
s*******1
发帖数: 16479 | 13 所以他们选希拉里。lawless的代言人
【在 g******a 的大作中提到】
: 法律在左臂眼里就是一坨屎。
|
i**********k
发帖数: 5274 | 14 The left is living on borrowed time. Brexit revealed that and that's why
they're so terrified. Borrowed time runs out in November.
Trump is killing it & liberal media propagandists need push polls to
manufacture news cycles in a desperate bid to protect Obama & Hillary
colossal failures
Reuters, CNN, ABC, NBC, WSJ, Washington Post...are going to look more silly
than they usually do when they have to announce, like overnight, the polls
are exactly the opposite. |
e**r
发帖数: 1144 | 15 在线投票没有什么参考价值
台湾大选前在线投票朱立伦还领先
现在落后是客观事实
还是认清形势才有利于以后反超
were
I
【在 i**********k 的大作中提到】
: On Friday June 24th there was an on-line MSN voting (1) Donald Trump for
: president (2) Hillary Clinton for president (3) Other candidate . There were
: more than 1 million VOTES. The result was:
: - Trump: 49%
: - Hillary: 31%
: - Other candidate: 20%
: Many pollers out there are being paid by special interests, who want their
: particular candidate to win the election, so the pollers can skew the
: polling results to influence the undecided voters to vote for the polling
: winner in November. Many pro-Clinton pollers are giving out fake results. I
|
r*********e
发帖数: 7733 | 16 板鸭同学，穆斯林杀了你几十个同类，你还舔老婊啊？她还要引进更多穆斯林。你用屁
股想你也知 道不该舔她啊？
【在 M*******5 的大作中提到】
: 为了证明自己不喜欢的民调多么biased，达克列举了一种最为biased的poll作为论据：
: self selection poll。。。。。。
: he web is filled with sites inviting you to participate by posting your
: opinion. This amounts to creation of samples via self-selection. That
: trashes the principle of random selection, where everyone in a target
: population has the same likelihood of being in the sample.
: http://cstl-cla.semo.edu/rdrenka/Renka_papers/polls.htm#Ugly_Polls
|
