Overtime Politics Thread (WARNING: Possible fraud)

[RI]

Since apparently this is a thing now...

http://overtimepolitics.com/new-iowa-poll-shows-trump-with-31-26-lead-over-cruz/

Trump 31
Cruz 26
Rubio 13
Carson 8
Paul 6
Bush 5
Fiorina 2
Kasich/Christie 1

That Paul result prompts some skepticism.

[RI]

More evidence that Selzer's anti-Trump methodology is flawed. The thing about polling a caucus is that turnout can vary wildly with enthusiasm. That's what happened with Obama in '08. People wondered if his voters would really turn out for him, and they did. Similarly, people are enthusiastic for Trump, and "unlikely" voters will turn out for him now. Voters (i.e. downscale white voters who have been stomped on by the system and by both parties) are sick and tired of Obama, and Trump is the least like Obama of all the candidates. That is why he is winning, and is why he will continue to win.

you realize almost half of trumpholes in iowa aren't even registered to vote? Feb 1st wont be kind to this forum

The caucuses have election day registration.

[RI]

How is 34% outlandishly high for Sanders here?

Bill Clinton himself only got 65% in Texas in 1992. That leaves 35% against him, and that was with way more conservative white Democrats than exist in Texas in 2016.

[RI]

Yeah, probably not a good idea to add these even if they're showing what most others are showing.

They've been getting added for several weeks now. Worst case they turn out to be fraudulent, and we delete them.

[RI]

It seems that not a single reputable media outlet or polling site has covered these blog posts from 'Fred'.   And now evev /politics at Reddit won't allow them to be posted (categorizing them as an "unacceptable source").
https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/41v5yq/clinton_holds_3_point_lead_over_sanders_in/

I do not understand why anyone would pay attention to them until they were vetted. I do not understand why these numbers are being put into the Atlas poll db.

Because there's virtually no harm in doing so and there's no evidence that they're fraudulent? Besides, they mostly poll highly underpolled states leaving the choice either potentially flawed data or no data.

[RI]

Dubious data is absolutely worse than no data at all. I understand the desire to fill in the blanks on a map, but that doesn't mean we should throw out all objectivity and accept any numbers that appear on some random anonymous blog. And polling in states after the first four, especially for post-Super Tuesday states is pointless anyway. 

This thread discussing the postings from this blogger are fine, but I see no reason why they should be considered 'polls' or 'data' until there is some kind of vetting.

We don't "vet" pretty much any other source. I don't see what makes Overtime special, nor do I see their numbers as more out of line than anyone else's.

[RI]

Dubious data is absolutely worse than no data at all. I understand the desire to fill in the blanks on a map, but that doesn't mean we should throw out all objectivity and accept any numbers that appear on some random anonymous blog. And polling in states after the first four, especially for post-Super Tuesday states is pointless anyway.  

This thread discussing the postings from this blogger are fine, but I see no reason why they should be considered 'polls' or 'data' until there is some kind of vetting.

We don't "vet" pretty much any other source. I don't see what makes Overtime special, nor do I see their numbers as more out of line than anyone else's.

I mean, we've pretty much analyzed Overtime's numbers to hell and back and concluded they are junk. It's not out [sic] fault that you haven't bothered to follow the debate we had.

"Junk" is not fraudulent. Law of large numbers implies more data moves you closer to the true mean. The averaging process takes care of most of the problems Overtime might present.

[RI]

Apparently the guy who does these polls is doing an AMA on Reddit today.

[RI]

Nevada Democratic Poll

Hillary Clinton – 47%
Bernie Sanders – 43%
Martin O’Malley – 3%
Undecided – 7%

18% Hispanic in poll. 15% Hispanic in 2008.

8% Black in poll. 15% Black in 2008.

[RI]

Sanders 48, Clinton 47

http://overtimepolitics.com/sanders-leads-clinton-by-1-point-in-iowa-the-day-before-the-caucuses-48-47/

[RI]

Trump by 9: 34-25, Rubio at 14

http://overtimepolitics.com/trump-leads-cruz-by-9-points-in-iowa-on-the-eve-of-the-caucuses-34-25/

[RI]

Maine Democratic Poll:
Sanders - 56%
Clinton - 41%

http://overtimepolitics.com/pollingdata/OvertimePolitics.comFeb3-Feb5DemocraticCaucusPoll-Maine.pdf

I'd love for this to be real, but it's Overtime.

It's about what I'd expect out of Maine, though.

[RI]

Can we please stop the sh**tposting in this thread. Thanks.