Chief Pollster of Trafalgar Predicts Trump Wins the Election

[EJ24]

Interesting exchange from this article:

The general consensus about why state polls of the Rust Belt were wrong in 2016 is that education was underweighted as a factor, specifically that less educated voters were much more likely to vote for Trump and were underrepresented in the samples used by pollsters. Some pollsters say they’ve since adjusted their models to fix that mistake and some now include the neighbor question. Do you think they’ll still be wrong?

"They’re not using [the neighbor question] properly. They factor it in, but they don’t understand it. They think that’s what they got wrong. They are not going to let go of this [practice] of calling a live person and asking a crazy amount of questions, 20, 30, 40 questions. That is the hill they’re going to die on. If they admit that model is now flawed and outdated, that in this modern world average people don’t participate in crazy long polls and that people lie to pollsters, if they admit that, they’ve lowered the threshold to entry into the polling game to digital, and when they do that, they can’t justify charging the crazy numbers they charge for polls. They are the Pony Express trashing the telegraph lines. They don’t believe that people are hiding their votes for Trump. Tell me this, why were they all wrong in Florida in predicting [Ron} DeSantis vs. [Andrew] Gillum, where the social desirability factor was in play, yet it wasn’t in the [Bill] Nelson race. We got both of them right. If they had fixed it, why did they all get Florida wrong? What they don’t understand is: In an age when people will lie to their doctor, lie to their priest, lie to their accountant, suddenly they turn into honest Abe when they answer a polling call? That is silly."

https://news.yahoo.com/shy-trump-voters-will-power-his-win-says-pollster-who-called-2016-race-203448623.html

[Alben Barkley]

I am SHOCKED!

[Senator Incitatus]

Well, they're betting their entire reputation on it being at least close.

[ProgressiveModerate]

Trafalgar is only right when Rs outperform polling, they were 10 points off in GA in 2018, so much for that argument, were 4% off in AZ-SEN, 8% off in NV-SEN, 7% off in TX-SEN, and so on. Guessing the correct answer on a multiple choice test that everyone else got wrong doesn't make me a genius, and this seems to be what's going on here with Trafalgar, since when you look at their methodology, it seems like they try hard to subtly manipulate the numbers to reach the output they want, as Silver said.

If he's right, he's right, but if he's wrong, he's wrong, we just have to wait and see.

[Alben Barkley]

They go on about Florida... Did anyone ask them to explain why they utterly failed in just about every other race in 2018? Or why their prediction that the GOP would hold the House proved laughably wrong?

[EJ24]

They go on about Florida... Did anyone ask them to explain why they utterly failed in just about every other race in 2018? Or why their prediction that the GOP would hold the House proved laughably wrong?

If you read the article, he claims that they called 2018 96% correctly, and the reason Georgia was so off was because he didn't get a list of new registered voters, which impacted the race. That's what he claims.

[SaneDemocrat]

They do seem to better in the rust belt then in the sun belt

[Alben Barkley]

They go on about Florida... Did anyone ask them to explain why they utterly failed in just about every other race in 2018? Or why their prediction that the GOP would hold the House proved laughably wrong?

If you read the article, he claims that they called 2018 96% correctly, and the reason Georgia was so off was because he didn't get a list of new registered voters, which impacted the race. That's what he claims.

Well that 96% “claim” is a straight-up lie, for one thing.

For another thing, I don’t buy for a second that would explain why they were so off in Georgia. I’m guessing their “social desirability” theory made them certain no white people in Georgia would vote for a black woman, turned out totally wrong.

And finally, considering how many new voters there are this year that are quite possibly being missed by all pollsters, how can he be so confident that won’t happen again?

[Tekken_Guy]

They go on about Florida... Did anyone ask them to explain why they utterly failed in just about every other race in 2018? Or why their prediction that the GOP would hold the House proved laughably wrong?

If you read the article, he claims that they called 2018 96% correctly, and the reason Georgia was so off was because he didn't get a list of new registered voters, which impacted the race. That's what he claims.

Maybe it's because most of the competitive races they polled in just happened to break for Republicans.

[Alben Barkley]

They do seem to better in the rust belt then in the sun belt

They got lucky in the rust belt in 2016. Got the results about right for the wrong reasons. “Shy Trump voters” weren’t why Trump (barely) won those states. It was a bunch of undecideds moving towards him at the last minute. Trafalgar was predicting Trump wins regardless due to a nonsensical debunked theory. They will look “right” whenever a Republican happens to win, because that’s the result they are going to ensure they find no matter what. It’s pretty clear now they decide what result they want in advance then engineer the sample to make it happen.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

They go on about Florida... Did anyone ask them to explain why they utterly failed in just about every other race in 2018? Or why their prediction that the GOP would hold the House proved laughably wrong?

They slightly overestimated Stabenow in Michigan but hardly by "laughably wrong" margins.

They might have done a terrible job at predicting the House but when it comes to 2016/18 swing state statewide elections they've been mostly okay if not above average and unless something crazy happens this election will be determined by statewide results, not CD results.

They're probably overestimating Trump but the 2016 forum is littered with posts from overconfident fools discounting them entirely. Maybe they really are just junk this time but I'll wait for the actual results before saying so.

[Stuart98]

lol, sure Traf.

[Alben Barkley]

They go on about Florida... Did anyone ask them to explain why they utterly failed in just about every other race in 2018? Or why their prediction that the GOP would hold the House proved laughably wrong?

They slightly overestimated Stabenow in Michigan but hardly by "laughably wrong" margins.

They might have done a terrible job at predicting the House but when it comes to 2016/18 swing state statewide elections they've been mostly okay if not above average and unless something crazy happens this election will be determined by statewide results, not CD results.

They're probably overestimating Trump but the 2016 forum is littered with posts from overconfident fools discounting them entirely. Maybe they really are just junk this time but I'll wait for the actual results before saying so.

I did say “just about” every other race was laughably wrong. Other examples, statewide, have been posted in this thread.

[brucejoel99]

For the love of all that is holy, there are no shy Trump voters. They're a myth. I mean, seriously: silent Trump supporters? You think the fascists, Nazis, neo-Confederates, bigots, religious lunatics, Klansmen, &/or enablers of all the aforementioned demographics are gonna be silent about that sh*t? Give me a break.

Get real: Trump won in 2016 on the basis of voter apathy & undecideds hating him less than they hated Hillary. That's it. And in case anybody may have forgotten, here's your reminder that neither of those factors are at play this year. Game over.

[Rand]

[Tekken_Guy]

For the love of all that is holy, there are no shy Trump voters. They're a myth. I mean, seriously: silent Trump supporters? You think the fascists, Nazis, neo-Confederates, bigots, religious lunatics, Klansmen, &/or enablers of all the aforementioned demographics are gonna be silent about that sh*t? Give me a break.

Get real: Trump won in 2016 on the basis of voter apathy & undecideds hating him less than they hated Hillary. That's it. And in case anybody may have forgotten, here's your reminder that neither of those factors are at play this year. Game over.

The only way I could see there being “shy Trump voters” is as a strategic move rather than actually being shy.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

They go on about Florida... Did anyone ask them to explain why they utterly failed in just about every other race in 2018? Or why their prediction that the GOP would hold the House proved laughably wrong?

They slightly overestimated Stabenow in Michigan but hardly by "laughably wrong" margins.

They might have done a terrible job at predicting the House but when it comes to 2016/18 swing state statewide elections they've been mostly okay if not above average and unless something crazy happens this election will be determined by statewide results, not CD results.

They're probably overestimating Trump but the 2016 forum is littered with posts from overconfident fools discounting them entirely. Maybe they really are just junk this time but I'll wait for the actual results before saying so.

I did say “just about” every other race was laughably wrong. Other examples, statewide, have been posted in this thread.

They did badly in the South (except Florida) and well in the Midwest but by and large the latter are the ones people attack. Maybe it's going to turn out that they happened to luck out with a sudden undecided swing in Trump's direction both times and this time they'll be exposed but going solely by their record they're not drastically worse than the likes of Quinnipiac or Emerson.

[Hammy]

Isn't Biden leading in most of their polls?

[EJ24]

Somebody said in another thread that there aren't really "shy" Trump voters so much as there are Trump voters who hang up on pollsters because Trump told them they are liars and crooked just like the MSM.

And working for a polling firm, I can confirm this. I'll normally call somebody and ask them if they'd like to participate in a poll about issues in their state/district, and what I find is that the majority of people who support Democrats are very open about sharing information and complete the poll.

On the other hand, I can immediately sense the Trump supporters because as soon as I ask something about participating in a poll they say things like "who's paying for this?" or "who are you affiliated with?". I've had a few say things like "this sounds like fake news" with some assorted cursing, and then they hang up on me. I've heard a LOT of this.

In other words, that social trust gap I've heard about as a theory of why Trump supporters are often hidden....there's probably something to that. They clearly dislike participating in polls. Just fair warning.

[exopolitician]

Isn't Biden leading in most of their polls?

Not in their state polls, no.

[AGA]

Can't wait for them to look like idiots after this election.

[Tekken_Guy]

Somebody said in another thread that there aren't really "shy" Trump voters so much as there are Trump voters who hang up on pollsters because Trump told them they are liars and crooked just like the MSM.

And working for a polling firm, I can confirm this. I'll normally call somebody and ask them if they'd like to participate in a poll about issues in their state/district, and what I find is that the majority of people who support Democrats are very open about sharing information and complete the poll.

On the other hand, I can immediately sense the Trump supporters because as soon as I ask something about participating in a poll they say things like "who's paying for this?" or "who are you affiliated with?". I've had a few say things like "this sounds like fake news" with some assorted cursing, and then they hang up on me. I've heard a LOT of this.

In other words, that social trust gap I've heard about as a theory of why Trump supporters are often hidden....there's probably something to that. They clearly dislike participating in polls. Just fair warning.

By this theory, Trump’s true approval rating has always been much higher than indicated.

[7,052,770]

I just don't see the "social desirability" theory playing out, because what Trump supporters are shy or secretive about admitting they like Trump? They tend to be loud and proud and under the impression that everyone else is too.

[Horus]

It is certainly more possible than many here seem to think. I think Biden has about a 2/3 chance if nothing else changes much in the next 10 days.

[love2seeit]

"They are not going to let go of this [practice] of calling a live person and asking a crazy amount of questions, 20, 30, 40 questions. That is the hill they’re going to die on. If they admit that model is now flawed and outdated, that in this modern world average people don’t participate in crazy long polls and that people lie to pollsters, if they admit that, they’ve lowered the threshold to entry into the polling game to digital, and when they do that, they can’t justify charging the crazy numbers they charge for polls.

His whole argument is that regular people don't respond to NYT/WaPo polls, but the response rate is essentially the same (very low, <5%) for his polls. It's cope.