PA-Big Data Poll: Oz+2

[GeorgiaModerate]

Every time there’s a poll with results people don’t like, they dismiss it.

I don’t like this either but there is a clear trend of Oz leading now.

This. Even if this poll isn't reliable, the fact remains that Oz has led the last several polls, and polling errors rarely if ever benefit Democrats these days. Lean R.

lol, he's (barely) lead in a total of four polls, all of which came from Republicans. The Wick poll actually got closer after the debate. Sure, "Lean R" though.

Pure tossup in reality.

This is why we need "mainstream" pollsters to come into Pennsylvania, because clearly people aren't willing to accept the results of any pollsters that are "Republican" or viewed as a right-leaning bias. The only pollsters acceptable are those like ABC, CNN, and Marist, even though they are less accurate than some of the pollsters (such as Big Data, Emerson, and Trafalgar) that are routinely disparaged.

Note that Big Data has been banned from 538.

I know that, and there is a longstanding feud between Baris and Silver. Nevertheless, this does not undermine the overall thrust of my argument. Certain pollsters are considered to be the "gold standard" even though they are consistently and plainly wrong. The midterms in a few weeks will serve as another test of this, but I fully expect for people to continue denigrating pollsters they don't like even if such pollsters are proven correct.

Silver is pretty lenient with what polls he lets in. I'm quite inclined to believe that these polls are faked or that the methodology is so ad hoc that it doesn't matter if data is actually collected.

Big Data's ban may also have to do with the fact that Baris is an unabashed Trumpist.

Unlikely considering that Rasmussen Reports, which is also run by Trumpists, is still in the average.   I strongly doubt that 538 would ban a pollster because of their political ideology (unlike another well-known poll aggregator with a three-letter acronym).

[pantsaregood]

It is important to remember that a poll can be "right" while also being statistical nonsense. If, by some chance, we learned that a pollster pulled results of between 55-45 D and 55-45 R out of a hat for every race and got them all right, that would not be a vindication of their methodology or cement them as a "good" pollster.

Bad (or no) methodology can yield "correct" results, but not valid results.

[Sestak]

Every time there’s a poll with results people don’t like, they dismiss it.

I don’t like this either but there is a clear trend of Oz leading now.

This. Even if this poll isn't reliable, the fact remains that Oz has led the last several polls, and polling errors rarely if ever benefit Democrats these days. Lean R.

lol, he's (barely) lead in a total of four polls, all of which came from Republicans. The Wick poll actually got closer after the debate. Sure, "Lean R" though.

Pure tossup in reality.

This is why we need "mainstream" pollsters to come into Pennsylvania, because clearly people aren't willing to accept the results of any pollsters that are "Republican" or viewed as a right-leaning bias. The only pollsters acceptable are those like ABC, CNN, and Marist, even though they are less accurate than some of the pollsters (such as Big Data, Emerson, and Trafalgar) that are routinely disparaged.

Note that Big Data has been banned from 538.

I know that, and there is a longstanding feud between Baris and Silver. Nevertheless, this does not undermine the overall thrust of my argument. Certain pollsters are considered to be the "gold standard" even though they are consistently and plainly wrong. The midterms in a few weeks will serve as another test of this, but I fully expect for people to continue denigrating pollsters they don't like even if such pollsters are proven correct.

Silver is pretty lenient with what polls he lets in. I'm quite inclined to believe that these polls are faked or that the methodology is so ad hoc that it doesn't matter if data is actually collected.

Big Data's ban may also have to do with the fact that Baris is an unabashed Trumpist.

So is Cahaly, and Trafalgar is still in the average (and highly rated!)

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Even if this poll is true a 51/49 Oz isn't safe with Shapiro gonna win by 10 and Johnson lead won't hold up with Evers beating Michels in WI but we must see that MQK poll on Wed, the last CNN poll had Evers surging  and Johnson only up 50/49

According to polls Barnes is down 50/49 and Fetterman 51/49

[Calthrina950]

Every time there’s a poll with results people don’t like, they dismiss it.

I don’t like this either but there is a clear trend of Oz leading now.

This. Even if this poll isn't reliable, the fact remains that Oz has led the last several polls, and polling errors rarely if ever benefit Democrats these days. Lean R.

lol, he's (barely) lead in a total of four polls, all of which came from Republicans. The Wick poll actually got closer after the debate. Sure, "Lean R" though.

Pure tossup in reality.

This is why we need "mainstream" pollsters to come into Pennsylvania, because clearly people aren't willing to accept the results of any pollsters that are "Republican" or viewed as a right-leaning bias. The only pollsters acceptable are those like ABC, CNN, and Marist, even though they are less accurate than some of the pollsters (such as Big Data, Emerson, and Trafalgar) that are routinely disparaged.

Note that Big Data has been banned from 538.

I know that, and there is a longstanding feud between Baris and Silver. Nevertheless, this does not undermine the overall thrust of my argument. Certain pollsters are considered to be the "gold standard" even though they are consistently and plainly wrong. The midterms in a few weeks will serve as another test of this, but I fully expect for people to continue denigrating pollsters they don't like even if such pollsters are proven correct.

Silver is pretty lenient with what polls he lets in. I'm quite inclined to believe that these polls are faked or that the methodology is so ad hoc that it doesn't matter if data is actually collected.

Big Data's ban may also have to do with the fact that Baris is an unabashed Trumpist.

So is Cahaly, and Trafalgar is still in the average (and highly rated!)

Yet Trafalgar has the same reputation as Big Data with many people, especially Democrats and left-leaning people.

[GeorgiaModerate]

Every time there’s a poll with results people don’t like, they dismiss it.

I don’t like this either but there is a clear trend of Oz leading now.

This. Even if this poll isn't reliable, the fact remains that Oz has led the last several polls, and polling errors rarely if ever benefit Democrats these days. Lean R.

lol, he's (barely) lead in a total of four polls, all of which came from Republicans. The Wick poll actually got closer after the debate. Sure, "Lean R" though.

Pure tossup in reality.

This is why we need "mainstream" pollsters to come into Pennsylvania, because clearly people aren't willing to accept the results of any pollsters that are "Republican" or viewed as a right-leaning bias. The only pollsters acceptable are those like ABC, CNN, and Marist, even though they are less accurate than some of the pollsters (such as Big Data, Emerson, and Trafalgar) that are routinely disparaged.

Note that Big Data has been banned from 538.

I know that, and there is a longstanding feud between Baris and Silver. Nevertheless, this does not undermine the overall thrust of my argument. Certain pollsters are considered to be the "gold standard" even though they are consistently and plainly wrong. The midterms in a few weeks will serve as another test of this, but I fully expect for people to continue denigrating pollsters they don't like even if such pollsters are proven correct.

Silver is pretty lenient with what polls he lets in. I'm quite inclined to believe that these polls are faked or that the methodology is so ad hoc that it doesn't matter if data is actually collected.

Big Data's ban may also have to do with the fact that Baris is an unabashed Trumpist.

So is Cahaly, and Trafalgar is still in the average (and highly rated!)

Yet Trafalgar has the same reputation as Big Data with many people, especially Democrats and left-leaning people.

This has absolutely nothing to do with why Big Data was banned by 538.  Would you at least acknowledge that your suggestion that 538 banned them due to political differences was not justified?

[Dani Rose]

Every time there’s a poll with results people don’t like, they dismiss it.

I don’t like this either but there is a clear trend of Oz leading now.

This. Even if this poll isn't reliable, the fact remains that Oz has led the last several polls, and polling errors rarely if ever benefit Democrats these days. Lean R.

lol, he's (barely) lead in a total of four polls, all of which came from Republicans. The Wick poll actually got closer after the debate. Sure, "Lean R" though.

Pure tossup in reality.

This is why we need "mainstream" pollsters to come into Pennsylvania, because clearly people aren't willing to accept the results of any pollsters that are "Republican" or viewed as a right-leaning bias. The only pollsters acceptable are those like ABC, CNN, and Marist, even though they are less accurate than some of the pollsters (such as Big Data, Emerson, and Trafalgar) that are routinely disparaged.

Note that Big Data has been banned from 538.

I know that, and there is a longstanding feud between Baris and Silver. Nevertheless, this does not undermine the overall thrust of my argument. Certain pollsters are considered to be the "gold standard" even though they are consistently and plainly wrong. The midterms in a few weeks will serve as another test of this, but I fully expect for people to continue denigrating pollsters they don't like even if such pollsters are proven correct.

Silver is pretty lenient with what polls he lets in. I'm quite inclined to believe that these polls are faked or that the methodology is so ad hoc that it doesn't matter if data is actually collected.

Big Data's ban may also have to do with the fact that Baris is an unabashed Trumpist.

So is Cahaly, and Trafalgar is still in the average (and highly rated!)

Yet Trafalgar has the same reputation as Big Data with many people, especially Democrats and left-leaning people.

There's a reason for that: Trafalgar's A rating is mostly an illusion. They wishcasted for the GOP in two consecutive presidential elections where Trump, the single great pillar of GOP overperformances, happened to be running. They accidentally got it right, and that gave them a level of credibility that they frankly never earned. We're seeing that a lot with their frankly bizarre polls outside of the Midwest this year.

[Calthrina950]

Every time there’s a poll with results people don’t like, they dismiss it.

I don’t like this either but there is a clear trend of Oz leading now.

This. Even if this poll isn't reliable, the fact remains that Oz has led the last several polls, and polling errors rarely if ever benefit Democrats these days. Lean R.

lol, he's (barely) lead in a total of four polls, all of which came from Republicans. The Wick poll actually got closer after the debate. Sure, "Lean R" though.

Pure tossup in reality.

This is why we need "mainstream" pollsters to come into Pennsylvania, because clearly people aren't willing to accept the results of any pollsters that are "Republican" or viewed as a right-leaning bias. The only pollsters acceptable are those like ABC, CNN, and Marist, even though they are less accurate than some of the pollsters (such as Big Data, Emerson, and Trafalgar) that are routinely disparaged.

Note that Big Data has been banned from 538.

I know that, and there is a longstanding feud between Baris and Silver. Nevertheless, this does not undermine the overall thrust of my argument. Certain pollsters are considered to be the "gold standard" even though they are consistently and plainly wrong. The midterms in a few weeks will serve as another test of this, but I fully expect for people to continue denigrating pollsters they don't like even if such pollsters are proven correct.

Silver is pretty lenient with what polls he lets in. I'm quite inclined to believe that these polls are faked or that the methodology is so ad hoc that it doesn't matter if data is actually collected.

Big Data's ban may also have to do with the fact that Baris is an unabashed Trumpist.

So is Cahaly, and Trafalgar is still in the average (and highly rated!)

Yet Trafalgar has the same reputation as Big Data with many people, especially Democrats and left-leaning people.

This has absolutely nothing to do with why Big Data was banned by 538.  Would you at least acknowledge that your suggestion that 538 banned them due to political differences was not justified?

I've read that 538 found that Big Data was falsifying some of their data, but I also referred to the feud between Baris and Silver. Baris absolutely detests Silver and repeatedly attacks him. But as I said, in less than two weeks, we'll know who's right. Will it be a neutral or Democratic-leaning year, as many on this forum believe, or will it be a Republican-leaning or wave year?

[soundchaser]

But as I said, in less than two weeks, we'll know who's right. Will it be a neutral or Democratic-leaning year, as many on this forum believe, or will it be a Republican-leaning or wave year?

Which will say absolutely nothing about the merits of this individual poll or pollster.

[Calthrina950]

But as I said, in less than two weeks, we'll know who's right. Will it be a neutral or Democratic-leaning year, as many on this forum believe, or will it be a Republican-leaning or wave year?

Which will say absolutely nothing about the merits of this individual poll or pollster.

The results in a few weeks will be very revealing. As I said, if pollsters such as this one turn out to be more accurate than the pollsters lauded by many on this forum, people here will continue to act as they did before, and bash the pollsters they don't like. Conversely, if pollsters such as this one are wrong, then they are wrong, and ought to be regarded with the same kind of skepticism as some regard the others.

People on here claim that I am biased and I've become too invested in defending the legitimacy of polls. But they refuse to believe that they themselves are biased, and only trust the pollsters who generate the results which they desire. And they are more likely to express feelings of giddiness or hope if pollsters show a positive result for a Democratic candidate, even if such a result is unlikely or not that plausible.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Oz lead of 2 pts isn't gonna hold up with Shapiro winning by 10 as I have said many times, why are users so worried about PA

Just like Evers was surging in WI CNN poll Johnson in the same poll was ahead by the same amount 51/49 the Ds will win Both races Fox news Power rankings have Ds at 51 and GA is going to a Runoff and we still have a chance in OH and NC

[pantsaregood]

But as I said, in less than two weeks, we'll know who's right. Will it be a neutral or Democratic-leaning year, as many on this forum believe, or will it be a Republican-leaning or wave year?

Which will say absolutely nothing about the merits of this individual poll or pollster.

The results in a few weeks will be very revealing. As I said, if pollsters such as this one turn out to be more accurate than the pollsters lauded by many on this forum, people here will continue to act as they did before, and bash the pollsters they don't like. Conversely, if pollsters such as this one are wrong, then they are wrong, and ought to be regarded with the same kind of skepticism as some regard the others.

People on here claim that I am biased and I've become too invested in defending the legitimacy of polls. But they refuse to believe that they themselves are biased, and only trust the pollsters who generate the results which they desire. And they are more likely to express feelings of giddiness or hope if pollsters show a positive result for a Democratic candidate, even if such a result is unlikely or not that plausible.

Even if every Big Data poll released nailed the margins and vote share perfectly, that wouldn't prove that their polling methodology was statistically sound. Bluntly, it is possible to arrive at the "correct result" with absolutely terrible methodology.

Center Street has showed some ridiculous polls with Democrats doing far better than they should. If we learned that their method of "polling" was drawing numbers out of a hat and one of their ridiculous polls nailed the margin, would that justify their methodology as valid?

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

This poll is not happening Fetterman+6, Oz was never ahead

[Crackerjack McJohnson]

Every time there’s a poll with results people don’t like, they dismiss it.

I don’t like this either but there is a clear trend of Oz leading now.

It's just math, and I wish people here couldn't be so partisan!  Numbers are numbers.  I think Fetterman is a good guy but a lot of old people in PA watch midday TV before lunch and I think they just see Dr. Oz as Oprah's nice doctor who made her eat a nutritious salad. 

[ElectionsGuy]

There are literally people in this thread saying even if this is accurate, it doesn't mean the poll is worth anything, because it's a "GOP poll" that's banned from 538. And it doesn't matter that Nate Silver and his preferred polls have overestimated Democrats significantly in every election since 2012. He's the supreme authority that we should all look up to.

[RussFeingoldWasRobbed]

There are literally people in this thread saying even if this is accurate, it doesn't mean the poll is worth anything, because it's a "GOP poll" that's banned from 538. And it doesn't matter that Nate Silver and his preferred polls have overestimated Democrats significantly in every election since 2012. He's the supreme authority that we should all look up to.

These people have learned nothing from past elections its pretty pathetic. I overestimated Ds in 2020 but you don't see me making the same hack predictions certain users are making now

[astrohuncho]

But as I said, in less than two weeks, we'll know who's right. Will it be a neutral or Democratic-leaning year, as many on this forum believe, or will it be a Republican-leaning or wave year?

Which will say absolutely nothing about the merits of this individual poll or pollster.

The results in a few weeks will be very revealing. As I said, if pollsters such as this one turn out to be more accurate than the pollsters lauded by many on this forum, people here will continue to act as they did before, and bash the pollsters they don't like. Conversely, if pollsters such as this one are wrong, then they are wrong, and ought to be regarded with the same kind of skepticism as some regard the others.

People on here claim that I am biased and I've become too invested in defending the legitimacy of polls. But they refuse to believe that they themselves are biased, and only trust the pollsters who generate the results which they desire. And they are more likely to express feelings of giddiness or hope if pollsters show a positive result for a Democratic candidate, even if such a result is unlikely or not that plausible.

Even if every Big Data poll released nailed the margins and vote share perfectly, that wouldn't prove that their polling methodology was statistically sound. Bluntly, it is possible to arrive at the "correct result" with absolutely terrible methodology.

Center Street has showed some ridiculous polls with Democrats doing far better than they should. If we learned that their method of "polling" was drawing numbers out of a hat and one of their ridiculous polls nailed the margin, would that justify their methodology as valid?

i'm fully convinced the purpose of "pollsters" like center street is to push up their favored candidates in polling averages. otherwise they'd only have ryan or fetterman up by 2 instead of 102

[Ferguson97]

There are literally people in this thread saying even if this is accurate, it doesn't mean the poll is worth anything, because it's a "GOP poll" that's banned from 538. And it doesn't matter that Nate Silver and his preferred polls have overestimated Democrats significantly in every election since 2012. He's the supreme authority that we should all look up to.

If a roll a die, it comes up 3, and then Oz wins by 3, that doesn't mean that my methodology of dice rolling was a sound way of determining who is winning the Pennsylvania Senate race.

[President Johnson]

There are literally people in this thread saying even if this is accurate, it doesn't mean the poll is worth anything, because it's a "GOP poll" that's banned from 538. And it doesn't matter that Nate Silver and his preferred polls have overestimated Democrats significantly in every election since 2012. He's the supreme authority that we should all look up to.

If a roll a die, it comes up 3, and then Oz wins by 3, that doesn't mean that my methodology of dice rolling was a sound way of determining who is winning the Pennsylvania Senate race.

I think it's impossible to convince ElectionsFuy of anything other than there's a zero chance Fetterman will win.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

There are literally people in this thread saying even if this is accurate, it doesn't mean the poll is worth anything, because it's a "GOP poll" that's banned from 538. And it doesn't matter that Nate Silver and his preferred polls have overestimated Democrats significantly in every election since 2012. He's the supreme authority that we should all look up to.

You're right. This was totally a top notch poll.