so Obama was the designer who stole the grilles and fenders and side panels from other badges eh??
Boy we should have impeached him for his playing Raymond Lowey
Need a new thread; Will Trump go for Three Terms?
Wednesday, July 15, 2020
President Trump has jumped back into the race and now trails Joe Biden by just three points in Rasmussen Reports’ weekly White House Watch survey.
Rasmussen's polling in the 2000 and 2012 U.S. presidential elections has been criticized by polling watchers as highly inaccurate while the company's performance in the 2004 and 2008 presidential elections was credited for its accuracy. Some, including Patrick Caddell and Douglas Schoen, have lauded Rasmussen Reports while others, such as Chris Cillizza, have questioned its accuracy. FiveThirtyEight gives the firm a "C+" rating, reporting it had a 3.9 point bias in favor of Republican candidates in the 2010 midterm election. The company's frequent divergence from results reported by other polls has been attributed to its use of Likely Voters, rather than Registered Voters or All Adults, in its survey panels.
With Joe Biden claiming almost a double-digit lead in national polls, one question still seems to loom over the race: Can we trust the polls after 2016?
It’s a good question. But for now, it’s not as important as you might guess. If the election were held today, Mr. Biden would win the presidency, even if the polls were exactly as wrong as they were four years ago.
The reason is simple: His lead is far wider than Hillary Clinton’s was in the final polls, and large enough to withstand another 2016 polling meltdown.
[... ... ...]
Perhaps the biggest risk is one that has loomed over the polling industry for a decade: declining response rates to telephone surveys. Up until now, there has been little evidence that low response rates have endangered the accuracy of high-quality survey research. It turns out that the people who respond to telephone surveys appear to vote similarly to people from their same demographic group who do not respond.
But they are different in some ways. They are likelier to be volunteers. They are likelier to express trust in their neighbors and society. Such differences could become more significant, or grow into closer alignment with political views. In the worst-case scenario, declining trust in experts, the news media and polling could lead to systematic nonresponse bias, where even adjusting for education or demographics would be far from enough to ensure a representative sample.
There are reasons to doubt that this will happen. Only a few months ago, polls showed Mr. Trump highly competitive, and there is a fairly simple explanation for the turn against him: his handling of coronavirus. The trend against the president holds regardless of how the survey was conducted. Panel surveys, in which respondents are repeatedly contacted, also show former Trump supporters abandoning the president. And most surveys show the right number of respondents who say they voted for Mr. Trump in 2016. They’re just saying they won’t vote for him again. It would take an awfully targeted form of bias for polls to get the right number of 2016 Trump voters yet vastly overrepresent those who are leaving him.
Even so, you can imagine how it could, possibly, happen — such problems can’t be discounted. The problems even harder to discount are those that can’t be imagined.
Heh, I have no ilk.
Is that why you need a gun?
I fired a few when I was in the Territorials.
I know what they’re like and what they do.
You’re salivating again.