Real time Facebook presidential poll shows a completely different story than mainstream media polls

a reply to: knoxie


I don't know where you live ? If you live near Philly I can understand I live 3 hours away from there. I have 3 friends out of 58 friends on FB that are voting for Hillary and they happen to be gay/lesbian. I don't know anyone who is voting for her aside from them 3. Sorry

a reply to: starlitestarbrite

I think its a myth that PA is a Left/Democratic stronghold. I have kinfolks who live in Harrisburg and they tell me that Trump/Pence signs DOMINATE their neighborhood.

a reply to: starlitestarbrite
Those are impressive numbers. I am not sure if the dems can fake enough votes to make up for a large Trump margin.
Then again if you pick Trump on a polling machine and the machine picks Hillary instead, they may have a way to cheat out a win.

What many dems are denying is that the so-called scientific polls are only as good as the people reporting them.

We all know the mainstream media is bought and paid for by the dem party.
So if a dem controls a supposedly unbiased poll, the results can be tainted toward Hillary.

In simple form:

You poll 1,000 voters their choice.
600 pick Trump
400 pick Hillary.

You throw away 250 Trump votes and now your "official" released poll results say
750 people were polled and
400 picked Hillary
350 picked Trump

That is how easy it is to fake a poll.
It just depends on who is in charge of the results.

a reply to: starlitestarbrite


I live in Colorado, and I honestly don't know anyone voting for trump expect my father (who's from Pittsburgh), and I'm still hopeful he'll vote third party like my mom.

in our neighborhood there are two Clinton signs and two trump signs. most signs are for our congressman who's a democrat.

I asked a bunch of friends whom share the same ideological viewpoints as me on who they are voting
They are all voting who I am voting for.
Therefore, I conclude that the sweeping majority is voting for the person I am because my friends and collegues whom all share values close to mine also are...and if it goes heavily in the other direction, its clearly wrong and some mischief is up.


this seems logical.

Sorry, as much as I like the conclusion, it is not a valid poll.

The participants are self-selecting and thereby not a scientifically representative sample of likely voters.
However, a similar argument can be made with respect to polls held up by the media as definitive. They (ABC, CBS, Fox, Rasmussen, etc.) start out with a large sample of respondents to their survey. Then they select a subset of those individuals they think will actually turn out to vote. This could be as logical as those respondents who say they have always voted or as soft as those who say they are enthusiastic for their candidate/party. They then cull that subset to individuals based on past & current statistics of their choice. For example, there are more registered Democrats than Republicans so they bias their sample to include more Democrats. Similarly, women have turned out in greater numbers than men in past elections so they bias to more women in their sample. I’m not aware of any agreed standards in this area so a large part depends up their choice of these algorithmic coefficients. Which explains the large variance among the polls from what should be an accurate measure.

So, one would think the average of polls would give an accurate measure. Wrong, the greater the variance the more effect it has on an averages. The mean (middle) would be more valid a measure than the average but even that could be wrong if the sample is not representative. The new voters who have just registered for the first time are largely ignored. Similarly, those who refuse to participate in polls (like me) are not included.

This election will be about turn out, period. And then, how many of those who do turn out will base their decision on personalities or policies? Do they vote for the most corrupt political machine since Boss Tweed or the sketchy non-politician with no special interest ties? What difference, at this point, does it make whether Russia or a disgruntled NSA employee released her emails? Does any non-Republican care that she and her MSM partners refuse to “legitimize” the leaked emails even though their DKIM proves they are unaltered and certifiably from her people?

If you plan to vote for Hillary, please research the leaked emails you won’t hear about on the MSM and wait for the final shoe to drop before going to the voting booth.
a reply to: Rezlooper

a reply to: SaturnFX

I have over 1000 friends on Facebook. Family, old high school friends, current friends and co-workers etc. There is a huge mix of Democratic and Republicans among them. Yes, even some people in my family are Democrats. I even know of some Democrats that are voting for Trump. That shouldn't be a shocker. However, there are also some Republicans that are voting for Hillary. So it goes both ways. What I'm saying is, there a HUGE difference of opinion on this topic that goes beyond the friendly confines of this message board forum. Ask 10 different people of the same political beliefs the same question regarding it, and you'll probably get 10 different answers.

So no, at least for me, a lot of folks who share different political beliefs then me are voting for Trump. These are Democrats that have NEVER voted Republican in their entire lives.

There are some things that I've noticed about this election and those taking sides. One, the people for Hillary, the ones really supporting her and bashing Trump, are left wing oriented. Not your everyday democrats( like my parents) but the far left. And they also are older, some in their 70s and 80s. Not exactly people who get out all that much and are exposed to the alternative media. Very set in their ways and way more inclined to believe that the government is like it was 50 years ago. They're drawing a pension check or social security check and get their benefits. Are they facing what younger people are facing these days? Plus they're more loyal to the party than younger people of today.
Trump supporters are genuinely more enthusiastic about him, numbers wise. Neither candidate is well liked or respected, the majority are looking at them and shaking their heads. But Trump gets people at his rallies and Hillary doesn't. People realizing that the government broken are going to be far more likely to give Trump a chance than to believe Hillary will somehow make an effort to fix anything. Trolls are everywhere for Hillary. People bash Hillary for free, many bash Trump because they're getting paid to do it. Or ordered to. Still the Hillary bashers outnumber the Trump bashers. I also caught a weird reach out by the Hillary camp trying to fish for supporters anywhere they can. They keep hinting that Hillary will seek full disclosure on Aliens. That's laughable. She'd never do anything to rock the boat and cause unrest and she's so absorbed in making money and gaining power she probably doesn't give a rats ass about UFOs.
Anyway, just my 2 cents. BTW, are people seeing ANY Hillary/Kaine signs anywhere? I've seen one in three counties in Pa. Obama had 3 in 2012. Trump/Pence signs are all over the place.

originally posted by: Nucleardoom

originally posted by: introvert

If she wins this election I will be totally convinced that America has been hijacked by the Clinton Cabal and we are all friggin' doomed!

Because of a non-scientific poll conducted on facebook?

That makes no sense.

Non-scientific poll? Is that like the MSM polls that have consistently been proven to be oversampling democrats so the polls fit their narrative?

If it was to fit their narrative they would put Trump in the lead to make the democrat go out and vote. If, like some of you think, the polls are riged, by putting Clinton in the lead, it means the MSM are for trump since he is shown behind (which is not the case). We all know that when someone have a large lead, all it does is making the supporter vote less since you beleive its allready won. So all to all, to me, all that FB poll show me is that Trump supporter are the loudest. And we all know: "the loudest you yap, the smallest .... you have"

CQFD

Great post!

a reply to: Gin

I once taught polling and statistics and methods. two thoughts. the act of voting is "self selection bias" just as is clicking trump or hillary on a facebook poll.
Now, having actually taught and constructed random sampling procedures, there are multiple pitfalls in generalizing from your random sample of potential voters to the actual population of voters who show up and push the button.
For example, some people deliberately deceive pollers.
I know one.

originally posted by: Bloodydagger
a reply to: SaturnFX

I have over 1000 friends on Facebook. Family, old high school friends, current friends and co-workers etc.

I am an old man (40) and so who I am generally surrounded with in the deep south here are trump supporters.
but
I have good genes (with a bit of prep I can pass for much younger) and my 26y niece is like my sister. She and her fiance are constantly asking me to go out with them, and they have a very wide circle of friends (you know the type..tons of hipster girls and muscle dudes all past their teens but still obnoxiously young) and they are all anti-trump simply because its the in thing.
They dont participate in online polling or any of that nonsense, they aren't locked behind a keyboard because they are typically having one of those stupid social lives.
If I went by stay at home moms and dads that stopped participating in normal social society, sure. it would be a Trump landslide. Thing is, online political activities are most done by old grumps like me, and teens who can't go out past 10 so will yammer on about stuff that is a bit above their knowledge base...the rest are watching netflix during the week and out socializing on the weekend, with occasional visits to snapchat and facebook to discuss trivial issues.

I am trying to spread the good word about how there are 3rd party candidates and you dont need to vote for the lesser demon...nobody listens, nobody cares enough tbh, and frankly they may be right. house/senate can keep a potus in check if they get too crazy.

a reply to: [post=21428086]MiloTheMarauder[/oops! looks like the fbi has reopened the hillary email investigation. you should give up betting. I mean, really, hillary winning? it was obvious before this happened that trump will win by a landslide.

originally posted by: spiritualarchitect
What many dems are denying is that the so-called scientific polls are only as good as the people reporting them.

We all know the mainstream media is bought and paid for by the dem party.
So if a dem controls a supposedly unbiased poll, the results can be tainted toward Hillary.

In simple form:

You poll 1,000 voters their choice.
600 pick Trump
400 pick Hillary.

You throw away 250 Trump votes and now your "official" released poll results say
750 people were polled and
400 picked Hillary
350 picked Trump

That is how easy it is to fake a poll.
It just depends on who is in charge of the results.

Remember all the talk of poll trickery when Romney ran? Remember how there was an actual website purporting to have only unbiased polls that always showed Romney winning?

All this poll trickery people keep going on about... it's not real.

a reply to: SaturnFX

Come on, let's not start calling 40 old. I am 39 and don't want to think I am old.

originally posted by: HarrryHendew
a reply to: SaturnFX

Come on, let's not start calling 40 old. I am 39 and don't want to think I am old.

That hill that we both went over is 10 years ago.
Enjoy your walker, grandpaps

a reply to: Rezlooper


This Facebook poll is hugely biased to hit a blue state population.

If someone from the inner city does the same type of poll and shows
Hillary doing poorly compared to MSM polls, then I'll be interested.
If Hillary loses a significant percentage of black voters, she's toast.

Recently I talked to an elderly educated black man. He was a enthusiastic about HRC last
summer. He didn't want to talk about her.

originally posted by: Bloodydagger
a reply to: Rezlooper

People can laugh about Facebook and Social Media all they want, but the fact of the matter is that Facebook is where a LARGE LARGE majority of the people are these days to get their daily news and whatnot. Its mega-popular. I think the fact that Trump crushes Hillary in followers and likes etc needs to be looked at a lot more closely.

FACT: SOCIAL MEDIA IS WHERE THE PEOPLE ARE NOW. So disbelievers need to get out of their caves and throw their stone tools away and get with the damn times.

We even saw questions taken from Facebook during some of these debates during these campaigns. So the MSM even deems Social Media to be vital and important enough to do that.

If Trump does somehow manage to surprise us and win, then we have a whole new way of gauging things going forward. It just means the old ways aren't accurate anymore due to people getting away from the antiquated old way and have found a new way. Things change. Deal with it.

Dear Lord, where does it go?

Polls can be very wrong, you only have to look at the last 2 major votes in the UK. The 2015 general election polls suggested a very tight contest that would mean a coalition would have been the only way of progressing. (Yet the Conservatives got a majority)
We then had the referendum on the EU and polls for that swung wildly with remain take 6%-10% leads in the last few days, even the exit polls showed a remain win by a comfortable margin.
Yet both of those votes went against the MSM polls. (And both went against the bookies odds)

A poll is just a snapshot of a very small percentage of a population, until votes start coming in it is all just a bit of educated guess work. Yes they try to get a wide range of demographics in these polls but sometimes people are unwilling to admit they are voting a certain way.