Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Quote:

---

The trend is upward. By every conceivable measure.

---

Except the polls.

---

Quote:

---

His numbers are up.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

You're not telling me anything I don't know, regarding those numbers.

I don't know what you're trying to argue here.

His numbers are up. Not up to where they were back in March, but they're certainly up from where they were a month to a month and a half ago.

They went down too during the peak of the fake impeachment. Then they went back up again. We're witnessing it going back up again. To deny it is stupid. You're not looking at the trend. You're using an obscure way of manipulating the data, and I can't figure out to what end.


I get why Ted denies it. Why are you acting stupid?

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

You're not telling me anything I don't know, regarding those numbers.

I don't know what you're trying to argue here.

His numbers are up. Not up to where they were back in March, but they're certainly up from where they were a month to a month and a half ago.

They went down too during the peak of the fake impeachment. Then they went back up again. We're witnessing it going back up again. To deny it is stupid. You're not looking at the trend. You're using an obscure way of manipulating the data, and I can't figure out to what end.

I get why Ted denies it. Why are you acting stupid?

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

You're not telling me anything I don't know, regarding those numbers.

I don't know what you're trying to argue here.

His numbers are up. Not up to where they were back in March, but they're certainly up from where they were a month to a month and a half ago.

They went down too during the peak of the fake impeachment. Then they went back up again. We're witnessing it going back up again. To deny it is stupid. You're not looking at the trend. You're using an obscure way of manipulating the data, and I can't figure out to what end.

I get why Ted denies it. Why are you acting stupid?

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Quote:

---

His numbers are up.

---

Not according to YOUR metric - that one must look ONLY at within-poll results.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

There is plenty good to post today. You just don't want to hear it.

I'm not worried, buddy.

I can't wait until election night.

You're boy Joey better do whatever he can to keep the debates from happening, because it's going to be a slaughter.

Have a nice day.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

It's your not you're boy Joe. Your departure from the current state of affairs concerning Trump, can only be taken as a sign there is no good news out there. Also, I haven't seen any.

As for any debates he may have with Biden, remember, Biden will be dealing in facts and Trump in lies.

So, because of his lying and incompetence. Every time Trump has opened his mouth in the past few months, his polls go down. I see no way the debates benefit him.


tick tock


T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
I'll mention a minor technical error, based on how you composed your words. I noticed this when I first saw your post, when it was much smaller. I have not re-read the post after editing and expansion.

That 11.1% in the table you show, it is not an average of all of the other percentages in that column, which your sentences might imply. That would be an unweighted averaging. But that figure is from the gross total of all Approval responses from all of the polls, divided by the gross total of all of the responses from all of the polls. So an inaccurate/biased poll with more participants has greater weight than an accurate/unbiased poll with smaller sampling.

I might find something else when I check out the whole post.

---

I'm going to need you to be more specific, and how you would rather I word it.

The 11.1 is the SPREAD. Because the polls show a higher DISAPPROVE than APPROVE for Trump, the lower the SPREAD the better. The inverse would be true if his APPROVE were higher than his DISAPPROVE.

Just like the APPROVE and DISAPPROVE columns, the SPREAD is calculated by adding up all of the SPREAD(s) from the polls in the Aggregate, then dividing by how many polls were in the Aggregate.

ie: -6 +2 -18 -9 -11 -12 -12 -17 -12 -9 -18 = 122

122 / 11 (polls in the aggregate) = 11.0909090909 (to inifinity) or 11.1

On a side note, it seems that Ted is still oblivious to the point of this thread.

The polls are biased bullshit today, just as they were in 2016. Perhaps more so.

But that doesn't mean that they're still not useful when comparing them to themselves to find how things are TRENDING.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
I'll mention a minor technical error, based on how you composed your words. I noticed this when I first saw your post, when it was much smaller. I have not re-read the post after editing and expansion.

That 11.1% in the table you show, it is not an average of all of the other percentages in that column, which your sentences might imply. That would be an unweighted averaging. But that figure is from the gross total of all Approval responses from all of the polls, divided by the gross total of all of the responses from all of the polls. So an inaccurate/biased poll with more participants has greater weight than an accurate/unbiased poll with smaller sampling.

I might find something else when I check out the whole post.

---

I'm going to need you to be more specific, and how you would rather I word it.

The 11.1 is the SPREAD. Because the polls show a higher DISAPPROVE than APPROVE for Trump, the lower the SPREAD the better. The inverse would be true if his APPROVE were higher than his DISAPPROVE.

Just like the APPROVE and DISAPPROVE columns, the SPREAD is calculated by adding up all of the SPREAD(s) from the polls in the Aggregate, then dividing by how many polls were in the Aggregate.

ie: -6 +2 -18 -9 -11 -12 -12 -17 -12 -9 -18 = 122

122 / 11 (polls in the aggregate) = 11.0909090909 (to inifinity) or 11.1

On a side note, it seems that Ted is still oblivious to the point of this thread.

The polls are biased bullshit today, just as they were in 2016. Perhaps more so.

But that doesn't mean that they're still not useful when comparing them to themselves to find how things are TRENDING.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Hey, man, I screwed up, and also misspoke. Partly from being too sleepy on Friday night, and partly from not posting until Monday, after reading Friday.

You are correct about the spread. I knew that and understood it, but by the time I posted yesterday had forgotten which column was which and I incorrectly described the meanings.

Turns out that 11.1% really is unweighted, and is merely an average of the other figures in that column.
While looking at that, noticed that Politico was listed as a polling source, and also WaPo. How did they miss the DNC poll? Why skip the Soros poll as well?
With WaPo having the smallest sampling (probably only folk in CA and NYC) as well as the greatest outlier, it has equal weight as the poll with 3.5 times the sample.

Sorry to have wasted your time.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

There is plenty good to post today. You just don't want to hear it.

I'm not worried, buddy.

I can't wait until election night.

You're boy Joey better do whatever he can to keep the debates from happening, because it's going to be a slaughter.

Have a nice day.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

It's your not you're boy Joe.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

You're not telling me anything I don't know, regarding those numbers.


I don't know what you're trying to argue here.


Why are you acting stupid?

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

That Trumps numbers are still the same; dismal. And, that you know it or you'd still be posting the polls in this thread. You started this thread on 7/31. It is now 8/16, and Trumps numbers have not improved in the least.

Again, Trumps numbers have not improved at all.

Times a ticking...

T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The numbers are fine.

You'll see.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Really, show us.

T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

this was just a vote about weighing Trump against a set of standards, that would be one scenario.

But, in most people's minds, this is a CHOICE between TRUMP/(Pence) and Biden/(HARRIS), which is a completely different scenario.

This is a bit like 2016, when Trump was being weighed against Hillary. Hillary's 'basket of deplorables' (and the DNC's identity politics platform) made Trump look kinda' good.

---

Moron, this is about before Trump became president and now. Look at the polls. He's getting destroyed. Destroyed based on his record. I'll add, you said he was the best person for the job in 2016. Your creds are shit. Trumps fucked up and broke everything he has touched.

T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The numbers are fine.

You'll see.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
Moron, this is about before Trump became president and now. Look at the polls. He's getting destroyed. Destroyed based on his record.

---

Quote:

---

I'll add, you said he was the best person for the job in 2016. Your creds are shit.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Quote:

---

Originally posted:
Moron, this is about before Trump became president and now. Look at the polls. He's getting destroyed. Destroyed based on his record.

---

Well, if you live by the polls then you die by them.

CNN Poll of Polls: Biden's lead is narrowing
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/08/17/politics/biden-trump-poll-of-polls-
august-election/index.html

That's backed up by my scan of nearly a dozen betting sites and other polls.

Biden was a poor choice. Adding Harris on top was an extra helping of a poor choice.

Quote:

---

I'll add, you said he was the best person for the job in 2016. Your creds are shit.

---

NOPE. I never, ever, not once, posted that Trump was the best person for the job. Let me repeat: not ever.

I posted that I was going to vote for NOT THE DEMOCRAT. That covers a lot of people on the ballot who were NOT THE DEMOCRAT.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
^ Warmongering, NeoCon backed Lincoln Project.

He is leading in Rasmussen, which is an outlier compared to the contemporaries, true.

But it was the only one that was right in 2016, and is likely more reflective of the actual situation again in 2020.


So, you're right. He's not leading in the polls. But the polls are bullshit.

Tracking trending from bullshit polls is useful, however, and the point of this thread. And it's not looking good for Democrats.

Have a nice day.


Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
No they don't.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:
I have my own, very scientific polling method: I drive around the city to all the different neighborhoods and count the campaign signs. Doesn't matter, rich or not so rich, Biden leads by an 8 to 1 margin. Incredible really. And the number of angry signs, "Flush the White House" "Get rid of the Turd" "ByeDon" etc, also stands out. I have never seen any pres candidate more hated in my city ever, than Trump. I am encouraged by this.

But... drive outside the city, where less "sophisticated," more gullible voters live, and you will see the reverse.

So - toss up.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

He'll be fine.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:

I have my own, very scientific polling method: I drive around the city to all the different neighborhoods and count the campaign signs. Doesn't matter, rich or not so rich, Biden leads by an 8 to 1 margin. Incredible really. And the number of angry signs, "Flush the White House" "Get rid of the Turd" "ByeDon" etc, also stands out. I have never seen any pres candidate more hated in my city ever, than Trump. I am encouraged by this.

But... drive outside the city, where less "sophisticated," more gullible voters live, and you will see the reverse.

So - toss up.

---

Fuck your elitism.


There aren't any campaign signs around here at all. People around here aren't assholes like they are where you live.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

---

So tell me G. Do you see anyway after the election for Jack to be seen as anything but a troll? He’s all in when it comes to the hate ticket. All in when it comes to posting bullshit and denying facts. It's as clear as a glass of water who and what he is.

T

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:
So tell me G. Do you see anyway after the election for Jack to be seen as anything but a troll? He’s all in when it comes to the hate ticket. All in when it comes to posting bullshit and denying facts. It's as clear as a glass of water who and what he is.

---

This statement is only correct in the alternate timeline where you're right and Biden wins in November.

You'll be eating these words, and then we'll see who was dealing with facts and who was dealing in propaganda.



Do Right, Be Right. :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by captaincrunch:
I have my own, very scientific polling method: I drive around the city to all the different neighborhoods and count the campaign signs. Doesn't matter, rich or not so rich, Biden leads by an 8 to 1 margin. Incredible really. And the number of angry signs, "Flush the White House" "Get rid of the Turd" "ByeDon" etc, also stands out. I have never seen any pres candidate more hated in my city ever, than Trump. I am encouraged by this.

But... drive outside the city, where less "sophisticated," more gullible voters live, and you will see the reverse.

So - toss up.

---

Fuck your elitism.


There aren't any campaign signs around here at all. People around here aren't assholes like they are where you live.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:

So tell me G. Do you see anyway after the election for Jack to be seen as anything but a troll? He’s all in when it comes to the hate ticket. All in when it comes to posting bullshit and denying facts. It's as clear as a glass of water who and what he is.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by CAPTAINCRUNCH:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by THG:

So tell me G. Do you see anyway after the election for Jack to be seen as anything but a troll? He’s all in when it comes to the hate ticket. All in when it comes to posting bullshit and denying facts. It's as clear as a glass of water who and what he is.

---

He’s been reduced to a pull string dummy. He has about 6 responses for everything, pull string: “wait until Nov 4th.” Pull string: “Faggot” Pull string: “C*nt” Nothing to say, no discussion, runs from any challenge. As far as I’m concerned Jack has always been a troll, drunk or sober. He’s insulted everyone here except maybe Sig. What he gains by posting here? No idea.

---