JohnStOnge wrote:
It's the present because every time we see a poll come out the response is "well the polls were way off in the 2016 election."
I just saw Michael Caputo do that on CNN. In trying to dismiss the ABC News/Washington Post poll estimating Trump as being way underwater on the job approval front he said the ABC News/Washington Post poll was way off for the 2016 election.
But, actually, the last ABC News/Washington Post poll prior to the 2016 election had a point estimate of Clinton winning the popular vote by 4 percentage points and she actually won it by 2.1 percentage points. So, no, that poll was not "way off." The difference between the point estimate for margin and the actual margin was WELL within what one would expect.
This thing of people dismissing polling data because they think the polls were way off in 2016 is sheer ignorance. You're just kidding yourself if you do it.
People who keep focusing on the national popular vote is sheer ignorance. The vote that mattered was the swing state- and the swing state polls were off. Trump won 7 swing states, flipping 5 of them from blue to red (compared to 2012). And the polls in ALL 7 of them under polled Trump.
Trump won Florida by 1.2%, turning it from blue to red. The RCP avg had Trump up .2%, which = 1% off.
Trump won Pennsylvania by .7%, turning it from blue to red.The RCP avg had Clinton up 1.9%, which = 2.6% off.
Trump won North Carolina by 3.7%. The RCP avg had Trump up 1.0%, which = 2.7% off.
Trump won Michigan by .3%, turning it from blue to red. Yet the RCP avg had Clinton up by 3.4%, which = 3.7% off.
Trump won Ohio by 8.1%, turning it from blue to red. The RCP avg had Trump up 3.5%, which = 4.6% off.
Trump won Iowa by 9.5%. The RCP avg had Trump up 3.0%, which = 6.5% off.
Trump won Wisconsin by .7%, turning it from blue to red. Yet the RCP avg had Clinton up 6.5%, which = 7.2% off.