He’s had yet another horrible week. The old tricks aren’t working. Kamala Harris does not fear him. And it’s showing in the numbers.

  • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Even then, the error % on polls is high enough that Trump could be ahead instead.

    Polls post their calculated error %. If they could be off by like 5% in either direction, then that’s what they say. And if the poll shows Trump losing by 2%, with a 5% error, that means Trump could win by 3%.

    Every single reputable poll that has been published shows a Trump victory within the margin of error.

      • Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        No, they just don’t have to poll massive groups, surprisingly small groups work well enough for polling.

        • hate2bme@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          3 months ago

          Well they didn’t prove shit when they said Hillary was gonna win. Just gonna say I’m not ever gonna trust one.

          • Bernie_Sandals@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            3 months ago

            Almost every poll had him winning within the margin of error, 2016 was never certain, just like this election isn’t.

          • zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            3 months ago

            Polls are all about probability. They can’t predict the future. So, even though Hillary was likely to win, there was still a chance that Trump could win. Does this mean that polls are useless? No, because knowing the popularity of your candidate relative to the other candidates is important information.