By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Chrkeller on 27 July 2019
Edit Thread
Immersiveunreality said:
Chrkeller said:

You simply don't understand statistical modeling.  For the record I am an analytical chemist who does statistics on a regular basis.  Margin of error is plus AND minus, not plus or minus.  Meaning error is suppose to be random, not directional in a singular sense.  As an example if my specification is 8-12, with a target of 10; and I run multiple batches and come up with 11.2, 11.9, 10.9, 11.8, 11.1..  yes I am in specification.  But my error isn't random, it is systematic, which brings into question the accuracy of my model.  Being within error does not equate to the predicted mean being accurate.  But hey, I won't argue with you over this.  Believe what you want.

In practically all 11 battle states Trump scored systematically better than he was suppose to.  Being within error doesn't negate systematic error within the true mean.  

But arent substances and matter more "static" in the form you use statistics to them?

I mean when you do statistics involving the ever fluctuating human mental mindset then you could say there is a bit randomness involved and that it is something able to be "manipulated" or be badly implemented also no?

Error should be randomly distributed across the sample mean, regardless of what data is being collected.  The only difference between physical data collection and consumer perception data is the range of the error.  

Making up an example, but a poll has Trump at 45% +/- 3%.  If I were measuring something my margin of error would be 45 ppm +/- 0.3 ppm.  Both should have distribution around the sample mean, one simply has a tighter range.  But the error should be random in both cases.  

Edit

It is my opinion one of two things occurred during polling in 2016.

1) those executing the panels didn't do a great job at sample selection, and those polled did not accurately represent the general population

2) those being polled weren't comfortable admitting they were voting for trump, thus the data collected had inherent bias from misleading feedback

Or maybe a bit of both happened.  For clarity I don't think the polls were awful and as misleading as some make it out to be.  But I also think there were clearly issues and we can do better.  

  

Last edited by Chrkeller - on 27 July 2019