ABC NewsWhat source are you looking at?
If you add those all up you get a sample of 33,000. That has a margin of error of c. 0.6% and Biden's lead is 2.6%. Biden looks a really good bet here at 2.4 but as I mentioned before I face PTD syndrome. I don't want to be losing money when suffering from Post Trump Depression.Thanks - sorry should have spotted it in the list -
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/florida/ - I was only looking at yesterday's newly added. It's a slight outlier but to be honest, they are all pretty much within the margin of error
If you add those all up you get a sample of 33,000. That has a margin of error of c. 0.6% and Biden's lead is 2.6%. Biden looks a really good bet here at 2.4 but as I mentioned before I face PTD syndrome. I don't want to be losing money when suffering from Post Trump Depression.
I am sure I have over simplified the situation. But certainly if say two sources conduct the same sort of poll at the same sort of time with say samples of 1,000 you can add them together to get the result of a sample of 2,000, provided that the samples do not overlap. 1,000 is a typical sample size (moe 3%) out of say an electorate of over 10 million so the possibility of overlap can be ignored. If the sources use different methodologies that might invalidate the simple statistical aggregation, but I think we still would get a good approximation.Lol.
I don't think you can aggregate polls quite that simply. I'm not expert enough on polling technicals but as far as I know each poll is distinct event from a statistical point of view. I don't think you can aggregate them to get a tighter margin of error. Also each polling company have their own proprietary modelling which will adjust for various factors such as education, liklihood to vote, history, demographics etc etc. I don't think aggregating tightens the margin of error - it might do the opposite. But - there may be others on here (or you?) who are better equipped to say.
I kow what 538 do is to capture all polling data and feed that into a more complex model which looks at other factors such as correlation between states, swings and even time to election and then run multiple scenarios - which gives them % liklihood of outcomes.
I would have thought that 'silent' voters would be more likely to vote Trump by a considerable margin? That would be my perception anyway.
In fairness, credit where credit is due, Biden has handled himself quite well over this campaign.
Glad you cleared that up, but do you think he will win?Between debates and performances he deserves to win, and I hope he does.
I think Purple is the only other tipping a Trump win.Wolfie last Wednesday said:My gut instinct is that Trump will win again.
Glad you cleared that up, but do you think he will win?
I really hope he doesn't but the advantage of being a pessimist is that one can only be pleasantly surprised.I think Purple is the only other tipping a Trump win.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?