Guess which one is a co-operative effort of ABC News and the Washington Post.
Which led Zero Hedge to conclude the fix is in:
Of course, like many of the recent polls from the likes of Reuters, ABC and The Washington Post, something curious emerges when you look just beneath the surface of the headline 12-point lead.
"METHODOLOGY – This ABC News poll was conducted by landline and cellular telephone Oct. 20-22, 2016, in English and Spanish, among a random national sample of 874 likely voters. Results have a margin of sampling error of 3.5 points, including the design effect. Partisan divisions are 36-27-31 percent, Democrats -- Republicans --Independents."
As we've pointed out numerous times in the past, in response to Reuters' efforts to "tweak" their polls, per the The Pew Research Center, at least since 1992, Democrats have never enjoyed a 9-point registration gap despite the folks at ABC and The Washington Post somehow convincing themselves it was a reasonable margin.Aha!
Proof positive of slanting the statistics.
Except it isn't.
The Investor's Business Daily poll that shows Trump up by 2 noted this: "The poll results include responses from 783 likely voters, with a weighted partisan breakdown of 282 Democrats, 226 Republicans, and 259 Independents. The results reflect the rolling average of six days' worth of polling, with a margin of error of +/- 3.6 percentage points."
That breakdown by percentage is 36-29-35. A 7-point Democratic advantage.
Same model + same method = different result?
Instead of trying to second guess the polls, readers should accept that polls are not science. If they were, people using the same methodology would not reach different results, especially ones that fall outside the margin of error. It would be like weighing Hillary with the same scale and coming up with answers of 170 pounds and 223 pounds on the same day.
We have known the polls are off for some time.
Four years ago, the polls listed on the Real Clear Politics Average predicted one day before the election that Obama would squeak out a 0.7 percent win.
Obama won by 3.9, which was outside the margin of error for random-digit dial surveys, which are the cottage industry's standard.
The only logical conclusion is that the polls are wrong. All of them, because the methods used are the same and the results vary beyond the margin of error. Some polls may have the exact outcome on Election Day, but that will not be by design but rather by the stroke of luck. Averaging polls is an exercise in futility popularized by Nate Silver, who got skunked in the nomination process so bad that he had to apologize to readers.
Read the polls. In arguments, cite the ones that agree with you. But vote on Election Day and see what actually happens.
Hate Nate? In "Trump the Press," I devoted a chapter to him and his erroneous forecasts. The book is a fun romp through the Republican nomination that uses the deadliest weapon to skewer the media experts: their own words. "Trump the Press" is available as a paperback, and on Kindle.