• jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    OK, here we go, so of the 22 PA polls currently up on 538:

    Not red wave: 6

    The New York Times/Siena College
    InsiderAdvantage
    Emerson College
    Quinnipiac University
    YouGov/Center for Working Class Politics

    Just Bad polling: 3

    Redfield & Wilton Strategies
    Research Co.
    Hunt Research
    OnMessage

    Red Wave: 2

    TIPP Insights - flooded the channel with 4 polls, but the polls split 50/50 with Harris showing a larger margin on her two than Trump did on his two.

    Fabrizio, Lee & Associates/McLaughlin & Ass. - McLaughlin being Trump’s preferred pollster.

    Fabrizio, Lee & Associates/GBAO - While Fabrizio is a Red Wave pollster, GBAO is not. Both polls show Trump up so it’s likely GBAO is just a beard here.

    So of the 22 polls, 7 are run by clearly red biased pollsters. I wouldn’t call 31.8% a “flood”, it’s about in line with MAGA support in the general population.

    6 are run by just questionable sources, I wasn’t able to determine bias other than “bad at their job” bias. Results seem evenly split, 2 Harris, 2 Trump, 2 tied.

    Which leaves 9/22 run by unbiased, quality sources.

    • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      16 days ago

      Ok, so I’m just scrolling through the most recent polls and picking out numbers based on this. I’m just going to grab the most recent numbers from Silver Bulletin. I’ll grab the latest, most recent number for a given pollster, Harris & Trump only.

      Not red wave: 6

      The New York Times/Siena College

      Harris/ Trump:

      44%/ 49% (but also, I’m not sure whats going on with the repeat entries on this poll…)

      InsiderAdvantage

      Not in Nate Silvers database, cant find in 538’s either, different name?

      Emerson College

      Harris/ Trump:

      50.2%/ 48.6%

      Fabrizio, Lee & Associates/GBAO - While Fabrizio is a Red Wave pollster, GBAO is not.

      Harris/ Trump:

      45%/ 50%

      Quinnipiac University

      Harris/ Trump:

      47%/ 49%

      YouGov/Center for Working Class Politics

      Harris/ Trump:

      51%/ 48%

      Just Bad polling: 3

      Redfield & Wilton Strategies

      Harris/ Trump:

      46%/ 48%

      Research Co.

      Harris/ Trump:

      49%/ 45%

      Hunt research:

      47%/ 47%

      OnMessage:

      Can’t find in either database.

      Red Wave (2):

      TIPP Insights

      Harris/ Trump:

      48%/ 49%

      McLaughlin

      Harris/ Trump:

      48%/ 49%

      Doing the quick stats…

      Not Red Wave Polls:

      Mean:
          Harris: 47.44%
          Trump: 48.92%
      Standard Deviation:
          Harris: 3.09%
          Trump: 0.73%
      

      Just Bad Polling:

      Mean:
          Harris: 47.33%
          Trump: 46.67%
      Standard Deviation:
          Harris: 1.53%
          Trump: 1.53%
      

      Red Wave Polls:

      Mean:
          Harris: 48.0%
          Trump: 49.0%
      Standard Deviation:
          Harris: 0.0%
          Trump: 0.0%
      

      The Red Wave polls and the Not Rave polls are in good agreement. These polls are all with each others MOE, and would fail a t-test.

      Harris:

      t-statistic: -0.405
      p-value: 0.706
      

      Trump:

      t-statistic: -0.245
      p-value: 0.818
      

      Both p-values are significantly higher than 0.05, indicating that there is no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of Harris and Trump percentages.

      The article is wrong. Unless it meant to say that Times/ Sienna is a “Red Wave” pollster, this an article targeted towards Blue MAGA to give them something they want to hear.

      [Fuck, I’m annoyed. I did this for national, not PA.]

      Annoyed so I just made a generalized analysis for everystate:

      Codeshare link: https://codeshare.io/ONzAZ0

      PA results:

      No significant differences. 95% confidence intervals in the shaded area.