Gluten-free Seitan: And partially indicated that in 2022, which was not reflected in 2022 actual voting. But I think the traditional method is to calibrate to election results, and they probably are trying.

does this sound like a plausible theory of the electorate to you

Biden loses youth and Hispanic vote outright in that poll

sure! why not!

1500 shut-ins we had to call 190,000 times can't be wrong and must be representative.

We can just weight it! You can weight your way out of anything!

you can reweight this stuff if you assume that the people who are not responding to the calls are uncorrelated with their polling answers. but if it's correlated, then you're measuring your instrument, not the thing you're measuring. i don't know how you fix that with phone polls.

like "how can we measure this correlation?" "well, first we conduct another phone poll of the people who didn't respond to our phone polls"

I'm being 100% serious here. Scientists have to deal with systematics in their instrumentation all the time. This is what instrument calibration is. I have literally no idea how you can calibrate correlations in polling non-responses by conducting another poll.

Polls are often compared to election results, but right now that method would indicate problems, not confidence.

right, like "our poll is showing a generational realignment in voting preferences in a way counter to anything like basic logic"

And partially indicated that in 2022, which was not reflected in 2022 actual voting. But I think the traditional method is to calibrate to election results, and they probably are trying.

Post