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

    declare that this is a given structural bias and that it will always exist

    You just lack reading comprehension.

    The quote is:

    best most recent structural bias measurement

    The previous comments said, “the best most recent estimate of structural bias”, which was Trump v Biden 2020. Its the best because its not a simulation or modeling. Its two measured values. I’ve seen simulations and statistical models to estimate things like structural bias, but none of them are as good as a measurement. We should use the measurement.

    I get it. You’ve got an axe to grind. And at this point you might be better off inside a warm fantastic cocoon where Harris is crushing it and is going to win FL and TX. It might be the last light of joy you get to experience.

    • usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      16 hours ago

      My response was more so to the “you don’t get to ‘wish’” part. It could go the same way, it could not. It’s not consistent year to year. Assuming it is when long term data does not support that, isn’t helpful

      Over the long term, there is no meaningful partisan statistical bias in polling. All the polls in our data set combine for a weighted average statistical bias of 0.3 points toward Democrats. Individual election cycles can have more significant biases — and, importantly, it usually runs in the same direction for every office — but there is no pattern from year to year

      https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/weve-updated-our-pollster-ratings-ahead-of-the-2020-general-election/

      No where am I claiming that Harris definitely will necessarily be underestimated, I am saying it is possible. Or perhaps even just underestimated by less. Dismissing the possibility out of hand by N=1 is what I am responding to