Trump up 1%!

Trump up 1%!

longroom.com/polls/

Longroom takes all the of the polls and unskews them by adjusting each poll based on the bias of the poll taking organization. That could be an oversampling of democrats, small sampling sizes, etc.

HillShills ETERNALLY BTFO

Other urls found in this thread:

strawpoll.me/10938061
longroom.com/polls/methodology/
m.youtube.com/watch?v=NNfWC4Sgkcs
youtube.com/watch?v=eVTXPUF4Oz4
m.youtube.com/watch?v=kZwhNFOn4ik
youtube.com/watch?v=E1lJ3tfQFpc
youtube.com/watch?v=J-puQoMeTRo
qu.edu/images/polling/ps/sfl07132016_demos_Smba72th.pdf
realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html
youtube.com/watch?v=XLf63B1R5aY
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

HOLY SHIT.
NATSOC AWAKENS!
strawpoll.me/10938061

(((unskewed polls)))

>Longroom

You Trumpniggers are retarded.

>p-polls don't mean anything
>only CTR shills post polls
>>finds the one poll in existence which shows Trump leading
>HOLY SHIT HILLARY BTFO
Thanks for Correcting Trump's Record, you earn one hole on your punch card, only 4 more and you get a free MAGA hat!

Daily reminder that long rooms methodology has predicted ever presidential election correctly that the midea has been applied to, so shills discrediting it are, well, shills

>The one poll in existence

HillShills are literally retarded, THIS IS EVERY FUCKING POLL CONDUCTED BY EVERY FUCKING ORGANIZATION, NOT A SINGLE POLL YOU FUCKING MORONIC FUCKSHITS

Just accept it. You are staring into the eyes of your next President.

>TFW CTR kept spamming constantly for a week that Khan the Cuck was the "end of Trump's capaign"

Anyone who ever fell for these fake polls is a legit retard

Trump's voter base would never turn its back on him just because some Sharia law loving sandnigger got pissy about him

>delusion
JUST

>unskews

Where's the rest of it?

>website created in 2015
>THEY PREDICTED THE LAST 3 ELECTIONS IN A 0.000003% range THEY ARE LEGIT !!! TRUMP IS AHEAD

>oct. 15th

Longroom predicted Obama would beat Romney retard shill faggot.

Liar disingenuous fuck just look at the website instead of getting your 2 cents faggot fuckhead

>no posts prior than 3 months ago
>NO REALLY GUISE THEY PICKED THE LAST 6 GORILLION ELECTIONS

So does Helmut Norpoth, a political science professor at Stony Brook University. He has correctly predicted each election since 1996. His forecast: 87% chance of a Trump victory.

Proof or gtfo

longroom didn't exist in 2012, they didn't shit

that's a fact btw

What is the retroactive application of a model? Every model does this as a means of validation. Stop showing your lack of a real education.

Hurr why was the only job I could get at CTR? Because your brain doesn't work correctly retard

>still shilling this shit website

How much money do they make off of ads? This site debunks itself. If you read this and still think they're not full of shit then you are dumb as fuck.

longroom.com/polls/methodology/

...

Do you personally own this website ?
Stop shilling your shitty website and get a real job.

There are more registered Dems. I'm fine unskewing but not so it's 50/50

Tho lots of people register Dem young and never bother to change it even if they shift

Go to the fucking website and read like one sentence you mouth breathing mook. It is literally not my job to educate you shitlord

>I'm in a huge hurry to show the whole board im too dumb to breathe!
Good on ya.

Their methodology is a fucking paragraph, which is to say no methodology at all.

fuck off trump shill you earned enough rubbles today!

>Twitter account made in January
>Website records dating back to January.

shills on suicide watch, look at them squirming itt kek

>MY AUTISM TRIGGERED REEEEEEEEEEEE

You wouldn't know a polling methodology if it dickslapped you in the face

Seems like you're pushing skewed polls. Here, I'll give you more accurate, recent data:

m.youtube.com/watch?v=NNfWC4Sgkcs

HOLY SHIOT ITS FUKING HAPPENING 77777777777777

This.. this is really sad :(

Seek help, friends

>If you read this and still think they're not full of shit then you are dumb as fuck.
Naw, if you think that this website is any more or less a definitive answer than any CNN or FOX poll, then you're dumb as fuck. Their methodology makes sense, but it seems like a heavy-handed assertion.

youtube.com/watch?v=eVTXPUF4Oz4

I'm sure you can explain why it's inaccurate then since you're so intelligent and not a shill.

Don't say that it oversamples Republicans or makes it 50/50 bc that would strongly imply you didn't read the methodology

m.youtube.com/watch?v=kZwhNFOn4ik

>literally

>trumpies are in this much denial

Uh-huh.

youtube.com/watch?v=E1lJ3tfQFpc

Shills are stumped so hard when asked to explain specifically what is wrong with the method.

Their two lies are that it makes the Democrat Republican split half and half and that retroactive method validation is somehow disingenuous rather than a rigorous practice.

Don't let them spread their bullshit

"unskewed" means skewed in my preferred direction

>Citing a comedy show

Why is it that millennials prefer to collect opinions and "data" from comedy shows with personal agendas?

...

As much as I want Trump to win, I can't help but express despair at the fact that all mainstream polling agencies are reporting Hillary as the leader. Not because I believe that means she'll win, but because I know that people like to vote for who they think the winner will be, and I'm sure that this is all part of Hillary's plan to finally defeat Trump.

It's funny. Hillary beats Trump not by meeting him head on and beating him the traditional way, but by paying a bunch of companies to SAY she's winning and shrinking debate coverage so no one actually gets to see her try to go toe-to-toe with Trump. It's a cowardly thing to do, but it's the sad state of American politics. We're all too lazy to vote for who we think should win, so we vote if we think our choice WILL win.

If that were the case wouldn't every poll have trump winning?

youtube.com/watch?v=J-puQoMeTRo

Not my job to educate you shitlord.

This is what an example of describing weights in a sample looks like:

qu.edu/images/polling/ps/sfl07132016_demos_Smba72th.pdf

Note the MoEs. Note specific sampling information.

You can't just say "hurr durr we know what the breakdown should be so we will just REweight everything and steal points from blue to give to red. Also we will claim past success by retroactivity modeling past elections when the results were already known even though we have only existed for months."

That's fucking x-tier garbage, just like you. Its even MORE shit than unskewed polls because they had the benefit of ignorance. You're just DELIBERATELY IGNORING THE SAME LOGICAL ERRORS THEY MADE.

I hope you're using the term "shitlord" ironically.

See

>all the hill shills ITT
it's sunday wtf are you niggers doing
get a gf or something

Remember that pol is satire

This is why I put a bet on at the bookies for Trump to win.

>I don't like your polls they say mean things about my retarded orange nigger candidate
>Nanana I can't hear you look at this other completely made up poll I just made up myself saying I win and you lose!

Remind me how trump kins aren't just as retarded as SJW again?

>p-polls are biased, here we have the real ones! they totally aren't just made up numbers to make us feel good

did I time travel to 2012?

>Thinks Sup Forums is satire

yeah m8 longroom's definitely unbiased

is this a shill poll site
rolling fer dubz

>we totally just didn't make up a number close to the real one to make all the trumptards think our "methodology" works

This whole rant makes no sense considering a) I'm not a millenial and you probably are, and b) It was a direct video of FOX news on election night.

>Is one of the summer tards who think Sup Forums is real.

They took their current methodology and used it on the numbers for the past elections and it worked... Fucking idiot French rapefugee

We'll see soon enough shill.

>Sup Forums has to find the most obscure poll to keep their hopes of a Trump Presidency up

pathetic. no really.

you trumpcucks are really getting desperate....

That's not even impressive, what's impressive is actually predicting what will be, not what was. Anyone can say, "In 2012 I said Obama would beat Romney by 3.8% & Obama beat him by 3.9% I am the next Nate Silver"

>longroom.com

Let the media continue to shove bullshit pro-Hillary polls down our throats, all they're going to accomplish is giving an already apathetic voting base even more of a reason to stay gold home.

The silent majority are going to show up in unprecedented numbers, regardless of what the polls say.

Also, if Trump is (((polling))) anywhere near Hillary going into the debates then he's going to win, and win BIG.

B-but I was told he was stumped THE ABSOLUTE MADMAN!!!

>unskewed polls

sure bud.

Talk about trumped up polls... no bueno.

are those (((adjusted))) polls?

Hillary's adjusted polls are unbiased because the mainstream media puts them in the news :^)

>shitlord

...and back to r.eddit you go

>unskews
that's not how it works
that's not how any of this works

Wow, impressive, that must have taken hours of cherry-picking.

Reality:
realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

>Dumb burger who thinks Sup Forums is one person

That's not the point...

>Longroom


AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHA

A. Fucking. Leaf.

...

CTR shill detected

Yes let's continue bumping the thread shall we

>Still haven't included the last several days of polling in their rolling average
>their methodology is shit in the first place
2012 Results
>Obama 51.1%
>Romney 47.2%

LongRoom
>Obama 48.5%
Off by 2.6%
>Romney 44.7%
Off by 2.5%

RCP
>Obama 48.8%
Off by 2.3%
>Romney 48.1%
Off by .9%

2008 Results
>Obama 52.9%
>McCain 45.6%

LongRoom
>Obama 50.2%
Off by 2.7%
>McCain 43.1%
Off by 2.5%

RCP
>Obama 52.1%
Off by .8%
>McCain 44.5%
Off by 1.1%

2004 Results
>Bush 50.7%
>Kerry 48.3%

LongRoom
>Bush 48.9%
Off by 1.8%
>Kerry 46.2%
Off by 2.1%

RCP
>Bush 48.9%
Off by 1.8%
>Kerry 47.4%
Off by .9%

Applying LongRoom's "unbiasing" to the polls in 2004, 2008, and 2012 makes them on average 82% less reliable than had they done literally nothing and just used the raw poll data like RCP.

Sounds like that dumb black kid in that debate.
> White live don't matter cus cus white people ain't real.

Dear Mr Trump, OP was a real working bee today. We were about to promote him to a lvl 2 shill, but he said he prefered title of the wizard. This is freaking cringey

>THIS much damage control

My problem with polls is that they can't accurately predict electoral college votes

...

youtube.com/watch?v=XLf63B1R5aY

Damage control would imply damage, m8.

Oh god it's the "unskew" faggot again.

$0.02

Are you comfortable with a Transgender person in your bathroom?
Why do people want this? I would rather shit on a girls chest than shake hands with a transvestite.

Are you serious? look at your own numbers in a non-retard way

2012 results
>Obama +3.9%

LongRoom
>Obama +3.8%

2008 Results
>Obama +7.3%

LongRoom
>Obama +7.1%

2004 Results
>Bush +2.4%

LongRoom
>Bush +2.7%

>unskews them by adjusting each poll based on the bias of the poll taking organization

I can't handle all this science.

>an aggregate of biased agenda polls is accurate
Not how it works.

>unskews them

oh god here we go again

Cut out the socialist part and yes.