re: Trump approval is pretty good.

quote:

---

if you can't confidentally (and correctly) answer this question, polling science is WAYYYY out of your depth.

---

Because this is a message board and I don't have time to defend Rasmussen polling. Mark Mitchell does this on a regular basis, FWIW.

quote:

---

if you can't confidentally (and correctly) answer this question, polling science is WAYYYY out of your depth.

---

Apparently polling science is within your expertise, so why not substantially contribute to the board and teach us something?

I get the analogy.

But Mark Mitchell, since he's taken over Rasmussen, is constantly transparent on his YT channel and has built up a lot of public trust. I rarely see other pollsters as transparent as Mark Mitchell.

As long as a particular pollster is consistent with their mythology tracking trends can be dependable. Where they become undependable, IMO, is when they change methodology and do not notify the public.

With that said, going into elections about the best measure of a campaign is the RCP aggregate. At least the outliers get averaged out with this approach.

quote:

---

But Mark Mitchell, since he's taken over Rasmussen, is constantly transparent on his YT channel and has built up a lot of public trust. I rarely see other pollsters as transparent as Mark Mitchell.

---

I'm going to look into this, I'm legitimatley curious.

quote:

---

As long as a particular pollster is consistent with their mythology tracking trends can be dependable. Where they become undependable, IMO, is when they change methodology and do not notify the public.

---

Totally agreed.

quote:

---

With that said, going into elections about the best measure of a campaign is the RCP aggregate. At least the outliers get averaged out with this approach.

---

Agreed again!

quote:

---

This is meaningless unless you reference their entire body of work vs actual results. Picking a night or two out of a whole season when some guy shot the lights out doesn't mean he's a great shooter.

---

They have been pretty accurate for years on many different types of elections. Media Bias/Fact Check says they are Right-Center biased, but highly credible.
Before FiveThirtyEight stopped including Rasmussen in their analysis, they looked at over 770 of their polls and said they were 78% accurate. That's pretty damn high considering that FiveThirtyEight has left-center bias according to Media Bias/Fact Check.

So it wasn't just a guy getting hot on a certain night. Rasmussen is a consistent shooter.

quote:

---

quote:
There's also this. If it won't load, just go to the menu and pull up Trump's approval ratings. Rasmussen is an outlier.

Rasmussen was one of the the top 5 most accurate pollsters in the 2024 presidential election (and were one of the top ones in 2020 and 2016 as well).

The only other top 5 pollster I see that has had a job approval poll this month was the #2 most accurate pollster in the 2024 election (Insider Advantage...which I think may be teaming with Trafalgar, another top 5 pollster, for polling now). And Insider Advantage's poll showed a 55% job approval after Trump's visit to the Middle East.

There are a gazillion polls, but only a few seem to have been trustworthy in the last presidential election polling cycles.

---

But PansyFagger's fee fees say it's incorrect. So, he is dishing out some TDS cope. Nevermind that pussy.