Trump Tweets About Phony Fox News
Here are the results of the Fox News Poll.
Interviews were conducted June 13-16, 2020 among a random national sample of 1,343 registered voters (RV). Landline (280) and cellphone (1,063) telephone numbers were randomly selected for inclusion in the survey using a probability proportionate to size method, which means phone numbers for each state are proportional to the number of voters in each state.
Results based on the full sample have a margin of sampling error of ± 2.5 percentage points.
The poll includes additional interviews (an oversample) of randomly selected black voters. These interviews were done to allow additional analysis of the subgroup and are weighted so they are not overrepresented in the overall national sample. The total 252 black sample is made up of 119 interviews as part of the base national sample and 133 oversample interviews.
Fox News does not conduct its own polls. Since 2011, The Fox News Poll is conducted under the joint direction of Beacon Research (D) (formerly known as Anderson Robbins Research) and Shaw & Company Research (R).
There is nothing remotely phony about the poll.
Fox News is rated A- by FiveThirtyEight.
ZeroHedge commented "The survey of 1,343 registered voters included an oversample of 252 black voters. Democrats were oversampled 46% vs. 40% Republicans. Of those, 40% said they were 'solid' Democrats vs. just 33% of Republicans who said the same."
So what? It is nearly impossible to get a demographic perfect mix. That is why all the pollsters normalize the polls.
Don’t Outguess or “Unskew” the Polls
FiveThirtyEight says Don’t Outguess or “Unskew” the Polls.
People who pick apart a poll by claiming it has, say, too many Democrats or too few black voters in its sample are generally wasting their time (and they usually have an agenda). Polls are almost always weighted to match their target population’s demographics, such as race and age. This doesn’t mean all pollsters assign weights in the same way, though, and there are practices like weighting by education on which the industry is split. Not weighting by education likely contributed to some of the most consequential polling errors of 2016, and many pollsters have now begun to factor education into their weighting, but others are still holding out. In an era when graduating from college has a significant bearing on white people’s political preferences, we recommend putting more stock in polls that weight by education than those that don’t. (On the other hand, weighting by partisanship, an idea that’s received some attention lately, is dicey and not something most pollsters do. That’s because party identification, unlike many demographic traits, is fluid, so setting it as a constant risks predetermining the poll’s outcome.)
Snapshots Not Predictions
Polls are snapshots, not predictions. Based on those snapshots, trump is clearly behind.
Didn't this happen in 2016?
Not really. The polls were all within the margin of error. A last second Charge by Comey Likely Tipped the Election.
Hillary Clinton would probably be president if FBI Director James Comey had not sent a letter to Congress on Oct. 28. The letter, which said the FBI had “learned of the existence of emails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation” into the private email server that Clinton used as secretary of state, upended the news cycle and soon halved Clinton’s lead in the polls, imperiling her position in the Electoral College.
Clinton’s decision to give paid speeches to investment banks, or her messaging on pocket-book issues, or the role that her gender played in the campaign — is hard to measure. The impact of Comey’s letter is comparatively easy to quantify, by contrast. At a maximum, it might have shifted the race by 3 or 4 percentage points toward Donald Trump, swinging Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Florida to him, perhaps along with North Carolina and Arizona. At a minimum, its impact might have been only a percentage point or so. Still, because Clinton lost Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin by less than 1 point, the letter was probably enough to change the outcome of the Electoral College.
Knowing the Unknowable
Many people congratulated themselves. I heard many comments like these.
- I knew Trump would win.
- I knew the polls were wrong.
Anyone making such claims is a fool or a charlatan. It is not possible to "know" such things.
The polls were not even "wrong" because they were within the margin of error.
Rather, people's interpretations of the polls were wrong.
Luck Not Knowledge
Those professing to "know" Trump would win got very, very lucky by Comey's letter.
Pollsters Want to be Right
Except for party sponsored polls, the pollsters want to get things right. That is how pollsters get business.
There is no reason pollsters for Fox News would ever deliver a "phony poll".
Trump is the Phony
Trump is the phony, Not Fox News.