Scott Adams (who isn't right about everything but is interesting enough to follow), nailed this one. To shorten and paraphrase (massively) it's a financial feedback loop.
They manage their predictions for their buyers, who are the media. The more pleasing they are for those buyers - the more they sell. Accuracy has zero marketability.
But yes - their samplings are complete bunk. For how long they've been bunk, I suspect has been far longer than Trump's presidency. That's why 'trendlines' are the only indicator - if there's any.
Interestingly enough - apart from Rasmussen, only the LA Times 'seemed' to accurately track the 2016 election. They were pretty spot on the whole way.
Scott Adams (who isn't right about everything but is interesting enough to follow), nailed this one. To shorten and paraphrase (massively) it's a financial feedback loop.
They manage their predictions for their buyers, who are the media. The more pleasing they are for those buyers - the more they sell. Accuracy has zero marketability.
But yes - their samplings are complete bunk. For how long they've been bunk, I suspect has been far longer than Trump's presidency. That's why 'trendlines' are the only indicator - if there's any.
Interestingly enough - apart from Rasmussen, only the LA Times 'seemed' to accurately track the 2016 election. They were pretty spot on the whole way.
Im Not worried about the polls, I'm worried about Deep State winning via fraud and enough people buying the lie.
This is our future, and it could be a disaster