Short answer: No Long answer: Ask Hillary LMAO

The best poll will be on November 3rd....oh, and it’s free.

0:17 A poll to see if polls are accurate haha

When your Legit first piece of information to see how accurate polls are is a poll about polls.

The only poll that matters is the ballot box on election day.

Pollster industry will be dead after this election, if Trump wins - Frank Lutz. I agree with you Frank and time to look for another job.

Polls are meant to ~shape~ people’s opinions NOT reflect them

I trust Polish people more than political polls and I don't even know anyone from Poland.

Not true. I voted for Mr. Poll last Tuesday.

Ask Hillary

Nope, with them saying Biden leads Texas.😂🤣😭😂🤣 was all the proof I needed to confirm my suspicions.

0:14. A poll of a polls!!! Ha ha ha ha! :D

Before watching. No.

We will find out in 8 days...

4:50 the revenues are not listed in order, but are talked about as if they are

We finally see how untrustworthy the Media is.

Doesn’t even talk about if they are trustworthy just talks about polling. Misleading title

When do these polls happen I never got polled by these so called accurate result givers

Sure but they influence voters to go vote harder or relax changing the next poll and the election outcome

I don't trust anyone or anything. It's too dangerous to trust these days.

Where do they get there sample size from? Never been poll in my life and neither has my family and friends.

Short answer: No

I have a lot of friends and family members in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin who say their voting for Biden when pollsters call them but all of them are voting for President Trump.

The answer is no. If you look at 2020 elections counts and drill down to each states, there is a definite and clear differences in votes from large city area and more rural area. If polls don’t mix up the population properly presenting the whole population, it will always result in skewed analysis

Who is to say that a lot of people who respond to polls aren't trolling to deliberately skew the numbers- just for fun?

It really comes more down to a very abstract concept of probability that would have to factor in all variables (and such list would probably be very long), the polls can not only be inaccurate at times but made even more inaccurate when someone decides to mess with the representation of data to make it fit their picture more.

i have read this as "are poles trustworthy?"))

This all seems to assume respondents are being honest.

The answer is no, I've saved you time.

4:47 It looks like CNBC made a mistake. Kantar’s and Gartner’s revenue is $3.8B and $3.4B, respectively. Cartner is ranked third while Kantar is somehow ranked fourth? Same with IRI and Ipsos

What an idiotic question. A poll is neither trustworthy nor untrustworthy. They are what they are. If people can't interpret them correctly then that's not the fault of the poll. If they're poorly designed then that's the fault of the pollster. If they are "wrong" (which is to say that they predict one thing and something else happens) then that goes back to people not being able to actually understand or interpret them correctly. A poll has not only a margin of error but also typically has a statistical deviation of any predictions that come out of it. Sometimes when something is 75-25, the 25% chance comes through. In fact, it comes through about 1/4 of the time... that's an awful lot of the time.

Not when you dominantly poll democratic areas to skew the numbers lol....

Uh no of course not

Why does the following show up when searching for Tony Bobulinski on CNBC's main website? 0 search result

No they are not trust worthy we saw what happened GO VOTE 🗳

I’ve never even been asked to participate in a poll

A couple days before the 2020 Nov. election, on Conservative Talk Radio, the guest was a Republican who was running for re-election and was behind in the polls by 2 or 3 points. The host asked him if he were worried and he said he was not worried because he knew that Republicans lie to pollsters and so he knew that he was still golden if he were only behind by 2 or 3 points.

I worked for a survey company. Our questions were about someone's opinion on a candidate, then ask them if they knew about the terrible things that candidate did, and what their opinion was. THEN, we would ask them about an alternate candidate and their opinions on the positive things the alternate candidate did. Is that legal?

i see ppl in the comments clearly didnt watch the video lol

A major problem with the whole discussion of statistics is the failure to distinguish between intentional and unintentional bias. I am not a statistician but have worked with quality engineers to endeavour to take unintentional bias out of sampling methods, especially those requiring human input. It is not easy. I can hear efforts in the video to reduce unintentional bias and one reference to what intentional bias may sound like. I did not hear, though I should probably listen again, any attempt to distinguish the two forms of bias. I feel that appreciating the difference is important for a consumer of polling data.

The problem is that USA is so diverse more than ever and its difficult finding a sample to represents the entire country

polls are like focus group studies, the accuracy depends on how you frame the questions and who you ask those questions.

Hell no.

So the people who make the polls had a poll to see if people believed in polls and now we must believe those polls...? Seems legit

Ignore the polls. Vote.

Trump 2020. I am an Asian born American who wants to make America great again!

No.

I trust poles, I mean why shouldn’t I if the dancer does?

This is basically the first few chapters of college level statistics course.

It is funny how business channels create distrust in the system. The way forward is to vote with all your might!

What if a common characteristic that fall along partisan lines is distrust and fear of participating in polls? How do you overcome that?

What is the utility of polling data to the general population other than as entertainment? The worse case scenario is that it drives complacency and a belief that there is some foregone conclusion and depresses turnout. So what positives are there to presenting polling data to people that are not involved in campaigns regardless of how accurate they are?

Before a poll can be considered trustworthy, it should be shown that it is not substantially biased. In the case of presidential election polls, it should be shown that the political party distribution of those sampled (Republican/right-leaning independent, Democrat/left-leaning independent) does not deviate from that of the overall population (i.e. higher proportion of left-leaning people in the sample than that in the actual population).

Allow me to answer ! Clears throat*** : Nope!

If a weatherman says there is a 93% chance of no rain tomorrow and it rains, that doesn't mean his prediction was wrong. There was also a 7% chance of it raining, and that's just what happened!

There is no obligation for people to tell the truth to pollsters.

They skipped everything people are interested in. We want to know how publishing a poll affects voting. If the poll, for example, says candidate A is winning by 9% in a State does that do more to get more votes out for candidate B or the candidate A? Does doubt in the accuracy of polls change that dynamic, and if so who does that favor? How are these patterns affected by larger or smaller gaps? How many polls are never reported to the public? Should they be required to? How can we stop insincere polling companies just designed to sway voters rather than really getting their untainted opinion? Can we accredit poling companies in some way, and make it fraud for these crooked companies to pretend they are accredited?

It still surprises me to some extent, how so big a chuck of the population that is struggling the most, that have been going through the toughest of breaks for a long time - seem to so commonly cast their votes for candidates, platforms and agendas that are the _least_ likely to help them towards improving their conditions. This is certainly not a uniquely American phenomenon by any stretch of the imagination, nor something new or isolated to large national elections. But it does at times seem like it's turned up to 11 in the US. I do wonder why this is. Mostly the general phenomenon, but also why it often seems so intensified and widespread in America. Is it the hardening polarization? Is it ingrown or inherited partisanship? Tradition? Us vs them flock mentality? Are those people primarily voting with their "hearts" or "gut" rather than their analytical mind? Is it a "since life is hard for me, I'd rather it was equally hard for everyone else too" thing? Are their desperations and/or shortfalls in insight, making them easy(er) targets for manipulation, for (reasonably obvious) empty promises and honeyed lies - telling them what they want to hear so they'll let their critical thinking guards down?

Depens on who "Commission" the poll

Vote Libertarian. Let's get it. 💪

The answer is NO. When I answered surveys, I answer the exact opposite of what I'm going to do.

In short terms.. no.

I guess we have officially crossed into the Great Unknown.... Buckle ☝

At 13:02 Patricia Moy incorrectly says that countries where you are forced to vote are totalitarian regimes. I can tell you right now, Australia's mandatory voting system with preferential (1-2-3-4 numbering) voting is much, much better and ultimately more democratic than the USA's.

2016 it happened, then in the UK it happened......and its the attitude of the left. The issue is how the media and people treat right-wing voters. The hassle, the comments, the abuse and attacks, it drives them underground or simply makes them afraid to say who they support, well, until voting day. That is why you have silent voters and you get the "how did that happen" on voting day. The same thing happened in the UK. Labour and left-wing going on at Brexit/Tory voters, abuse and everything you can name, so in the polls, they looked like they would maybe win. Even on the voting day, it looked like the polls had the win for Labour, but what happened was a Tory landslide, the biggest in 100 years. This was because people just kept hush about who they want to win, some even said Labour just so they could fit in and not get hassle, the same thing is going to happen Nov 3rd. A poll (lol) was done with Trump voters, they asked how many hide the fact that they support Trump, 13% said they did, now if that is national, that is a win right there. Also saw a story with a guy saying there were no political signs up in his neighbourhood (mixed race) then one morning he said "screw this" and put a Trump sign up, days later there were dozens of signs and flags lol they were all just hiding the fact.

NO

No

Only trust statistics, you made yourself 😉

I'm Indian American voting for TRUMP ... Polls says Indian American r not voting for Rep. but it's wrong in this election more nd more Indian community and Black people r voting for Trump ..m

I trust Facebook and UKposts likes and dislike bar more than these polls. And we have trolls here.

The notion that places with very high voter turnout are less democratic seems unfounded to me. I might be wrong, but I think France and Australia have mandatory voting, and those places are hardly less democratic than the US.

The speed of this video is faster than others. Is there any effects on the audiences.

I clicked on this video thinking it was about polish people

Only if people actually vot so VOTE!!!

How come they never pull me? They don't like my answers.

Polls are as annoying as popup ads. Of course people ignore them. Therefore poll results are unreliable due to the small sample pool.

"polls are more accurate than EVERR!" 2016 - "hand my beer to 2020"

You don't have to look at the polls. Just look at the statistics of early voting. Texas has 80% of the vote that they got in 2016 already. Maine has 43% of the vote already. Other states are quickly shattering records.

no

Of 100 million registered voters in the United States...how many were polled. If you asked ONE MILLION people, that's 1%. Not a good sample.

Nope... I've never known a republican who's been polled... ever.

The sample size in most polls is too small to have any accurate scientific result. There's no way a poll of 500 or 800 people can be representative of 325 million people, or in a state like PA with 13 million people.

You can trust a poll by a poll about polls 😉

This didn't age well.

Include Nevada , Minnesota and New Hampshire

Answee: of course you can't

At the end of the day no

Nooooo!!

I have quit doing surveys. They waste your time.

I'm sorry but the elephant in the thumbnail cant be kept up by that bench. It would be snapped in half in .001 milliseconds

I'll never believe in the accuracy of polls, surveys, statistics, whatever, ever since the one that said most people in America want to work more hours, even if they have a job where they work a lot of overtime, and if given the choice between having more time for family and friends or working, they'd prefer to work. While there are enough workaholics to make that true in some cases, to say the majority of Americans feel that way was just ridiculous. Now i don't pay attention to any of that stuff.

Paying people to poll in person would give a better data result and a larger turnout. For example a $5 meal, shopping coupon, free Calling minutes.... Hence, more accurate margin.

A lot of people reject the polls though. What if the people who answer are different than the general population?

No!

About as trustworthy as your network is CDNC 😂

Why have I never been polled?!?!

I lie on polls all the time.

No, go vote. Now have fun watching the video.

As long as they share information I will never participate in a poll, it is clear they are making money by sharing your information with anybody they want, when all you wanted to do was give your opinion.

Wrong question. You should ask: "what factors are undermining the accuracy of polls? Are there actual deliberate acts inflicted by dubious actors that pollute the voting experience?" Resolve that factor before your analysis stand a chance of being, say, un-futile.