Ann Selzer still searching for answers after final Iowa Poll badly missed its mark

[NorthernHawkeye]

Ann Selzer still searching for answers after final Iowa Poll badly missed its mark​

The pollster, whose sterling reputation took a hit when it missed the Trump-Harris result in Iowa by 17 points, said she has seen nothing in the polling data that signaled the results were off

JOHNSTON — More than a month after the November election, Iowa-based pollster Ann Selzer still is searching for answers.

Full article:

Ann Selzer still searching for answers after final Iowa Poll badly missed its mark

The pollster, whose sterling reputation took a hit when it missed the Trump-Harris result in Iowa by 17 points, said she has seen nothing in the polling data that should have signaled the results were off

www.thegazette.com

 

[THE_DEVIL]

Is that a bad thing?

 

[JimStarr777]

Ann Selzer still searching for answers after final Iowa Poll badly missed its mark​

The pollster, whose sterling reputation took a hit when it missed the Trump-Harris result in Iowa by 17 points, said she has seen nothing in the polling data that signaled the results were off

JOHNSTON — More than a month after the November election, Iowa-based pollster Ann Selzer still is searching for answers.

Full article:

Ann Selzer still searching for answers after final Iowa Poll badly missed its mark

The pollster, whose sterling reputation took a hit when it missed the Trump-Harris result in Iowa by 17 points, said she has seen nothing in the polling data that should have signaled the results were off

www.thegazette.com

17 points!? Eat that crow! She was paid off to run untruthful poll results. She deserves all the criticism she gets

 

[Scruddy]

I think the problem is that she's retarded, as was anyone who believed her last poll

 

[NorthernHawkeye]

I hope the media continues to check in with her on a regularly basis. It will be interesting if she finds any answers.

 

[THE_DEVIL]

Side note- Every time I see her name my mind sees Alka Seltzer

 

[hawkedoff]

Confirmation bias so bad she still doesn't see the problem.

 

[Lindemann]

Confirmation bias so bad she still doesn't see the problem.

You think she built confirmation bias into her model?

 

[sober_teacher]

Confirmation bias so bad she still doesn't see the problem.

What confirmation bias? She's a pollster with a long history of pretty good results - she came close than most to the final results in '20. So she naturally takes pride in doing a good job, but something went askew this time.

 

[SA_Hawk]

It was clearly a fake poll to drive and discourage supporters on both sides. In order to makeup her fake numbers she had Trump losing 20-30 points among rural white male voters in Iowa.

 

[onlyTheObvious]

Would not surprise me if the poll was made up.

If it wasn’t made up the lady is worthless at getting a true cross section of voters.

Either way, she sucks at her job.

 

[sober_teacher]

Would not surprise me if the poll was made up.

If it wasn’t made up the lady is worthless at getting a true cross section of voters.

Either way, she sucks at her job.

Her polling history prior to this would suggest you're full of crap.

 

[onlyTheObvious]

Her polling history prior to this would suggest you're full of crap.

We know she is.

Lots of people sell out for their team.

She might also have gotten lazy.

After all the career democrats demanded millions to campaign for Harris anything is on the table.

 

[hawkedoff]

What confirmation bias? She's a pollster with a long history of pretty good results - she came close than most to the final results in '20. So she naturally takes pride in doing a good job, but something went askew this time.

Yep. Confirmation bias. She found what she was looking for this time.

Either that or it was on purpose. I mean you lay out the case convincingly on her ability....

 

[joelbc1]

Side note- Every time I see her name my mind sees Alka Seltzer

That is her aunt…

 

[joelbc1]

Yep. Confirmation bias. She found what she was looking for this time.

Either that or it was on purpose. I mean you lay out the case convincingly on her ability....

Did any of you watch the interview with her done by IPBN this weekend?
She has no idea what “went wrong” with this poll. She has checked and rechecked her data and really can’t find a flaw. She is waiting with anticipation the Sec of State’s “official” voting numbers to see if her data of Republican’s who told her they were /were not going to vote proves accurate. Those numbers will be contained in Pate’s release.
The morons here claim she was “bought” are fools. She and her polling are far beyond that. What reason would she have to miss so badly in such a public poll that is read by so many people?
She did say she will continue to do polling for private businesses as she has for years.

 

[sober_teacher]

Yep. Confirmation bias. She found what she was looking for this time.

Either that or it was on purpose. I mean you lay out the case convincingly on her ability....

We know she is.

Lots of people sell out for their team.

She might also have gotten lazy.

After all the career democrats demanded millions to campaign for Harris anything is on the table.

So, whose team was she on when she accurately predicted the Iowa and Wisconsin results in particular back in ‘20, when most pollsters predicted a convincing Biden win, in Wisconsin in particular?

She was wrong this time, and she’s trying to figure out why. To say she is on team democrat here is just stupid.

 

[Chishawk1425]

Ann Selzer still searching for answers after final Iowa Poll badly missed its mark​

The pollster, whose sterling reputation took a hit when it missed the Trump-Harris result in Iowa by 17 points, said she has seen nothing in the polling data that signaled the results were off

JOHNSTON — More than a month after the November election, Iowa-based pollster Ann Selzer still is searching for answers.

Full article:

Ann Selzer still searching for answers after final Iowa Poll badly missed its mark

The pollster, whose sterling reputation took a hit when it missed the Trump-Harris result in Iowa by 17 points, said she has seen nothing in the polling data that should have signaled the results were off

www.thegazette.com

I am too. I can't believe how pathetic this state now is. Absolutely pathetic and a disgrace.

 

[Chishawk1425]

I hope the media continues to check in with her on a regularly basis. It will be interesting if she finds any answers.

The fact Iowa went this hard for a terrorist, rapist and felon isn't a good thing ya dope.

 

[Underscore2]

Side note- Every time I see her name my mind sees Alka Seltzer

Yes. I was gonna have some alka selzter tonight but this thread just ruined it for me.

 

[NorthernHawkeye]

The fact Iowa went this hard for a terrorist, rapist and felon isn't a good thing ya dope.

Why are you hurling insults this evening?

 

[Chishawk1425]

Why are you hurling insults this evening?

Stating facts may hurt at times. Iowa went far shit hole.

 

[DavidHawk324]

The people saying she purposely tanked it are really reaching imo. It seems like this is mostly Trump people treating her like a democratic agent tor some reason.

Do you really think her polling results would swing actual results in any big manner? Her last poll killed her reputation. Yeah, she retired, but most people have pride / ego in how they are viewed. It’s pretty far-fetched to think she would put her reputation at such risk for an idea that her poll is so important it was going to largely change the actual voter turnout.

 

[Chishawk1425]

The people saying she purposely tanked it are really reaching imo. It seems like this is mostly Trump people treating her like a democratic agent tor some reason.

Do you really think her polling results would swing actual results in any big manner? Her last poll killed her reputation. Yeah, she retired, but most people have pride / ego in how they are viewed. It’s pretty far-fetched to think she would put her reputation at such risk for an idea that her poll is so important it was going to largely change the actual voter turnout.

At the end of the day this is an indictment on how pathetic Iowa now is. Not her poll.

 

[sober_teacher]

The people saying she purposely tanked it are really reaching imo. It seems like this is mostly Trump people treating her like a democratic agent tor some reason.

Do you really think her polling results would swing actual results in any big manner? Her last poll killed her reputation. Yeah, she retired, but most people have pride / ego in how they are viewed. It’s pretty far-fetched to think she would put her reputation at such risk for an idea that her poll is so important it was going to largely change the actual voter turnout.

Especially when 4 years ago her polls favored Trump.

 

[MikeyHawk]

What confirmation bias? She's a pollster with a long history of pretty good results - she came close than most to the final results in '20. So she naturally takes pride in doing a good job, but something went askew this time.

This is such a clueless response. Congrats

I wonder what went wrong? some of the Harris campaign money?

 

[MikeyHawk]

So, whose team was she on when she accurately predicted the Iowa and Wisconsin results in particular back in ‘20, when most pollsters predicted a convincing Biden win, in Wisconsin in particular?

She was wrong this time, and she’s trying to figure out why. To say she is on team democrat here is just stupid.

No, it is not really stupid at all. For a "well respected pollster" to put out a poll so clearly wrong, there is obviously biases involved.

Trying to imagine being a "well respected pollster" and putting out a poll that was clearly wrong when she hit submit. Anyone putting out a poll stating that Harris would win Iowa let alone by 4 points is pretty remarkable. I am amazed that anyone involved in the poll didn't point out how far off that poll was from reality.

 

[stanzithemanzi12]

You think she built confirmation bias into her model?

Deep down, I don't think she really even believed herself. And that's all you really need to know here.

 

[sober_teacher]

No, it is not really stupid at all. For a "well respected pollster" to put out a poll so clearly wrong, there is obviously biases involved.

Trying to imagine being a "well respected pollster" and putting out a poll that was clearly wrong when she hit submit. Anyone putting out a poll stating that Harris would win Iowa let alone by 4 points is pretty remarkable. I am amazed that anyone involved in the poll didn't point out how far off that poll was from reality.

So where was this bias previously, when historically she had built one of the most accurate polls in the country? Particularly again, when she pretty much nailed Iowa and Wisconsin in '20, when many other pollsters had Biden up by near double digits and thought that Iowa was even in play.

We don't know whether her mistakes in '24 were due to some sort of bias she had in the poll this time around - why you think she is in the bag for Democrats when she wasn't previously is beyond me; whether it was a fault in her methodology; perhaps respondents were simply dishonest in their responses to her; or some combination of the 3 above.

But it's just ridiculous to say she was on the payroll of Harris/Democrats.

 

[Chishawk1425]

This is such a clueless response. Congrats

I wonder what went wrong? some of the Harris campaign money?

That Iowa is full of dumbass idiots.

 

[dgordo]

There are tons of pollsters that I believe push an agenda and make polls to get a result they want. I have never believed Ann selzer was one of them.

 

[MikeyHawk]

So where was this bias previously, when historically she had built one of the most accurate polls in the country? Particularly again, when she pretty much nailed Iowa and Wisconsin in '20, when many other pollsters had Biden up by near double digits and thought that Iowa was even in play.

We don't know whether her mistakes in '24 were due to some sort of bias she had in the poll this time around - why you think she is in the bag for Democrats when she wasn't previously is beyond me; whether it was a fault in her methodology; perhaps respondents were simply dishonest in their responses to her; or some combination of the 3 above.

But it's just ridiculous to say she was on the payroll of Harris/Democrats.

You are still posting this garbage. If she is so accurate, why would she release the poll? It was so far off, it was obvious when it was released.
She released a poll in June showing Trump up 18 over Biden. I guess it makes sense that Harris would generate a 21 point change in a few months in a state. So dumb
Trump won Iowa by more than Harris won New York. Imagine a "well respected pollster" releasing a poll a few days prior to the election and having Trump up by 3 points in New York.
Of course she was paid by Harris/Democrats. It was a well organized plan with the media. Just watch the reactions to the poll, high comedy.

 

[Chishawk1425]

You are still posting this garbage. If she is so accurate, why would she release the poll? It was so far off, it was obvious when it was released.
She released a poll in June showing Trump up 18 over Biden. I guess it makes sense that Harris would generate a 21 point change in a few months in a state. So dumb
Trump won Iowa by more than Harris won New York. Imagine a "well respected pollster" releasing a poll a few days prior to the election and having Trump up by 3 points in New York.
Of course she was paid by Harris/Democrats. It was a well organized plan with the media. Just watch the reactions to the poll, high comedy.

You're a joke

 

[hawksurprize]

Yep. Confirmation bias. She found what she was looking for this time.

Either that or it was on purpose. I mean you lay out the case convincingly on her ability....

Red wave, Trump Harris pollsters slipping.

 

[dgordo]

It’s an interesting plan Ann had, spend 40 years building her reputation as one of the best, then intentionally release a fake poll to destroy her reputation.

 

[JimStarr777]

It’s an interesting plan Ann had, spend 40 years building her reputation as one of the best, then intentionally release a fake poll to destroy her reputation.

I mean…17 points off. 🤷‍♂️ Either she did or that was the worst polling effort of all time.

 

[Hawky42]

Ann even said "if I win". Choosing a side

Her mood changed when talking about the prospect of Kamala being competitive.

We voted for Obama twice but he sucked let's not kid ourselves. Biden is a disaster and Kamala has a terrible resume and background.

 

[KFsdisciple]

I actually feel bad for her. To be that far off, it's like watching Shaq shoot free throws...

 

[Bank of Hawk]

She’s clueless as to why her own special poll was so far off?
Deep down does she still feel like her poll was correct? Or was she compensated to have her polls go a certain way? (and is contractually obligated to continue to say she doesn’t know why her polling was off?)

 

[sober_teacher]

You are still posting this garbage. If she is so accurate, why would she release the poll? It was so far off, it was obvious when it was released.
She released a poll in June showing Trump up 18 over Biden. I guess it makes sense that Harris would generate a 21 point change in a few months in a state. So dumb
Trump won Iowa by more than Harris won New York. Imagine a "well respected pollster" releasing a poll a few days prior to the election and having Trump up by 3 points in New York.
Of course she was paid by Harris/Democrats. It was a well organized plan with the media. Just watch the reactions to the poll, high comedy.

Why would she release a poll that she believed was accurate? Seriously?

Not to mention yes her June poll with Biden showed a wide gap…you evidently forgot that she released two subsequent polls after Biden dropped out and Harris became the nominee that showed a closer race. It’s not like she only released the two polls.

And again, if she’s being paid by team blue, why did she release polls in ‘20 that showed a far closer race than most depicted? You keep forgetting to discuss this point.