CNN/ORC poll Trump rocks it over everyone else Trusted most on economy, immigration, ISIS

[tinydancer]

Well here's another poll that should have the inside the beltway elite running for their Extra Strength Immodium AD and antacid pills.

I think what we are really witnessing is a rejection of the "insiders". A rejection of "the Jeb who should be the annointed".

And voters embracing a man who is simply laying it all out there with no political correctness. This is showing in poll after poll now.



Donald Trump trusted above Republican rivals on ISIS economy immigration Daily Mail Online

Trump towers above rivals on policy issues as Republican voters say they trust him most on economy, immigration and ISIS

• New CNN/ORC poll: 45 per cent of GOP voters say Trump is the Republican candidate they trust most to handle the economy
• That number is up an astonishing 25 points since June and no other GOP candidate is in double-digits
• Trump gets top marks from 44 per cent of Republicans on illegal immigration, his signature issue – up 30 points in the last two months
• Overall Trump scores 24 per cent support among registered Republicans, nearly twice the number posted by nearest rival Jeb Bush

Read more: Donald Trump trusted above Republican rivals on ISIS economy immigration Daily Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

[TheOldSchool]

 

[ScienceRocks]

If Trump doesn't fuck up he may just run away with the nomination...I'll start really believing this if this still the case in November.

 

[Derideo_Te]

But the sting is always in the tail!

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2015/images/08/17/rel8a.-.gop.2016.pdf

6 in 10 republicans believe they would have a better chance in 2016 with someone who isn't T-Rump!!

 

[westwall]

But the sting is always in the tail!

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2015/images/08/17/rel8a.-.gop.2016.pdf

View attachment 47726

6 in 10 republicans believe they would have a better chance in 2016 with someone who isn't T-Rump!!

Oh boy. 283 respondents! Now that is what I call a large sample population..... NOT!

 

[jillian]

But the sting is always in the tail!

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2015/images/08/17/rel8a.-.gop.2016.pdf

View attachment 47726

6 in 10 republicans believe they would have a better chance in 2016 with someone who isn't T-Rump!!

Oh boy. 283 respondents! Now that is what I call a large sample population..... NOT!

the margin of error is pretty clear. that is more significant than the sample population.

but you know that.

 

[westwall]

But the sting is always in the tail!

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2015/images/08/17/rel8a.-.gop.2016.pdf

View attachment 47726

6 in 10 republicans believe they would have a better chance in 2016 with someone who isn't T-Rump!!

Oh boy. 283 respondents! Now that is what I call a large sample population..... NOT!

the margin of error is pretty clear. that is more significant than the sample population.

but you know that.

283 is a vanishingly small number of respondents. I can't stand Trump, but this constant crowing about how his time is done is stupid. The man gains every time one of these stupid threads is posted! I truly fear that if Trump gets the nomination we are in serious trouble. He will turn into the tail that wags the dog.

 

[jillian]

But the sting is always in the tail!

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2015/images/08/17/rel8a.-.gop.2016.pdf

View attachment 47726

6 in 10 republicans believe they would have a better chance in 2016 with someone who isn't T-Rump!!

Oh boy. 283 respondents! Now that is what I call a large sample population..... NOT!

the margin of error is pretty clear. that is more significant than the sample population.

but you know that.

283 is a vanishingly small number of respondents. I can't stand Trump, but this constant crowing about how his time is done is stupid. The man gains every time one of these stupid threads is posted! I truly fear that if Trump gets the nomination we are in serious trouble. He will turn into the tail that wags the dog.

and the size of the margin of error reflects the size of the sample. but if the sample is scientifically chosen, it is not an invalid sample.... especially when the numbers are so far beyond the margin of error.

 

[westwall]

But the sting is always in the tail!

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2015/images/08/17/rel8a.-.gop.2016.pdf

View attachment 47726

6 in 10 republicans believe they would have a better chance in 2016 with someone who isn't T-Rump!!

Oh boy. 283 respondents! Now that is what I call a large sample population..... NOT!

the margin of error is pretty clear. that is more significant than the sample population.

but you know that.

283 is a vanishingly small number of respondents. I can't stand Trump, but this constant crowing about how his time is done is stupid. The man gains every time one of these stupid threads is posted! I truly fear that if Trump gets the nomination we are in serious trouble. He will turn into the tail that wags the dog.

and the size of the margin of error reflects the size of the sample. but if the sample is scientifically chosen, it is not an invalid sample.... especially when the numbers are so far beyond the margin of error.

The margin of error is a cute way of trying to hide the fact that it is a small sample. There is a lot more information that would need to be gathered from them before that small of a sample would be given relevance in a scientific study.

 

[jillian]

But the sting is always in the tail!

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2015/images/08/17/rel8a.-.gop.2016.pdf

View attachment 47726

6 in 10 republicans believe they would have a better chance in 2016 with someone who isn't T-Rump!!

Oh boy. 283 respondents! Now that is what I call a large sample population..... NOT!

the margin of error is pretty clear. that is more significant than the sample population.

but you know that.

283 is a vanishingly small number of respondents. I can't stand Trump, but this constant crowing about how his time is done is stupid. The man gains every time one of these stupid threads is posted! I truly fear that if Trump gets the nomination we are in serious trouble. He will turn into the tail that wags the dog.

and the size of the margin of error reflects the size of the sample. but if the sample is scientifically chosen, it is not an invalid sample.... especially when the numbers are so far beyond the margin of error.

The margin of error is a cute way of trying to hide the fact that it is a small sample. There is a lot more information that would need to be gathered from them before that small of a sample would be given relevance in a scientific study.

no. the margin of error is an aspect of statistical analysis. even if this sampling were off by the numbers in the margin of error (approx 5%) the stats would still show that the majority of voters think you lose if trump gets the nomination.

 

[westwall]

Oh boy. 283 respondents! Now that is what I call a large sample population..... NOT!

the margin of error is pretty clear. that is more significant than the sample population.

but you know that.

283 is a vanishingly small number of respondents. I can't stand Trump, but this constant crowing about how his time is done is stupid. The man gains every time one of these stupid threads is posted! I truly fear that if Trump gets the nomination we are in serious trouble. He will turn into the tail that wags the dog.

and the size of the margin of error reflects the size of the sample. but if the sample is scientifically chosen, it is not an invalid sample.... especially when the numbers are so far beyond the margin of error.

The margin of error is a cute way of trying to hide the fact that it is a small sample. There is a lot more information that would need to be gathered from them before that small of a sample would be given relevance in a scientific study.

no. the margin of error is an aspect of statistical analysis. even if this sampling were off by the numbers in the margin of error (approx 5%) the stats would still show that the majority of voters think you lose if trump gets the nomination.

With such a small sample size, and without a whole bunch more information on the respondents, the margin of error is fictitious. The larger the sample size the more accurate the margin of error information estimate becomes. That's the problem with any poll that relies on such a small sample size...and why they are almost always wrong.

 

[Statistikhengst]

But the sting is always in the tail!

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2015/images/08/17/rel8a.-.gop.2016.pdf

View attachment 47726

6 in 10 republicans believe they would have a better chance in 2016 with someone who isn't T-Rump!!

Oh boy. 283 respondents! Now that is what I call a large sample population..... NOT!

the margin of error is pretty clear. that is more significant than the sample population.

but you know that.

283 is a vanishingly small number of respondents. I can't stand Trump, but this constant crowing about how his time is done is stupid. The man gains every time one of these stupid threads is posted! I truly fear that if Trump gets the nomination we are in serious trouble. He will turn into the tail that wags the dog.

and the size of the margin of error reflects the size of the sample. but if the sample is scientifically chosen, it is not an invalid sample.... especially when the numbers are so far beyond the margin of error.

The margin of error is a cute way of trying to hide the fact that it is a small sample. There is a lot more information that would need to be gathered from them before that small of a sample would be given relevance in a scientific study.

No. That is a lie. A margin of a error is a mathematical computation of the leeway in accuracy, based on the size, type and weighting of any survey group. Every poll of any integrity will calculate a MoE.

Your personal opinion may differ from this, but the math is the math is the math. And pure math trumps a partisan viewpoint any day of the week.

Furthermore, we can look back and compare end-polling results to actual results and find out who was accurate along the way and indeed, CNN/ORC has a very, very good reputation.

That being said, I think you should hope that this group stays small, because a very large group tends to magnify large values, so that 6 in 10 value of forlorn elephants who think they have a better chance with someone other than Trump is probably closer to 7 in 10 in reality. Why? Because a decidely larger polling group will have more from the middle, and the middle is decidedly against Trump.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Oh, and btw, the survey group is 466 RV, which is just about the size of a standard Rasmussen group.

 

[Meathead]

What will Stats do now that Gay Jews for Clinton is disbanding?