Reuters Blatantly Rigged

Women's suffrage is the worst mistake the west ever made.

Those articles quoted the Reuters poll too. I didn't just grab random ones about polls.

Yes, In a sample you have X Female and Y Male. The Green line is Z% more Females compared to Males.

>oversample female by 55%
>clinton still within MoE

do you have any more historical data to see how long htey've been doing this?

The actual difference should be 12%. As 53%women/47%men is 12% which was 2012 demographics

In two weeks they went from a 5% female advantage to 55% yet thecunt's numbers barely moved.

>Literally retarded

53-47 == 6

kek, nice retardpost, well done

kek

47 increased by 12% is 52.64

No, to get the metric the graph is using, you have to do 53/47.
702/431= 63% more females than males, which is the data point on the chart for 8/23/2016.
Otherwise you'd get (702-431)/(702+431) or 23%.

Wow, you guys weren't just making excuses when you said the polls were rigged.

When did Reuters become so shit?

Not sure what you are saying. The scale of the y-axis of the graph is percent MORE women than men sampled, not percent of people sampled that are women.

Also if you want to plug in the data into your own spreadsheets it's all at pastebin.com/Fee1svd4

See

He's saying that last election 12% more Females was the result which puts into perspective the 50%+ more Females you see in the chart. A reasonable %MoreFemales would be between 10% and 20%

Would it not be more advantageous to have Clinton voters so sure of victory that some don't bother showing up to the polls? Trump supporters already know the MSM is shifty would this make enough of a difference to justify scaring the waster/google voter base out of smug apathy? I'm genuinely curious, all I know of your political climate is what truth I can parse from the media kaleidoscope

Here is a chart with just %Female of the total sample

Also here is this from last thread

>Wat is percent

>Not using superior version

If Trump is getting destroyed in the polls, fence sitters find it harder to vote for him when they believe that the vast majority of the country disagrees with them.

Holy shit, bump

Those who sit on the fence deserve to be impaled by it.

Also 44% dem
33% rep
23% independent

I see these rigged polls and I think that it's more an attempt to affect the other candidate's strategy and infrastructure than the voters.

During the primary the polls showing that Trump would lose by double digits to Hillary were the #1 justification the Republicans were using to push for a convention fight. Then after the nomination there were similar polls and Republicans were using them to say that the RNC should dump Trump and focus only on downballot races.

We must be kindred souls OP (assuming you are the same OP from the past thread).

Just yesterday I was finishing the same analysis, using the same method but focusing on party affiliation instead of on gender.

See (or at archive.4plebs.org/pol/thread/90906769/#90906848 if it gets pruned) for the first chart, also pic related.

Did you notice they post the weighted and unweighted numbers at their json? The percentages they show is based not on the amount of votes burning some secret sauce based on "demographics" (as they state at their about page on polling.reuters.com).

Because of that if you guys will do any further calculation about their numbers don't use the percentages, use the raw number of votes.

They already "unskew" the percentages so it would be misleading to "double unskew".

See at I mean, that's where I posted it

I noticed numbers which I don't know the purpose of.

Where did you get the unweighted data?

bump

Crazy how everything the polling user said has come true. Did he say anything else of interest in that thread?

The json has it along with the weighted one.

The other thread is still alive, why are we splitting it here?

Finish that one first then recycle this

this pleases lord kek dank be his memes