MN-Change Research: Klobuchar +9, Smith +3

[Vern]

Funny thing is, in 2016 when these no named "junk" polls where showing Trump and Republicans doing well. Atlas said it was wrong. But Atlas turned out to be the wrong ones.

[Vern]

Funny thing is, in 2016 when these no named "junk" polls where showing Trump and Republicans doing well. Atlas said it was wrong. But Atlas turned out to be the wrong ones.

This comment is all types of wrong though. And void of context. Take Ohio, where there were a bunch of polls saying Trump would win.

This is literally the first poll in a number of polls that shows the Dems doing that badly. So for now, it's an outlier, plain and simple

No one on Atlas was saying Clinton would win Ohio. But when polls showed MI,WI and PA close or for Trump, Atlas freaked out saying it was wrong and an outlier. Don't get me wrong, this poll could well be wrong. But my point is, Atlas is so quick to call a poll a "junk" poll when it doesn't show the results they like or think will happen.

[Vern]

But my point is, Atlas is so quick to call a poll a "junk" poll when it doesn't show the results they like or think will happen.

While that's true of some users, that doesn't mean that they don't sometimes happen to be right (e.g. a poll showing Trump slightly ahead in Oregon.)

This is true, that is why polls should be looked at together with others for trends. Because at the end of the day, we truly don't know what will happen.

[Vern]

Seems like garbage, but this poll has piqued my interest nonetheless. Taking it with a grain of salt without ignoring it is probably the best thing to do in this case.

EDIT: Before someone says anything, I'll just leave this here.

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=251467.0
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=251497.0

Them links are my point.