One pollster’s explanation for why the polls got it wrong

Re:One pollster’s explanation for why the polls got it wrong by dragonwriter on Tuesday November 10, 2020 @04:09PM (#25051941)

> There aren't many people with $100 million income

Sure, but there's also a couple with over an order of magnitude more.

> So while I'd rather the media reported the median income than the median income, it's the number we have and hopefully it's a useful approximation.

It's not a useful approximation of anything, and we have a lot more detailed information that “average income of voters of one side vs. the other" on the relationship between income and voting / party preference. And it tells a more complicated story (e.g., in 2016, Clinton won significantly among those with income of $150K+ and under $30K, was nearly even among those with $100-150K and $50-75K, lost significantly among those with $74-100K and $30-50K.)

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/10/30/a-voter-dat...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:One pollster’s explanation for why the polls got it wrong by masonic on Tuesday November 10, 2020 @11:35PM (#25055517)

  Sure, but there's also a couple with over an order of magnitude more.

Who has an income of more than $1 billion a year?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:One pollster’s explanation for why the polls got it wrong by amanaplanacanal on Wednesday November 11, 2020 @06:09AM (#25057379)

There are people whose wealth on paper grow that much. Maybe they are counting that as income?

[ Parent | on HN ]