Summary

Renowned pollster Ann Selzer is defending herself against accusations from Donald Trump and his supporters after her final Iowa pre-election poll underestimated Trump’s support by 19 points.

The poll showed Trump losing by 3 points, but he won by 16.

Trump alleged on Truth Social that Selzer deliberately rigged the poll, calling for an investigation.

Selzer denied the claims on Iowa PBS, asserting she has never intentionally manipulated poll results and finds the accusations serious and baseless.

  • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    edit-2
    8 days ago

    Yeah, Ann, they’re accusing you of a crime. This is what fascists do.

    You know all those people who bent the knee and changed their reporting to fluff Trump before the election? That was those people trying to avoid being “accused of a crime,” the awful crime of actually holding Donald Trump accountable for anything.

    Fight like hell, Ann. Don’tbe silent, don’t bend the knee like everyone else, please.

    • Atelopus-zeteki@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      8 days ago

      “I am mystified about what the motivation anybody thinks I had and would act on in such a public poll,” Selzer said. “I don’t understand it. And the allegations I take very seriously. They’re saying that this was election interference, which is a crime. So, the idea that I intentionally set up to deliver this response, when I’ve never done that before, I’ve had plenty of opportunities to do it, it’s not my ethic.”

      Selzer added, “To suggest without a single shred of evidence that I was in cahoots with somebody, I was being paid by somebody, it’s all just kind of…it’s hard to pay too much attention to it except that they are accusing me of a crime.”

      Sue them for defamation. Don’t just complain, hit them back hard and fast. If you act mystified, that’s just what they want. They will suggest all sorts of things without evidence. That which is asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence.

  • suburban_hillbilly
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    The only thing Ann Selzer did wrong was trust her methodology. If you take a lot of samples, some of them will be outliers, wecome to statistics. Reminds me of the classic stats homework assignment to toss a coin 100 times. The fakers are easy to find because none of the streaks are long enough, aka, no outliers.

    Other pollsters would have tossed the result simply because it was different. Those pollster suck. You’re supposed to do what Ann did because that is the only way to converge on the actual value.

    • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 days ago

      You’re supposed to do what Ann did because that is the only way to converge on the actual value.

      How cute, you still think we live in a reality where facts matter.

      This is Trumpworld now, and we are all just stuck living in it. And in Trumpworld, facts don’t matter if Trump doesn’t like them. And expect to see a lot more of this. It’s why Jeff Bezos, ABC, MSNBC, Joe Scarborough, and George Stephonopolous all bent the knee. Because “Freedom of the Press” now means being free to say whatever Trump wants you to say. And your choices are now to either report everything in a Trump-friendly matter a-la North Korean state media, or report objective facts and risk criminal prosecution. And in a justice system littered with Trump cronies up and down the judicial system ready to tip the scales in his favor, you can’t be surprised that more and more people are simply trying to avoid the latter.

      There’s a reason why some of the richest and most powerful people and corporations in the country have crumbled like a house of cards while barely putting up a fight. The reality of the situation is that no matter how much money, power, and influence you have, you cannot win a game that was rigged from the start. And in a federal justice system that starts with people like Aileen Cannon and ending with people like Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, these people know that the fix is already in.

      I’d love to agree and say these people need to fight the good fight, but that implies a world where legal protections still exist and it’s at least something resembling a level playing field. But fighting a fight you literally cannot win isn’t bravery. It’s suicide, and I understand why people are choosing to go down the path that keeps their careers intact and keeps them out of jail while they hope for an opportunity in the future.