贵阳哪里治小腿静脉曲张啊贵阳治腿上静脉血栓医院,贵阳股静脉血栓治疗,贵阳鲜红斑痣科医院,贵阳好的精索静脉曲张医院,贵阳下肢动脉硬化哪所医院好,贵阳武侯立交附近精索静脉曲张医院,贵阳看静脉血栓那个医院好

The polling industry has a lot on the line heading into Tuesday's midterm election.Critics blamed pollsters when voters were caught off guard by Donald Trump's election in 2016. Old cries of "don't believe the polls" became fevered shouts. And the president has encouraged distrust by calling certain polls "fake" and claiming they are used to "suppress" the vote.Although there is no evidence to suggest that is true, there is persistent and widespread suspicion about polling, according to, you guessed it, a McClatchy-Marist poll. And it exists on both sides, albeit in different forms."I think Democrats may have felt let down by the polls but don't think it was an intentional error. I think many Republicans believe the polling errors of 2016 were intentional," GOP pollster and co-founder of Echelon Insights Kristen Soltis Anderson told CNN.So can the industry regain trust?Since 2016 there's been a whole lot of self-reflection in the polling world. Pollsters have tweaked their techniques; pundits have become more cautious when talking about polls; and news outlets have conducted some fascinating experiments.On Tuesday, all the efforts are being put to the test."Some pollsters would disagree with this, but the way that the public generally views whether or not polling is accurate is whether or not it gets the results of the election right," CNN analyst Harry Enten said on "Reliable Sources.""I'm not necessarily sure that's fair," Enten said, "but I do think that there is more pressure on pollsters this year to get it right given the president's rhetoric and given what happened in 2016."Many, though not all, 2016 polls underestimated support for Trump. This effect was particularly pronounced at the state level, where there were embarrassing "misses," showing Hillary Clinton with safe leads in states Trump actually carried.Most national polls accurately showed Clinton winning the popular vote. But reporters and commentators made lots of mistakes in their interpretations of the polls. Readers and viewers did, too. Many people discounted the margin and other factors and made faulty assumptions that Trump would lose to Clinton.There were other problems, too. Predictive features on websites gained lots of traffic before the election but caused lots of consternation afterward. HuffPost's model infamously showed Clinton with a 98 percent chance of winning. "We blew it," the site admitted afterward.But just as importantly, HuffPost's Natalie Jackson tried to explain why.Other news outlets have also tried to be more transparent and remind voters of what polls cannot convey.In special elections since 2016, Democrats have repeatedly outperformed polls of their races.The top example was the Virginia governors' race. "Ralph Northam was favored by three points. He ended up winning by nine," Enten said.But past outcomes are not an indicator of future results."I think many pollsters and forecasters have tried to be much more intentional about explaining uncertainty and being humble about what data can and can't tell us," Anderson said. "Because I think there was a big sense that in 2016, there was more certainty conveyed than may have been justified by the available data."So political pros and reporters are communicating poll results differently this time. Time magazine's Molly Ball, who has a no-predictions rule for herself, said that even people who do make predictions are adding more caveats: There's "less of the, 'Well, the needle shows this' and more of, 'Here's what it doesn't show, here's what we should always remember can happen about probabilities.'"Early voting has been explosive in the midterms, indicating above-average enthusiasm among both Democrats and Republicans. Pollsters have to make assumptions about turnout when contacting "likely voters," and this is a difficult election to forecast.The 2018 electorate is "a universe that doesn't exist yet," Democratic pollster Margie Omero said. "I mean, people don't know whether they're going to vote, some people."They may tell a pollster that they're sure to vote, but never make it to the ballot box. Or they might change who they're voting for.Conversely, certain subsets of voters may have a big impact on the final results without really showing up in the pre-election polling. If pollsters assume relatively low youth turnout, but lots of young people vote for the first time, that could cause big surprises in certain races.The vast majority of people who are called by pollsters decline to participate, so the researchers have to make a huge number of phone calls, bend over backwards to reach a representative sample of people, and weight their results accordingly.Some polls are higher quality than others. Most news outlets tend to favor live interviewers, as opposed to computerized systems, and a mix of landline and cell phone calls. But some outlets are wading into web-based polling. CNN's polling standards preclude reporting on web polls.This fall The New York Times pulled back the curtain by conducting "live polling" and publishing the results in real time, call by call. Working with Siena College, the surveyors made 2,822,889 calls and completed 96 polls of House and Senate races."We wanted to demystify polling for people," said Nate Cohn of The Times' Upshot blog."From our point of view, it's almost a miracle how accurate polls usually are, given all the challenges," Cohn said in an interview with CNN.He emphasized that polls are "very fuzzy things." And the real-time polling showed this to the public. The researchers sought to interview about 500 people for each race that was examined.In Iowa's fourth congressional district, for example, 14,636 calls resulted in 423 interviews.The results showed the incumbent, far-right congressman Steve King, with 47% support, and his Democratic challenger J.D. Scholten with 42%.The Times characterized this as a "slight edge" for King, with lots of room for error. "The margin of sampling error on the overall lead is 10 points, roughly twice as large as the margin for a single candidate's vote share," the Times explained on its website.Cohn's final pre-election story noted that "even modest late shifts among undecided voters or a slightly unexpected turnout could significantly affect results."That's the kind of language that lots of polling experts are incorporating into their stories and live shots, especially in the wake of the 2016 election."With polling, you never actually get to the truth," Cohn said. "You inch towards it, and you think you end up within plus or minus 5 points of it at the end."As Enten put it, "polls are tools," not meant to be perfect. But that message needs to be reinforced through the news media. 6753

The man accused of setting a Southern California fire that has burned more than 19,000 acres appeared in court Friday and said, "It's all a lie!" as a judge read the charges against him.Forrest Gordon Clark, 51, did not enter a plea during the brief appearance in an Orange County courtroom. When the judge explained the process further to him, Clark said, "I comprehend. I do not understand though."He is due back in court August 17 for arraignment and bail review.Clark was charged Thursday with aggravated arson and criminal threats, among other offenses, in starting the Holy Fire in Cleveland National Forest that has scorched 19,107 acres and was 10% contained as of Friday night, according to forest officials. 725

The Justice Department's inspector general has sent a criminal referral regarding former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe to the US attorney's office in Washington, according to a source familiar with the matter.A McCabe spokesperson, the Justice Department and US attorney's office all declined to comment.The IG had found that McCabe "lacked candor" on four occasions when discussing the disclosure of information for a Wall Street Journal article about the FBI's Clinton Foundation investigation, according to a copy of the report obtained by CNN.In addition, the inspector general determined that McCabe was not authorized to disclose the existence of the investigation because it was not within the department's "public interest" exception for disclosing ongoing investigations. The disclosure to the Journal was made "in a manner designed to advance his personal interests at the expense of department leadership," the report said.The findings formed the basis of McCabe's firing last month by Attorney General Jeff Sessions.The-CNN-Wire 1052

The midterm election was not just an opportunity to change the face of Congress and statehouses nationwide. Voters in 37 states also considered ballot measures on social and political issues such as health care, marijuana and election policies.Some were initiated by citizens, others by lawmakers. The questions included whether to restrict abortion access, expand Medicaid, or change voting requirements.Here are some of the ballot measures we're keeping an eye on nationwide. We'll continue updating the results as they come in. 538

The police officer who handcuffed and arrested a nurse for refusing to go against the hospital's policy on drawing blood said through an attorney that he would like to personally apologize for the incident, KUTV reported. Detective Jeff Payne faced criticism for the way he handled an incident in July where he requested hospital employees to draw blood from an unconscious driver who had just been in an accident without that driver's permission or a warrant. The hospital, citing legal precedent, has a policy of not drawing blood without permission or a court-ordered warrant. When nurse Alex Wubbels refused to draw blood, she was handcuffed and placed in the back of a police cruiser. "Jeff would love the chance to sit down and apologize for what happened here," attorney Greg Skordas told KUTV. "If he could do this over he would do it over differently."Payne, along with another officer, were placed on administrative leave by the Salt Lake City Police Department after video of the incident went viral. The department has also since updated it policy regarding blood draws."I think he would love the chance to talk to people about what happened and why it happened and how he would do it differently," Skordas told KUTV. 1262