菏泽大功率工业吸尘器承德工业吸尘器,北海工业吸尘器,黄石大功率工业吸尘器,湘潭大型工业吸尘器,无锡工业吸尘器厂家,潍坊大型工业吸尘器,郴州工业吸尘器

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 orca whale that made headlines in July 2018 for carrying her dead calf 1,000 miles is a mother again.Researches at the Center for Whale Research announced that Tahlequah, also known as J-35, gave birth last week. 224

The home portrayed as Buffalo Bill’s in the award-winning 1991 film “The Silence of the Lambs” is for sale.The home is located in Perryopolis, Pennsylvania, about an hour outside Pittsburgh and is listed for just under 0,000.A video tour of the home shows a lot of the Victorian charm inside and outside has remained unchanged. The tour highlights a front room, the kitchen, basement and other rooms used in the movie. 429

The makers of the popular video game Fortnite have a big supporter in their corner as they go to battle against Apple - Microsoft.A few weeks ago, Epic Games introduced Epic Direct payments, a direct-payment plan for Apple's iOS and Google Play that bypasses the App Store.Apple said the service violated its guidelines, so they removed the game from the App Store.Epic, in return, took legal action. On Sunday, Microsoft issued a statement, which was tweeted out by Xbox boss Phil Spencer, that explained they were backing up Epic in their court battle because "Apple’s discontinuation of Epic’s ability to develop and support Unreal Engine for iOS or macOS will harm game creators and gamers." 703

The production company behind the American version of the Russian state-funded network RT has officially filed as a foreign agent with the Department of Justice.T&R Productions LLC formally registered on November 10 as an agent of ANO TV-Novosti, described in the forms as a non-governmental organization "under Russian Federation law," which has principal "responsibility for creating a TV network that will be competitive with other TV networks operating around the world." The DOJ identified ANO TV-Novosti as the "Russian government entity responsible for the worldwide broadcasts of the RT Network"In its announcement, the DOJ said T&R Productions LLC "has operated studios for RT, hired and paid all U.S.-based RT employees, and produced English-language programming for RT, which is both shown on cable networks across the United States and available on RT's website."The DOJ announced the registration and published the forms on Monday. The National Security Division's FARA Registration Unit is reviewing T&R's filings for sufficiency, the DOJ said."Americans have a right to know who is acting in the United States to influence the U.S. government or public on behalf of foreign principals," Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security Dana J. Boente said in a statement on Monday. "The Department of Justice is committed to enforcing FARA and expects compliance with the law by all entities engaged in specified activities on behalf of any foreign principal, regardless of its nationality."The filing comes after weeks of public pronouncements and increasing tension between Russia and the U.S. over media outlets in the two countries. RT said after initially skipping its October deadline to register under FARA, they were forced to file or their employees could face imprisonment and have their assets seized. While this is technically true under the law, harsh enforcements under Foreign Agents Registration Act are rare, experts say.The DOJ's registration request has prompted Russian officials to retaliate by threatening to enforce harsher restrictions against American news organizations operating in Russia, especially government-funded outlets such as Radio Free Europe and its television sister network Current Time.The filing was made under news director Mikhail Solodovnikov, a former reporter for a Russian TV outlet who said in the forms that he is a U.S. citizen by marriage. He listed his salary as 0,000 a year. He is the sole member and owner over the LLC and produces the various shows for ANO TV-Novosti, according to the filing.Solodovnikov disputed the need for the FARA registration in the filing."The production of shows remains under the independent editorial control of registrant," he wrote. "Registrant respectfully disagrees that FARA should apply."T&R confirms in the paperwork that ANO TV-Novosti is financed by a foreign entity, but the production company also said on the forms that it was not "sufficiently aware" of who controls or funds the NGO.In the filing, Solodovnikov wrote that he does not see RT as political actors, saying that the "primary purpose of T&R Productions LLC is to produce news, talk show, and entertainment programs that are designed merely to inform, not influence. Programs produced cover a broad range of news and talk show topics, reflect balance regarding commentary, and are not aimed to primarily benefit any foreign government or political party."RT was singled out in a January intelligence community report for the impact it may have had on the 2016 U.S. election. The report said RT "conducts strategic messaging for [the] Russian government" and "seeks to influence politics, [and] fuel discontent in the U.S." The report also mentioned a separate Russian-government-controlled website Sputnik as "another government-funded outlet producing pro-Kremlin radio and online content."Federal investigators are also reportedly looking into whether Russian government-funded outlets such as RT and Sputnik were part of Russia's influence campaign aimed at the 2016 presidential election. Yahoo News has separately reported that the FBI interviewed a former Sputnik correspondent about his work at the website.Russian government officials, including President Vladimir Putin said they'd take a "tit for tat" measure against American outlets in Russia in retaliation for the pressure on RT. Last week Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that new action against American outlets would come this week. 4546