Which is ironic, because women were the "code monkeys" of back when human computers were a thing - humans actually doing the computing by hand; and most of them were women.
It's not like I disagree with you, but we're looking at the same thing with different lens. You're saying things like "science is accurate" which I can agree with. But then you see headlines like "science says vaccines cause autism," and that's what I'm talking about.
So, in your own words:
The polls are actually pretty good.
People are shit at statistics.
And unfortunately, people like clean story-lines and news organizations are more than happy to supply them.
We're not disagreeing.
If I see a report that says "polls show that Biden/Trump/Clinton is winning," I'll think "I'll believe it on election day."
Just do a google search with these terms: polls show clinton trump biden
You will see polls largely favoring Hillary, or largely favoring Biden, or saying that Trump is winning. Then in the end the elections are pretty much 50/50.
Exactly my experience. The poll would indicate a vast advantage of one candidate over the other, then the election shows results that are very, very close calls.
Yes, I remember this. But people have wised up. How do I know? Because Trump lost while being a sitting president, an event that doesn't happen often. At least in 2015/2016, a lot of people were giving him the benefit of the doubt. And it wasn't the majority (he lost the popular vote, as we all know.)
Right? It's like the Town of Swastika, Ontario. Hardly any swastikas visible anywhere!