Joseph Angolano

The greatest European footballer we have ever seen. What you achieved for Portugal on the international stage is unprecedented. You only have to look at Portugal's record of qualifying for major tournaments before your arrival to truly appreciate the magnitude of your impact. You didn't just inspire a generation. You transformed the expectations, ambitions and mentality of the entire footballing world. Your legacy goes beyond goals, trophies and records. It is beyond generational. One message, Cristiano Roanldo. Just thank you. 🐐❤️

Five of the eight Argentina players to play for #mufc have now been booed at Old Trafford. The club's curious love affair with Argentinians seems to be ending thesun.co.uk/sport/40909170/…

😡 "Back in my day, he would have his head RIPPED off!" 🇦🇷 "He lives in our country and is dancing around with an Argentina flag in the World Cup!" Nicky Butt says Martinez should be AXED from the Man United squad... 📺 youtu.be/G5mIwsQfVT4 @piersmorgan | @sjopinion10

I need to make a correction here. I had misinterpreted what one source said (and which another source confirmed in general but not in specifics). I should not have implied I had solid info about the Chow campaign's internal polling. I apologize for misleading you. 1/6

First of all, when calculating accuracy for polls you have to check if it falls within the margin of error. For example: Forum’s final poll on Oct 25th (53-43) was in the +-4 MoE and the final result of 54-41. So what’s the margin of error and why does it matter, then? In 95% of cases if you ran the poll again, it would produce a result within 4 points each way. The MoE shrinks with increased sample size. Simply put, you can say with 95% confidence that the true result is contained in that space. If the actual result fell outside of the MoE at 95% confidence level it would be ~2 standard deviations away from the mean. Build Canada’s October 16th poll (Bradford +4.7) had an MoE of +-3.1. The polling miss of 17.1 points (for the margin of victory) meant that the actual result was nearly 5.62 standard deviations away from the poll’s mean. If this was just because of pure random sampling luck, this has a 1 in 51 million chance of occurring. The poll did not reflect the voting public that showed up on October 26th. To attribute this miss solely to voter preferences swinging double digits in a week is an excuse for poor methodology.

There's all kinds of problems with Polymarket, but the market, for the most part, got this one right. A bunch of polls came out around Oct 21-23 showing Bradford tied or with a lead, which caused the race to tighten. But by the 24th, that went away.

Too many media want the easy - already written up - story.... Like, the BS Polls suggesting that Brad Bradford was tied and even ahead of Olivia Chow. Too many media ran with it - any poll and press release - already done for them. Based on the polling I had, Bradford was 10-points ahead with males over 54 years of age and only 3-points behind with females over 54 years of age. For Chow to have won by 13-points, clearly means Chow had a much higher quality list of "identified supporters", with names, addresses & phone numbers - and they were able to get them out to vote to overcome the advantage Bradford had with 55+ voters.

Our final Toronto poll: @oliviachow 53, @BradMBradford 43. The result: Chow 54, Bradford 41. Number one. First with the most accurate result in the Toronto mayoral race. #TOpoli

A big congratulations to @JosephAngolano and Pallas Data — quickly becoming one of Canada's best and most reliable polling firms. They had the closest results in BC and Toronto, and were almost perfect in Quebec.

🚨🚨🚨 And that's a wrap! Our final Toronto poll for this election @oliviachow - 53% @BradMBradford - 43% #TOpoli