Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

5 Stunning Facts About the 2016 Election
San Francisco Chronicle, Twitter via ZeroHedge ^ | November 15, 2016 | posted by George Washington

Posted on 11/15/2016 11:21:11 PM PST by Zakeet

Edited on 11/16/2016 12:22:47 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]

Here are 5 stunning facts about the 2016 election ...

Polls showed that Bernie Sanders might well have beat Trump. Not only did Sanders score much higher in likeability than Clinton, but many moderate voters actually preferred Sanders.

Remember, Sanders (like Trump) created a tremendous amount of excitement, with massive turnout at his rallies. Clinton didn

(Excerpt) Read more at zerohedge.com ...


TOPICS: Politics
KEYWORDS: 2016election; 2016issues; 2016polls; dnc; feelthebern; hillary; trumptransition; trumpvictory
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-47 next last
To: gunsequalfreedom

That is my read as well.

Sanders would have turned out his young supporters and they would have worked hard for him.

Ironically a more neutral media (i.e., only anti-Trump 80% of the time instead of 99.9% of the time) would have made folks more likely to take them seriously, and that would have hurt Trump.

Sanders would have won all the rust belt states while Trump probably would have taken Virginia—result a narrow Sanders win.


21 posted on 11/16/2016 1:51:54 AM PST by cgbg (Pedophiles--the siren is wailing--incoming!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Chandler

When has the mainstream media been right on just about anything?


22 posted on 11/16/2016 2:13:14 AM PST by maddog55 (America Rising a new Civil War looks like it happened!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

Aside from your spelling, are you claiming that gun control prevents violent crimes?


23 posted on 11/16/2016 2:17:08 AM PST by SamAdams76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: FreeperCell

I ask my Democratic friends why Joe Biden was muscled aside and they have no answer. I think Biden would have won comfortably.


24 posted on 11/16/2016 2:17:15 AM PST by jalisco555 ("In a time of universal deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act". George Orwell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: snuffy smiff
Please accept my apologies.

No apology needed; I agree to a large extent. The pollsters employed by major media outlets knew what results their sponsors wanted and worked to produce those results.

25 posted on 11/16/2016 2:43:01 AM PST by Pollster1 ("Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Chandler

There was no “positive” coverage of Trump. His candidacy was promoted by the media because they thought he would be a joke. He received a lot more airtime than the other candidates because the media though it would make for good Republican-bashing copy. They thought they were helping hillary but little did they know that he was the only person on the stage at the time that could take out hillary.

Like Obama, he’s a product of the media. But I think this man understands what he’s supposed to do versus the clueless Kenyan pothead.
We are moving towards a time when persona and imagery will replace competence and experience. Trump might be the last candidate with the competence and experience.


26 posted on 11/16/2016 2:53:40 AM PST by newnhdad (Our new motto: USA, it was fun while it lasted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jalisco555
I think Biden would've won comfortably

That's my suspicion. Scranton might well have brought PA to him, as an example.

27 posted on 11/16/2016 3:04:06 AM PST by grania
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: newnhdad
There are still folks who make a living selling horseshoes.

There will also always be a few self-proclaimed "objective" media outlets that are in fact fronts for George Soros (and his successors and assigns after we drone his sorry rear end... :-) ) and the DNC.

But--we will continue to hear less and less from them. (movie cite: "Brotherhood of the Bell" :-) )
28 posted on 11/16/2016 3:39:33 AM PST by cgbg (Pedophiles--the siren is wailing--incoming!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

There was once a 3D map like this for 1980 I think or some election after that showed the red and blue areas with heights proportional to their populations. It is STUNNING when you see it like that. It shows you why popular vote is just mob rule.


29 posted on 11/16/2016 3:56:41 AM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Pollster1

You have it right. Whether the source of money is media tycoons or candidates, Pollsters are in the business of keeping their source of money happy and getting repeat business.

The same is true of paid political consultants. Their #1 skill is raising money for the campaign, which means for themselves. Examples: Shrum and Murphy can raise money even though they always lose.

The pollster who seeks the truth is rare, but might exist.

The paid political consultant whose #1 priority is his candidate winning is rare, but might exist.


30 posted on 11/16/2016 4:07:14 AM PST by spintreebob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: koalkracker1981

Sanders would of secured the current “democrat” States (North East/West Coast/Illinois) and protected most of the rust belt States. Florida could have been a wash. Democrats shot themselves in the foot and “don’t it feel good.”


31 posted on 11/16/2016 4:13:02 AM PST by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: spintreebob
The pollster who seeks the truth is rare, but might exist.

They exist. Campaign management may not release their results even to the campaign staff, but they have to know the truth. That's most of what I did for a living, and I always reported accurate results to the best of my ability. I included the uncertainties, not just the classic statistical uncertainty but also in my assumptions.

32 posted on 11/16/2016 4:23:23 AM PST by Pollster1 ("Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: All

They liked Sanders because they didn’t know him....when his Commie roots were exposed, he would have been toast.


33 posted on 11/16/2016 4:51:41 AM PST by Maverick68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: shibumi
Those are also the most densely populated areas, so if gun violence were homogeneous throughout the population, those areas would still show the highest concentration.
34 posted on 11/16/2016 5:06:45 AM PST by Family Guy (A society's first line of defense is not the law but customs, traditions and moral values. -Williams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: FreeperCell
1) The Clinton Campaign promoted Trump as a Republican candidate -- Be careful what you wish for.

2) Sanders had a better chance of beating Trump -- say the same polls that had Hillary in a landslide (?)

3) Trump took an overwhelming majority of U.S. counties -- Ditto Romney-Obama, McCain-Obama, heck probably even Dole-Clinton.

4) The Numbers show Trump did NOT win because of racism and sexism -- but what the heck, why ruin a good liberal narrative?

35 posted on 11/16/2016 5:10:43 AM PST by cincinnati65
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: shibumi
I would love to see other quality of life correlations with the election map.
36 posted on 11/16/2016 5:11:01 AM PST by Awgie (Truth is always stranger than fiction.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer
Like this one from 2014
37 posted on 11/16/2016 5:54:40 AM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: grania
That's my suspicion. Scranton might well have brought PA to him, as an example.

I think Biden would have also carried Michigan and Wisconsin. The Democrats were fools to bypass him. They're loss, America's gain.

38 posted on 11/16/2016 5:58:35 AM PST by jalisco555 ("In a time of universal deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act". George Orwell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: FreeperCell

“(Is this why the mainstream media’s coverage of Trump was fairly positive up until his nomination ... and then universally negative after?)”

I have now heard that line for months. And my challenge is for anyone to submit an example, on video or audio, of when the press treated Trump fairly positively.

I watched the whole whole campaign closely, and the coverage of Trump always began with a sardonic smear, and ended the same way.

Drudge offered up a sample the other day.


39 posted on 11/16/2016 6:03:09 AM PST by odawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jalisco555

He might not be on our side, but Biden does have what hillary couldn’t fake. He comes across as authentic.


40 posted on 11/16/2016 6:03:44 AM PST by grania
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-47 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson