Posted on 09/07/2016 4:06:31 AM PDT by Trump20162020
Polls must employ some kind of turnout model. One can call it Skewing if one thinks the turnout model overly optimistic for one of the choices. On election day we will find out which models are skewed...but msnbc is smoking hopium when they use a 2012 model.
But do you see 10% of the people going to the polls and standing in line for hours to cast a vote that's ultimately meaningless? Outside of a handful of hardcore FReepers?
Nope, they'll just not bother to show up.
Adjusted (Using 2012 Fraud)
I doubt the black turnout will rival that of 2008 and 2012. I also doubt the young adult turnout will rival those two years. The young people I know (and we’ve seen reports of the same) do not like either candidate.
It does seems that slowly, but surely, Trump is gaining % of the registered Republican vote. Last I saw it was 90% which is a huge improvement from a few months ago. He needs to up that some and I expect he will.
“Yeah, we all know Hillary will drive the same black turnout that Obama did /sarc”
Exactly, there is NO WAY IN HELL that black men will vote her like they did in the “American Idol” election of oblahblah...that was “historic” and I believe most have gotten that out of their system.
Of course the “welfare moms” will vote for her — But black men will more than likely just not vote.
When most men, and I do mean men, not skinny jeans boys, but men are repulsed by her appearance and that voice...holy dog $hit...that voice is the cure for men who are experiencing an erection that lasts more than four hours, no need to call a doctor, just listen to her voice - Problem solved, however, don’t look at her picture or you may never experience another one, hell even Bill chose other women over hillary.
Hilarious. They are masters of self delusion.
Ah, but the 2012 election was the first to be “won” with the help of Diebold. As the country has done NOTHING to address the fraud “programmed” into the election the best model will be the one that accurately assesses ALL the important factors that impact the outcome. So the model that incorporates the influence of massive fraud programmed into these machines will best predict the outcome. It is sort of like gummint employment and other economic indicators. Who are you going to believe? Gummint or your lying eyes?
Well said.
How many here have taken a poll and asked the questions?
When I have taken a poll about 1/3 of the respondents will, at the end of the interview, ask:
“How did I do? How many did I get correct?”
Many respondents don’t understand the concept of a poll as you and I do. They think it is a test of whether they know the correct answer, or not.
Of course, many vote that way also. They vote for what they think is the correct way to vote.
I posted another story about this last night, but I did not have the neat-O-keen graphic to go with it. As the article I posted last night concluded:”Just how stupid do these people think the American voters are?”
I can see 10% doing what you describe as nobody doing.
You should develop that idea! (even if its BS, not saying it is, just saying I don’t care. Fight fire with fire.)
That's like saying, "If I believed that professional politicians lie..."
Polls used to be a tool for learning the voters' preference(s). They are now used to shape those same preferences. Instead of measuring or weighing, they are trying to condition how we vote by showing us that our guy "just can't win."
Look at the "Brexit" vote. Polls had Brexit losing by 10 points on the morning of the election! They were trying to shape public opinion, and THE VOTE OUTCOME!!!!
So why did Brexit win by 10%, a 20 point shift from the AM "polls."
THE POLLS LIE AND LIE AND LIE!!!!!!!! You moron!
Saying "Trump has a 2-point lead" when his lead is actually 20 points isn't telling 'some of the truth.' It's an effing lie. Effing DB.
Right.
Hillary < Obama
Trump > Romney
It’s not 2012.
The media, like a dog, returns to it's own vomit.
Well, on Nov. 9th we’ll find out which one of us was right. Guaranteed. :-)
Well.... I think that the "Over" would always be a safe bet there.
I believe you’re right. Clinton is one of the least liked (most disliked) candidates in history. She does not rally the base. Her scandals and obvious health problems make active campaigning difficult. The ‘rats are facing a very low turnout. They’ve got to find something to spur the faithful. Look for the ‘rats to demonize Trump in any and every way possible, from the silly to the down-right nasty. This is an all-in election for the Clintons (all of them). Hillary wins, or they are probably looking at not just the collapse of their power empire, but very probably serious prison time too.
Yeah.....Mika.....playing patty-cake with ‘Intern’ Joe.
Hmmm, let’s see....what could possibly be different than 2012????
- A candidate that is so bad not even the media can cover for her
- A BLACK president that, for eight years, has failed black people
- A president with policies that have failed everyone, I see nobody even talking about him...except after his apology tours
- A candidate that wants to be another 4 more years of Obama
- A world experiencing Islamic invasions, constant terrorism
- A national debt that is frightening to even think about
- A nation tired of political correctness
- A nation tired of establishment candidates
- ...and so on.
But let’s us all of the data from 2012 and assume it will hold true for 2016.
Doh!!! It’s funny to see all the political science experts doing the “turn the crank” analysis of this election. They don’t get it.
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.