hmmm NBC.
I have yet to meet a single Carson supporter.
Internals pls
Yea...r i g h t
NBC, CBS? Okay. :-)
NBC didn’t get the memo. Carson was last month’s flavour. Rubio is this month’s.
Non politicians getting 52% of vote, that is real story. Then you have Tippie Toes @ 8% that makes a nice sidebar.
If I thought this was true, I would use the chains that hold up my heavy bag, and dangle like a participle.
So is this a lagger? Because we just had two new IA polls out showing Carson falling behind again. The key here is figuring out which are the “leading” polls and which are “lagging.”
...and we should trust NBC—why???
Wait till Trump starts putting out the negative ads against Carson.
It will be all over for the Doc.
Actually, come to think of it, this is good news for Trump because of all those people who want to cite November and December polls and say, “But those guys never win.”
NBC/WSJ: The worst of both worlds. Ole Ruppert Murdoch is busy at the WSJ trying to derail Trump.
Fueled by Democrat crossovers who will be voting Democrat in the general election.
Another thread just posted shows Trump ahead again in Iowa.
What happened to the Carson surge there?
Probably the same that will happen with this poll in a while. Manipulated numbers inflated to fit the narrative.
I don’t see it. Not a Trump fan, but I haven’t met anyone with any interest in Carson. And Carson’s performance in the debate seems unlikely to have improved his standing significantly. If it did, I cannot imagine what it was. He seemed...limp. It would be like sending overcooked spaghetti into battle.
I am not a Trumpie, but my opinion of NBC/WSJ polls is pretty low. So, I am of the wait & see mindset at this point.
I do have a very conservative cousin in her 80s who is rooting for Carson. And yes, she still has all her marbles.
It’s all marketing, right?
I can’t find the internals. Can anyone else?
It does have an error margin of +/- 4.9%. That is pretty high compared to others.
No disrespect to Dr. Carson but I find this very hard to believe. There’s an agenda in this poll somewhere.
CNBC Execs in the Tank for Hillary
Rush Limbaugh.com ^ | November 2, 2015 | Rush Limbaugh
Posted on 11/2/2015, 2:49:33 PM by Kaslin
RUSH: Folks, what did I tell you? Not that you needed to be told, by the way, so patently obvious. Here we go from Breitbart: “CNBC Debate Executive Worked in the Clinton White House for Al Gore.” What did I tell you? The very next day I said these are hit people. These are people from the Clinton campaign that ran that CNBC debate. No matter where you go in the media you’re gonna run into Clinton hacks. Stephanopoulos is over at ABC, they’re everywhere. They’re at CNN. Cuomo is over there at CNN. You’ve got people over at CNBC.
This guy, his name is Brian Steel, senior vice president of communications, CNBC, the second highest ranking network official at Wednesday night’s debate described by an insider as the “executive on hand” for the debate. He worked in the Bill Clinton White House as a domestic policy advisor to Algore. His White House gig was just one of three jobs he held in the Clinton administration.
These Clinton hacks are everywhere, and they go from government to media. They’re at CBS, ABC, NBC. They’re at CNN, CNBC, MSNBC. They’re everywhere, and the CNBC debate, exactly as I told you, the whole thing put together, planned, and orchestrated by Clinton war room hacks.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Not only that, but the wife — ready for this? — the wife of the CNBC debate executive who had three different jobs in the Clinton White House, is a Hillary Clinton donor. “The CNBC executive who oversaw the catastrophic Republican presidential debate in Colorado is married to a Hillary Clinton 2016 donor. Breitbart News reported that CNBC vice president of communications Brian Steel was the ‘executive on hand’ at Wednesday night’s debate ... is married to Eileen Libutti, managing partner at New York City’s Lewis Johs Avallone Aviles LLP law firm. Libutti donated $2,700 to Hillary For America on June 23, just four months before the CNBC debate.”
Of course, this is not a surprise. I’m just confirming. These are not journalists in any way, shape, manner, or form. They’re hacks. They’re party hacks disguised as journalists or disguised as lawyers, disguised as think tank analysts and senior fellows and whatever the heck else. No shock, surprise whatsoever.
The Republican campaigns have agreed to cut the Republican National Committee out of the debate process and instead negotiate directly with the networks. Well, fine and dandy. You’re still negotiating with Clinton hacks. I mean, even after this, it’s like I told you after the CNBC debate, all these stories about how embarrassed everybody was and how negative the coverage seemed to be, don’t kid yourself. They look at this as mission accomplished. Because the questions were what were important, the questions were the bullets, the questions were the attacks. The answers were incidental. The questions were designed to explain to the viewers who these Republicans are. The questions were what was used to be destructive.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3355656/posts