Posted on 10/20/2016 2:29:39 PM PDT by BlackFemaleArmyColonel
If you listened to the mainstream media, you might be tempted to believe that Democrat presidential nominee Hillary Clinton leads Republican rival Donald Trump in the polls by double digits. However, it’s no secret that polls can be manipulated to a yield certain result.
A group of statisticians and actuaries compiled data from previous polls to show how just how unreliable polls can be. They took data from a recent Fox poll from Oct. 14 that showed Clinton ahead of Trump by seven points and a WSJ/NBC poll from Oct. 16 that showed Clinton with an 11-point lead.
The statisticians first noted that both of these polls were “heavily skewed” toward Democrats. The Fox sample group consisted of 43 percent Democrats to 36 Republicans to 21 “other,” and the NBC poll showed 44 percent Democrats to 37 Republicans to 19 “other.”
Simply put, by selecting more Democrats to participate in the polls, they are tailored to favor a Democrat result.
When the actuaries calculated results using the same data from the same surveys with an even split of 40 Democrats, 40 Republicans and 20 “other,” they got a different result, which put Trump in the lead.
The statisticians also looked at past polls from 1980 and 1988, where Democrats were favored to win but ended up losing. In 1980, Jimmy Carter was ahead of Ronald Reagan 47 to 39. Reagan ended up winning the election in a landslide. In 1998, Michael Dukakis was ahead of George H. W. Bush by 17 points, and Bush ended up winning the election easily.
This election season has been unlike any other in recent years, and independent voters, as well as undecided voters, remain difficult to predict.
(Excerpt) Read more at conservativetribune.com ...
There is also the outright fear of violence if you say you support Trump in many areas. Dilbert creator Scott Adams for months endorsed Clinton for his safety and said so on his blog, and he noted the irony that Democrats didn’t see any problem with him admitting so but threatened to kill him for merely speaking well of Trump without said endorsement.
I wonder how many people officially support third party candidates but in reality support Trump.
If someone says “I support the Green Party”, I believe them - and that they won’t go to Clinton. If they say libertarian or another party, they may actually mean Trump but are literally afraid to do so.
I think the average length of an American memory is about fifteen minutes these days.
You have me by thirteen years. But I recall arguing with a friend about Nixon/Humphrey in ‘68. Ancient history to my 26 year old kids.
“For the first time in my life the rats might actually tone back their election fraud.”
It’s a little late for that, isn’t it?
Amnesty is not a winning position, bob, no matter how much you spin it.
TTTT!
Amen!!!
We’re studying Judges at Bible Study right now. What a mess it was back then too!!!
Hubby said Hillary is every man’s ex-wife!!!
I’m just a deplorable....fixed it, haaa!
I’m trying to get to the status of “Reprehensible”. Not sure Hillary could pronounce that word without having a seizure.
With that said, Reagan got 50.75% sooooo, "Sundances" prediction over at Conservative Tree House of 56% is not out of the question....
Amnesty is right...or wrong is one position.
Amnesty is a winning ..or losing position is a different argument.
The reality is that Voters are split over immigration.
Many are ambi-valent on the topic.
JD Hayworth lost to McCain thanks to his immigration stance.
Utah had a very corrupt US Sen. A good candidate ran in the primary on issues other than immigration and was far ahead of the incumbent. Then, against the advice of his libertarian leaning campaign advisors, he inexplicably went anti (illegal) immigrant in the last week. His poll numbers plummeted and he lost the election.
Mormons specifically have a history of immigration to Mexico and then back to the US when Commie Cailles threw them out. George Romney was born in Mexico, remember.
In my IL libertarian leaning Oberweiss spent millions of his own money running statewide every 2 years, and then for Congress. But he was identified by a single over-the-top anti-immigrant TV ad. In going door-to-door both against him in the primary and for him in the general I repeatedly heard strong pro-life evangelicals and very secular capitalist types and corporatist types and every type of conservative and Republican you can imagine vowing that could not vote for him due to his anti-immigrant stance.
Voters who have lived near/with immigrants for many years have many immigrant friends, legal and illegal. We pray beside them in church. We work beside them (both white and blue collar). Our kids play with their kids. We have an emotional reaction to kicking them out. Illegals were a big portion of the homeowners where I used to live. If they were deported, we’d have a lot of abandoned buildings in our suburb and property values would go down. If they didn’t fill the IT slots in my IT shop, my entire project would be outsourced to India because we could just not find enough Americans to fill the slots for IT in the rust belt.
At the same time, there is a big faction that does agree with Trump on immigration.
We are split big time.
What doesn’t help is the name calling. People who disagree with me are not racist. People who agree with me are not traitors. We disagree.
Don't kid yourself.
If anything they will double down...
They have absolutely no reason not to...
The MSM has already set the table for Trump if he contests the election, if he is going to claim he was cheated, might as well cheat as much as you can...
Did the lying media tell ya that? It's BS!
Only morons, leftist and our enemies would be against these reckless out of control chain immigration policies and decades long violent open borders.
Of course. However, such transparency could ruin the agenda!
Not buying it, bob, Trump is the nominee largely because he has stood with the citizens and the rule of law.
Yeb!, Rubio and the other open borders candidates went nowhere.
McCain won against Hayworth because he had millions od dollars to carpetbomb Hayworth with negative ads, most of which were lies.
Mormons may want open borders, but the rest of America does not.
Trump is the nominee because he had the 40% of the voters that agrees with him on immigration. Plus he was more n anti=Washington than even Cruz. Plus Cruz, Rubio, Carson (the only 3 who were serious challengers to Trump) all ran flawed campaigns.
Trump and his supporters need to convince the undecided, who will be convinced on
1) anti crooked Hillary.
2) Small government. Hillary is big REMOTE government.
3) most important, friendliness, likeability. Insult the opposition candidate. But don’t insult the undecided voter.
Where did ya get that? Did the lying media tell ya that? It's BS!
Unlike Blacks who are geographically concentrated, Hispanics are quite dispersed and live beside non-Hispanics, and vice versa.
I’m a consultant and have worked beside immigrants at over 30 Fortune 100. They are mostly accepted.
I’ve gone door to door in Chicago, near and far burbs and downstate.. tens of thousands of doors knocked on. I just don’t see the anti (illegal) immigrant sentiment, except on websites like FR. What I see and hear is a positive attitude towards most, but not all, immigrants.
In other words, most people seem to be like me on immigration.
Now, don’t get me wrong. Whether something is popular or not is not the same as whether it is right or not. Each needs to be debated separately.
Consultant? Hispanics? Knock on doors? What are you talking about?
I was referring to tens of millions here illegally and our reckless dangerous out of control chain immigration polices. To be honest, it sounds like you haven’t the first clue regarding this epic decades long violent government sponsored invasion.
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.