Do Not Trust Any Polls - October Surprise Thread #2

The Vanity Post | 18 October 2016 | 1Eagle

[1-Eagle]

In 1996, The Clintons used Polls as Propaganda to suppress the Dole/Kemp Campaign. Imagine trying to get donations, recruit volunteers, or attract people to your rallies if your team has been behind in the polls by as much as 27% all summer, and those polls have been pounded into your brain 24/7. Thats what happened to Dole/Kemp.

Take a look at the poll averages for 1996 here:
1996 Polling on wikipedia

This example of polls being used as propaganda is instructive. Notice how Clinton is said to be leading by as much as 27% during one week! Yet on election day he won by 8%. This would seem to be a very radical swing of opinion, except that it is all fabricated. Only 2 of approximately 15 pollsters even finished within the fictional accuracy statistic called the "margin of error". This, alone, should show everyone that the "margin of error" is a fiction of the pollsters imagination. A propaganda tool to say "this poll is accurate within 4%" when no such thing is true, and certain was NOT true for 99% of polls leading up to election day.

How did we get into this discussion?

A Freeper did some impressive extrapolation of an LA Times Poll and discovered that approximately 57% of respondents were women, which is about 5% over the national census for 1996. Don't quote me on that, theres been a lot of water under the bridge. But that is close. Can't remember the handle of the Freeper that discovered this interesting demographics problem which slanted the poll toward Clinton because many women have been known to vote democrat for a reason that remains unknown. So this launched a lot of interest into the techniques used by pollsters especially when you consider the high water mark set by the polls with a lead of 27% for Clinton in mid-summer. Clearly polls could be and were being used as Campaign Suppression tools.

Any college student who has taken Statistics can vouch that the accuracy of a poll is determined by various factors with one of the most important being the size of the sample. In todays America of over 300 million people, you simply cannot call 500, 900, or even 10,000 people and get any accurate idea of what is going to happen if the election were held even today. There are too many factors including the time of day most calls were made, and so on and so forth.

Notice in this 1996 polling example how the pollsters covered themselves by finally making the polls show a tight race right at the end. By this time, the damage was done, the time for raising funds, recruiting volunteers, holding large rallies was over. It was now safe for the slanted polls to adjust and show a tight race. Having watched this carefully there was no doubt in my mind this was a carefully orchestrated propaganda scheme that worked perfectly for Clinton/Gore. Dole/Kemp struggled all summer to raise cash. A British journalist surmised after the election that in view of the finally tally of 8% if the media had not been so biased against Dole/Kemp they might have had a fighting chance.

[TMA62]

Agreed. Remember, the only poll that they want to be accurate is the last one taken a day or two before the election. That way, the pollster can have credibility. PRIOR to that last poll, they are only used to be news stories in themselves, to influence public opinion and to demoralize turnout. Thats all.

[A CA Guy]

Maybe the polls are the narrative used by the elite to cover up massive voter fraud to get the results they want and to not have populations riot.