Posted on 08/22/2015 12:24:48 PM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
I was wondering why a polling outfit (CNN/ORC) is now all of a sudden trusted by conservatives? If not, then say so. If it is all of a sudden now trusted by conservatives...I thought that CNN is a liberal outfit and not to be trusted?
Limbaugh seems to be going after CNN for their Morten Downey Jr. documentary on TV as somehow being used to juxtapose against Trump, and for their interviews of Trump supporters, and wondering if they are going to hand-pick the worst of the worst in those interviews to somehow paint all Trump supporters in a negative light. But are CNN polls now simultaneously trustworthy simultaneously alongside the aforementioned?
If we stick to an unmoving set of principles, based upon conservative belief that liberals are not to be trusted, why then should we trust CNN? Were they liberal back in 2007/2008 and 2011/2012 in those presidential election cycles, but are now conservative polling outfits all of a sudden? Did they try to pick the GOP nominee back then in each of those presidential election cycles? If so, has CNN then changed its spots for 2015/2016?
How about Rasmussen? Just because Scott Rasmussen is (as has been said here at FR) no longer running the show there, is Rasmussen no longer to be trusted?
In a recent thread here, Rasmussen was panned by more than one person as being no longer trustworthy in their eyes when Donald Trump didn't do so well in the second-to-last poll from them, but in Rasmussen's most recent poll, Trump seemed to do a little better - and so Rasmussen was praised. How did that come about?
Let me see if I get this straight: those polling outfits (CNN/ORC, ABC News/WaPo and NBC News/WSJ) - that conservatives once did not trust - are now trustworthy. But Rasmussen is trustworthy if it procures the desired result for Trump?
And I thought that WSJ is now considered to be an establishment outfit. Why then trust any NBC News/WSJ poll? Just wondering...
Nate Silver... noted. I may remind you later sometime this election season.
No but the bias can more easily be quantified, and can be taken into account, and adjusted for
Sure.
You just answered "sure" to the question, does the pro Obama media has a case.
But if you want to believe there is a secret society of pollsters that bias the results of hundreds of national samplings, that’s your right.
Don't put words in my mouth. I never said their was a "secret society of pollsters".
Geez.
My above point remains. The media is biased. So too could be the media-paid-for pollsters.
True.
The trends and the size of the margin show that Trump is way ahead of the pack.
No, I don’t trust polls, and Trump himself said he had no need for them but for quoting them.
I trust momentum, but you know, that could be cut off in a single moment if the cameras pull off of Trump coverage. He has them in a spot, because covering him increases their ratings.
What would happen to Trump if there were to come a Pravda-like induced blackout on him? Yikes!
These same polls show Hillary’s poll numbers dropping..big time.
Are they inaccurate on Hillary, as well?
Glenn Beck is on a crusade against Trump, but I thought Hannity answered him pretty well yesterday.
I have participated in two polls.
The first was by land line during the Iraq War. The Iraqi army had collapsed and joy was in the air.
While answering the questions, I told the young lady she had already asked that question only phrased differently.
She laughed it off, but I was much more attentive.
In all, I was asked about 50 questions.
Reviewing the questions after the call ended, I realised the point of the poll was to downplay the popularity of GWB and show public dissatisfaction with his foreign policy.
The second time was by cell phone in Obama’s third year in office.
Every question was designed to show Obama as popular with the public in some degree.
I refused to take part in a poll just after Obama’s reelection.
I believe each poll is designed to elicit a desired response and the polling agencies give the public no real chance to be honestly heard.
I have since switched to a prepaid cell phone and have not been bothered by pollsters or salespersons.
What is good for CNN is good for the leftist movement. All media on the left are obsessed with trying to find the right formula to counter FOX News.
Friday night I was on wifi in McDonalds when CNN featured Trump from at least 8-10:30 pm EDT. He was on when I came in and was on when I left.
Trump is their new OJ to replace the Malaysian plane nobody cared about. Trump is getting eyeballs to CNN. Every person who walked into McDonalds (mostly Black Dems) stayed and watched Trump for a long period of time. Over 50 at the peak and over 30 when I left at 10:30pm. I go to this McDs often and have never seen more than 8 people stay beyond a typical fast food quick trip.
Trump is clearly capturing the eyeballs and support of these Black Dems who reason: I’m not a Republican. But Trump isn’t really a Republican either so I can support him.
I have frequent political conversations in mostly Black fast food places on the East and South sides of Atlanta. There is no love for Hilary. And Obama has become a deep disappointment because their employment and life has gotten worse under him.
Trump is benefitting from the Obama malaise.
So yeah, I do think the polls are generally correct, more so the closer we get to election day.
How so, if CNN, PPP, Bloomberg (and others) are all libbberal outfits and not to be trusted?
The only thing that I trust is negatives (the negatives on candidates) as a barometer.
I and others tried to warn people about Romney’s sky-high negatives but so many wouldn’t listen. Trump’s negatives are even higher than Romney’s were...
I hear ya. But I think the profit motive (and his name recognition) is enough to keep them covering Trump.
It’s easier to suppress things that people aren’t familiar with, like the Planned Parenthood scandal.
Everybody knows Trump, and if an outlet tried to downplay the coverage, people would go looking for it elsewhere.
“Do Independents get to vote in the Republican Primary? I doubt it but I don’t really know. But if they don’t then what are they doing in the poll?”
Varies from state to state. There is plenty of misinformation thrown around, on forums.
For example the idea that non-Republicans influence results, because of so many “open primaries” is something I researched and found to be untrue.
I have seen a couple of studies done on accuracy of poll results AFTER elections.....It seems that something like 80% over estimate the margins for democrats while underestimating the margin for Republicans compared to the actual results...Makes u wonder...
[Who gets called??]
Uh, Poles-R-Us?
Wrong analysis.
I have been juxtaposing how one poll says one thing, and we don’t seem to hear a peep from Trump, but other polls we do seem to hear from him on.
If so, why is that?
And why have some “conservatives” in the media bashed CNN and others for years but don’t seem to be doing so now witty their polls?
This juxtaposing of polls and my citing of them has been building up to this.
And now I can continually remind people of this...
Not only NO!, but HELL, NO!! Manipulators, deceivers, and Bullsh!t artists, ALL.
Go ahead and make note of this and him. I really don’t care.
And I will continue to make note of how some so-called conservatives have bashed CNN and others in the past but now seem to have let up on that.
And I will continue to make note of how some here at FR pan polls from what were once called libbberal and/or GOP-e outfits and then turn around and sing their praises if and when that polling outfit shows good %’s for their candidate.
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.