Thanks Timestax!
“For Trump supporters, this is a tempting narrative to believe. But this simply isn’t so. The fact is there just are more Democrats out there than Republicans, and this has largely been the case at least since the New Deal. That obviously doesn’t mean Democrats always win, but it’s unwise to assume a pollster is biased because its sample included more Democrats than Republicans.”
There aren’t 12% more Dems than Reps.
If all the Democrats and Republicans who voted in 2012 vote in 2016, Hillary! will win. Trump wins if and only if he can get Republicans-who-stayed-home-in-2012, plus “independents” (read: old-fashioned Democrats) to the polls to vote for him. That is what the polls cannot predict, and at this point in the campaign, neither can we.
I like the false narrative that Hillary is winning. Her people already are not excited about getting to the polls, this will insure a Trump landslide.
Meaning that the US >is< becoming an insane asylum.
I believe it. The power of Free Sh*t is strong.
At this point in 1980 I think Carter was up by 11.
Warning: Washington Post polls are junk surveys with major sampling bias issues
6-26-16 | Lowly sidebar mod
Posted on 6/26/2016, 3:12:05 PM by Sidebar Moderator
The Washington Post is actively trying to demoralize the Republican base to depress fundraising and recruitment and ultimately to suppress turnout in November by promoting their false narrative that Trump has no chance. Think about that before posting the same poll over and over from different sources. You know who you are.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3443909/posts
“The fact is there just are more Democrats out there than Republicans, and this has largely been the case at least since the New Deal.”
Looking for citation.......
Can’t find one, but lecture away, Mr blogger.
Thanks Timestax!
I’m inclined to agree that at this point, Hillary probably has a legit 4-5 point lead, but I think polls showing a 10+ point lead are dubious.
That’s fine. This was never going to be easy and it was always going to be a long shot. If we’re going to lose, let’s go down guns blazing. Bombs away!
Don’t we know always to act like our guy (or gal) is down 20 pts? Work your butt off to see they’re elected! While I DO like Trump, it’ll be worth a lot of sweat to work to defeat Hillary! If she’s elected, I’m going to burrow in for 8 years.
No there are not significantly more Democrats than Replicans out there.
I have no doubt Clinton is ahead at this point. Not the 10-12% but in the 4-6% range. They are closer in the states that matter, but Trump has to define Clinton the way he defined the field in the primaries to pull this out. He’s got all the opportunity to win, but he hasn’t won it yet.
Sure, there are more Democrats than Republicans in the general electorate.
That’s been true since the New Deal. But there aren’t twice as many Democrats in the general electorate.
Gallup reports the partisan split in America as 46 D 40 R and 14 I.
Hillary is indeed leading but not by double digits.
The liars at NBC/WSJ with another push poll for their lying mediots for discussions this Sunday of how Trump is losing!
Three Strikes - 3rd Time This Campaign Season NBC/WSJ Caught Promoting Agenda Polls
The Conservative Treehouse ^ | 02/17/2016 | Sundance
Posted on 2/17/2016, 4:57:15 PM by PJBankard
The team of NBC and Wall Street Journal (Rupert Murdoch owned) has struck again with their latest highly coordinated and heavily manufactured latest “Agenda Poll”. We have previously revealed NBC/WSJ’s prior two constructs.......
[SNIP]
Remember, an “agenda poll” is not created to show a statistical snapshot of the presidential race. An “agenda poll” has nothing to do with the support. Agenda Polls are manufactured to create media talking points, to create media narratives.
Agenda polling is about setting out to make a story, to sell a specific narrative, by using polling as the means to justify the story you are selling. Nothing more, and nothing less.
(Excerpt) Read more at theconservativetreehouse.com …
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3398474/posts
The Electoral College is often denigrated for doing exactly as it was intended: preventing large states from dominating the popular vote. A candidate has to build a winning set of electoral votes from multiple states, rather than just focusing on the population centers.
For various reasons, most states are predisposed to one political party or another. It takes a true landslide to swing these states to the other party. But, without a landslide (like Reagan's 1984 election), it comes down to a handful of battleground states.
In those battleground states (PA, FL, OH, VA), Clinton's lead is much less than the national average. If the Republican Party will ever stop undermining Trump and focus on those battleground states, Trump can win the election.
Is this another paid shill for Jeb Bush, the Biggest Loser of them all?
Brexit is only a disaster for the globalists.
Another #NeverTrumper