Posted on 08/16/2016 3:52:27 PM PDT by NKP_Vet
"subtlety", "nuance", "twitches", "tremors", "fine tuning", these the less visible notations a researcher can find when they look into the quiet data the smart-set stroll past.
However, that said, when the New York Times is noticed shuffling around in the same data sets, you just know they are attempting to quantify the reality behind the stats the MSM consistently, and fraudulently, represent. In addition, when they stop looking over their shoulder and begin polishing off the dirt from the glowing nugget, well,.. they wouldn't be standing next to us if they didn't suspect we were mining in a more lucrative locale.
CTH readers already know the scope of the research we've put into this election. Our spidey senses also anticipate a certain republican candidate has previously invested in a very similar endeavor. Indeed, it would be impossible for us to predict so accurately were it not for an accidental synergy and ideological alignment therein.
In a rare admission today, the New York Times is walking back over 10 years of prior demographic presentations regarding the U.S. electorate. In essence what they are saying is the voting base is far less ethnically diverse and far more white than historic leftist presentations.
Oh my.
The New York Times is also outlining something, carefully, without actually outlining the something they need to be careful about. Candidate Donald Trump's "potential" broad-based coalition is far larger than candidate Hillary Clinton's "potential" identity-brand political coalition.
(Excerpt) Read more at theconservativetreehouse.com ...
It is necessary to deny the existence of the Monster Vote prior to denying the counting of the Monster Vote.
Trump organizers should pick one precinct somewhere in America and rally R voters to attest to their balloted choice for POTUS. After the poll station closes, compare the electronic tally of R votes to that which folks have legally sworn to have selected, and would be willing to raise a collective legal shit storm over inconsistencies vis-a-via the official certification.
vis-a-vis
This won’t take into account of the early and absentee voting.
There is a related phenomenon.
I have been polled over the phone quite a few time in the past.
I always lie. Always.
I detest polls.
May there be many many many more just like you out there......
The truth is that Trump won last night with law and order speech.
Also good news in that as the boomers aged they have conservative. Also Hillary is hated bigtime.
In a few more weeks, the larger polling forms like Gallup will become very concerned about being correct. Their credibility and accuracy in polling is their product.
I have to wonder how they are factoring in all the cord cutters into their polling. There are millions upon millions of potential voters out there that have nothing more than a smartphone and those users have complete control over what they read and who they talk to.
I wonder what it'd be like around here if Hillary happens to win. Would it be Zot Blood Bath: The Sequel?
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.