That goes both ways. Find me one person who hasn’t endorsed Trump or openly supported him who is predicting he’s going to win this election. Everyone has a bias and bias isn’t the only thing to look at in judging someone’s analysis.
No, the difference is you are assuming that those who hate Trump are “credible” and dismissing those who are not so quick to press the Pro Clinton propaganda as “baised.
This analyst in NV floated the theory in Sept that
Polling in NV finds it very hard to poll the Hispanic vote. There is no actual evidence to back up that assumption, but let it go.
Assumption 2. The Hispanic vote is going to go very heavily against Trump because of his supposed racists attitudes twoards Hispatnice.
Fact is Trump did very well in the Nevada primary with Hispanics. So the assumption that Hispanics are automatically voting Hillary, as this analysis assumed, does not match real data from recent elections.
So this analysis simply turned out any contrary data, looked for data that validated his assumptions and said “See I told you Trump was in trouble in NV”. The Hispanics areas all turned out and voted against Trump.
There no way to know until election day who those votes are for and his assumption, that these are sure Clinton votes is at odds with Trumps Hispanic support in NV.
Beck thinks Trump is going to win by 5%.