Posted on 09/04/2018 4:23:10 PM PDT by vannrox
With their supporters energized in opposition to Donald Trump, Democrats hold their widest advantage in midterm election vote preferences since 2006, when they seized control of both houses of Congress.
Rebounding from a tighter contest in the spring, Democratic House candidates now lead their Republican opponents nationally by 52-38 percent among registered voters in a new ABC News/Washington Post poll – a lead that holds up across a range of likely voter models.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
IOW, the partisan media shills are getting an early start on inciting riots, same way they did in 2016, with grossly unrealistic estimates of imaginary Demwit leads.
Rahm Emanuel announces he’s not running for Chicago mayor reelection
abc7chicago.con | September 4, 2018
Posted on 9/4/2018 12:09:56 PM by rdl6989
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3684711/posts
1) Only 25% GOP
2) Random adults not voters (Possibly not even citizens)
3) Questions written to reinforce bias
#DataScam
just like 2016!
https://mobile.twitter.com/parscale/status/1035547616086515714
Brad Parscale is Trump’s campaign manager for 2020.
Rush said it years ago. He’s right.
Should serve as a clarion call to repubs and get them energized.....should.....
If you don’t like Drudge don’t go to his page
Name calling is classless
They are doing everything possible to manipulate a win.
Media and Dems living in the echo chamber again?
The whole country can be their sample size since they know how we feel based on our emails, posts and browsing history.
Trends and Intensity would be very easy to measure. That’s why they are so into shadow banning. They don’t want our side to know how many people agree with us.
A certain percentage of the population are followers, they want to be on the winning side no matter what. These are the people they are trying to sway.
Might be false but we still have to prove it wrong by voting as if this is 2016
Poll was 33D, 25R, 37I and by the breakdowns from the I, it looks like the “I” was members of the ABC newsroom, the halls of Harvard and someone polled MSNBC staff.
Having a big sample size does not help unless it is a representitive sample of who will vote in an election. It only makes the the poll more precise in its inaccuracy. As an extreme example to illustrate the difference consider a poll of 100,000 members of a communist fan club vs a poll of only 1000 residence from households in a district who regulraly vote. The “margin of error” of the 100,000 communist fans will be very very small due to a huge sample size. But they are not a representitive sample of voters so the poll results will be garbage.
Voting in 2018 could help too.
Only +14? C’mon, ABC, you can lie better than that. Why not say +34? +44? Lol.
For decades, that was a “suppression” poll. With Trump, it became a mobilizer.
Let’s keep letting them lie about it, and we’ll see the flood roll in. Let them keep lying. It’s only motivating.
And I thought another poll showed them dead even?
Is Drudge a never Trumper?
It would be easy for a program to generate a random list of voters with the correct demographic ratios.
A 2nd program then datamines their social media, email and browsing history to calculate who they are likely to vote for.
Far more accurate than traditional polls where they have to deal with diminishing land lines, shy voters and those who deliberately lie to the pollster.
Most modern polls are push polls designed to sway or measure public opinion.
Should have been: measurethe effect of propaganda on public opinion.
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.