To some degree she is correct. I don’t answer unknown calls unless I’m expecting a call and
I don’t know the number. They can leave a message and I may or may not return the call.
But Trump as such has aroused a lot of people that otherwise may have been silent.
Remember the ‘silent majority’ idea. What I’d like Trump to do is to get in an unmarked
vehicle’and travel thru some of the smaller towns where he is at and stop and talk to a few
people. It would be interesting to see if that materialize into a bunch of people showing up.
Too many viable competing theories.
There’s only one poll that matters, and until then we have to get the “vote Trump” message out.
Neither piece of reasoning (yours and hers) makes much sense to me.
...tell her polls are a method in which rats “ over sample” to get the results they wish. Point out to her, if polls meant anything, how did Trump become our candidate while all the early polls said no chance
It’s been speculated that Trump has tapped into the so-called “Monster Vote,” people who have not voted in the past, which is why they don’t show up in polling. He needs to be stressing voter registration at his rallies, pounding the point home that if they’re not registered, they can’t vote and he must have their votes to win.
Many of the libs I know are yellow dogs. That is, they are going to vote ‘D’ and that is that. This being the case, they don’t have to engage in politics. There is no need to discuss, to learn, to go to a single rally. They just go about their lives and when the 1st Tuesday in November rolls around they go to the polls and push all the ‘D’ buttons.. Just like their mommies and daddies.
As to the enthusiasm at the rallies: those are big crowds, but there may be bigger crowds sitting at home, living off the government dole who are voting for Hillary to keep their bennies. The crowds could be like a cult. A cult is often small, but more enthusiastic than mainstream groups.
The only way you will win the argument is if Trump wins.
Just the facts...
Discount any poll showing Hil ahead by double digits.
Concerning rally attendance vs polling - it IS the case that you cannot extrapolate from one indicator to confirm or deny the other indicator.
SOME rally goers might answer polls. Many would not. We can’t know that ALL of them won’t. We can’t know the percentages. But it’s a pretty good generalization.
You CAN tell that Trump folks are enthusiastic enough to
rally, whereas Hil people will pull the lever for her just because she is a Dem and they hate/fear Trump, NOT because they are enthusiastic about her, they’re not.
Those are basic facts/truths in the situation you are discussing.
What is your point when you are “arguing”. What are you claiming - that your wife disagrees with. Are you claiming you can prove Trump is a likely winner because of his crowds, and she disagrees?
What I’ve posted here should help clarify things.
Heck, if we trace the concept back to the first couple, it was Eve who felt that Adam was wrong to not want a bite of that fruit.
He wasn't, but it didn't matter...
...his mate was a woman. The End.
8^)
Ask her to prove those who go to rallies don’t vote in polls and those who don’t do vote in polls.
PS. The best idea is to let the wife win this discussion
as it matters not which is correct.
In a typical election only about half of the electorate vote. If a party can increase their typical turnout by 10% that could determine the outcome. If you know of anybody who might usually sit out the election, point out to them the power they have to swing the election.
She is simply stating the Trump supporters are not inclined to answer a poll to show their support. If true, the polls are understating Trump’s support, which seems plausible.
Brexit. Brexit. Brexit.
The election turns on turn out!
Count on the Monster Vote.
Believing the media in October is a fool’s errand.
Follow FReeper LS on polling and internals.
Drink more adult beverages.
Polls have to be cooked to account for voter fraud. The networks have been burned too many times by paying attention to polls.
My opinion is that from a political perspective intimidation works. Seen it many times. The left and the media know this and use it when ever they can.
It works not necessarily so well on those being directly intimidated, but most effectively on those weak minded people who merely see such intimidation targeting others.
It is a natural human tendency to not want to be on the “outs” with the “in-crowd.” You saw it with both girls and boys in Junior High and High school, and it is not all that much different than what you see today.
Dems knows this which is why they use intimidation in their speech and physical tactics. Anecdotally, I have personally seen many a Trump sign on the highway get defaced or torn down. In my entire neighborhood there is not one Trump sign or bumper sticker. The good news there is only one Hillary yard sign.
Let’s just hope the vote turns out to be significantly under estimated much like it was with the Brexit vote where there was lots of name calling and intimidation before the vote, which arguably explains why the polling numbers missed the actual vote results by so much.
There are many Democrats who don’t care about Clinton, simply vote straight ticket Democrat no matter who is on the ticket. Hence the very old joke about Yellow Dog Democrats, they’d vote for any Democrat, even if it was only a yellow mangy dog. And such voters will vote Democrat to keep the welfare or Social Security flowing without ever showing up at a rally.
Dems aren’t enthusiastic enough about Hillary to attend a rally, but they’re not going to vote Trump, so they’ll vote Hillary by default.
Don’t even bother acknowledging any polls results as acceptable unless you can look at the internals. Those polls showing Hillary winning are also skewed whereby the pollsters over poll women - (in some polls women have been over sampled at 58% which is ridiculous. Just anecdotally, it seems, from my perusal of polls, to be the polls that show her winning by 5+ points. Polls were she is winning by less than 5 usually over sample dems by 7 to 10 points) - by several points and since Trump is trailing in the female demographic by 20 or so points, that’s the easiest way for the establishment pollsters to make it look like she’s winning. The press and the establishment uniparty of D’s and never-Trumper R’s and their pollsters are waging psychological warfare against the electorate. Don’t let them get to you, believe your eyes not what establishment news readers tell you to believe.
Has anyone considered the possibility of fraud? They may be skewing the polls in order to say “it was so close” in order to hide massive fraud. I for one believe this occurred in 2012. It’s going to be really hard to stomach this time. I hope the Trump train is so big they won’t be able to defraud this time.