Posted on 10/25/2016 3:52:47 PM PDT by Kaslin
Just for laughs, are there any states that are a Longshot but Still POSSIBLE regarding Trump?
Not the battleground states. I dont know if VA is a battleground state.
Special Report
How Carter Beat Reagan
Washington Post admits polling was “in-kind contribution”; New York Times agenda polling.
By Jeffrey Lord – 9.25.12
Dick Morris is right.
Here’s something Dick Morris doesn’t mention. And he’s charitable.
Remember when Jimmy Carter beat Ronald Reagan in 1980?
That’s right. Jimmy Carter beat Ronald Reagan in 1980.
In a series of nine stories in 1980 on “Crucial States” — battleground states as they are known today — the New York Times repeatedly told readers then-President Carter was in a close and decidedly winnable race with the former California governor. And used polling data from the New York Times/CBS polls to back up its stories.
Four years later, it was the Washington Post that played the polling game — and when called out by Reagan campaign manager Ed Rollins a famous Post executive called his paper’s polling an “in-kind contribution to the Mondale campaign.” Mondale, of course, being then-President Reagan’s 1984 opponent and Carter’s vice president.
All of which will doubtless serve as a reminder of just how blatantly polling data is manipulated by liberal media — used essentially as a political weapon to support the liberal of the moment, whether Jimmy Carter in 1980, Walter Mondale in 1984 — or Barack Obama in 2012.
First the Times in 1980 and how it played the polling game.
The states involved, and the datelines for the stories:
· California — October 6, 1980
· Texas — October 8, 1980
· Pennsylvania — October 10, 1980
· Illinois — October 13, 1980
· Ohio — October 15, 1980
· New Jersey — October 16, 1980
· Florida — October 19, 1980
· New York — October 21, 1980
· Michigan — October 23, 1980
Of these nine only one was depicted as “likely” for Reagan: Reagan’s own California. A second — New Jersey — was presented as a state that “appears to support” Reagan.
The Times led their readers to believe that each of the remaining seven states were “close” — or the Times had Carter leading outright.
In every single case the Times was proven grossly wrong on election day. Reagan in fact carried every one of the nine states.
Here is how the Times played the game with the seven of the nine states in question.
• Texas: In a story datelined October 8 from Houston, the Times headlined:
Texas Looming as a Close Battle Between President and Reagan
The Reagan-Carter race in Texas, the paper claimed, had “suddenly tightened and now shapes up as a close, bruising battle to the finish.” The paper said “a New York Times/CBS News Poll, the second of seven in crucial big states, showing the Reagan-Carter race now a virtual dead heat despite a string of earlier polls on both sides that had shown the state leaning toward Mr. Reagan.”
The narrative? It was like the famous scene in the Wizard of Oz where Dorothy and her friends stare in astonishment as dog Toto pulls back the curtain in the wizard’s lair to reveal merely a man bellowing through a microphone. Causing the startled “wizard” caught in the act to frantically start yelling, “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!” In the case of the Times in its look at Texas in October of 1980 the paper dismissed “a string of earlier polls on both sides” that repeatedly showed Texas going for Reagan.
Instead, the Times presented this data:
A survey of 1,050 registered voters, weighted to form a probable electorate, gave Mr. Carter 40 percent support, Mr. Reagan 39 percent, John. B. Anderson, the independent candidate, 3 percent, and 18 percent were undecided. The survey, conducted by telephone from Oct. 1 to Oct. 6, has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.
In other words, the race in Texas is close, assures the Times, with Carter actually in the lead.
What happened? Reagan beat Carter by over 13 points. It wasn’t even close to close.
http://spectator.org/articles/34732/how-carter-beat-reagan
I seriously doubt the polling in 1980 was “faulty” nor is it now. In 1980 the DNC knew that Reagan had much more support than Carter did and used the polling process to try to discourage Reagan voters. That is what is going on now with Trump.
One of those moments I VIVIDLY remember, when Peter Jennings on
ABC had a look on his face that gave it all away, he was dumb founded, he had loose bowels, and no words to say. it was the MOUTH wide open Shock look that was worth a thousand dollars. Never did forget it. When the whole country spoke and newscasters realized they had been cast aside, people voted their own minds.
The fifth-column leftist media were scum-of-the-earth back in 1980 and they’re still scum-of-the-earth today.
And now that I think about it the fifth-column leftist media were scum-of-the-earth back in 1964. And the biggest floater was “Uncle Walter.”
I listened to this today. Absolute gold! Thank you, El Rushbo!
They all said that RR won big because Carter was unpopular, because people were sick of him, because of the Iran Hostage crisis (which ended the minute RR took the oath of office), because they were sick of stagflation, etc., etc. But Reagan had not gotten a mandate, according to the Democrats, and therefore the MSM set about drilling home the idea that he had no mandate, and he had to cooperate and compromise with the Democrats in Congress.
And then, in 1984, when RR won an even bigger landslide 49 out of 50 states, take a guess.
Go on, take a guess.
That's right. According to the Democrats/MSM, RR still did not have a mandate! The biggest electorial shellacking in anyone's memory, but it still didn't mean he got his way on anything without a fight.
Thanks to Travis McGee!
I would love to see clips of news people talking about Ronaldus Magnus winning.
The more reliable polls at the present time seem to be indicating that about 15% of the voters have not decided yet. Or they are not willing to tell a stranger.
Look at those polls which are not liberal-biased and you will see roughly 41-41 poll results. Of the 18 per cent that remain, maybe 3 or 4 per cent will eventually vote for another candidate (this excludes Utah, I don’t know what’s going to happen there).
It leaves 12 to 15 per cent of the voters yet to declare. Of the two major candidates, which one is likely to get the majority of these votes? It should be Trump. My feeling is that Trump is new and different, therefore for some voters, requires a process. Clinton is very old school and if you aren’t sure about her by now, you never will be.
So I continue to predict an outcome something like this — Trump 51%, Clinton 44%, Johnson 4%, Stein etc 1%.
That should translate to a comfortable electoral college win for Donald Trump. There may even be a late-breaking shift bringing supposedly safe Democrat states into the Trump column.
Fingers crossed that you are right. The mainstream pollsters must be cutting a lot of corners, making a lot of assumptions, rounding off, etc. Hope they have a repeat of 1980 coming ...
If D +6 to D +9 are right, Hillary’s going to get more votes than Obama?
This is the same woman who couldn’t hold onto her Dornsife tracking poll lead she seized Monday.
And we’re told she’s a lock for the White House.
They said the same thing about Anthony Brown and Alison Lundergran Grimes.
Where are they?
The media could never be this wrong about anything. They do such a great job reporting on even what the Repub candidate said 15-20 years ago, that they surely get everything right in real time.
Please do not post information that is so obviously incorrect. /sarc
ping for later.
I’ll give you a few: Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Michigan.
Hillary Clinton is a plague. Nobody likes that woman.
At around the 8:43pm mark of the broadcast (about 43 minutes into this YT video)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMuWVsPQbwM
there is an interview with Ted White, the historian who wrote The Making Of The President series of books.
It is extraordinary to hear what he says about the 1980 results. He actually talks about Free Trade being a good thing in 1932 but that we have to re-think it now, given what has happened to Detroit, the steel industry, etc.!!!
Goes to show you . . . the only thing that changes is technology . . . human nature never changes! And for the Never Trumpers out there, don’t forget, Reagan utilized strong arm tactics with the Japanese on their car imports until they agreed to open plants here.
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.