[don-o]

Fine. You're right. The Caucus is wrong.

C'mon Windy. You're better than that. I think Finny has compiled based off comments from the threads. Different methodology.

A little detail would be interesting.

[Finny]

Thank you, don-o.

HARD NUMBERS tell the truth, Windy, not the few hundred FReepers who happen to catch that day's caucus (I have participated in at most three, more probably two, out of ... how many, Windy????), but the kind of FReepers who represent the more common conservative, folks who read more and blab only every once in awhile.

THEY are the ones you RARELY see on the Daily Caucuses; the ones you do see are mostly hard-core FReepers whose opinions I have already tallied.

I do NOT make this tally for the purpose of confirming my own opinion. I make this tally in order to discern as big and as true a picture as I can.

[Windflier]

C'mon Windy. You're better than that.

Don, I'm not trying to be uncivil. I'm just done arguing about it. As I've told Finny numerous times that I'm at peace with my choice of nominee.

The only reason I spoke at all, is because she included me in her ping. I'm perfectly fine with others choosing who they will.

[Finny]

Here's my methodology, and I first put it to use in 2010. I have one list of individuals who have either clearly stated or VERY consistently implied one opinion, and another list of the same for the opposite opinion. As I read the threads, when I come across a name that is new or that I think might not have been tallied, I add it to the respective list, and at the end of the day or three days or whatever, I alphabetize it and look for duplicates to remove names written twice, and then make a count. The lists grow longer with every passing week.

MOST of the time, I add a name to a list when an opinion is CLEARLY stated; if it is implied, I will go in-forum and back-read posts until I can find a post confirming one position or the other; if I cannot confirm it to my satisfaction, the name stays OFF either list.

WINDFLIER, because I am so aware of my own bias, I require LESS evidence to put someone on the Trump list than on the non-Trump list, so if anything, the Trump 1st numbers are the inflated ones.

INTERESTINGLY, three FReepers who, in forum, come across consistently, day after day, as very much Trump First -- actually prefer Cruz, so those three names were on the Trump list for awhile (and would still be there if I hadn't decided to take them at their word that they are for Cruz first).

Likewise, there have been a few instances where I had to take a name off the other list (not really pro Cruz as much as Trump 2nd, although the vast majority on that list name Cruz as their first pick) because while the tone and frequency of their posts implied preference for Cruz, in fact when asked they stated their first choice as Trump.

That's my methodology and it is the ONLY way that I can satisfy my goal of knowing where most people ACTUALLY stand, as opposed to where fewer people who post more frequently and aggressively, stand.

People can believe me or not as they choose. They have no way of knowing how truthful I am being, but I DO. It is why I post my tally results with confidence.