 |
Posted on 06/24/2016 3:40:49 PM PDT by Berlin_Freeper
Democratic presidential contender Hillary Clinton regained a double-digit lead over Republican rival Donald Trump this week, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Friday.
The June 20-24 poll showed that 46.6 percent of likely American voters supported Clinton while 33.3 percent supported Trump.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
LOL - sure she has
If a pollster contacted me, I’d tell them I’m voting for Hillary. Let ‘em think they have it in the bag.
Polling is so inaccurate Gallup has stopped conducting polls.
Landline calls are virtually worthless.
And you can’t screen Internet respondents for bias.
Mr. Berlin again!
Agree.
People are not going to tell the truth in regards to voting this time around.
I agree, I see no reason why the obamatards wont vote for her...
Over-polling Detroitistan and San Francisco
|
Exactly.
Push poll by Reuters late on a Friday so the political press can refer to it in sound bytes when reporting about the Presidential campaign over the weekend. When in reality it is a fake poll.
The Reuters/Ipsos poll was conducted online and included interviews with 1,201 likely voters in all 50 states. It has a credibility interval, a measure of accuracy, of 3.3 percentage points.
HIllary: Did that fake online push poll go out yet?
Staff: Right on schedule, expecting it to get lots of airtime.
So the poll says they did a combination of online and interviews. Were the interview online? This is the weirdest poll ever. And they provide no details about how it was conducted.
Expecting this poll to be a negative against the press and the left because it is just one more example of how dishonest and desperate they are to push propaganda and lies on the American people. This poll will backfire on HC because it is so over the top in it's attempt to frame false information.
Sorry, I looked at Real Clear Politics and it said registered.
Hillary would get at most 52% if she holds the Obama coalition together.
Of course, even if she loses, she’s guaranteed to get 45%.
Any generic Democrat should beat a generic Republican and the only thing crippling is her dishonesty.
Which in her world is a resume enhancement.
I wonder if Rutgers has some 2 for 1 bridge sale coupons left
And pigs learned how to fly today, eat me. They are all full of sh##
Lies. Lies. Lies. Lies. Lies. Lies.
Heck, she’s got a 13% lead among likely MALE voters in this poll!
http://polling.reuters.com/#poll/TM651Y15_13/filters/LIKELY:1,SEX:1/dates/20160401-20160624/type/smallest
...
I don’t think this poll is of any legitimate use at all.
LOL!
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
Agree. Complete BS. Your meter is spot on!!
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.