Posted on 10/21/2016 7:17:03 AM PDT by jmaroneps37
I don’t think those women, most of them anyway, are “coming forward.” I think they are mostly being dragged and pushed forward, perhaps with threats and financial inducements.
Dems are deeply concerned that the faithful may not turn out or that conservative fence sitters and anti-Trumpers will hold their nose and start supporting Trump. And to keep the Trump faithful from becoming disheartened, many in the conservative media will claim the polls are outright rigged or find the poll or two that shows a better race for Trump.
That’s a LOT of numbers!!
I forgot who won in 2012. in NC
I don’t think those women, most of them anyway, are “coming forward.” I think they are mostly being dragged and pushed forward, perhaps with threats and financial inducements.
I heard that and remember thinking, “How in the hell can you ‘tighten’ when most polls hardly show her with an advantage?”
I usually just pass most of the daily poll threads. Most of the polls are weighted in favor of certain candidates.
In the final stretch, the polsters will want to be more accurate so they can use that accuracy pitch to sell their services for the next election.
Regarding financial inducements, I'd like to check out the bank accounts of some of these women to see if they've grown substantially in the past month or so. That would be very telling, indeed.
NC numbers are a bit worrisome but I know absolutely nothing when it come to the methodology of polls...but it looks like the rats have the advantage there..am I correct?...I’ll be more than happy to be completely wrong!
it will be a real “tell” if/when some of these crooked manipulative pollsters suddenly start turning toward a Trump victory in order to salvage some credibility for future business.
Polling is a business. People who would do far more despicable things would think not thing of faking up some numbers in an Excel spreadsheet and calling “poll results”.
Rush addressed this a month or so ago, pointing out that the mid-campaign polling was mostly of the “lies, damned lies, and statistics” variety intended to shape the message that “Trump=loser Hillary=winner”. He said that, as we got closer and closer to the election, the polls would gradually shift to more closely align with reality, because at the end of the day the polling organizations live and die by their reputation for being right.
There’s not much question on the ground that Trump is stomping Hillary as far as support goes, so as we pass through these final weeks, the polls are going to have to start reflecting that support or no one will ever believe the pollsters ever again.
Since a lot of the pollsters are closet leftists, they’ll probably drag their feet as much as possible, and try to keep shaping the narrative of Trump trailing Hillary right up to the final few days in hopes of convincing Trump supporters to “surrender now, Dorothy”, but in the end they’re going to have to show the Trump lead in all its glory or they’re going to look incompetent after the election.
This is 1980 all over again. Quite aside from the usual oversampling of Democrats (which is inapplicable when a movement Republican is running against an unlikable Democrat), there is the Shy Tory Factor, which means that many people planning to vote for the media-demonized non-liberal candidate have been bullied into keeping their support to themselves, thus affecting the accuracy.
If Clinton paid protestors $1,500 to go to Trump rallies and become violent, then offering these woman $5,000 or $10,000 to make up stories about Trump is fully expected. Just like the airplane fiction story, they all crashed and burned.
As soon as an allegation is launched, Trump’s lawyers should show up with a Complaint and a court reporter, put the tootsie under oath, and obtain a detailed statement of the supposed event.
Even Natie Silver knows the polls we see are fake and built on fake turnout models”
Huh? He does? Can you point us to a link or something on that?
This begs the question: “Why would a Clinton spokesperson say the polls would “tighten” let alone say “the polls [would] tighten significantly?”
So all the Polls up to this point are ENGINEERED ADVERTISING for Hillary, which makes them All an ILLEGAL IN KIND CONTRIBUTION to Hillary’s campaign.
Where is the FEC,FBI,CONgress....???
I don’t agree that the polls are going to change to reflect reality before the election this time around.
They are so in the tank for Hillary they will march lockstep with her right until the results are in, and maybe even after, even if they ‘die’ in the process.
But, I guess the expense of getting a random sample is prohibitive compared to using the models. So, the pollsters try to predict what the turnout will be. Even if we give them the benefit of the doubt that they are trying to be objective, there really is no way they can predict with any accuracy what the voter participation and party affiliation will look like. That is the real wild card in virtually every poll that is not truly random.
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.