"Scientific polling" exposed

[Divine Wind]

I know a great deal because I have made it my business to know it and have dedicated the time and effort.....why do you have a problem with that?

See TheGreatGatsby ? You're not alone.

 

[Divine Wind]

Yea, the government and corporations are saints. Your party doesn't even say that.

What party is that?

 

[Toro]

Chuck Todd tears into Trump spokesman: You know these online polls are 'bogus'!

Media admitting they can alter their polls for starters

But yea, when the media isn't asking leading questions based on over-represented populations and often based on a myriad of skewed factors by companies with literal vested interests in a politician, the polls are suddenly just not 'scientific' and thusly not valid. I submit they've never been valid based on the parameters I just gave. But at least a whole host of snapshots give us a real picture that we can lucidly trust. And the picture: THE MEDIA LIES THEIR ASSES OFF, AND TRUMP IS CRUSHING HILLARY.

lol

Math is hard

 

[Toro]

Unskewedpolls.com

Successfully predicting Presidential elections since 2012.

 

[Rambunctious]

Picture Hillary doing her shimmying while naked and tell me you can still vote for her to be your president.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Chuck Todd tears into Trump spokesman: You know these online polls are 'bogus'!

Media admitting they can alter their polls for starters

But yea, when the media isn't asking leading questions based on over-represented populations and often based on a myriad of skewed factors by companies with literal vested interests in a politician, the polls are suddenly just not 'scientific' and thusly not valid. I submit they've never been valid based on the parameters I just gave. But at least a whole host of snapshots give us a real picture that we can lucidly trust. And the picture: THE MEDIA LIES THEIR ASSES OFF, AND TRUMP IS CRUSHING HILLARY.

Online click-winner-polls are not snapshots - they are straight up useless GARBAGE for entertainment purposes only. We don't even know how many of those clicks are by actual humans or some program running on someone's pc in Russia!

So how can a CNN poll be accurate? No one watches the shit network except for fucked up progressives

It's not a "scientific poll" of their viewers. It's a poll that they conduct. And frankly, they have a vested interest and shouldn't be in the business of polling (or news).

Toro

'and agree' next time, Fluffer Republican.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Picture Hillary doing her shimmying while naked and tell me you can still vote for her to be your president.

Picture her bedbound and paralyzed ala Woodrow Wilson, tbh.

 

[konradv]

They are being manipulated to show she leads when the reality is not that many people support her.

Based on what? The same geniuses that swore Romney won Ohio?

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

They are being manipulated to show she leads when the reality is not that many people support her.

Based on what? The same geniuses that swore Romney won Ohio?

He did win Ohio. Unless you believe that the hood rats are showing up at a 95 percent clip. If you believe that, then you haven't spent one minute in the projects.

 

[konradv]

He did win Ohio. Unless you believe that the hood rats are showing up at a 95 percent clip. If you believe that, then you haven't spent one minute in the projects.

Who said they showed up at a 95% rate? I think you're mixing up your conspiracy theories.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

He did win Ohio. Unless you believe that the hood rats are showing up at a 95 percent clip. If you believe that, then you haven't spent one minute in the projects.

Who said they showed up at a 95% rate? I think you're mixing up your conspiracy theories.

I think you don't know the facts.

Plenty of (black) urban precincts with 90-95 percent turnout rates. And many supposedly didn't have one vote for Romney. That's just a load of sh**.

 

[IsaacNewton]