IMO Joe Biden is using the same Poll and MSM Rigging Methods used by Hillary Clinton in 2016.

a reply to: carewemust

Actually any one of them could beat trump.
He is a one term president.
There is no way he can win after the past couple of years.
and I invite anyone to bookmark this post for 2020 as my prediction.

a reply to: carewemust

To whom?
I'm sure you can prove that quote right?

So if Biden loses to Trump, can we finally conclude that those polls are fake. I mean we already seen the emails where Podesta coordinates with the media on how to skew the polls. We have the evidence on how they manipulate it.

a reply to: Sillyolme

I can guarantee you Trump will repeat. The Democrats know it that is why they are so unhinged and desperate.

a reply to: carewemust

I don't think it's as much malice as many assume, though I'm not ruling that aspect out.

I think the polls themselves are just flawed. It's impossible to have accurate sample sizes that reflect the way electoral college is going to pan out. Typically there are slightly a little more democrats than republicans, and how many of each are going to come out to vote is an unknown.

It also relies on humans, which around 50%~ of voting Americans are independent. When on the phone way before an election, if many of those independents are asked who they're voting for, I could easily see many just saying someone other than Trump since he is polarizing in his approach. But once the democrat is decided for the ticket, and the real final stretch kicks off, I could see many people who said they weren't going to vote for Trump decide differently at the poll.

The polls should just be taken with a grain of salt, though I think they'll likely help the right again with some of the left not showing up thinking they have a shoe in.

Lastly, as I've noted many times before, I think betting odds typically are more accurate, there is money at stake, so they try to be tighter than a poll with nothing to lose... But at the end of the day, no one can read the future.

a reply to: carewemust

" what did Hillary Clinton use to manipulate the polls/MSM/pundits in 2016?"

Meetings and parties with all of her friends in the press. In fact they directly instructed the press to pay a lot of attention to Donald Trump during the primary because Team Hillary thought she would have a better chance against a hand picked "pied piper" in Trump than a real candidate. Whoever came up with the pied piper thing must have forgot how that story ended.

originally posted by: funbobby
a reply to: carewemust

" what did Hillary Clinton use to manipulate the polls/MSM/pundits in 2016?"

Meetings and parties with all of her friends in the press. In fact they directly instructed the press to pay a lot of attention to Donald Trump during the primary because Team Hillary thought she would have a better chance against a hand picked "pied piper" in Trump than a real candidate. Whoever came up with the pied piper thing must have forgot how that story ended.

Thats campaigning. That's politics.

How's that different than Trump firing his in house pollster or rant tweeting about Fox because of their polls? Or being on a constant phone correspondance with Sean Hannity?

Did Hillary, and the DNC play dirty last cycle? I think so.... But what you described is common practice.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: carewemust

A have a few friends who, all things considered, are assholes.

I'm guessing your friends do as well.

originally posted by: xuenchen
The polls are over-sampled and slanted 😎 🐇 😎

The tactic is so old, nobody recognizes it anymore 😎🐇😎

They're still doing it. Yesterday, I was reading an article on how some special election on North Carolina was polling as a dead heat (Republican up by about 1%). If you read further down, it's clear they over-sampled Democrats to get that result. They polled roughly even numbers of Democrats and Republicans, even tho the district is solidly Republican.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Fox is one network, and Sean is one guy, and Trump and Fox and Sean are fairly open about their relationship. Hillary on the other hand plotted in secret with the rest of the media, every other station and newspaper besides FOX to affect the outcome of the opposing parties primary. Are you saying there is an equivalence there?

Anyhow when did FOX meet with Trumps people or correspond with them about trying to pick certain Democrat candidates to highlight during the primaries and which to ignore to try to promote their worst candidates the most and ignore their more mainstream candidates?

I didn't say there was anything wrong with it, I love it, Hillary and most of the media conspired to get her a candidate she could beat but instead the picked Donald Trump! Thank God they did because he would never have been elected otherwise would he?

a reply to: funbobby
It's hilarious to see Joe Biden following
this same strategy. They're down-polling Kamala Harris, because she's the only one who poses a serious threat to him. They're trying to winnow it down to him and Elizabeth Warren, who these days is a joke on account of her long-running "I'm a Native American" farce. It'll be the classic "one choice to accept and one choice to reject" situation.

The irony is that Biden will secure the 2020 nomination just as it's becoming impossible to overlook the fact that he's going senile.

I can't really disagree with you. I have yet to meet a single person that has said that they prefer Biden over every other possible candidate. The media clearly have their favorites already. Case in point the continued hatchet job against Bernie. He has consistently polled second and yet, even when reporting on those polls, the media only mentions how well Biden, Warren, and Harris are polling.

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

I will reply in meme form



Biden is this years Jeb!

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
I can't really disagree with you. I have yet to meet a single person that has said that they prefer Biden over every other possible candidate. The media clearly have their favorites already. Case in point the continued hatchet job against Bernie. He has consistently polled second and yet, even when reporting on those polls, the media only mentions how well Biden, Warren, and Harris are polling.

Take a look at Pete Buttigeig. The media clearly loves him. Probably because he's gay. But he consistently polls in the low single digits.

You can say the same thing about Corey Booker. No, there is nobody who wants Sparticus to be president, or plans to vote for him. He gets under 1% in most polls, no doubt because he's demonstrated on several occasions that he's an idiot who doesn't know what problems we have, let alone how to fix them. At least Buttigeig comes across as being of normal intelligence.

To hear the media fawn over them, you'd think these guys are major contenders, when really they're just minor also-rans.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: carewemust

Trust me... No one was more surprised by this win than donald trump.

He never intended the election to be anything more than a device for launching a new agency.

and he won the electorial college only.
The popular vote went exactly as the polls said they would. To Hillary.

No other office is decided like this.
In any other election including class president the winner is decided by popular vote.

AND of course polls that do no agree with your point of view are rigged.

There is one rule of thumb I follow
Anyone that begins a statement with "trust me..." , I turn and walk away.

originally posted by: carewemust

Personally, I think its as simple as paying for desired results, in cash, and promises of future favors from the Biden Administration.

I think its Trump paying out the money. He benefits when he's the underdog as it energizes and turns out his base. It also helps to make is opostion complacent.

Trump.also benefits if Joe Biden is the D nominee and really is as sleep as he is appearing of late.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Phage

Mudpit was considered. However - The similarities between 2016 and 2020 polls/media being illogically "in the tank" for the Democrat front-runner are beyond coincidental.

Agreed, it is exactly the same as before when Hillary ran. Completely rigged polls. It's also hilarious to see old Hillary supporters popping in with the same "nothing to see here" jargon.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: [post=24599345]carewemust[/post

and he won the electorial college only.
The popular vote went exactly as the polls said they would. To Hillary.

You do realize that there are more than just national polls that were wrong in 2016. The whole "no path to victory" mantra by the talking heads was based on individual state polls and not the overwhelming support Clinton was getting in California.

And its "he won the electorial college period" .... since no one participated in a national popular vote its impossible to infer who would have won such a contest if it where conducted. Especially since the 2016 polls were found to be in error ... even the state specific ones.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Apparently his pollster hasn't been fire as you say, he has been with Trump from his Mar-a-largo days and still active today.

Bottom line is that most polls, poll 1/3 more democrats and over sample minorities, so either way it's going to favor democrats. However, just like in 2016 they will lose. Polls are mostly done this way in favor for the establishment candidate to push out and make the non establishment candidate look bad.

Just read John Podesta emails, he breaks down the metrics and coordinates with the pollsters. We already have evidence from him that is rigged. Why are we still talking about this nonsense.