NBC/FOX Appear To Commit Blatant Polling Fraud

[Reub]

"The national poll results showing Hillary Clinton with a double-digit lead over Donald Trump has been repeated across all of the Mainstream Media outlets today, and certainly by Fox News, NBC, CNN, and MSNBC – with the clear intent of trying to convince voters of a Hillary Clinton Election Day tsunami.

The above poll is being advertised as the first post-second debate poll.

Except it actually wasn’t taken after the debate.

The poll was initiated two days before the debate, and was concluded on the day of the debate. Worse yet, the majority of the polling was completed before the debate, thus, making this very much NOT a post-second debate poll."

"Now, once we delve into the actual “meat” of the poll itself, we find something else quite startling. That is, if attempting to conduct a fair and honest poll was actually the intent. (Which it clearly wasn’t in this case.)

Of those polled, 46% indicated they voted for Barack Obama in 2012, and only 32% for Mitt Romney – a very lopsided +14% polling sample when you consider Obama defeated Romney nationally by about 4%. That also means that the NBC/Wall Street Journal/Fox News poll over-sampled Democrat-leaning voters by more than 300%. (4% of actual national results vs +14% from the polling sample.)

Another way to look at is is this. NBC/Wall Street Journal gave Hillary Clinton a +14 polling sample advantage, but she was only able to garner a +10 result, meaning she is actually under-performing by 4% points!

And another thing to consider that reveals just how slanted this poll is. It was taken immediately after the Trump “naughty-word” tape scandal broke on Friday, and then concluded the day of the second debate.

This poll was skewed from the outset, did NOT include voter input after the second debate, and in fact shows Hillary Clinton under-performing badly given the lopsided polling sample."


Read more at http://dcwhispers.com/nbcfox-appear-to- ... xFxII1H.99

[Cortopassi]

Funny thing is this could easily backfire. Lull Clinton voters into complacency, and fire up Trump ones because of the conflict of interest.

[MachineGhost]

Funny thing is this could easily backfire. Lull Clinton voters into complacency, and fire up Trump ones because of the conflict of interest.

Doubtful. Democratic GOTV is yuuuuge vs the demoralized Republicans.

[Cortopassi]

I disagree. I think with the lack of Trump becoming presidential and instead taking the shackles off and a scorched earth policy, I think a lot of people on the fence are pissed off enough to say "why not!" and will vote Trump.

Either way, I don't think it will be close. My theory will happen and Trump has a major landslide upset, or Hillary has a landslide. I don't think it will be close. Sort of like Brexit.

**I am not usually right on these things!!

[MachineGhost]

I disagree. I think with the lack of Trump becoming presidential and instead taking the shackles off and a scorched earth policy, I think a lot of people on the fence are pissed off enough to say "why not!" and will vote Trump.

Either way, I don't think it will be close. My theory will happen and Trump has a major landslide upset, or Hillary has a landslide. I don't think it will be close. Sort of like Brexit.

Brexit was not a landslide. Only 72% of the eligible voters voted for a measly 3.8% edge and the Anti-Brexit voters largely stayed home because of the media hype about Anti-Brexit being a foregone conclusion. It's not even comparable to the current election. The Democrats are going to turn out in yuuuge numbers because of their GOTV jauggernaut and their emotionally visceral dislike for the rich, white male playboy that hijacked the Republican Party. It's invorigating!!! Slick Hilly just doesn't inspire the same kind of fervor in the Republicans given the whole sad sack situation they find themselves in.

But, I don't believe there will be a landslide either way. There's too many rank-and-file lemmings that vote the party line regardless of the personality heading it. But, I guess it depends on what we mean by "landslide". I'm thinking in terms of nearly evenly divided popular vote. But Slick Hilly could "landslide" the electoral college because electors are who really matter not the average boob voter on the street. That map doesn't favor Trump at all but I can't see Slick Hilly landsliding all of those Republican West/Heartland states. If that were to happen, there would be no doubt at all that Trump destroyed the Republican Party.

[clacy]

I think the polls are tighter than they would indicate, but with that said, Trump will have to be within 2% to have a shot by Nov 4th or so.

I do think it will tighten, however this lead may be insurmountable for Trump, however ANYTHING is possible in this election IMO due to Clinton's baggage.

It's not like she's a no-brainer for minorities and millenials.

[MachineGhost]

It's not like she's a no-brainer for minorities and millenials.

How do you figure that in regards to minorities? Democrats get at least a 3 to 1 advantage with minorities.

[Cortopassi]

The final Economist poll for Brexit before the voting had Remain at 44, Leave at 44 and Undecided at 6. I don't really understand that, so I would say it should have been 44/44/12.

Brexit finished 48.1% remain, 51.9% leave, with leave winning by about 1.3 million votes in the end. Felt like a landslide to me!

Latest 4 way presidential poll has Clinton 43, Trump 39, Johnson 7, Stein 2, Undecided 9

66% of undecideds went with Leave. If a similar number break for Trump, he gets to about 45%, which depending on turnout and where these votes come in from, could be a landslide.

**I am not a pollster and barely understand these things. And as the topic title states, there could be bias in these numbers in the first place, and/or people secretly voting Trump who don't want to publicize it.**

***I may be biased as well -- all I see in the media are blatant and not so blatant attempts at pushing Hillary.

[Reub]

A new poll by one of the few non-media controlled sources has Trump up by 2 points. Rasmussen has a history of being one of the most accurate.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_ ... atch_oct13

[Cortopassi]

It seems the kitchen sink is being thrown at Trump at this point. Now we have octopus level groping.

There's going to be a slow drip of these stories for the next month while the generally more boring, but important, Wikileaks stuff will get much less coverage unless there's a bombshell waiting.

I will say, it is not hard to believe Trump did these things. He's likely had many women throw themselves at him a lot in his life and just thinks it's normal that women want him (I assume the money and confidence portrayed are major factors). So he likely steps over normal bounds you and I wouldn't cross.

It isn't helping! The guy is obviously a womanizer and a jerk, but he'd still make a better president.

[MachineGhost]

A new poll by one of the few non-media controlled sources has Trump up by 2 points. Rasmussen has a history of being one of the most accurate.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_ ... atch_oct13

Major automated poll firms like Rasmussen have a long history of house leaning statistical effects that favor the Republicans that has to be adjusted for. Once that is done, Trump is not ahead. Heck, last week their poll showed that Trump was 7 points ahead, so its actually a negative to be at 2 points if you believe they're "one of the most accurate" which they clearly ain't.

[Reub]

I think that you're underestimating the "Brexit" factor.

[I Shrugged]

Except that Brexit did not involve an octopus.

[MachineGhost]

I think that you're underestimating the "Brexit" factor.

You'd need that and the Bradley Effect to win. Good luck!

BTW, take what I said about the house leaning effects with a grain of salt. It seems that Nate Silver doesn't have any published, peer-reviewed basis for the adjustments he personally makes to poll results to account for the house leaning effects. It doesn't mean Rasmussen is representative of the voters (it isn't), but it explains one of the reasons why his forecast model is such crap.

[Reub]

I'm reading that the latest Bloomberg Poll and Fox polls are overestimating Dems by +9!

http://akdart.com/polls.html

[Reub]

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/em ... #efmAJgANV

Wikileaks on rigged polls.

"We are as interested in the "who" suburban, rural, we are polling as the issues. The plan includes a possible focus on women, might be something we want to do is over sample if we are worried about a certain group later in the summer."

[Reub]

Democrats just experienced some of their
lowest turnout ever in a hotly contested
Primary, and yet pollsters are sampling in bigger Democratic numbers than 2008. I smell a leftist rat!

[Xan]

If the polls were rigged, who would that favor? I would think that lulling one side to sleep with a fake lead would benefit the other side, would it not?

[MachineGhost]

If the polls were rigged, who would that favor? I would think that lulling one side to sleep with a fake lead would benefit the other side, would it not?

It would favor Republicans. Democrats are -21% vs +63% Republicans in the primary. Problem with that is primary has no corelation to general. A good example is Democrat turnout was about double that of Republican and yet Bush Sr. won in 1988. Or more Republicans turned out for 2000 but Bush would have lost if the Florida Supreme Court had waited and didn't steal the election by giving the electoral points to him (he did lose the popular vote).

[Reub]

Hillary Superpac paying for NBC/WSJ poll showing her +11

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xGxn2QB3rZE&feature=share

[I Shrugged]

If the polls were rigged, who would that favor? I would think that lulling one side to sleep with a fake lead would benefit the other side, would it not?

People want to vote for the winner. That's a fact.

[Reub]

"Anonymous" uncovers payments of $220,000
from Hillary's Superpac to the originators of the
NBC/WSJ poll in the month of September alone.
Busted!
Trust nothing that you are hearing from the
mainstream media because they are manipulating
your mind. Theyre funded and controlled by
Hillary. Think for yourself.

[Reub]

A recent Arizona poll that shows Hillary 3 points ahead polled 34% more Democrats in a state that is 5% more Republican! These polls are as crooked as Hillary is!

[Reub]

The most accurate poll in the last 3 elections, the IBD/TIPP poll, has Trump in the lead 41%-40%. It appears as if Trump is gaining support in their poll too.

http://www.investors.com/politics/ibd-t ... tion-poll/

[MachineGhost]

The most accurate poll in the last 3 elections, the IBD/TIPP poll, has Trump in the lead 41%-40%. It appears as if Trump is gaining support in their poll too.

http://www.investors.com/politics/ibd-t ... tion-poll/