most accurate poll in 2012 shows trump leading

[southtown4488]

http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2...hining-bts.cnn

[DSK]

Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

whether or not the main stream polls are correct in their results and methodology there remains the following 2 things:

the hellary campaign wanted an oversampling of dimocrat voters to affect the election and thereby discourage conservatives and their turnout in a continuing dimocrat fraudulent manner

and the pollsters have complied

I hope that is true and Trump pulls off a surprise victory.

I'm not very optimistic about it, though.

The only good thing about this election is that we Republicans could probably find a considerably better candidate in 4 years and possibly win it back.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

whether or not the main stream polls are correct in their results and methodology there remains the following 2 things:

the hellary campaign wanted an oversampling of dimocrat voters to affect the election and thereby discourage conservatives and their turnout in a continuing dimocrat fraudulent manner

and the pollsters have complied

There is always an excuse. The polls are rigged. The election is rigged.

[nevergaveitathought]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

There is always an excuse. The polls are rigged. The election is rigged.

no its not an excuse, how can it be an excuse? an excuse of what? an excuse the hellary campaign wanted dimocrats oversampled and they are being oversampled?

those two things happened and are happening

if its proper methodology so be it, but it remains, the hellary campaign wanted it to happen and it happens

[Luke_Wyatt]

Originally Posted by DSK

I hope that is true and Trump pulls off a surprise victory.

I'm not very optimistic about it, though.

The only good thing about this election is that we Republicans could probably find a considerably better candidate in 4 years and possibly win it back.

DSK my gripe with the party is we(GOP) knew in 2008 that no DEM was going to contest Obama in 2012, so we had 4 years to prepare for Obama- that backfired because the GOP figured let's not do anything to make Obama look bad and we win in 2012.
Now everyone knew that Hillary was going to run in 2016 and overwhelmingly be the nominee- so the GOP had 8 years to groom a candidate. We had 19 candidates and the best we got is Trump???? I can name easily 10 candidates of the 19 that could have easily defeated Clinton and we feed Clinton Trump???? The gOP strategy failed yet again- it's becoming a broken record of how we keep screwing up and there's a pretty good darn chance the DEMS will win some senate seats.

[Luke_Wyatt]

Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

no its not an excuse, how can it be an excuse? and excuse of what? an excuse the hellary campaign wanted dimocrats oversampled and they are being oversampled?

those two things happened and are happening

if its proper methodology so be it, but it remains, the hellary campaign wanted it to happen and it happens

I think speed racer was being sarcastic in his comment.

[nevergaveitathought]

Originally Posted by Luke_Wyatt

I think speed racer was being sarcastic in his comment.

for it to be sarcastic, there would be a less than sincere agreement or some satirical overstatement

as in "oh, yeah, sure"

it wasn't sarcasm

remedial literary and rhetorical device classes needed?

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

no its not an excuse, how can it be an excuse? an excuse of what? an excuse the hellary campaign wanted dimocrats oversampled and they are being oversampled?

those two things happened and are happening

if its proper methodology so be it, but it remains, the hellary campaign wanted it to happen and it happens

Can you prove that Democrats were over-sampled in any of the national polls? And I was not being sarcastic in my post. Republicans are behind in the national polls so tnevergaveitathought says he polls are rigged. Donald Trump in all likelihood will lose the election so he says the voting must be rigged. Al Gore, who I voted against, lost the election in 2000 by a handful of votes and to the best of my knowledge never mentioned "voter fraud".

[canuckeight]

Originally Posted by Luke_Wyatt

DSK my gripe with the party is we(GOP) knew in 2008 that no DEM was going to contest Obama in 2012, so we had 4 years to prepare for Obama- that backfired because the GOP figured let's not do anything to make Obama look bad and we win in 2012.
Now everyone knew that Hillary was going to run in 2016 and overwhelmingly be the nominee- so the GOP had 8 years to groom a candidate. We had 19 candidates and the best we got is Trump???? I can name easily 10 candidates of the 19 that could have easily defeated Clinton and we feed Clinton Trump???? The gOP strategy failed yet again- it's becoming a broken record of how we keep screwing up and there's a pretty good darn chance the DEMS will win some senate seats.

The GOP didn't give us Trump, the people voted for him.

[i'va biggen]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...rump-just-yet/

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

no its not an excuse, how can it be an excuse? an excuse of what? an excuse the hellary campaign wanted dimocrats oversampled and they are being oversampled?

those two things happened and are happening

if its proper methodology so be it, but it remains, the hellary campaign wanted it to happen and it happens

that was according to the John Podesta emails on getting the pollsters to oversample their data.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

that was according to the John Podesta emails on getting the pollsters to oversample their data.

I'd like to see those emails. If you take a large enough sample and the poll is conducted RANDOMLY, there should be no "oversampling" of any group of voters.

Example - if you are conducting a poll in a state where the breakdown of registered voters is 40% dems/35% repubs/25% independents - then a large enough RANDOM sample will yield this same breakdown or a very close approximation. Again, the key is to make sure those polled are selected RANDOMLY.

It should be an easy matter to see if any group is "oversampled" in a poll - just compare the breakdown of those polled with the actual percentages of registered voters.

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

whether or not the main stream polls are correct in their results and methodology there remains the following 2 things:

the hellary campaign wanted an oversampling of dimocrat voters to affect the election and thereby discourage conservatives and their turnout in a continuing dimocrat fraudulent manner

and the pollsters have complied

As have the sheepople of trump. Because that's what the uneducated do. They comply with the loudest voice.
If you can be talked out of voting by polls no one believes anyway, you've double downed on becoming a Carthaginian.

Just ask Sun Tzu.

"Pretend inferiority and encourage his arrogance."

"If your opponent is of choleric temper, irritate him."

"Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win."

"The general who wins the battle makes many calculations in his temple before the battle is fought. The general who loses makes but few calculations beforehand."

And look!

The bitches brought their own salt.

[CuteOldGuy]

The Republicans don't need a better candidate, they need to be a better party. The people have spoken. The Republican "business as usual" is over. If the Establishment steps back in, the party will die. And it should. The former Republican Party was no better than the Democrats. They would routinely say the things the base wanted to hear, and then vote the Establishment line when in office. Well, they got caught. The people want a different party. An anti-establishment party. The old guard has got to go.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by lustylad

I'd like to see those emails. If you take a large enough sample and the poll is conducted RANDOMLY, there should be no "oversampling" of any group of voters.

Example - if you are conducting a poll in a state where the breakdown of registered voters is 40% dems/35% repubs/25% independents - then a large enough RANDOM sample will yield this same breakdown or a very close approximation. Again, the key is to make sure those polled are selected RANDOMLY.

It should be an easy matter to see if any group is "oversampled" in a poll - just compare the breakdown of those polled with the actual percentages of registered voters.

I agree totally.