Trump for US President?

Rigging Polls

Today Wikileaks released Podesta emails: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/26551

Email starts out with a request for recommendations on “oversamples for polling” in order to “maximize what we get out of our media polling.”

2016.10.23%20-%20Oversample%201_0.jpg



Email also attaches 37-page guide with the following poll-rigging recommendations.

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails//fileid/26551/7326

In Arizona, over sampling of Hispanics and Native Americans is highly recommended:

– Over-sample Hispanics
– Use Spanish language interviewing. (Monolingual Spanish-speaking voters are among the lowest turnout Democratic targets)
– Over-sample the Native American population

It recommends “consistently monitoring” samples to makes sure they’re “not too old” and “has enough African American and Hispanic voters.” Meanwhile, “independent” voters in Tampa and Orlando are apparently more dem friendly so the report suggests filling up independent quotas in those cities first.

– Consistently monitor the sample to ensure it is not too old, and that it has enough African American and Hispanic voters to reflect the state.
– On Independents: Tampa and Orlando are better persuasion targets than north or south Florida (check your polls before concluding this). If there are budget questions or oversamples, make sure that Tampa and Orlando are included first.

it’s suggested that national polls over sample “key districts / regions” and “ethnic” groups “as needed.”

– General election benchmark, 800 sample, with potential over samples in key districts/regions
– Benchmark polling in targeted races, with ethnic over samples as needed
– Targeting tracking polls in key races, with ethnic over samples as needed


Sarcasm: Truly scientific polls. Ignore the other polls, they are not scientific. Believe and trust the media scientific polls.

Guys, if you read this far, you've just done something illegal:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_X16_KzX1vE[/ame]

Everything you learn, you should learn from CNN <- advice from CNN
 


What are you suggesting here?

How can someone tell if the people self-identified as Republican were registered members?

These questions can be directed at CNN, since they are supposed to have a scientific poll, checked and controlled.

I'm getting at why they don't weight polls by party id. Someone may not be registered with any party, but tell the pollster they lean Democrat or Republican based on their candidate of choice. Even someone registered with a party can tell them whatever.

This was a thing back in 2012, people were claiming "oversampling Democrats" back then, too.
 
Rigging Polls

Today Wikileaks released Podesta emails: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/26551

Email starts out with a request for recommendations on “oversamples for polling” in order to “maximize what we get out of our media polling.”




Email also attaches 37-page guide with the following poll-rigging recommendations.

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails//fileid/26551/7326

In Arizona, over sampling of Hispanics and Native Americans is highly recommended:

– Over-sample Hispanics
– Use Spanish language interviewing. (Monolingual Spanish-speaking voters are among the lowest turnout Democratic targets)
– Over-sample the Native American population

It recommends “consistently monitoring” samples to makes sure they’re “not too old” and “has enough African American and Hispanic voters.” Meanwhile, “independent” voters in Tampa and Orlando are apparently more dem friendly so the report suggests filling up independent quotas in those cities first.

– Consistently monitor the sample to ensure it is not too old, and that it has enough African American and Hispanic voters to reflect the state.
– On Independents: Tampa and Orlando are better persuasion targets than north or south Florida (check your polls before concluding this). If there are budget questions or oversamples, make sure that Tampa and Orlando are included first.

it’s suggested that national polls over sample “key districts / regions” and “ethnic” groups “as needed.”

– General election benchmark, 800 sample, with potential over samples in key districts/regions
– Benchmark polling in targeted races, with ethnic over samples as needed
– Targeting tracking polls in key races, with ethnic over samples as needed


Sarcasm: Truly scientific polls. Ignore the other polls, they are not scientific. Believe and trust the media scientific polls.

Guys, if you read this far, you've just done something illegal:

Everything you learn, you should learn from CNN <- advice from CNN

Pretty sure this is for internal primary polling, though you're not going to find an explanation about that on zerohedge or infowars.
 
Pretty sure this is for internal primary polling, though you're not going to find an explanation about that on zerohedge or infowars.

I don't see why there would be an explanation that it is internal primary polling in anywhere that details this story as that is conjecture (unless its CNN).

What is the chances of Podesta sending an email to ATLAS leading to 30+ pages of recommendations, mentioning media polls, and its actually to influence an internal poll. What is the ROI in that.
 
I don't see why there would be an explanation that it is internal primary polling in anywhere that details this story as that is conjecture (unless its CNN).

What is the chances of Podesta sending an email to ATLAS leading to 30+ pages of recommendations, mentioning media polls, and its actually to influence an internal poll. What is the ROI in that.

This is not about influencing polls, it is about getting better visibility into groups who may/may not respond to their ad messaging. Campaigns have control over their internal polling, because they are paying for it. Most real POTUS campaigns have their own data operation, especially on the Democrat side. When the public polls are released, the campaigns are looking for movement in certain demographics. Because of the sample size, they can only drill down so far before results are showing "N/A" because the MoE goes into the double digits. Without their internal polling, they have no way of knowing if their targeted ad campaigns are responsible for moving that larger demographic.

The only Republican campaign coming close to what the Democrats do this cycle was the Cruz campaign- they were running their own data operation and drilling all the way down to the individual voter in Iowa, and that's how they won Iowa. They tried scaling this to other states, but like campaign $$, data only gets a candidate so far. Since 2008, the DNC has been running this data operation nationwide. It's why the Clinton campaign has been able to now go into NC and AZ and pick off enough GOP voters to make those states tossups.
 
jryan21 actually makes sense and doesn't come off as a conspiracy nutjob posting Alex Jones videos that make simple minded claims of rigged elections when reality is much more complex than that.
 
This is not about influencing polls, it is about getting better visibility into groups who may/may not respond to their ad messaging. Campaigns have control over their internal polling, because they are paying for it. Most real POTUS campaigns have their own data operation, especially on the Democrat side. When the public polls are released, the campaigns are looking for movement in certain demographics. Because of the sample size, they can only drill down so far before results are showing "N/A" because the MoE goes into the double digits. Without their internal polling, they have no way of knowing if their targeted ad campaigns are responsible for moving that larger demographic.

The only Republican campaign coming close to what the Democrats do this cycle was the Cruz campaign- they were running their own data operation and drilling all the way down to the individual voter in Iowa, and that's how they won Iowa. They tried scaling this to other states, but like campaign $$, data only gets a candidate so far. Since 2008, the DNC has been running this data operation nationwide. It's why the Clinton campaign has been able to now go into NC and AZ and pick off enough GOP voters to make those states tossups.

I appreciate your explanation. It can be a plausible reason. Much better than the guy below you who freely screams racist and conspiracy around like its a smart argument. He gets no response from me.
 



Computer Programmer testifies at senate hearing to election voting fraud:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP4fS2fTrPg[/ame]

Gary and I went to early vote today...I voted a straight Republican
ticket and as I scrolled to submit my ballot I noticed that the
Republican Straight ticket was highlighted, however, the clinton/kaine box was also highlighted! I tried to go back and
change and could not get it to work. I asked for help from one of
the workers and she couldn't get it to go back either. It took a second election person to get the machine to where I could correct the vote to a straight ticket. Be careful and double check your selections before you cast your vote! Don't hesitate to ask for help. I had to have help to get mine changed.

https://www.facebook.com/lisa.houlette/posts/10207673604943708

Hey everyone, just a heads up! I had a family member that voted this morning and she voted straight Republican. She checked before she submitted and the vote had changed to Clinton! She reported it and made sure her vote was changed back. They commented that It had been happening. She is trying to get the word out and asked that we post and share. Just want everyone's vote to be accurate and count. Check your vote before you submit! Mary Sims-Beckham and Bradina Benson do y'all know how to report this?
Edit: this happened this morning In Arlington TX. Mon, Oct 24, 2016, which is also when I posted!

https://www.facebook.com/shandy.clark.1/posts/781098258694741
 
Much better than the guy below you who freely screams racist and conspiracy around like its a smart argument. He gets no response from me.

But you did respond in a lame passive aggressive sort of way. It's a bitch move.

Besides you haven't made a single intelligent point. All you do is regurgitate stuff from Prison Planet and similar low quality biased sources. The only credible stuff you posted is from wikileaks, who I definitely consider a high quality source.
 
Michael Moore, a Hillary supporter and the one who supposedly called Trump supporters legal terrorists, just gave a speech that can be one of the best endorsements for Donald Trump:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pwXB2iIFeo[/ame]


This election has more drama than a hollywood movie lol.
 
He's actually trying to flip Trump supporters. All in the game:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1EnRLZ3p4o[/ame]
 
He's actually trying to flip Trump supporters. All in the game:

YouTube

The video has been taken down. Here is what he says after:

[Voting for Trump will feel good] for a day. Maybe a week. Possibly a month. And then. Like the Brits, who wanted to send a message, so they voted to leave Europe only to find out that if you vote to leave Europe you, actually have to leave Europe.
And now they regret it. All the Ohioans, Pennsylvanians, Michiganders and Wisconsinites of Middle England, right, they all voted to leave and now they regret it.
And over 4 million of them signed a petition to have a do-over, they want another election, but It's not going to happen. Because you used the ballot as an anger management tool. And now you're fucked. And the rest of Europe. They're like, Bye Felicia.
So when the rightfully angry people of Ohio and Michigan and Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin find out after a few months in office that President Trump wasn't going to do a damn thing for them, it will be too late to do anything about it.
But I get it. You wanted to send a message. You had righteous anger. And justifiable anger. Well, message sent.
Goodnight America. You've just elected the last president of the United States.

The speech is supposedly taken from his Trumpland video.

I don't think it would work in his favour. There are many videos of his 'partial' speech on youtube that are getting plenty of views. There are many who won't investigate further and will take it as a Trump endorsement.

Though his endorsement wouldn't carry weight, more importantly the speech outlines the reasons for voting Trump that would resonate amongst the majority of the population. And if they do view the rest of the speech, the reasons for not voting for Trump (he will let you down) pales in comparison to his earlier segment.
 
Its happening just like Brexit. While the polls predicted remain, David Cameron thinking its a done deal, that remain would win, the media scaremongering about the prospect and stupidity of Brexit, the calls and labeling of racism, people like me who never cares to vote before, goes and vote for Brexit.

https://twitter.com/Darren32895836/status/791350873272168448

Remainers are not as determined as leavers, just like Hillary supporters are not as determined Trump supporters. We would go vote no matter the weather or circumstances. Brexiteers like myself firmly believe UK should leave the EU and wanted to bring about it. I sense and feel, Trump supporters have similar sentiments.
 
Its happening just like Brexit.

It's nothing like Brexit. The polls for Brexit were well within the margin of error.

So please note well: The polls were not wrong about Brexit. Anyone who read incorrect results into them did so for the exact same reason that Gingrich is wrong now: Wishful thinking.

The final vote for Brexit, the UK’s June 23, 2016 referendum on whether it should leave the European Union, turned out to be 52% in favor of leaving and 48% to remain. What did the polls say before the vote? Thanks to the internet, we can look back and see. Many media outlets in the UK adopted the policy of collecting public polls and averaging them, a best practice for dealing with volatile public opinion.

The Financial Times‘ tracker offered an average of 48% Remain, 46% Leave and 6% undecided ahead of the vote. The Economist’s final tracker found Remain and Leave tied at 44% each, with 9% saying “don’t know.” I can’t quite figure out where the BBC’s polling average wound up, but their last commentary is “a final set of polls continues to give an unclear picture of the referendum outcome.” In other words, a unified message came from poll analysts: This is too close to call. That’s especially true given the the margin of error of 3% in most surveys of 1,000 or more people, which characterizes most of these national polls.

No, Newt, the polls didn't get Brexit wrong and they won't save Donald Trump — Quartz

This is not the case with Hillary vs Trump where Hillary is a strong lead over Trump.

Trump could theoretically still win this election by gaining 270 Electoral College votes, even if he loses the popular vote which is meaningless since it is actually the Electoral College electors who directly votes for the President.
 
It's nothing like Brexit. The polls for Brexit were well within the margin of error.



No, Newt, the polls didn't get Brexit wrong and they won't save Donald Trump — Quartz

This is not the case with Hillary vs Trump where Hillary is a strong lead over Trump.

Trump could theoretically still win this election by gaining 270 Electoral College votes, even if he loses the popular vote which is meaningless since it is actually the Electoral College electors who directly votes for the President.

The thing is, the media at that time were promoting the polls that showed remainers in the lead. Its what happening right now too. There are some poll(s) that show Trump in the lead but the media loves to use the polls showing Hillary in the lead.

The sentiment however amongst the Trump supporters are similar to Brixiteers. Regardless the polls are rigged, not rigged, biased, not biased, they cannot possibly find out what the people who don't usually bother voting would choose.
 
The thing is, the media at that time were promoting the polls that showed remainers in the lead. Its what happening right now too. There are some poll(s) that show Trump in the lead but the media loves to use the polls showing Hillary in the lead.

The sentiment however amongst the Trump supporters are similar to Brixiteers. Regardless the polls are rigged, not rigged, biased, not biased, they cannot possibly find out what the people who don't usually bother voting would choose.
Were it not for media owned and operation opinion polls, there would not be a single reason to think Hillary is still in the race - much less has already won the damn thing two weeks out.

Here's some facts that the media can't spin: Trump spending more time in NH / Maine / Michigan / Pennsylvania, possibly Oregon & Minnesota ... while Hillary needs to twin-headline with Michelle Obama in North Carolina.
 
Were it not for media owned and operation opinion polls, there would not be a single reason to think Hillary is still in the race - much less has already won the damn thing two weeks out.

Here's some facts that the media can't spin: Trump spending more time in NH / Maine / Michigan / Pennsylvania, possibly Oregon & Minnesota ... while Hillary needs to twin-headline with Michelle Obama in North Carolina.

Yeah, Trump can't get shit from any of those states. The reason the Democrats are campaigning so aggressively right now is because while the GOP nominee is out there attacking other GOPs and potential supporters, the Dems are going to take the POTUS, Senate and get closer to even in the House.
 
Yeah, Trump can't get shit from any of those states. The reason the Democrats are campaigning so aggressively right now is because while the GOP nominee is out there attacking other GOPs and potential supporters, the Dems are going to take the POTUS, Senate and get closer to even in the House.

No. According to the delusional Trumpkins on this forum and elsewhere, Trump will win by a landslide and/or the Presidential election is rigged. All the polls are rigged too.

Of course the only people on this forum that seem to be grounded in reality is you, BabyGotBacklink, Galacon, and a couple of others; you're completely 100% correct. Maybe Trump has a tiny sliver of a chance of barely gaining enough electoral votes to win if he can take Florida and a few other critical states, but that is a only a very remote possibility and probably won't be happening.

Even Trump doesn't think he'll win the election. That's why he's been more focused on the grand opening of his newly branded Trump Hotel in Washington DC rather than the Whitehouse.

People who didn't think Trump was anything but a showman clown who was in it for himself really have egg on their face.