Polls showing Biden ahead are grossly undersampling Republicans (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

    Status
    Not open for further replies.

    RushRoom

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Jul 23, 2020
    Messages
    57
    Reaction score
    97
    Age
    70
    Location
    floridas
    Offline
    https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2020/07/20/biden-has-been-co-opted-by-bernie-and-the-far-left/

    Polls Showing Biden with a Double-Digit Lead Undersample Republicans

    USH: Now, you’ve seen the polling data that shows Trump way behind Biden. ABC, Washington Post, Quinnipiac. Well, a bunch of people have dug deep into these polls, and they found out that in every one of them the Republican sample has been 24%. ABC/Washington Post poll sample of Republicans, 24%. Quinnipiac, 24%. The actual number is 33%. The 2016 exit poll showed that 33% of people that voted were Republican. 2018, the midterms, 33% were Republican.


    APP-060220-Biden-3.jpg



    So these are polls designed to depress you. They are designed to dispirit you. They are designed to deflate you. They’re designed to make you think your guy is losing, you may as well not even show up. They do it every year, every election. They under-sample Republicans, and it gives them the opportunity to misreport. There is a big difference in a Republican sample of 24% and one of 33%.

    Folks, I know what you're thinking. I just pulled that out of Rush's arse, right? And I wouldn't blame you for being skeptical. So I dug a little further.

    https://mclaughlinonline.com/2020/06/08/memo-to-president-trump-skewed-media-polls/

    To: President Trump


    From: John McLaughlin


    Re: Skewed Media Polls


    Date: June 8, 2020
    _____________________________________________________


    The latest skewed media polls must be intentional. It’s clear that NBC, ABC and CNN who have Democrat operatives like Chuck Todd, George Stephanopoulos and other Democrats in their news operations are consistently under-polling Republicans and therefore, reporting biased polls. They continue to poll adults or registered voters that skew away from likely voters. So instead of the 33% Republican turnout which actually happened in 2016, they are reporting polls on only 26%, 25% or even 24% Republicans. Since you get over 90% of the Republican vote, for every point fewer Republicans that they do not poll, they reduce your vote total by a point. In contrast CBS polled likely voters. CBS had 32% Republicans and a close national race. The bias seems to be an intentional strategy to suppress your vote. The latest media spin is that it’s too late to define Joe Biden and it’s too late for President Trump to win. We can hardly wait until they start spinning a “Biden electoral lock”. It has to be a strategy to counter the enthusiasm of Trump voters.


    For, example, the CNN poll out today is another skewed anti-Trump poll of only 25% Republican. It’s a poll of 1,259 adults – not even registered voters, let alone likely voters. Also, it was done between June 2nd and 5th, before the great economic news from last Friday. In their questionnaire between asking about your job approval and the ballot, they had questions on issues including race relations, not job creation, which could have biased the poll further. It appears that the CNN poll is biased in both sample and questionnaire design to manufacture an anti-Trump outcome.


    This isn't the first time the WOKE left has tried to dispirit Trump voters. Establishment types in BOTH parties are STILL scratching their heads and wondering how in the hell this man defeated their CHOSEN ONE in 2016.

    Because you can't trust pollsters, the only reliable polls are the single party polls. Where is Biden's support in the Democrat Party? Where is Trump's support?

    Right now, the president enjoys 91 percent support in the Republican Party. (It wasn't that high in 16, when he creamed the Republican darling Jeb Bush.)
    And right now, a LOT of Democrats are going to sit home because the presumptive Democrat nominee can't remember his name half the time and sometimes thinks he's running for the US Senate.

    Watching the establishment freak out over Trump's presidency, (and the GREATEST ECONOMY OF ALL TIME, thanks to his policies) is like watching a private country club in Mississippi in 1959 when a black child tries to use its restricted swimming pool.

    This AWFUL economy (thanks to the Wuhan Virus and the needed shutdowns) only will remind voters of how bad it was during eight years of Biden/Obama.
     
    Any idiot can make a chart. I have produced factual sources.

    The chart is from the labor department of the United States. Your sources are Rush Limbaugh and brietbart. Give me a break.

    You're obviously not here to "debate those who disagree with me". Your just trolling and when you get presented with info that disproves what you are saying you call it "fake news" and move on to the next predetermined troll bit.
     
    you aren’t just some other hack. Give yourself credit, you are a tremendous hack, don’t sell yourself short!

    you are an obvious troll and a bad one at that. Rush Limbaugh is an uneducated pedophile and he is a stain on America. But he isn’t a source for anything other than where to find sex trafficked boys.

    repeat after me: “Person, Man, woman, camera, tv”
     
    "I only accept sources that agree with me" doesn't exactly invite discussion.

    I don't think the 2020 polling can be read the same way as the 2016 polling. Between the polling and Hillary just not being hugely popular, it led to a good degree of apathy. I don't see that repeating regardless of who the Dem candidate ended up being.
     
    All my sources are reliable and factual. They may trigger you because you do not agree with them, but they are all correct.

    Your sources are not. Forbes? A total Democrat shill? Seriously?

    enough of this, you are posting editorials and citing them as facts. You posted a snapshot of time and claimed it stood for the entire Obama presidency. You are using sources that are extremely biased to your side, while calling out sources that say things you don’t like as biased.

    just a word of advice: you may want to take a small break and gather yourself. You’re destroying any credibility you could hope to have here.
     
    This guy is a retread from the old site, I just can't remember what name he posted under.
     

    The chart is from the labor department of the United States. Your sources are Rush Limbaugh and brietbart. Give me a break.


    Rush's sources are valid. So are Brietbart. So is McLaughlin. Just because you don't like those sources does not mean they are not accurate. And any idiot can create a chart. Any idiot can misinterpret data from the Labor Department.

    You're obviously not here to "debate those who disagree with me". Your just trolling and when you get presented with info that disproves what you are saying you call it "fake news" and move on to the next predetermined troll bit.

    You do not know the definition of the word "trolling." I'm merely giving opinions that most of America believes. If you disagree with them or you don't like them, that doesn't automatically rise to the level of trolling. And when you use proven fake news hacks like Factcheck and Politifact, (both of which have been widely discredited in the accuracy process) I'm going to call them what they are. I'm giving facts, and facts don't care about your feelings.
     
    The chart is from the labor department of the United States. Your sources are Rush Limbaugh and brietbart. Give me a break.

    Rush's sources are valid. So are Brietbart. So is McLaughlin. Just because you don't like those sources does not mean they are not accurate. And any idiot can create a chart. Any idiot can misinterpret data from the Labor Department.

    You're obviously not here to "debate those who disagree with me". Your just trolling and when you get presented with info that disproves what you are saying you call it "fake news" and move on to the next predetermined troll bit.

    You do not know the definition of the word "trolling." I'm merely giving opinions that most of America believes. If you disagree with them or you don't like them, that doesn't automatically rise to the level of trolling. And when you use proven fake news hacks like Factcheck and Politifact, (both of which have been widely discredited in the accuracy process) I'm going to call them what they are. I'm giving facts, and facts don't care about your feelings.

    giphy.gif
     
    The chart is from the labor department of the United States. Your sources are Rush Limbaugh and brietbart. Give me a break.

    Rush's sources are valid. So are Brietbart. So is McLaughlin. Just because you don't like those sources does not mean they are not accurate. And any idiot can create a chart. Any idiot can misinterpret data from the Labor Department.

    You're obviously not here to "debate those who disagree with me". Your just trolling and when you get presented with info that disproves what you are saying you call it "fake news" and move on to the next predetermined troll bit.

    You do not know the definition of the word "trolling." I'm merely giving opinions that most of America believes. If you disagree with them or you don't like them, that doesn't automatically rise to the level of trolling. And when you use proven fake news hacks like Factcheck and Politifact, (both of which have been widely discredited in the accuracy process) I'm going to call them what they are. I'm giving facts, and facts don't care about your feelings.

    Can you please show me where Factcheck.org and PolitiFact have been widely discredited?
     
    "I only accept sources that agree with me" doesn't exactly invite discussion.

    If you think about it, NOBODY accepts sources they disagree with.

    I don't think the 2020 polling can be read the same way as the 2016 polling. Between the polling and Hillary just not being hugely popular, it led to a good degree of apathy. I don't see that repeating regardless of who the Dem candidate ended up being.

    Hillary was a much more skillful and effective candidate than Joe. She may have been very detestible in her style, but she wasn't senile. She could actually put together whole sentences. Her handlers didn't keep her in a basement, afraid that she would expose her senility. Hillary's landslide defeat REALLY pissed off a lot of snowflakes and they STILL haven't shut up about it. So many idiots wanted to make history by voting for the first woman president in history and it didn't happen.


    Joe has no program, no real reason to vote for him, other than 24 percent of the country saying ORANGE MAN BAD.
     
    Man your the one claiming Trump created more jobs 6 months into his presidency than the last 5 democratic presidents combined. Your the one that needs to come with data that backs it up. Because it's not even close to correct.

    Barack Obama 11.5 million jobs
    Bill Clinton 23.6 million jobs
    Jimmy Carter 10.3 million jobs
    Lyndon Johnson 9.9 million jobs
    Kennedy/Johnson 5.9 million jobs

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jobs_created_during_U.S._presidential_terms

    and don't "Oh god Wikipedia as a source!?!?!?" because it has them all sourced from .gov websites.

    Trump about a million in June of 2017. In February before all this started he was sitting at 6.7 Million jobs created. A little less than 61.2 million combined from the last 5 guys with D's next to their name.

    Obama's policies LOST jobs. He had the worst jobs numbers in history. People were actually giving up on looking for jobs. Job participation during his disastrous tenure was the lowest in history.

    https://thepoliticalinsider.com/obamas-final-economic-numbers-are-in-and-theyre-devastating/

    By the way, to give you a further taste of how manipulative the Obama Administration is with their numbers, Press Secretary Josh Earnest recently claimed that 805,000 manufacturing jobs were created under President Obama. The truth is Obama presided over a LOSS of 303,000 manufacturing jobs from the start of his presidency in January 2009. Earnest cherry-picked data from 2010 to create his own number.


    n his last full month in office, President Barack Obama has hit a new record high! A record high number of Americans out of the labor force, that is: 95.1 million people are not working, reports CNSNews.com.


    Barack Obama’s presidency began with a record number of Americans not in the labor force, and it’s ending the same way.
    The final jobs report of the Obama presidency, released Friday, shows that the number of Americans not in the labor force has increased by 14,573,000 (18.09 percent) since January 2009, when Obama took office, continuing a long-term trend that began well before Obama was sworn in.
    In December, according to the Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics, a record 95,102,000 Americans were not in the labor force, 47,000 more than in November; and the labor force participation rate was 62.7 percent, a tenth of a point higher than in November.
    The participation rate dropped to a 38-year low of 62.4 percent on Obama’s watch, in September 2015. It was only 3-tenths of a point higher than that last month.
     
    Obama's policies LOST jobs. He had the worst jobs numbers in history. People were actually giving up on looking for jobs. Job participation during his disastrous tenure was the lowest in history.

    https://thepoliticalinsider.com/obamas-final-economic-numbers-are-in-and-theyre-devastating/

    By the way, to give you a further taste of how manipulative the Obama Administration is with their numbers, Press Secretary Josh Earnest recently claimed that 805,000 manufacturing jobs were created under President Obama. The truth is Obama presided over a LOSS of 303,000 manufacturing jobs from the start of his presidency in January 2009. Earnest cherry-picked data from 2010 to create his own number.


    n his last full month in office, President Barack Obama has hit a new record high! A record high number of Americans out of the labor force, that is: 95.1 million people are not working, reports CNSNews.com.
     
    Maybe nobody you've ever met.

    But it's important to let facts dictate your opinions, rather than the other way around.
    For real. I accept many sources I don't agree with, as long as they're sourced and proven to be telling the truth. But that isn't even what we're really dealing with here. He's using editorials and opinion pieces as factual reporting while knowing good and damn well that it isn't.
     
    Status
    Not open for further replies.

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom