Crooked hillary

[BobStackFan4Life]

 

[TWDeac]

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016...-s-line-in-sand-won-t-believe-what-it-is.html

Now that is a clickbait title. Jokes on you, Fox News. I'm not falling for it.

 

[myDeaconmyhand]

Her own team isn't nearly as kind: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/17343#efmARpATcAeEAfj

On the need to lead on reforming public corruption, the hillaryclinton.com sent email said:

This is a jump ball. She may be so tainted she's really vulnerable

With friends like that...

Here you see the difference between the two campaigns; one campaign knew that their candidate was flawed and vulnerable from the beginning, while the other has a polling expert lying to their candidate 3 weeks from the election.

Sent from my SM-N930T using Tapatalk

 

[marquee moon]

Here you see the difference between the two campaigns; one campaign knew that their candidate was flawed and vulnerable from the beginning, while the other has a polling expert lying to their candidate 3 weeks from the election.

Sent from my SM-N930T using Tapatalk

Why do YOU lie, kind sir?

WHY DO YOU LIE!!???

 

[myDeaconmyhand]

It seems to be that the Trump campaign had a lot riding on this death by a thousand cuts wiki-leak event, and it's just not moving the public opinion like they excepted.

Sent from my SM-N930T using Tapatalk

 

[BobStackFan4Life]

New Podesta Email Exposes Playbook For Rigging Polls Through "Oversamples"
Earlier this morning we wrote about the obvious sampling bias in the latest ABC / Washington Post poll that showed a 12-point national advantage for Hillary. Like many of the recent polls from Reuters, ABC and The Washington Post, this latest poll included a 9-point sampling bias toward registered democrats.

"METHODOLOGY – This ABC News poll was conducted by landline and cellular telephone Oct. 20-22, 2016, in English and Spanish, among a random national sample of 874 likely voters. Results have a margin of sampling error of 3.5 points, including the design effect. Partisan divisions are 36-27-31 percent, Democrats - Republicans - Independents."

Of course, while democrats may enjoy a slight registration advantage of a couple of points, it is nowhere near the 9 points reflected in this latest poll.

Meanwhile, we also pointed out that with huge variances in preference across demographics one can easily "rig" a poll by over indexing to one group vs. another. As a quick example, the ABC / WaPo poll found that Hillary enjoys a 79-point advantage over Trump with black voters. Therefore, even a small "oversample" of black voters of 5% could swing the overall poll by 3 full points. Moreover, the pollsters don't provide data on the demographic mix of their polls which makes it impossible to "fact check" the bias...convenient.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-23/new-podesta-email-exposes-dem-playbook-rigging-polls-through-oversamples

 

[ChrisL68]

Remember these arguments verbatim from four years ago about how the polls were oversampling dems. Whatever you need to get you through the next 15 days be it denial or......

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

 

[Deacs89]

It seems to be that the Trump campaign had a lot riding on this death by a thousand cuts wiki-leak event, and it's just not moving the public opinion like they excepted.

Sent from my SM-N930T using Tapatalk

The media machine is in the tank for Hillary. They underestimated how far they are willing to go.

 

[EatLeadCommie]

Remember these arguments verbatim from four years ago about how the polls were oversampling dems. Whatever you need to get you through the next 15 days be it denial or......

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

The ABC News poll, which showed a remarkable 12 point lead for Hillary (including her getting 50%, which is not going to happen), oversampled Dems by 9%. That's an obvious oversight on their part, and one so obvious as to call into question who they're working for. But in the end, what it most certainly is not about is Pubs bitching about oversampling. It's about how the flock is managed by the shepherd.

We are a poll-driven society. Politicians-- particularly in the last 20 years-- consistently cite polls in order to manipulate public opinion on a vast number of issues. It is to the point where nothing is about the issue now, but rather about what the polls say. To have people intentionally manipulating polls makes the story about Hillary's lead, Hillary's Presidency, Trump losing ground, etc... It does things like sway the undecided voter to vote for Hillary, or the Trump voter to not vote at all since it's all over, etc... You can argue that it doesn't or shouldn't do any of those things, but then why the hell is Podesta doing it if it doesn't do precisely those things?

 

[Demonwolverine]

Pretty sure both parties have news sources that have faulty polls.

Can we please stop pretending like every little thing that happens is the first time it has ever happened in history?

 

[TheTwinAndreBen]

The ABC News poll, which showed a remarkable 12 point lead for Hillary (including her getting 50%, which is not going to happen), oversampled Dems by 9%. That's an obvious oversight on their part, and one so obvious as to call into question who they're working for. But in the end, what it most certainly is not about is Pubs bitching about oversampling. It's about how the flock is managed by the shepherd.

We are a poll-driven society. Politicians-- particularly in the last 20 years-- consistently cite polls in order to manipulate public opinion on a vast number of issues. It is to the point where nothing is about the issue now, but rather about what the polls say. To have people intentionally manipulating polls makes the story about Hillary's lead, Hillary's Presidency, Trump losing ground, etc... It does things like sway the undecided voter to vote for Hillary, or the Trump voter to not vote at all since it's all over, etc... You can argue that it doesn't or shouldn't do any of those things, but then why the hell is Podesta doing it if it doesn't do precisely those things?

Gee what an astute analysis of a real problem. If only, especially for the benefit of those precocious still-undecideds, there were a website that looks at ALL the polls and their methodology, and then gives them grades based on the analysis of that methodology, and then uses a summation of the weighted polls to make predictions on the respective state races based on such statistical data. If only....

 

[WakeandBake]

The ABC News poll, which showed a remarkable 12 point lead for Hillary (including her getting 50%, which is not going to happen), oversampled Dems by 9%. That's an obvious oversight on their part, and one so obvious as to call into question who they're working for. But in the end, what it most certainly is not about is Pubs bitching about oversampling. It's about how the flock is managed by the shepherd.

We are a poll-driven society. Politicians-- particularly in the last 20 years-- consistently cite polls in order to manipulate public opinion on a vast number of issues. It is to the point where nothing is about the issue now, but rather about what the polls say. To have people intentionally manipulating polls makes the story about Hillary's lead, Hillary's Presidency, Trump losing ground, etc... It does things like sway the undecided voter to vote for Hillary, or the Trump voter to not vote at all since it's all over, etc... You can argue that it doesn't or shouldn't do any of those things, but then why the hell is Podesta doing it if it doesn't do precisely those things?

Wouldn't 2012 completely destroy this premise? Polls had a dead heat and Obama won by a mile

 

[PhDeac]

I thought the polls had Obama up comfortably. Romney bought fireworks because the right wing media had the right believing all the polls were skewed by Nate Silver's black magic.

 

[Liquid Karma]

I thought the polls had Obama up comfortably. Romney bought fireworks because the right wing media had the right believing all the polls were skewed by Nate Silver's black magic.

This is correct. That was the election that effectively neutered Karl Rove.

 

[WakeandBake]

I thought the polls had Obama up comfortably. Romney bought fireworks because the right wing media had the right believing all the polls were skewed by Nate Silver's black magic.

that's right.

So ELCs theory is that by talking about the polls being in favor of Hillary, it makes it so, because the undecideds change their minds or dont vote.

Sorry these wild media conspiracy theories confuse my feeble mind

 

[WakeForestRanger]

It seems to be that the Trump campaign had a lot riding on this death by a thousand cuts wiki-leak event, and it's just not moving the public opinion like they excepted.

Sent from my SM-N930T using Tapatalk

I think most people just tuned it out.

 

[PhDeac]

Yep. Republicans have been crying wolf about Hillary for 25 years.

They're so convinced Hillary is the devil that they believed secret emails they hadn't even seen would destroy her. They also seemed to have no clue that there would be an October surprise against them.

 

[Deacfreak07]

Yep. Republicans have been crying wolf about Hillary for 25 years.

They're so convinced Hillary is the devil that they believed secret emails they hadn't even seen would destroy her. They also seemed to have no clue that there would be an October surprise against them.

To be fair, some of the info in the emails in a conventional race would be really harmful. The problem is she is running against someone who is not only wholly unqualified to even serve in a cabinet post but is also a giant tiny handed child.

 

[PhDeac]

And that's on them. Republicans get offended that they're not allowed to run a conventional race because they didn't nominate a conventional candidate.

 

[ChrisL68]

To be fair, some of the info in the emails in a conventional race would be really harmful. The problem is she is running against someone who is not only wholly unqualified to even serve in a cabinet post but is also a giant tiny handed child.

Yes, a one-sided attempt by a foreign government to influence an election by hacking the inner workings of one campaign would unfortunately probably be successful. Good things the Rs nominated a lunatic.