Don Lemon: "I am not quite sure that the polls are accurate as it relates to the tightening of the polls and who will support whom"

[shockedcanadian]

This after he asked many black in the Swing States who they are voting for. I saw some of the video and I was not surprised with Trumps broad appeal.

Of course he repeats the usual lazy allegations, "Trump is racist" etc. Yawn. Every election, rinse and repeat, after all, their dumb voters will nod and agree, right? Not this time it seems.

I am in agreement with him on this point, I don't believe the polls. I think they are skewing them to increase Harris money from donors and to convince Trump, as they did with Biden; that he needs to debate her.

MSN

MSNBC host Jen Psaki was surprised as former CNN host Don Lemon shared how black voters told him that they did not know who Vice President Kamala Harris was and that they plan to vote for former President Donald Trump — who they believe is “on black people’s side.”

On Monday’s Inside With Jen Psaki, Lemon explained how his interviews with black voters ahead of the Democratic National Convention and in his travels across several key swing states were “eye-opening” and that despite the “metrics” on economy that back Harris, many people recall the 2021 stimulus check that bore Trump’s signature and are choosing, instead, to “vote with their wallets.”

 

[bdtex]

I don't believe the polls. I think they are skewing them

You guys thought that in 2012 too.

 

[Magnus]

This after he asked many black in the Swing States who they are voting for. I saw some of the video and I was not surprised with Trumps broad appeal.

Of course he repeats the usual lazy allegations, "Trump is racist" etc. Yawn. Every election, rinse and repeat, after all, their dumb voters will nod and agree, right? Not this time it seems.

I am in agreement with him on this point, I don't believe the polls. I think they are skewing them to increase Harris money from donors and to convince Trump, as they did with Biden; that he needs to debate her.

MSN

MSNBC host Jen Psaki was surprised as former CNN host Don Lemon shared how black voters told him that they did not know who Vice President Kamala Harris was and that they plan to vote for former President Donald Trump — who they believe is “on black people’s side.”

On Monday’s Inside With Jen Psaki, Lemon explained how his interviews with black voters ahead of the Democratic National Convention and in his travels across several key swing states were “eye-opening” and that despite the “metrics” on economy that back Harris, many people recall the 2021 stimulus check that bore Trump’s signature and are choosing, instead, to “vote with their wallets.”

So, when did you stop believing the polls? Was it before or after Kamala left the orange loser in the dust?

 

[shockedcanadian]

So, when did you stop believing the polls? Was it before or after Kamala left the orange loser in the dust?

The polls have always been biased against Trump.

 

[Magnus]

The polls have always been biased against Trump.

So, even when he was ahead in the polls, they were just messing with him?

This is why I love you retards—your brains work in such mysterious ways! Keep 'em coming!.

 

[shockedcanadian]

So, even when he was ahead in the polls, they were just messing with him?

This is why I love you retards—your brains work in such mysterious ways! Keep 'em coming!.

He was never behind in the polls, especially not in the G.E. Perhaps in some national popular polls but that would be about it.

He was well ahead of Biden before he even debated him it was why the Dems were desperate to get him in there early to try and make up ground, the backup plan would be to replace him as they would have time.

Trump has never trailed Harris in all likelihood. She and Biden had the lowest approval rating in history but we are supposed to believe she is suddenly the next JFK?

The methodology of these polls is always critical and they have always under polled Trump supporters. Since 2016.

 

[22lcidw]

So, even when he was ahead in the polls, they were just messing with him?

This is why I love you retards—your brains work in such mysterious ways! Keep 'em coming!.

The problem with Progressives is that your foundation is vast but thin. You have vast alliances with different groups and most have a viral hatred for each other when it comes down to resources allocated or not allocated. You had to make and enemy and you did. White Males and Christians who are White. Close behind are white females and African Americans who are not Progressives. Again, your allied groups are a bloodbath waiting to happen. The pulse club is an example. The Hamas/Israel situation another. Wehn you guys act out, it is on the stage and nasty.

 

[jbrownson0831]

He was never behind in the polls, especially not in the G.E. Perhaps in some national popular polls but that would be about it.

He was well ahead of Biden before he even debated him it was why the Dems were desperate to get him in there early to try and make up ground, the backup plan would be to replace him as they would have time.

Trump has never trailed Harris in all likelihood. She and Biden had the lowest approval rating in history but we are supposed to believe she is suddenly the next JFK?

The methodology of these polls is always critical and they have always under polled Trump supporters. Since 2016.

Trump has been ahead about 4 points nationally, likely will be 6 now that Kennedy has dropped out.
Rasmussen and Gold Crown report accurate polling results.

 

[Magnus]

He was never behind in the polls, especially not in the G.E. Perhaps in some national popular polls but that would be about it.

He was well ahead of Biden before he even debated him it was why the Dems were desperate to get him in there early to try and make up ground, the backup plan would be to replace him as they would have time.

Trump has never trailed Harris in all likelihood. She and Biden had the lowest approval rating in history but we are supposed to believe she is suddenly the next JFK?

The methodology of these polls is always critical and they have always under polled Trump supporters. Since 2016.

Blah...blah... That wasn't the question I asked, retard. Learn to read.

Let me repeat my question: So, even when he was ahead in the polls, they were just messing with him?

 

[shockedcanadian]

Blah...blah... That wasn't the question I asked, retard. Learn to read.

Let me repeat my question: So, even when he was ahead in the polls, they were just messing with him?

The key is that EVERYTHING is politicized now.

Do you realize how low trust is across media and "experts"?

How many intelligence experts, some of them well known and apparently trusted; signed a letter claimed that the laptop was Russian disinformation? That alone could have turned the election.

How many economic experts signed a letter saying that the I.R.A wouldn't lead to inflation?

How much censorship was forced during covid?

You'll have to excuse me if I am one of hundreds of millions that is a little more critical of the information I consume and it's desired efficacy.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Blah...blah... That wasn't the question I asked, retard. Learn to read.

Let me repeat my question: So, even when he was ahead in the polls, they were just messing with him?

Don't be a dick.

 

[Magnus]

The key is that EVERYTHING is politicized now.

Do you realize how low trust is across media and "experts"?

How many intelligence experts, some of them well known and apparently trusted; signed a letter claimed that the laptop was Russian disinformation? That alone could have turned the election.

How many economic experts signed a letter saying that the I.R.A wouldn't lead to inflation?

How much censorship was forced during covid?

You'll have to excuse me if I am one of hundreds of millions that is a little more critical of the information I consume and it's desired efficacy.

LOL Again, with all the gobbldygook? Do you really think I am going to let you off the hook? You started this thread. Let's see if you have the guts to back it up by answering my question.

One more time... So, even when he was ahead in the polls, they were just messing with him?

And, nope. Not going to let it go till you answer this question.

 

[shockedcanadian]

LOL Again, with all the gobbldygook? Do you really think I am going to let you off the hook? You started this thread. Let's see if you have the guts to back it up by answering my question.

One more time... So, even when he was ahead in the polls, they were just messing with him?

And, nope. Not going to let it go till you answer this question.

I am saying I have never fully embraced ANY poll.

What I do know is watching videos and following other metrics like 100s of millions listening to the recording of Trumps interview with Musk for instance. His rallies and people randomly asking people on the streets.

There was an interview of citizens in NY and it was unedited, I'd say 75% of these random people in deep blue NY supported Trump.

How would you like me to interpret this information?

Beyond this, I see that Rasmussen, the pollster that has been most accurate the last two elections explaining why some of the poll data we saw which had her in the lead were well off the mark.

I knew Biden was ahead in the polls, I thought Trump might squeak it out in the G.E and he almost did if not for covid. She is way behind his numbers and even further behind Hillaries.

 

[jbrownson0831]

I am saying I have never fully embraced ANY poll.

What I do know is watching videos and following other metrics like 100s of millions listening to the recording of Trumps interview with Musk for instance. His rallies and people randomly asking people on the streets.

There was an interview of citizens in NY and it was unedited, I'd say 75% of these random people in deep blue NY supported Trump.

How would you like me to interpret this information?

Beyond this, I see that Rasmussen, the pollster that has been most accurate the last two elections explaining why some of the poll data we saw which had her in the lead were well off the mark.

I knew Biden was ahead in the polls, I thought Trump might squeak it out in the G.E and he almost did if not for covid. She is way behind his numbers and even further behind Hillaries.

...and there you go.
Individual research isn't that hard yet dimtards are just sheeple, and too lazy.

 

[Magnus]

I am saying I have never fully embraced ANY poll.

What I do know is watching videos and following other metrics like 100s of millions listening to the recording of Trumps interview with Musk for instance. His rallies and people randomly asking people on the streets.

There was an interview of citizens in NY and it was unedited, I'd say 75% of these random people in deep blue NY supported Trump.

How would you like me to interpret this information?

Beyond this, I see that Rasmussen, the pollster that has been most accurate the last two elections explaining why some of the poll data we saw which had her in the lead were well off the mark.

I knew Biden was ahead in the polls, I thought Trump might squeak it out in the G.E and he almost did if not for covid. She is way behind his numbers and even further behind Hillaries.

That wasn't the question, retard. Try again. A simple yes or no would suffice.

You claimed that the polls have always been biased against Trump.

My question: So, even when he was ahead in the polls, they were just messing with him?

 

[shockedcanadian]

That wasn't the question, retard. Try again. A simple yes or no would suffice.

You claimed that the polls have always been biased against Trump.

My question: So, even when he was ahead in the polls, they were just messing with him?

I am saying that they have continuously under represented Trumps support. This has been occurring for years with the GOP in general truth be told but with Trump it is even worse. Part of this is at the feet of Trump supporters who dont like to do polls or don't want to have to explain why they support him, other aspects are methodology bias.

I think Reagans was the most egregious when in 1980 the pollsters called it "too close to call", The guy won 44 states or something.

The dishonesty and gaslighting we have seen for years and which culminated at its peak during covid has done great damage to media and its supporting institutions.

 

[Magnus]

I am saying that they have continuously under represented Trumps support. This has been occurring for years with the GOP in general truth be told but with Trump it is even worse. Part of this is at the feet of Trump supporters who dont like to do polls or don't want to have to explain why they support him, other aspects are methodology bias.

I think Reagans was the most egregious when in 1980 the pollsters called it "too close to call", The guy won 44 states or something.

The dishonesty and gaslighting we have seen for years and which culminated at its peak during covid has done great damage to media and its supporting institutions.

Your thread. If you want to keep proving you are a coward, who am I to judge? So, I will keep asking the question and you keep equivocating and proving you are a coward. Deal?

Here ya go... I am still looking for a Yes or No answer.

You claimed that the polls have always been biased against Trump.

My question: So, even when he was ahead in the polls, they were just messing with him?

 

[shockedcanadian]

Your thread. If you want to keep proving you are a coward, who am I to judge? So, I will keep asking the question and you keep equivocating and proving you are a coward. Deal?

Here ya go... I am still looking for a Yes or No answer.

You claimed that the polls have always been biased against Trump.

My question: So, even when he was ahead in the polls, they were just messing with him?

How would I know if that particular poll which you don't specify the date or source is/was accurate or not? You also seem to have an "all or none" definition based on if he is ahead or not. I can easily see him being, say 2% ahead in a poll of a state when it is more closer to 5% for instance.

So how would you like me to definitively answer your question? It sounds as if you are just looking for the answer which most appeals to you.

 

[Magnus]

How would I know if that particular poll which you don't specify the date or source is/was accurate or not? You also seem to have an "all or none" definition based on if he is ahead or not. I can easily see him being, say 2% ahead in a poll of a state when it is more closer to 5% for instance.

So how would you like me to definitively answer your question? It sounds as if you are just looking for the answer which most appeals to you.

What part of this is confusing?

You claimed that the polls have always been biased against Trump.

So, my question: So, even when he was ahead in the polls, they were just messing with him?

You came up with "polls have always been biased against Trump". So, were they biased against him when he was leading in the polls?

Keep equivocating. It is fun to see you twisting in the wind.

 

[shockedcanadian]

What part of this is confusing?

You claimed that the polls have always been biased against Trump.

So, my question: So, even when he was ahead in the polls, they were just messing with him?

You came up with "polls have always been biased against Trump". So, were they biased against him when he was leading in the polls?

Keep equivocating. It is fun to see you twisting in the wind.

You have a comprehension problem it seems.

I won't reiterate what I deemed to be a sufficient and clear response. So I will just avoid the nuances and eliminate your argument with this "sure, they were messing with him because he was probably ahead by MORE than they showed",

If that helps you to spiritually and mentally move along, I am happy for you.