Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The party samples are the number of people they reach that say they are registered or lean towards one party. They don't sample for a certain number of each part and there aren't an equal number of people belonging to the parties in this country.Relook those numbers and tell us which way they generally lean.Average the internet and live phone..Internet is waaaay better using your own numbers.
Internet margin - 1.37
Live phone- 1.93
Internet margin is smaller therefore more accurate.
How do 19 of 23 polling agencies having a bias toward republicans 'depress the vote'?
Why would the 'skewed poll' schtick have any more value this election, than it did in 2012 when it was laughably wrong?
Look at the party samples........it matters
Liar!This is not 2012 and your not running against a wimp.But this time its different, huh? Did you guys learn *nothing* from 2012?
Romney was polling far better than Trump at this point in the election. And he still lost badly.
But keep those eyes screwed shut. Though you may want to pick out the lies you'll have to start telling yourself in November early, just so you don't steal anyone else's thunder.
It would be awkward. Like two girls arriving at prom in the exact same dress.
Again, the democrats made the *exact* same argument in 2004, claiming that polls showing Bush leading Kerry 'oversampled' republicans.
Their claims were dogshit. The polls were right. Bush won.
Republicans made the exact same argument in 2012, insisting that polls that showed Obama leading Romney oversampled democrats.
Their claims were dogshit. The polls were right. Obama won.
And after 2 obvious and unimpeachable examples of your theory failing spectacularly, you're going to return to the *exact* same theory again with no modifications...expecting it to magically work this time?
Um, why would you ever do that?
Because a 26 percent sample of republicans isn't near correct.....31 percent is much closer to reality.
Your ilk said the same thing in 2012, insisting that the 'oversampling' of democrats by about 6% skewed the polls.
Yet in exit polls, self identified democrats led self identified republicans by (gasp) about 6%. Exactly as the polls indicated.
The 'oversampling' horseshit doesn't work. It didn't work for Democrats in 2004, Republicans in 2008 or 2012.
Why would it suddenly work in 2016?
Ok I'm gonna go slow
Not all polls have the same sampling correct?
Sigh....just make your argument. You've already completely abandoned your 'depress the vote' horseshit. So can we move this along?
No I haven't so as I said before 31 percent is much closer to reality than 26 percent republican. That's 4 to 5 percent in the polls it makes a huuuuuuge difference. That ls how they skew polls.
They aren't adjusting anything. Learn how polls work.The party samples are the number of people they reach that say they are registered or lean towards one party. They don't sample for a certain number of each part and there aren't an equal number of people belonging to the parties in this country.Relook those numbers and tell us which way they generally lean.
Internet margin - 1.37
Live phone- 1.93
Internet margin is smaller therefore more accurate.
How do 19 of 23 polling agencies having a bias toward republicans 'depress the vote'?
Why would the 'skewed poll' schtick have any more value this election, than it did in 2012 when it was laughably wrong?
Look at the party samples........it matters
Why would this scheme benefit the democratic party? Do you think that if the polls showed Trump behind without playing around with the samples that they would 'adjust' them? It just seems kind of fishy that almost all of them are doing that and the fact they would do it to benefit one party over another shows that their is some kind of bias going on.
The party samples are the number of people they reach that say they are registered or lean towards one party. They don't sample for a certain number of each part and there aren't an equal number of people belonging to the parties in this country.Relook those numbers and tell us which way they generally lean.
Internet margin - 1.37
Live phone- 1.93
Internet margin is smaller therefore more accurate.
How do 19 of 23 polling agencies having a bias toward republicans 'depress the vote'?
Why would the 'skewed poll' schtick have any more value this election, than it did in 2012 when it was laughably wrong?
Look at the party samples........it matters
Why would this scheme benefit the democratic party? Do you think that if the polls showed Trump behind without playing around with the samples that they would 'adjust' them? It just seems kind of fishy that almost all of them are doing that and the fact they would do it to benefit one party over another shows that their is some kind of bias going on.
How do you know the percentage of Republicans out there? When the pollsters are all coming up with similar numbers, you should trust them.Again, the democrats made the *exact* same argument in 2004, claiming that polls showing Bush leading Kerry 'oversampled' republicans.
Their claims were dogshit. The polls were right. Bush won.
Republicans made the exact same argument in 2012, insisting that polls that showed Obama leading Romney oversampled democrats.
Their claims were dogshit. The polls were right. Obama won.
And after 2 obvious and unimpeachable examples of your theory failing spectacularly, you're going to return to the *exact* same theory again with no modifications...expecting it to magically work this time?
Um, why would you ever do that?
Because a 26 percent sample of republicans isn't near correct.....31 percent is much closer to reality.
Your ilk said the same thing in 2012, insisting that the 'oversampling' of democrats by about 6% skewed the polls.
Yet in exit polls, self identified democrats led self identified republicans by (gasp) about 6%. Exactly as the polls indicated.
The 'oversampling' horseshit doesn't work. It didn't work for Democrats in 2004, Republicans in 2008 or 2012.
Why would it suddenly work in 2016?
Ok I'm gonna go slow
Not all polls have the same sampling correct?
Sigh....just make your argument. You've already completely abandoned your 'depress the vote' horseshit. So can we move this along?
No I haven't so as I said before 31 percent is much closer to reality than 26 percent republican. That's 4 to 5 percent in the polls it makes a huuuuuuge difference. That ls how they skew polls.
I'm they.had a sample of 70 percent republican 10 percent democrat....it would be incorrect...so the percentage matters.
Liar!This is not 2012 and your not running against a wimp.But this time its different, huh? Did you guys learn *nothing* from 2012?
Romney was polling far better than Trump at this point in the election. And he still lost badly.
But keep those eyes screwed shut. Though you may want to pick out the lies you'll have to start telling yourself in November early, just so you don't steal anyone else's thunder.
It would be awkward. Like two girls arriving at prom in the exact same dress.
Sharyl Attkisson: Trump is Outperforming Romney by 16 Points - WaPo/ABC News Poll
http://wapo.st/2b3UQRx
After conventions, Clinton leads Trump by 8 points
http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/politics/washington-post-abc-news-poll-aug-1-4-2016/2071/
How do you know the percentage of Republicans out there? When the pollsters are all coming up with similar numbers, you should trust them.Because a 26 percent sample of republicans isn't near correct.....31 percent is much closer to reality.
Your ilk said the same thing in 2012, insisting that the 'oversampling' of democrats by about 6% skewed the polls.
Yet in exit polls, self identified democrats led self identified republicans by (gasp) about 6%. Exactly as the polls indicated.
The 'oversampling' horseshit doesn't work. It didn't work for Democrats in 2004, Republicans in 2008 or 2012.
Why would it suddenly work in 2016?
Ok I'm gonna go slow
Not all polls have the same sampling correct?
Sigh....just make your argument. You've already completely abandoned your 'depress the vote' horseshit. So can we move this along?
No I haven't so as I said before 31 percent is much closer to reality than 26 percent republican. That's 4 to 5 percent in the polls it makes a huuuuuuge difference. That ls how they skew polls.
I'm they.had a sample of 70 percent republican 10 percent democrat....it would be incorrect...so the percentage matters.
How do you know the percentage of Republicans out there? When the pollsters are all coming up with similar numbers, you should trust them.Your ilk said the same thing in 2012, insisting that the 'oversampling' of democrats by about 6% skewed the polls.
Yet in exit polls, self identified democrats led self identified republicans by (gasp) about 6%. Exactly as the polls indicated.
The 'oversampling' horseshit doesn't work. It didn't work for Democrats in 2004, Republicans in 2008 or 2012.
Why would it suddenly work in 2016?
Ok I'm gonna go slow
Not all polls have the same sampling correct?
Sigh....just make your argument. You've already completely abandoned your 'depress the vote' horseshit. So can we move this along?
No I haven't so as I said before 31 percent is much closer to reality than 26 percent republican. That's 4 to 5 percent in the polls it makes a huuuuuuge difference. That ls how they skew polls.
I'm they.had a sample of 70 percent republican 10 percent democrat....it would be incorrect...so the percentage matters.
That's the part that is so laughably hillarious. His source on party affiliation numbers......is pollsters recording self identified party affiliation.
Yet in his next breath, he insists that pollsters recording self identified party affiliation can't be trusted.
Its like watching Norman slowly winding down on an episode of Star Trek
It is staggering how many conservative posters don't have a clue how polls work.How do you know the percentage of Republicans out there? When the pollsters are all coming up with similar numbers, you should trust them.Your ilk said the same thing in 2012, insisting that the 'oversampling' of democrats by about 6% skewed the polls.
Yet in exit polls, self identified democrats led self identified republicans by (gasp) about 6%. Exactly as the polls indicated.
The 'oversampling' horseshit doesn't work. It didn't work for Democrats in 2004, Republicans in 2008 or 2012.
Why would it suddenly work in 2016?
Ok I'm gonna go slow
Not all polls have the same sampling correct?
Sigh....just make your argument. You've already completely abandoned your 'depress the vote' horseshit. So can we move this along?
No I haven't so as I said before 31 percent is much closer to reality than 26 percent republican. That's 4 to 5 percent in the polls it makes a huuuuuuge difference. That ls how they skew polls.
I'm they.had a sample of 70 percent republican 10 percent democrat....it would be incorrect...so the percentage matters.
That's the part that is so laughably hillarious. His source on party affiliation numbers......is pollsters recording self identified party affiliation.
Yet in his next breath, he insists that pollsters recording self identified party affiliation can't be trusted.
Its like watching Norman slowly winding down on an episode of Star Trek
The party samples are the number of people they reach that say they are registered or lean towards one party. They don't sample for a certain number of each part and there aren't an equal number of people belonging to the parties in this country.Internet margin - 1.37
Live phone- 1.93
Internet margin is smaller therefore more accurate.
How do 19 of 23 polling agencies having a bias toward republicans 'depress the vote'?
Why would the 'skewed poll' schtick have any more value this election, than it did in 2012 when it was laughably wrong?
Look at the party samples........it matters
Why would this scheme benefit the democratic party? Do you think that if the polls showed Trump behind without playing around with the samples that they would 'adjust' them? It just seems kind of fishy that almost all of them are doing that and the fact they would do it to benefit one party over another shows that their is some kind of bias going on.
C'mon. Your ilk made these same arguments verbatim in 2012. And you were laughably, incompetently, spectacularly wrong.
Why would you return to the same dogshit that didn't work in 2012....and expect it to work in 2016?
They aren't adjusting the party affiliation. They're merely *reporting* what people self identify as. And in defiance of all reason, history and logic, you're insisting that when someone self identifies as a democrat......they're wrong.
Um, no. The poll respondent knows *way* more about their own affiliation than you do.
But they don't poll people in Memphis only.How do you know the percentage of Republicans out there? When the pollsters are all coming up with similar numbers, you should trust them.Ok I'm gonna go slow
Not all polls have the same sampling correct?
Sigh....just make your argument. You've already completely abandoned your 'depress the vote' horseshit. So can we move this along?
No I haven't so as I said before 31 percent is much closer to reality than 26 percent republican. That's 4 to 5 percent in the polls it makes a huuuuuuge difference. That ls how they skew polls.
I'm they.had a sample of 70 percent republican 10 percent democrat....it would be incorrect...so the percentage matters.
That's the part that is so laughably hillarious. His source on party affiliation numbers......is pollsters recording self identified party affiliation.
Yet in his next breath, he insists that pollsters recording self identified party affiliation can't be trusted.
Its like watching Norman slowly winding down on an episode of Star Trek
Wow you have no clue...you know people have precinct data....they know where certain voters live.
I could do all.of my calls in fucking memphis.....will that represent the vote in TN ....I mean how would I know they self identify
How stupid.
How do you know the percentage of Republicans out there? When the pollsters are all coming up with similar numbers, you should trust them.Because a 26 percent sample of republicans isn't near correct.....31 percent is much closer to reality.
Your ilk said the same thing in 2012, insisting that the 'oversampling' of democrats by about 6% skewed the polls.
Yet in exit polls, self identified democrats led self identified republicans by (gasp) about 6%. Exactly as the polls indicated.
The 'oversampling' horseshit doesn't work. It didn't work for Democrats in 2004, Republicans in 2008 or 2012.
Why would it suddenly work in 2016?
Ok I'm gonna go slow
Not all polls have the same sampling correct?
Sigh....just make your argument. You've already completely abandoned your 'depress the vote' horseshit. So can we move this along?
No I haven't so as I said before 31 percent is much closer to reality than 26 percent republican. That's 4 to 5 percent in the polls it makes a huuuuuuge difference. That ls how they skew polls.
I'm they.had a sample of 70 percent republican 10 percent democrat....it would be incorrect...so the percentage matters.
You're a liberal and I'm the King of England.The party samples are the number of people they reach that say they are registered or lean towards one party. They don't sample for a certain number of each part and there aren't an equal number of people belonging to the parties in this country.How do 19 of 23 polling agencies having a bias toward republicans 'depress the vote'?
Why would the 'skewed poll' schtick have any more value this election, than it did in 2012 when it was laughably wrong?
Look at the party samples........it matters
Why would this scheme benefit the democratic party? Do you think that if the polls showed Trump behind without playing around with the samples that they would 'adjust' them? It just seems kind of fishy that almost all of them are doing that and the fact they would do it to benefit one party over another shows that their is some kind of bias going on.
C'mon. Your ilk made these same arguments verbatim in 2012. And you were laughably, incompetently, spectacularly wrong.
Why would you return to the same dogshit that didn't work in 2012....and expect it to work in 2016?
They aren't adjusting the party affiliation. They're merely *reporting* what people self identify as. And in defiance of all reason, history and logic, you're insisting that when someone self identifies as a democrat......they're wrong.
Um, no. The poll respondent knows *way* more about their own affiliation than you do.
When you say 'my ilk' does that mean liberal? Because that is what I am. I'm not sure about the state of the current democratic party but that is what I am. I watch CNN as much as I watch Fox News so I don't understand what makes someone a 'liberal' in this day and age other than believing that the communist system works.
It was true then and true now but in 2012 no one on the right wanted to vote for Romney because of a lack of enthusiasm so his lead didn't really matter in the end. The question to ask is why are they oversamplying democrats when enthusiasm for Hillary is much less than Trump?
When was the last time polls were ever altered in order to make republicans look good. If this was truly a usual thing done to make polls more accurate then I would suspect that it would happen quite often and you should be able to find examples of the same thing happening for republican candidates as much as democrats since it is completely unbiased. Can you name one instance of this ever happening?
There is no tampering, you clearly have not a clue of which you speak of.How do you know the percentage of Republicans out there? When the pollsters are all coming up with similar numbers, you should trust them.Your ilk said the same thing in 2012, insisting that the 'oversampling' of democrats by about 6% skewed the polls.
Yet in exit polls, self identified democrats led self identified republicans by (gasp) about 6%. Exactly as the polls indicated.
The 'oversampling' horseshit doesn't work. It didn't work for Democrats in 2004, Republicans in 2008 or 2012.
Why would it suddenly work in 2016?
Ok I'm gonna go slow
Not all polls have the same sampling correct?
Sigh....just make your argument. You've already completely abandoned your 'depress the vote' horseshit. So can we move this along?
No I haven't so as I said before 31 percent is much closer to reality than 26 percent republican. That's 4 to 5 percent in the polls it makes a huuuuuuge difference. That ls how they skew polls.
I'm they.had a sample of 70 percent republican 10 percent democrat....it would be incorrect...so the percentage matters.
The numbers they come up with before tampering show Trump is ahead. You should trust that.
There is no tampering, you clearly have not a clue of which you speak of.How do you know the percentage of Republicans out there? When the pollsters are all coming up with similar numbers, you should trust them.Ok I'm gonna go slow
Not all polls have the same sampling correct?
Sigh....just make your argument. You've already completely abandoned your 'depress the vote' horseshit. So can we move this along?
No I haven't so as I said before 31 percent is much closer to reality than 26 percent republican. That's 4 to 5 percent in the polls it makes a huuuuuuge difference. That ls how they skew polls.
I'm they.had a sample of 70 percent republican 10 percent democrat....it would be incorrect...so the percentage matters.
The numbers they come up with before tampering show Trump is ahead. You should trust that.
How do you know the percentage of Republicans out there? When the pollsters are all coming up with similar numbers, you should trust them.Your ilk said the same thing in 2012, insisting that the 'oversampling' of democrats by about 6% skewed the polls.
Yet in exit polls, self identified democrats led self identified republicans by (gasp) about 6%. Exactly as the polls indicated.
The 'oversampling' horseshit doesn't work. It didn't work for Democrats in 2004, Republicans in 2008 or 2012.
Why would it suddenly work in 2016?
Ok I'm gonna go slow
Not all polls have the same sampling correct?
Sigh....just make your argument. You've already completely abandoned your 'depress the vote' horseshit. So can we move this along?
No I haven't so as I said before 31 percent is much closer to reality than 26 percent republican. That's 4 to 5 percent in the polls it makes a huuuuuuge difference. That ls how they skew polls.
I'm they.had a sample of 70 percent republican 10 percent democrat....it would be incorrect...so the percentage matters.
The numbers they come up with before tampering show Trump is ahead. You should trust that.
No it doesn't. You are making this raw data claim up out of thin air.There is no tampering, you clearly have not a clue of which you speak of.How do you know the percentage of Republicans out there? When the pollsters are all coming up with similar numbers, you should trust them.Sigh....just make your argument. You've already completely abandoned your 'depress the vote' horseshit. So can we move this along?
No I haven't so as I said before 31 percent is much closer to reality than 26 percent republican. That's 4 to 5 percent in the polls it makes a huuuuuuge difference. That ls how they skew polls.
I'm they.had a sample of 70 percent republican 10 percent democrat....it would be incorrect...so the percentage matters.
The numbers they come up with before tampering show Trump is ahead. You should trust that.
The raw data gives Trump an advantage and I decided to take your advice. Since they are coming up with the same conclusion then that must be right.
There is no tampering, you clearly have not a clue of which you speak of.How do you know the percentage of Republicans out there? When the pollsters are all coming up with similar numbers, you should trust them.Sigh....just make your argument. You've already completely abandoned your 'depress the vote' horseshit. So can we move this along?
No I haven't so as I said before 31 percent is much closer to reality than 26 percent republican. That's 4 to 5 percent in the polls it makes a huuuuuuge difference. That ls how they skew polls.
I'm they.had a sample of 70 percent republican 10 percent democrat....it would be incorrect...so the percentage matters.
The numbers they come up with before tampering show Trump is ahead. You should trust that.
The raw data gives Trump an advantage and I decided to take your advice. Since they are coming up with the same conclusion then that must be right.
But they don't poll people in Memphis only.How do you know the percentage of Republicans out there? When the pollsters are all coming up with similar numbers, you should trust them.Sigh....just make your argument. You've already completely abandoned your 'depress the vote' horseshit. So can we move this along?
No I haven't so as I said before 31 percent is much closer to reality than 26 percent republican. That's 4 to 5 percent in the polls it makes a huuuuuuge difference. That ls how they skew polls.
I'm they.had a sample of 70 percent republican 10 percent democrat....it would be incorrect...so the percentage matters.
That's the part that is so laughably hillarious. His source on party affiliation numbers......is pollsters recording self identified party affiliation.
Yet in his next breath, he insists that pollsters recording self identified party affiliation can't be trusted.
Its like watching Norman slowly winding down on an episode of Star Trek
Wow you have no clue...you know people have precinct data....they know where certain voters live.
I could do all.of my calls in fucking memphis.....will that represent the vote in TN ....I mean how would I know they self identify
How stupid.
