Reported Polling Results Biased For Hillary?

[eohrnberger]

Re: Reported Polliung Results Biased For Hillary?

Oh...you want a reason.

Okay.

Because!

Anyone who needs anything more than that...wouldn't understand the reasoning.

reasoning?
How about "Or lack there of".

 

[QuadpolarNutjob]

Re: Reported Polliung Results Biased For Hillary?

Just remember, when Trump was running in the primary, every poll for months showed him losing. even after he became the front-runner, polls were continually skewed to show cruz/rubio/etc as having a chance. in the actual primary; trump dominated, completely, no one else even had a chance. The polls were clearly biased, and they came from the big 3; cnn/nbc/fox. why would you think they suddenly got rid of that bias?


it's going to be a landslide, clinton has one chance; sanders as her VP. that's it. no sanders on the ticket, no democrat president next january, it's that simple.

 

[Frank Apisa]

Re: Reported Polliung Results Biased For Hillary?

reasoning?
How about "Or lack there of".

Hillary Clinton is simply a much better choice for the job than Donald Trump. Bernie Sanders is a much better choice for the job than Donald Trump. John Kasich is a much better choice for the job than Donald Trump. Marco Rubio is a much better choice for the job than Donald Trump. Jeb Bush is a much better choice for the job than Donald Trump. Mike Huckabee is a much better choice for the job than Donald Trump.

There are others.

In my opinion, Donald Trump is singularly unqualified and unfit for the office.

 

[eohrnberger]

Re: Reported Polliung Results Biased For Hillary?

Hillary Clinton is simply a much better choice for the job than Donald Trump. Bernie Sanders is a much better choice for the job than Donald Trump. John Kasich is a much better choice for the job than Donald Trump. Marco Rubio is a much better choice for the job than Donald Trump. Jeb Bush is a much better choice for the job than Donald Trump. Mike Huckabee is a much better choice for the job than Donald Trump.

There are others.

In my opinion, Donald Trump is singularly unqualified and unfit for the office.

OK. What's your specific bullet points that drew you to that conclusion? After all, others have posted specifics, but you, as of yet, have not.
Just a bunch of hand waving so far (at least that I can see).

 

[Frank Apisa]

Re: Reported Polliung Results Biased For Hillary?

OK. What's your specific bullet points that drew you to that conclusion? After all, others have posted specifics, but you, as of yet, have not.
Just a bunch of hand waving so far (at least that I can see).

Point one: I listen to what the candidates have to say...and what Donald Trump has to say indicates he would be a poor choice even for high school class president.

Point two: I listen to what the candidates have to say...and what Donald Trump has to say indicates he would be a poor choice even for high school class president.

Point three: I listen to what the candidates have to say...and what Donald Trump has to say indicates he would be a poor choice even for high school class president.

Point four: Well...I'm sure you get the picture.

 

[eohrnberger]

Re: Reported Polliung Results Biased For Hillary?

Point one: I listen to what the candidates have to say...and what Donald Trump has to say indicates he would be a poor choice even for high school class president.

Point two: I listen to what the candidates have to say...and what Donald Trump has to say indicates he would be a poor choice even for high school class president.

Point three: I listen to what the candidates have to say...and what Donald Trump has to say indicates he would be a poor choice even for high school class president.

Point four: Well...I'm sure you get the picture.

A nice list of what what you've done or do, but still not any sort of substantiation or information on which you've come to your opinion / position.

Yeah, I get the picture. You are unable, or unwilling, to cite specifics, so I guess you must have arrived at your position / opinion based on what you feel (not very empirical).

 

[eohrnberger]

Re: Reported Polliung Results Biased For Hillary?

Point one: . . . .

I'm looking for something similar to this, but from your perspective to support your opinion / position.

Fact-Checking Hillary: No, the Clinton Foundation Hasn't Operated With 'Complete Transparency'
Credit to MSNBC's Rachel Maddow for asking about a thorny issue that has largely receded to the back burner for Hillary -- perhaps rightfully so, given the fact that she's reportedly about to be questioned by the FBI over a separate scandal, about which she's lied constantly. Nevertheless, the heart of the Clinton Foundation controversy sits at the intersection of big money and power politics. It represents exactly the sort of unholy, influence-peddling and -purchasing system that Hillary's primary opponent has railed against, to great electoral effect. Watch as Mrs. Clinton assures viewers that any concerns about her family foundation serving as a giant dodgy political "slush fund" (as one good government watchdog called it) should be allayed by her...commitment to transparency. Via the Free Beacon:

1. Clinton Foundation Failed to Disclose 1,100 Foreign Donations (Bloomberg)
2. Clinton charity never provided foreign donor data (Boston Globe):
3. Clinton charities will refile tax returns, audit for other errors (Reuters)
4. And here are some serious reported details on a highly controversial and suspect uranium deal involving the Russians, approved by Hillary's State Department (New York Times):
   As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well. And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock. At the time, both Rosatom and the United States government made promises intended to ease concerns about ceding control of the company’s assets to the Russians. Those promises have been repeatedly broken, records show.
   ​

So if you are against darnk money in US politics, I don't see how you can support Hillary for POTUS.
The Clinton Foundation is nothing but 'dark money', with little to no control of where it comes from and where it goes (I'll wager sizable sums end up in the Clinton's pockets).

Every one of those 'donations' is someone having leverage on Hillary when she's in office. Every one of them has leverage over her to get what they want from her, while she is POTUS.

From that citation, we also have:

"First off, if you haven't already, go back and read my 12-point summary of a devastating Washington Post expose of how Hillary's email scheme came to exist and explode into a national security scandal."
​

Which is yet another scandal, with layers upon layers of Hillary lies - some under oath (must be a Clinton family trait), bad judgement, arrogance, with implications of a number of threats to national security.
So if you're at all concerned about national security in these troubled times, and those ahead, I don't see how you can possibly support Hillary for POTUS.

So Frank. What have you got beyond your hand waving and feelings to support your candidate?

I have to say that any that I can't see how or why any reasonable person could continue to support her.

 

[Frank Apisa]

Re: Reported Polliung Results Biased For Hillary?

A nice list of what what you've done or do, but still not any sort of substantiation or information on which you've come to your opinion / position.

Yeah, I get the picture. You are unable, or unwilling, to cite specifics, so I guess you must have arrived at your position / opinion based on what you feel (not very empirical).

I gave you my reason for why I think Hillary Clinton (and all those other people) are better qualified to be president of the United States than Donald Trump...and you continue to suggest that I am arriving at my opinions based on what I feel?

Okay...so lemme ask you:

Why are you rejecting my reasons?

Be as specific as possible.

 

[eohrnberger]

Re: Reported Polliung Results Biased For Hillary?

Point one: I listen to what the candidates have to say...and what Donald Trump has to say indicates he would be a poor choice even for high school class president.

Point two: I listen to what the candidates have to say...and what Donald Trump has to say indicates he would be a poor choice even for high school class president.

Point three: I listen to what the candidates have to say...and what Donald Trump has to say indicates he would be a poor choice even for high school class president.

Point four: Well...I'm sure you get the picture.

I gave you my reason for why I think Hillary Clinton (and all those other people) are better qualified to be president of the United States than Donald Trump...and you continue to suggest that I am arriving at my opinions based on what I feel?

Okay...so lemme ask you:

Why are you rejecting my reasons?

Be as specific as possible.

These aren't reasons, Frank. They are activities coupled with your conclusion and not homework as to how you got to the conclusion.

 

[iguanaman]

Re: Reported Polliung Results Biased For Hillary?

I think it's different than last time. Did the media polls purposefully distort the standings last time, such as they've done here?
They might have, but I don't recall them doing so last time.
So this is not 'the exact same excuses'.

I'd just as soon have honest and accurate polls that are using sound methodology. Wouldn't you?

I agree that it is different this time. I think the polls are UNDERESTIMATING Hillary's lead over Trump. This will be the biggest Democratic landslide since Goldwater.

 

[eohrnberger]

Re: Reported Polliung Results Biased For Hillary?

I agree that it is different this time. I think the polls are UNDERESTIMATING Hillary's lead over Trump. This will be the biggest Democratic landslide since Goldwater.

Maybe. Maybe not. But how does this justify releasing distorted / biased polling?

Or do you now think that it's OK for the pollsters to take on the role of Soviet era Pravda?

 

[Frank Apisa]

Re: Reported Polliung Results Biased For Hillary?

These aren't reasons, Frank. They are activities coupled with your conclusion and not homework as to how you got to the conclusion.

Do the "homework" yourself.

Anyone who heard or read what Donald Trump has got to say...and who cannot see that Hillary Clinton (or any of those other people) are better qualified to be our next president...

...is not going to be moved by "homework."

It is unfortunate that we have people who support him...but they have a right to do so.

Said another say: Go play your "homework" game with someone else.

 

[iguanaman]

Re: Reported Polliung Results Biased For Hillary?

Maybe. Maybe not. But how does this justify releasing distorted / biased polling?

Or do you now think that it's OK for the pollsters to take on the role of Soviet era Pravda?

Actually I wish pollsters would say the race was closer because I don't want the voters to think they don't need to worry about Trump and not go to the polls. Is that what you want too?

 

[eohrnberger]

Re: Reported Polliung Results Biased For Hillary?

Do the "homework" yourself.

Anyone who heard or read what Donald Trump has got to say...and who cannot see that Hillary Clinton (or any of those other people) are better qualified to be our next president...

...is not going to be moved by "homework."

It is unfortunate that we have people who support him...but they have a right to do so.

Said another say: Go play your "homework" game with someone else.

It's not my position or opinion to support. It's yours. So you sending me off to do your homework is pretty bogus.

Suffice it to say that you've got nothing, and just feel that way. Fine. Got it.

 

[MrWonka]

Tell me again how the news media is unbiased? :roll: I really need to hear it again, maybe this time I'll believe it. :roll:

Well let's see here in 2012 it was actually Fox News polling that said Romney was going to win the election whereas it was Nate Silver the most widely cited pollster by the Huffington Post and most supposedly biased liberal media outlets that hit the nail on the head predicting the correct outcome of every single state and the white house overall. Maybe you're just paying attention to the wrong media.

 

[eohrnberger]

Re: Reported Polliung Results Biased For Hillary?

Actually I wish pollsters would say the race was closer because I don't want the voters to think they don't need to worry about Trump and not go to the polls. Is that what you want too?

I'd want an honest, accurate, and un-biased poll. Form there, let the cards fall where they may. After all, you and I have very little influence in how this is going to unfold.

 

[Frank Apisa]

Re: Reported Polliung Results Biased For Hillary?

It's not my position or opinion to support. [/qiug It's yours. So you sending me off to do your homework is pretty bogus.

Suffice it to say that you've got nothing, and just feel that way. Fine. Got it.

Do whatever you want, Eo.

What the heck...you are a guy who has listened to what Donald Trump has to say...and still have trouble understanding why I think all those people I mentioned would make a better president.

And you want me to "EXPLAIN" why I feel that way???

 

[eohrnberger]

Re: Reported Polliung Results Biased For Hillary?

Do whatever you want, Eo.

What the heck...you are a guy who has listened to what Donald Trump has to say...and still have trouble understanding why I think all those people I mentioned would make a better president.

And you want me to "EXPLAIN" why I feel that way???

Sure. Trump is an unconventional bombast populist demagogue. That's still more preferable than electing a corrupt, lying, crook with serious liabilities, as I've documented, to office.

 

[Frank Apisa]

Re: Reported Polliung Results Biased For Hillary?

Sure. Trump is an unconventional bombast populist demagogue. That's still more preferable than electing a corrupt, lying, crook with serious liabilities, as I've documented, to office.

Okay. Fine.

For me...I think any of the people I mentioned, including Hillary Clinton, WOULD MAKE A BETTER CHOICE THAN DONALD TRUMP.

If you want to quibble about who is the better choice...find someone who want to quibble with you. I don't.

And, in November, we will find out how the voting public feels on this issue...right?

 

[Frank Apisa]

Oh, since I didn't mention it above...allow me to do it here.

I am not voting for Hillary Clinton because she is a much better choice for president than Donald Trump. Not necessary to use that extremely low bar as a reason.

I am voting for her because she is, in my opinion, one of the most qualified candidates ever to run for the office...and I think she will do a decent job as president.

I realize there are people in the country who hate her and want to call her names. I cannot help but laugh out loud whenever I see an example of it being displayed...because...uhhh, well, because it is funny as hell.

Just sayin'!

 

[Deuce]

Re: Reported Polliung Results Biased For Hillary?

So you think the MSM isn't in Hillary's corner?

Was Hillary Caught Colluding With AP To Announce Delegate Win Before California | Zero Hedge

Why don't we ask Sanders?

I find that when a headline asks a binary question, the answer is always "no."

 

[Ikari]

Oh, since I didn't mention it above...allow me to do it here.

I am not voting for Hillary Clinton because she is a much better choice for president than Donald Trump. Not necessary to use that extremely low bar as a reason.

I am voting for her because she is, in my opinion, one of the most qualified candidates ever to run for the office...and I think she will do a decent job as president.

I realize there are people in the country who hate her and want to call her names. I cannot help but laugh out loud whenever I see an example of it being displayed...because...uhhh, well, because it is funny as hell.

Just sayin'!

She's a corporate politician the likes of Bush and Obama. Nothing will change under her except that corporations and big government donors will gain more power and incfluence. But if you somehow think that supporting the status quo is going to change the status quo; than more power to you.

The fact that she is running even with Trump shows that she ain't much better.

 

[Frank Apisa]

She's a corporate politician the likes of Bush and Obama. Nothing will change under her except that corporations and big government donors will gain more power and incfluence. But if you somehow think that supporting the status quo is going to change the status quo; than more power to you.

The fact that she is running even with Trump shows that she ain't much better.

You certainly are entitled to that opinion...and I thank you for sharing it with me.

 

[Deuce]

She's a corporate politician the likes of Bush and Obama. Nothing will change under her except that corporations and big government donors will gain more power and incfluence. But if you somehow think that supporting the status quo is going to change the status quo; than more power to you.

The fact that she is running even with Trump shows that she ain't much better.

Sadly, the GOP managed to pick a candidate so terrible that the status quo is the better of the two options.

 

[clownboy]

Sadly, the GOP managed to pick a candidate so terrible that the status quo is the better of the two options.

Why "sadly", you wouldn't have been voting for or supporting the GOP candidate no matter who it was.