Next election, will you trust major media and polls?

[Texashiker]

You know you had a decent somewhat sane approach to this thread, and then you went and toothlessed it up

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pao_v._Kleiner_Perkins

drumpf provided cheering, and rah-rah sessions. exactly how he was going to bring jobs back was never fully fleshed out. and if you think drumpf will be hard on corporations or banks.. hahahahahahaha. Ok.

first two links do not work.

She had her day in court, just as the law prescribes. Just because she lost does NOT mean there is anything wrong with the law.

 

[C1]

Stay away from FB & google. These belong to the alphabet agencies.

http://www.startpage.com/
https://duckduckgo.com/
http://www.goodgopher.com/

http://www.thepaperboy.com/

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

first two links do not work.

She had her day in court, just as the law prescribes. Just because she lost does NOT mean there is anything wrong with the law.

links work fine.

 

[Commodus]

You know it's the truth. Name one that Trump won't do better than.

Here's the problem: whatever you think of them, they're still just promises. It remains to be seen if someone who doesn't have any political experience (nor does a large chunk of his expected cabinet) can even implement what he said he would, let alone that it would have the effect he promised. How about you wait for evidence before proclaiming Divine Leader Trump the greatest politician to have ever lived?

 

[fskimospy]

10x 100% ≠ 2,000% :/

You said twice as good as Reagan and ten times better than anything since Reagan's first few days. I was combining all your ridiculous superlatives into one nice round number.

 

[Sunburn74]

America is going to do better with Trump.Most likely he'll end up being twice as good as Reagan.

Reagan was terrible. Easily one of the worst presidents in the last 30 years.

1) allowed HIV to reach epidemic levels in the US rather than nipping it early in the bud (see we are doing with Zika for example)
2) iran-contra
3) Crack cocaine being sold by CIA to inner cities
4) allowed racial relations to reach its worst point after passive of civil rights legislation. Actively vetoes legislation to expand civil rights protection
5) ran the economy into the ground with trickle down in almost every measurement of economic prosperity
6) You realize he had alzheimers and his wife secretly ran the country.


These are not partisan criticisms here. They are the facts. His approval rating when he left was in the low 30s.

 

[NesuD]

America is going to do better with Trump.Most likely he'll end up being twice as good as Reagan.

Ok that proves it! this is just a liberal shill trolling his own people for fun. All real conservatives know there will never be anyone as good as Reagan.

 

[dank69]

3) That was George H.W. Bush

4) Still not as divisive as Obama who's had more riots in his last two years than the previous 40 combined.

5) Also H.W. Bush

6) H.W. Bush yet again.

HW tried to reverse trickle down and called it voodoo economics.

 

[Pens1566]

Hoover came after Reagan? Who knew?



Now THAT is funny! LOLz

Excellent retort. How can any of us argue agains emoji logic.

 

[mrjminer]

If you trusted the media or the polls this election, you were an idiot, anyways. I don't see many of the nuts on this forum being cured of that in the passing of four years.

 

[dank69]

I see you didn't deny point #4 there, because you know it's true, right?

Yes, it's true in Trumplandia.

 

[VX - Nerve Agent]

To say that Hillary won the popular vote and couldn't even fill a high school gymnasium for a rally is absurd.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

To say that Hillary won the popular vote and couldn't even fill a high school gymnasium for a rally is absurd.

yet another citation needed from this clown.

 

[soundforbjt]

To say that Hillary won the popular vote and couldn't even fill a high school gymnasium for a rally is absurd.

Remember Ron Paul? He filled his rallies and lost bigly, crowd turnout does not equal votes.

 

[Commodus]

Let's see how you argue about Obama having more riots under his belt in the last 2 years of his presidency than happened in the previous 40.

Hmm?

That's pretty easy... sorry to disappoint.

An absence of protests does not mean that things are better off. It can also mean that people aren't aware of systemic problems, that they're afraid of protesting, or that they don't believe their efforts will be effective. Police murdering unarmed black people has been happening for many decades -- it's just that the rise of social networks, camera-equipped smartphones, dash/body cams and overall social progress has highlighted the scope of the problem and prevented cops from covering up those murders as easily they have in the past.

Think of it this way: were race relations better in the 1940s just because there wasn't mass resistance to discrimination, such as desegregation efforts and the Selma marches? No, of course not. Protests, even if they unfortunately prompt riots at times, are the signs of a healthy democratic system. I would be more worried if BLM didn't exist.

Also, did you forget the widespread protesting when Bush went to war in Iraq based on a massive lie? Selective memory is a pain, isn't it...

 

[PrincessFrosty]

I don't trust the main stream media. Much of the MSM in the UK has become increasingly left wing, especially the BBC. Back when we all voted on Brexit, it was mostly the left wing crowd who wanted us to stay in the European Union, and we saw the same thing then, almost every news outlet saying we'd remain in, the polls all showed remain with a 10pt lead, and the leave campaigns were utterly smeared to hell and back, the media where overwhelmingly behind the remain camp and it was transparently obvious to people like me who backed leave. Fast forward to the day and leave won by 4pts and the media had a melt down about how the leave camp lied, on and on and on.

So when I followed the US election, which I did closely and became a trump backer and I started to see their media do the same, I KNEW there was bias there. Every time we see Trump in the news it's always a picture of him looking silly and every time we see hillary she's looking presidential. Everything reporting on Trump was about shenanigans rather than campaign points and vice versa for hillary. The run up to election day the MSM went dark on major political issues like the findings in the leaked Podesta emails, about project veritas and the uncovering of the violence and scams the democrats employed to disrupt voting and Trumps rallys. Anyone mentioning wikileaks was simply cut off the air mid sentence, we saw that over and over again.

And I knew from putting out feelers to speak to real people I know in the US that Trump was campaigning well, his rallies had way more attendees, people were backing him but keeping their mouth shut, because the media and the left wing establishment, and quite frankly a massive amount of the left wing supporters are fast to try and socially shame people for their beliefs by hurling accusations at them of racist and sexist, etc.

And I knew this was going on, I knew the media were skewing polls and basically trying their hardest to destroy this man, so just like with Brexit, if the polls say it's close but we know they have a left leaning bias, then we can be fairly sure he's got a good chance at winning. So I put a bet down on Trump at 3/1 a few weeks before his win and walked away with a bundle of cash, because that's how sure I was that the media is slanted left.

This isn't the last time we'll see this, because left/right has stopped being simply about differing political opinions but a virtue war waged by the left. Many of them portray people on the right as monsters, or Hitler, the way they talk about Trumps win is like something out of a Disney movie, like he's some kind of evil spirit in a mans body, and that everyone who voted for him is literally a sexist, racist, homophobic, patriarchal shitlord. They talk about this as dark clouds hanging over america, about WW3, some kind of literal Apocalypse or nightmare come alive to damn us all to an eternity in hell. The hyperbole I see every day on the net, reactions from popular liberal youtubers and so on, it's crazy, it's like people have lost their minds. If you treat politics like this, rather than being serious and accepting that some things are just different points of view, and actually engaging in debates about issues rather than trying to shame people into silence, then you create a silent majority and you create the need for a president like Trump who will blow through political correctness and give a voice to people who are so poorly represented.

 

[umbrella39]

To say that Hillary won the popular vote and couldn't even fill a high school gymnasium for a rally is absurd.

Oh look! Yet another low-information election season ALT account to plonk the fuck out of.

 

[Zaap]

I've always thought the excessive polling was pointless. I think it just serves to make some falsely feel good when it shows their guy on top... but then has major backfire potential.

The media per se... same holds true as always. Get your news from a variety of different sources. Either side just wallowing in far left moonbat sites or far right insanity sites is going to have a skewed crazy outlook.

Likewise...peeps that juat see John Stewart (and similar) and maybe a splattering of CNN are equally out of it.

No one knows everything thats going on, but it is true many know absolutely nothing. Too much trust in singular echo-chamber sources will pretty much guarantee that.

 

[mect]

Anyone that understands statistics realizes that the polls weren't really heavily flawed. Sometimes, unlikely things happen.

 

[SP33Demon]

MSM was exposed by wikileaks and will continue to be as long as wikileaks lives on.

 

[fskimospy]

I don't trust the main stream media. Much of the MSM in the UK has become increasingly left wing, especially the BBC. Back when we all voted on Brexit, it was mostly the left wing crowd who wanted us to stay in the European Union, and we saw the same thing then, almost every news outlet saying we'd remain in, the polls all showed remain with a 10pt lead, and the leave campaigns were utterly smeared to hell and back, the media where overwhelmingly behind the remain camp and it was transparently obvious to people like me who backed leave. Fast forward to the day and leave won by 4pts and the media had a melt down about how the leave camp lied, on and on and on.

So when I followed the US election, which I did closely and became a trump backer and I started to see their media do the same, I KNEW there was bias there. Every time we see Trump in the news it's always a picture of him looking silly and every time we see hillary she's looking presidential. Everything reporting on Trump was about shenanigans rather than campaign points and vice versa for hillary. The run up to election day the MSM went dark on major political issues like the findings in the leaked Podesta emails, about project veritas and the uncovering of the violence and scams the democrats employed to disrupt voting and Trumps rallys. Anyone mentioning wikileaks was simply cut off the air mid sentence, we saw that over and over again.

And I knew from putting out feelers to speak to real people I know in the US that Trump was campaigning well, his rallies had way more attendees, people were backing him but keeping their mouth shut, because the media and the left wing establishment, and quite frankly a massive amount of the left wing supporters are fast to try and socially shame people for their beliefs by hurling accusations at them of racist and sexist, etc.

And I knew this was going on, I knew the media were skewing polls and basically trying their hardest to destroy this man, so just like with Brexit, if the polls say it's close but we know they have a left leaning bias, then we can be fairly sure he's got a good chance at winning. So I put a bet down on Trump at 3/1 a few weeks before his win and walked away with a bundle of cash, because that's how sure I was that the media is slanted left.

This isn't the last time we'll see this, because left/right has stopped being simply about differing political opinions but a virtue war waged by the left. Many of them portray people on the right as monsters, or Hitler, the way they talk about Trumps win is like something out of a Disney movie, like he's some kind of evil spirit in a mans body, and that everyone who voted for him is literally a sexist, racist, homophobic, patriarchal shitlord. They talk about this as dark clouds hanging over america, about WW3, some kind of literal Apocalypse or nightmare come alive to damn us all to an eternity in hell. The hyperbole I see every day on the net, reactions from popular liberal youtubers and so on, it's crazy, it's like people have lost their minds. If you treat politics like this, rather than being serious and accepting that some things are just different points of view, and actually engaging in debates about issues rather than trying to shame people into silence, then you create a silent majority and you create the need for a president like Trump who will blow through political correctness and give a voice to people who are so poorly represented.

This is a really weird rant that's almost entirely divorced from reality. Final RCP polling average was Clinton +3. Looks like the final national popular vote will be somewhere around Clinton +2, meaning they were spot on. They were in fact more accurate than in 2012.

Additionally, polling aggregates gave 'leave' and 'remain' nearly equivalent chances of winning in the Brexit vote.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/25/upshot/why-the-surprise-over-brexit-dont-blame-the-polls.html?_r=0

I strongly suggest you try to be more serious about how you look at these things because it looks like you've somehow embraced a bizarre conspiracy theory about polling that is easily disproven by even the most basic look at what actually happened.

 

[buckshot24]

Those polls were of the popular vote for the most part, which she did in fact win pretty comfortably. In fact the polling error for this year on the popular vote was smaller than in 2012. So yes, you would have to be stupid not to view public opinion polls as the best evidence available. They won't be right 100% of the time but by looking at them in an objective, analytical way you will be right more often than any other method.

Also, bonus points for the 'electrical college'.

That's what people forget, 2012 Obama outperformed his polling but since it was in the direction of an Obama win people didn't notice how far off they were. If Romney outperformed his polling by the same number as Obama did then he might have won and everybody would be asking these same questions 4 years ago.

 

[Ackmed]

No, I won't. I haven't believed MSM for awhile now. I typically read several and cross reference. Almost all have their own agenda, and out right lie to the public. They sway stories or news to fit whatever narrative they want. It's pretty sad.

Yeah Hillary won the popular vote. You can't go changing the rules now and claim that she would have if the popular vote mattered. Both candidates would have campaigned differently if the election was won by the popular vote, but it isn't. Trying to claim that because about 1% (maybe 2% now?) more voted for Hillary means something now is silly. Just as it is silly to not give any weight to the alleged voting from people registered as dead, or the video that clearly shows a DNC staffer admitting to busing people around to vote over and over again. Jobs were lost, proof enough. How much? No idea. I'm sure it happened on the other side too. I don't have a lot of confidence in our voting system. But I'm sure someone will attach me for saying that, or believing that voting fraud took place.

 

[theeedude]

I will only trust major media.

 

[PokerGuy]

Ah yes, so made up bullshit on your part. So now your contention is that the media was favoring Clinton over Sanders while 'savaging' conservatives during the primary. Let's look at that!

http://shorensteincenter.org/pre-primary-news-coverage-2016-trump-clinton-sanders/

http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2016/06/the-making-of-the-campaign-2016/


I have no doubt that despite actual empirical research into this that shows what you said is completely bullshit you will in no way change your mind because you don't care about evidence. (as we already covered!) Someday I hope you prove me wrong and man up enough to admit you were wrong.

I said in the primaries, and you respond with drivel about coverage PRE primaries?

Trump got more coverage than anyone because he moved the needle. Nothing surprising there. During the primaries, the media essentially ignored Bernie and was forced to cover Trump more and more (ratings = money, and money > ideology). Then, once the primaries were over and we had Trump vs illary, the gloves came off and it was time to start attacking Trump. It was a nice organized coalition of lefty main stream media and lefty social media platforms smearing Trump. illary was so dislikable that they didn't even bother to try and push her, they figured just smearing Trump (he's Hitler!) would be sufficient. It wasn't.