Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Totally bogus. According to their website, 13 people completed 50,000 interviews in 2 weeks, That's 274 per day per interviewer and doesn't include incompletes or no answers (you'd need ~300-500,000 calls or more to get 50,000 completes). Also 1,000 per state gives more weight to smaller states. Of course there are are no breakdowns or details.
Yeah, I think I will stick with 538 for my poll-watching. I like their track record.
Young people vote in terribly low numbers, so that doesn't amount to much of anything
In 2012, voters under the age of 30 were 19% of the electorate, while those 30-39 were 17%. If we guess that 9% of that 17% were 35-39, that means that 8% were 30-34 (ie, Ponderosa's 'under 35). 19% + 8% = 27% of the electorate.
What planet do you live on where getting killed 56%-20% with more than a quarter of the electorate, to quote you, 'doesn't amount to much of anything'?
PS - I see you utterly missed Ponderosa's point about the damage Trump is doing to the GOP in future elections by driving younger voters disproportionately to the Democratic Party.
A few weeks ago, Pat Cadell slammed the Reuters poll which showed Clinton with a 10 point lead after just the previous week showing Trump with a 10 point lead. That simply isn't possible, and Cadell knew it. He also used the occasion to slam other polls that had changed there methodology in order to favor Clinton.
Now we have a real poll, done fairly, of 50,000 people. It shows Trump leading Hillary, 67% to 19% nationwide.
Putting faith in this poll, eh? Conservatives truly are in denial beyond any comprehension.
Similar to those commercials for Jet.com, I predict that on the morning after election day, the heads of many of these delusional right-wingers will be spouting plumes of smoke. Whether the smoke will be purple--as in those commercials--is something else entirely, but when someone convinces himself/herself that something constitutes reality--despite all credible evidence--it can be very difficult to accept reality when it does finally arrive.
No actual like to the poll data? Because if it is on the Internet and you agree with it, then it must be true. Without any link to the data, I question if this is even a real poll, it seems more like a fake post on a random blog that some people are being suckered to believe it is true.
Seems like you didn't read the explanation of how the poll was done that was included with this. Not surprised. Many people don't like to read. They just make their assumptions and go with that.
A few weeks ago, Pat Cadell slammed the Reuters poll which showed Clinton with a 10 point lead after just the previous week showing Trump with a 10 point lead. That simply isn't possible, and Cadell knew it. He also used the occasion to slam other polls that had changed there methodology in order to favor Clinton.
Now we have a real poll, done fairly, of 50,000 people. It shows Trump leading Hillary, 67% to 19% nationwide.
Seems like you didn't read the explanation of how the poll was done that was included with this. Not surprised. Many people don't like to read. They just make their assumptions and go with that.
Yes, that's exactly the point many of us are making. We did read the explanation of how the poll was supposedly done, and some of us have pointed out that it was clearly a lie - because some of the things they claim about their methodology are completely impossible.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.