Reuters polls 12% more Democrats than Republicans to come up with a result of Hillary leading by 5%

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: alomaha
But dont worry folks, I'm sure they're planning on rigging the election too. So nothing to see here, just move along...

Yes, that conspiracy has already begun to surface. Many on the Right are concerned that Trump is not going to win the election, so they have begun to fall back on the default excuse that the election is going to be rigged.

You think they won't do for Clinton what they did for Bush?

Regardless, we've already seen what corruption and lying they are willing to do to prop up Hillary falsely. The propaganda and poll rigging isn't working, do you think they are just going to stop there?

Do you understand the historical implications of what happens when people allow Democracy to erode like this?

originally posted by: Nikola014
a reply to: introvert

How can you even make this assumption, after everything we found out about how Bernie lost fair and square?

I did not make any assumption. I said it is much more likely that he loses the election fair and square. Also, party election processes have different rules than the general election.

Its beyond my mind how can you rationalize and justify every single Hillary's action..

What action of Hillary's have I rationalized in that post?

a reply to: ScriptedSociety

You think they won't do for Clinton what they did for Bush?

No. There will not be a need to.

Regardless, we've already seen what corruption and lying they are willing to do to prop up Hillary falsely. The propaganda and poll rigging isn't working, do you think they are just going to stop there?

What poll rigging?

Do you understand the historical implications of what happens when people allow Democracy to erode like this?

I don't see any erosion of democracy.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: ScriptedSociety

You think they won't do for Clinton what they did for Bush?

No. There will not be a need to.

Regardless, we've already seen what corruption and lying they are willing to do to prop up Hillary falsely. The propaganda and poll rigging isn't working, do you think they are just going to stop there?

What poll rigging?

Do you understand the historical implications of what happens when people allow Democracy to erode like this?

I don't see any erosion of democracy.

originally posted by: 727Sky
Amazing how things are manipulated to reach a desired goal.. I have just about given up on anything I hear about politics and many other things that can have some government driven agenda behind it,

Reuters had a total of 1522 poll participants.

They had 650 Democrats, 496 Republicans and 196 Independents..

So, in their survey 650 out of 1522 is 42.7%. We round it to 43%, that is the percentage of the people polled who are Democrats.

Further, 496 out of 1522 is 31%-are Republicans.

So Reuters has 12% more Democrats than Republicans in their survey, when they know that there are only 3% more Democrats in the population.

So, Reuters over-polled the Democrats by at least 9% and they are claiming that Clinton is leading by 5%. This means that in reality Trump is leading by about 4%.

This corresponds with the latest USC/LA Times daily poll, which shows Trump currently leading by 5%.

Oh, silly you!

They are simply taking into account the voting fraud that will be committed.

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Indigo5

uhh...no...he isn't

Wait, you might be right.
He would be an honest person.
Maybe he isn't a Democrat.
JK....

.

Find humor anywhere you can...It's much needed this election cycle and frankly I know it's not a good time to be a true conservative. Hope you are surviving it well.

Someday, it will come through to you that I am not a true conservative.
- I believe in a woman's right to choose.
- I believe that all drug laws should be abolished.

Those things do not make a very good 'true conservative'.

I don't understand. Did they know what the participants political leaning was prior to contacting them? If so then yeah, the results are suspect. But if they contacted a random selection of 1522 people and recorded their political affiliation after the fact then I don't see the issue.

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Indigo5

uhh...no...he isn't

Wait, you might be right.
He would be an honest person.
Maybe he isn't a Democrat.
JK....

.

Find humor anywhere you can...It's much needed this election cycle and frankly I know it's not a good time to be a true conservative. Hope you are surviving it well.

Someday, it will come through to you that I am not a true conservative.
- I believe in a woman's right to choose.
- I believe that all drug laws should be abolished.

Those things do not make a very good 'true conservative'.

The above is precisely a "true conservative"...small government only where it needs to be and definitely not in the bedroom or making reproductive decisions for women. I do understand though that people might have forgotten what conservatism stands for in the past 20 years as the GOP courted the Evangelicals with social issues and promoted the war on drugs for the "law and order" vote.

I suppose the current definition of "true conservative" has been pretty abused in recent years..and even more so this year.

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: atrollstalker

...I am not educated but tried to participate in polls over the past few years...
ps. I like reading the posts over at Real Climate ....those are real number crunchers and at the top of their game imo

I have a high education but I don't consider education as being the delineation of smart. Intelligence is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. Being smart knows it doesn't go in a fruit salad. I would bet you know the difference. Thanks for the compliment.

a reply to: 727Sky

I live in the Philippines and get out to the bar to watch news in English and so found myself watching Reuters the other day and could barely watch it as it was so biased for Clinton.
I never really watch Mainstream media and know little about what political side each station is alligned to but within seconds of some English woman host coming on and giving a positive run down on the DNC and glowing accolades for the frump Clinton and seconds later baseless innuendo and snide comments about Trump i got to the point where i was nearly swearing loudly at the T.V.

As i keep saying it's social engineering,the media are trying to sway the public consciuosness into the direction the special interests and elites wish them to go by using outright lies and the manipulation of facts.

Just a heads up for our members. I screwed up as I forgot to place the Link to the article...and I would have sworn I did link it... sorry for that ! Here is the original Link.. www.orlytaitzesq.com...

I am 12 hours difference on the other side of the world (from the central USA) so I am unable to edit due to time limitations on ATS editing when the error of my ways was discovered. Anyway just a heads up..

DontTreadOnMe, was kind enough to add the link to the original posting of the thread.. Thanks for all the work our unpaid mods do and especially DontTreadOnMe for being on top of things and an all around good guy

They are polling an accurate interpretation of the population. If there are more Democrats in the population, they will have to take that into account with their polling. I looked it up, and the percentage of Democrats is accurate, but the percentage of Republicans is low.