Wait...How do we know if most of the major political polls are rigged?

Are the polls rigged?

Deduction tells us they are, past news reports certainly implicate them in more than just rigging; the software that runs embedded within the machines that tabulate the votes can assign a decimal value to your vote, think about that for a bit.

If you don't think that votes, much less polls, aren't manipulated, then you have no idea how the system is working as it is presently.

originally posted by: Logarock
a reply to: blargo

Well first stop an say to yourself.....were did I get all that spin and interpretation of Trumps action? His opponents press and PR people otherwise known as CBS ect. They could do the same with Hillary.......she has years of gaffing in public on film and with some spin ect they could turn her into mud in a week.


As far as endorsements of party heads......these guys are badly beaten lame ducks getting put in their place. He doesn't have to do anything for them. I hope he doesn't not it will make him look weak and political after all. They act all ass hurt like they are still queens of the ball getting jilted. They want Trump to do political mouth to mouth resuscitation on these two damaged and disloyal political ducks.

As far as Kahn.....he was bait set in a trap by Hillary. A tool. His son sacrificed not him. He wants to get up in a high stakes political contest and pull that act? Shame on him and Hillary. They started a fight and act like scalded dogs when they get what they ask for.

So if I paraphrase what you wrote here, is Trump cannot help himself and the mastermind Hillary knew the dastardly things to do to make Trump implode. Got it.

a reply to: blargo


So are you saying that Trump shouldn't have or didn't have the right to defend himself for some pocket waving, guilt tripping and really anti american blabber mouth on a national stage calling him out?

a reply to: Logarock

They suppose that a supreme court take over will settle it but it wont.

I'm not sure, maybe I'm misunderstanding what you've written, but I think SCOTUS could and probably will at some point settle the 2nd Amend issue by overturning the most recent decision and re-interpreting the language to mean that only members of a well regulated militia have the right to bear arms. You have to understand that there's no honor or integrity with these people and you have to understand that their primary motivation is hatred and craving for power and imposition of authoritarianism.

The fact that many have loaded up on firearms doesn't alter the equation. All the AR 15's in the world aren't going to stand up to Abrams Tanks.

BTW, I'm all up for 2nd Amend rights, but I'm also realistic.

originally posted by: Logarock
a reply to: blargo


So are you saying that Trump shouldn't have or didn't have the right to defend himself for some pocket waving, guilt tripping and really anti american blabber mouth on a national stage calling him out?

Trumps biggest weakness are his own words. The insults, the bigotry, the sexism, the lies that change from day to day. The DNC has the easiest job in the world making campaign attack ads, all they do is play Trump speaking. His own words and actions have not only been bizarre as of late but, of course they have him crashing in the polls. If the guy can be set off so easily and distracted so simply of course people are not going to vote for him. Who wants somebody who is so easily manipulated in office. And that is where his poll numbers have really crashed, being fit for office.

a reply to: MamaJ

FDR also said that

IF IT HAPPENS IN POLITICS, IT WAS PLANNED THAT WAY.

Sobering reality.

a reply to: BO XIAN

He like others of times past gave us warning after warning...

FDR also stated.. “The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerated the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than the democratic state itself. That in its essence is fascism: ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or any controlling private power.”

a reply to: MamaJ

I certainly never wanted to see

a SElection, actually an era . . .

in which the oligarchy put forward the worst combination of evil doers with the blackest, most ruthless, corrupt, narcissistic, greedy, arrogant, tyrannical hearts imaginable.

Let's think about even more basic stuff than "rigging" the polls and start with: How are these polls conducted?
Most of these polls are conducted by phone are they not? Land line phones.
What percentage of the population still has and answers land lines?
Are these pollsters "re-calculating" for that resident bias? If so, how?

For the most recent polls that missed so badly, take a look at the polling being done prior to the Kentucky Gubernatorial election last year.
The Republican candidate was anywhere from 9% to 2% down in all the "reputable" polls released. He won by a margin of 9% and the libs (as in the Huff Post people) nearly went off the rails trying to defend the polls. It was indeed a comical display of sputtering and stuttering "journalists" trying to understand how their great prophets had failed them.

Anyone with half a brain in working condition can guess the source of the poll from the questions asked. Since most of the folks who still have landlines are old fogies like me, they have lived long enough to see how these polls are used and will prank them by going along with whatever the pollster seems to want to hear. Yeah, that's right, we lie to pollsters. Why do I care if they think I'm going to vote for some criminal?

a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

Been pondering the question.

IIRC, a lot of the better polling orgs have been bought out by . . . drum roll . . .

the oligarchy--in one way or another.

I think one issue to be aware of is who owns the organization.

Harris and Gallup used to tend to be more reliable. They may still be on topics of no interest to the oligarchy. I hesitate to trust them on anything political or religious.

Even the Pew research org was bought out by . . . curious folks . . . IIRC.

I'd love to see the better websites ROUTINELY have VERY EASY TO IMPLEMENT polling functions.

Maybe that's why they don't. The oligarchy wouldn't likely want that.

Hmmmmmm

I'm routinely polled by the yougov.com online polling org . . . I wonder how accurate they are.

They COULD be one of the more accurate. I just don't know.

They have a fairly robust comments section. I haven't tabulated the conservative vs liberal responses.

As I understand it . . . for many centuries, the oligarchy has been MASTERFUL at their data collection, maybe at analysis . . . don't know about interpretation. One would think that in this era, they have it down even more extensively to greater depth, breadth, detail and in real time from a super massive data collection apparatus. Sobering, at least.

Certainly they have a huge investment in knowing what the facts are AND IN PREVENTING THE POPULACE from knowing what the facts are.

It's easy to know if the polls are rigged. If they show Clinton winning they're rigged.

a reply to: diggindirt

Trouble is . . . tilting the poll unrealistically toward XYZ candidate . . . influences liberal idiots who blithely go along with the rest of the propagandized lemmings toward the purported "to be winner."

There's a huge psychological tendency to want to vote for who is likely to win--for a good chunk of the populace--all other things being equal and too often--even not being equal.

a reply to: JustXeno

I sure don't know anyone face to face who is voting for her . . . besides my estranged, very clueless, very RAD afflicted 4th cousin.

a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

Right now is a poll going on in my neck of the woods for the political candidate Hillary and Trump, it was all over the news for a about three days, they were telling people to call and tell who their favor for the white house, I didn't call, neither my husband and nobody that I knew.

But I am sure that it will be finalized as a reliable and accurate poll, to me I don't think so.

a reply to: BO XIAN
So how do you explain the Kentucky Gubernatorial election last year? Not trying to argue here, just need an explanation of why the polls were showing the Democrat with a hefty lead only to have the results be off by nearly ten percentage points. If the polls could actually sway people's votes, the Dem should have had a landslide.
But that didn't happen.
So were the polls manipulated? Did the manipulation occur with the pollsters or with those being polled not being truthful about their vote?
Or....was it simply a matter of the Republicans being able to purchase more voting machine hacks than the Democrats had bought?

a reply to: diggindirt

The liberal folks seem to chronically include 10% or MORE DEMS in their polling than GOP.

That automatically skews the poll.

It is not disclosed all that often either, IIRC.

Otherwise, your guess is likely as good as mine.

a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

The polls are rigged, sort of. Basically, when polls are commissioned the person wanting the poll already has a predefined bias as to what the results are, whether that's 10% for something, 30%, 60%, or whatever. The point of polling is to get a more specific number. Most polls, especially political ones have a range they can't go outside of. If the expectation is that 50% of people support candidate A, but as the poll is ongoing they're finding candidate A has 80% support, they'll simply stop recording support for that person (and instead give it to their rival) until it gets closer to the numbers they were expecting.

That's simply how polls are conducted. On the one hand you can say this is rigging the system, but on the other hand it serves as a correction against a specific sample being overly biased due to either random chance or poor selection decisions.

You cant' really trust any specific poll, what you can trust though are a range of polls, in particular ones that have been sponsored by groups with agendas counter to each other and are then averaged.

originally posted by: bobw927
In today's world of modern technology and now that 99% of voting machines are electronic anything can be hacked. I have posted and older documentary on electronic voting machines to give you an example of what can be done maybe you have seen it and maybe you have not but it's interesting to watch on how VOTING can be Rigged !

www.youtube.com...

Anything can be hacked. It is far too time consuming and expensive to hack everything. The polls are not hacked, and they are not rigged (well rigged in the sense you're thinking of).

a reply to: John_Rodger_Cornman

Just look at the rallys...Thousands show up to hear Trump...Barely a hundred show up to hear Hillary...

Use Brexit as an example. 95% of the polls, even the odds on betting sites, were in favor of the Remain camp. The silent majority is coming out in 2016 like we've never seen before.