Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Site Notices
Page / 47
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 1:22:10 PM EST
[#1]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
That’s your excuse?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

Another rogue prosecutor on the loose.
That’s your excuse?
Timing of the announcement with Giuliani in the news is suspicious to you.
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 1:22:27 PM EST
[#2]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
That’s your excuse?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

Another rogue prosecutor on the loose.
That’s your excuse?
Not an excuse...your ability to discern criminality is not to be trusted.

You are anti Trump so you don't count.
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 1:23:58 PM EST
[#3]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I'll tell you why the polls are wrong:  Conservatives are not polled.  Look at  how many polls heavily favored Democrats in the samples.

At the other end:  People often don't let themselves be polled.  People are sick and tired of being solicited for everything  under the sun and polling is no different.
View Quote
Except liberals.   They love to tell everyone and everything about their fucked up worldview.
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 1:43:14 PM EST
[#5]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Timing of the announcement with Giuliani in the news is suspicious to you.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

Another rogue prosecutor on the loose.
That’s your excuse?
Timing of the announcement with Giuliani in the news is suspicious to you.
Liberals want to take down Rudy
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 2:14:29 PM EST
[#6]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Not an excuse...your ability to discern criminality is not to be trusted.

You are anti Trump so you don't count.
View Quote
You seem worried, tovarishch.
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 2:17:57 PM EST
[#7]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Liberals want to take down Rudy
View Quote
I'll be very surprised if Rudy is a popular guy around here a year from now.

I don't think he's served the president well at all.

Time will tell.
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 2:23:15 PM EST
[#8]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

I'll be very surprised if Rudy is a popular guy around here a year from now.

I don't think he's served the president well at all.

Time will tell.
View Quote
I just don't think the guys cheese is quite centered on his cracker anymore if you know what mean
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 2:25:03 PM EST
[#9]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I just don't think the guys cheese is quite centered on his cracker anymore if you know what mean
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

I'll be very surprised if Rudy is a popular guy around here a year from now.

I don't think he's served the president well at all.

Time will tell.
I just don't think the guys cheese is quite centered on his cracker anymore if you know what mean
He must of had his salad tossed by Donald!
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 2:35:32 PM EST
[#10]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

He must of had his salad tossed by Donald!
View Quote
Not quite what I was getting at ha
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 2:53:23 PM EST
[#11]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
That’s your excuse?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

Another rogue prosecutor on the loose.
That’s your excuse?
if the pussy hat fits...
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 2:56:49 PM EST
[#12]
I WANT the House of Representatives to hold an impeachment vote so the issue can move to the senate where Trump will most certainly be able to both bring into focus the democratic mis-deeds, and the attempted coup, then the senate can reject the impeachment and we can move on.

I have even thought that it would be smart for the Republicans in the house to ask for an impeachment vote, just to get the ball rolling into the senate and shortstop all the BS in the house.
The House democrats will drag this out as long as possible, so having republicans ask for the vote would short stop their tactic.  Much like when all the representatives were calling for the dissolution of I.C.E., then once a vote on the issue was requested they backed off.

The great irony would be if republicans asked for an impeachment vote in the house of representatives, the democrats would be faced with voting in favor of something the republicans asked for (which they hate), or voting against impeachment...  The irony of those two choices would be truly entertaining to watch.
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 3:20:59 PM EST
[#13]
This is supposed to be the sampling data for the Fox news poll.

Link Posted: 10/10/2019 4:43:56 PM EST
[#14]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
This is supposed to be the sampling data for the Fox news poll.

https://i.redd.it/96a4nbxnhpr31.jpg
View Quote
That wasn't sampled but rather manufactured to a desired outcome.

But....they have a headline

This isn't going to turn out like they think.
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 5:42:34 PM EST
[#15]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
This is supposed to be the sampling data for the Fox news poll.

https://i.redd.it/96a4nbxnhpr31.jpg
View Quote
If that is accurate, then it's little wonder the results are what they are.

Republicans as sampled against Democrats:

Total Number: -29%
Men: -15%
Women: -38%
White: +2.5%
Black: -87%
Non-White: -78%
White Men: +27%
White Women: -25%
Non-White Men: -73%
Non-White Women: -83%
Under 45: -52%
45+: -4%

In the second section, they sampled Democrats that more strongly identified with the Democrat Party than Republicans that identified with the Republican Party. If I'm reading that correctly. Would also like to see the rest of this section

Again, Republicans vs Democrats sampled.

Urban: -55%
Suburban: -38%
Rural: +25.7%
Suburban Women: -49%

Section three. Also want to see the rest.

White College Degree: -20%
White No Degree: +22%
White Men Degree: +10%
White Men No Degree: +48%
White Women Degree: -49%
White Women No Degree: +11%

Of an interesting note is the Lib/Mod/Cons stats.

Democrats 80%/44%/20%  There is a pretty strong indicator of the fractures in the Democrat party, between the hardcore liberals and the more moderate, even occasionally conservative Democrats.

Republicans 9%/18%/62% Here, while the Republicans don't as strongly identify as conservative, there is drastically less of split in positions.

Overall, a great example of how to abuse statistics.
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 5:57:57 PM EST
[#16]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Of the ones that showed battleground state losses, most were almost certainly within the margin of error.

- Pennsylvania won by just 44,292 votes. Aggregate polling indicated Clinton +1.9, actual was Trump +0.7
- Wisconsin won by just 22,748 votes. Aggregate polling indicated Clinton +6.5, actual was Trump +0.7
- Michigan won by just 10,704 votes. Aggregate polling indicated Clinton +3.4, actual was Trump +0.3

Of just those 3, Wisconsin is the only one that could be considered diverging significantly from the polled results in part because they expected a larger showing for Stein and Johnson. Given that it's Wisconsin, that's not really going that far out on a limb I don't think.

Polling also showed Trump winning Ohio decently, which he did, and eeking out a win in Florida, which he also did.

Again, aside from the 5.8% divergence in Wisconsin, polling for battleground states was, no surprise, pretty close.

So, again, ignore them if you want but I wouldn't recommend it. I would, however, recommend keeping an eye on Real Clear Politics for the aggregate polling which tends to give a more accurate result since it helps eliminates outliers which both sides like to use.

Of course I didn't mention it because it's not really relevant. It was more "forecasting" (aka propaganda), not polling conducted by polling firms.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm pretty sure Trump was polling behind in several of the battleground states he won.
Of the ones that showed battleground state losses, most were almost certainly within the margin of error.

- Pennsylvania won by just 44,292 votes. Aggregate polling indicated Clinton +1.9, actual was Trump +0.7
- Wisconsin won by just 22,748 votes. Aggregate polling indicated Clinton +6.5, actual was Trump +0.7
- Michigan won by just 10,704 votes. Aggregate polling indicated Clinton +3.4, actual was Trump +0.3

Of just those 3, Wisconsin is the only one that could be considered diverging significantly from the polled results in part because they expected a larger showing for Stein and Johnson. Given that it's Wisconsin, that's not really going that far out on a limb I don't think.

Polling also showed Trump winning Ohio decently, which he did, and eeking out a win in Florida, which he also did.

Again, aside from the 5.8% divergence in Wisconsin, polling for battleground states was, no surprise, pretty close.

So, again, ignore them if you want but I wouldn't recommend it. I would, however, recommend keeping an eye on Real Clear Politics for the aggregate polling which tends to give a more accurate result since it helps eliminates outliers which both sides like to use.

Quoted:
Plus you don't even mention the "95% chance of winning" the electoral college the whole media was talking about on election day.
Of course I didn't mention it because it's not really relevant. It was more "forecasting" (aka propaganda), not polling conducted by polling firms.
Thank you. Drives me crazy seeing people gleefully ignorant towards polling and how it works. For many it's much easier to simply scream out "fake polls!" and dismiss any polling data they don't like.

That and the fact presidential and mid-term polling pre and post 2016 has been extremely accurate. 2016 was just an outlier but the polling was accurate again during the 2018 mid terms.
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 6:04:04 PM EST
[#17]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Thank you. Drives me crazy seeing people gleefully ignorant towards polling and how it works. For many it's much easier to simply scream out "fake polls!" and dismiss any polling data they don't like.

That and the fact presidential and mid-term polling pre and post 2016 has been extremely accurate. 2016 was just an outlier but the polling was accurate again during the 2018 mid terms.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm pretty sure Trump was polling behind in several of the battleground states he won.
Of the ones that showed battleground state losses, most were almost certainly within the margin of error.

- Pennsylvania won by just 44,292 votes. Aggregate polling indicated Clinton +1.9, actual was Trump +0.7
- Wisconsin won by just 22,748 votes. Aggregate polling indicated Clinton +6.5, actual was Trump +0.7
- Michigan won by just 10,704 votes. Aggregate polling indicated Clinton +3.4, actual was Trump +0.3

Of just those 3, Wisconsin is the only one that could be considered diverging significantly from the polled results in part because they expected a larger showing for Stein and Johnson. Given that it's Wisconsin, that's not really going that far out on a limb I don't think.

Polling also showed Trump winning Ohio decently, which he did, and eeking out a win in Florida, which he also did.

Again, aside from the 5.8% divergence in Wisconsin, polling for battleground states was, no surprise, pretty close.

So, again, ignore them if you want but I wouldn't recommend it. I would, however, recommend keeping an eye on Real Clear Politics for the aggregate polling which tends to give a more accurate result since it helps eliminates outliers which both sides like to use.

Quoted:
Plus you don't even mention the "95% chance of winning" the electoral college the whole media was talking about on election day.
Of course I didn't mention it because it's not really relevant. It was more "forecasting" (aka propaganda), not polling conducted by polling firms.
Thank you. Drives me crazy seeing people gleefully ignorant towards polling and how it works. For many it's much easier to simply scream out "fake polls!" and dismiss any polling data they don't like.

That and the fact presidential and mid-term polling pre and post 2016 has been extremely accurate. 2016 was just an outlier but the polling was accurate again during the 2018 mid terms.
I dunno man, the poll above is pretty

Even a die hard Northwestern Conservative such as yourself can see that.
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 6:06:05 PM EST
[#18]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Thank you. Drives me crazy seeing people gleefully ignorant towards polling and how it works. For many it's much easier to simply scream out "fake polls!" and dismiss any polling data they don't like.

That and the fact presidential and mid-term polling pre and post 2016 has been extremely accurate. 2016 was just an outlier but the polling was accurate again during the 2018 mid terms.
View Quote
What you dont seem to understand is they can make the polls say what they want.

The methodology is usually if you look into it.
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 6:09:49 PM EST
[#19]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I WANT the House of Representatives to hold an impeachment vote so the issue can move to the senate where Trump will most certainly be able to both bring into focus the democratic mis-deeds, and the attempted coup, then the senate can reject the impeachment and we can move on.

I have even thought that it would be smart for the Republicans in the house to ask for an impeachment vote, just to get the ball rolling into the senate and shortstop all the BS in the house.
The House democrats will drag this out as long as possible, so having republicans ask for the vote would short stop their tactic.  Much like when all the representatives were calling for the dissolution of I.C.E., then once a vote on the issue was requested they backed off.

The great irony would be if republicans asked for an impeachment vote in the house of representatives, the democrats would be faced with voting in favor of something the republicans asked for (which they hate), or voting against impeachment...  The irony of those two choices would be truly entertaining to watch.
View Quote
Wont happen.  They aren't worried
about being exposed.  No one is ever going to do anything to them.

They just dont want to lose the issue
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 6:17:57 PM EST
[#20]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I dunno man, the poll above is pretty

Even a die hard Northwestern Conservative such as yourself can see that.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm pretty sure Trump was polling behind in several of the battleground states he won.
Of the ones that showed battleground state losses, most were almost certainly within the margin of error.

- Pennsylvania won by just 44,292 votes. Aggregate polling indicated Clinton +1.9, actual was Trump +0.7
- Wisconsin won by just 22,748 votes. Aggregate polling indicated Clinton +6.5, actual was Trump +0.7
- Michigan won by just 10,704 votes. Aggregate polling indicated Clinton +3.4, actual was Trump +0.3

Of just those 3, Wisconsin is the only one that could be considered diverging significantly from the polled results in part because they expected a larger showing for Stein and Johnson. Given that it's Wisconsin, that's not really going that far out on a limb I don't think.

Polling also showed Trump winning Ohio decently, which he did, and eeking out a win in Florida, which he also did.

Again, aside from the 5.8% divergence in Wisconsin, polling for battleground states was, no surprise, pretty close.

So, again, ignore them if you want but I wouldn't recommend it. I would, however, recommend keeping an eye on Real Clear Politics for the aggregate polling which tends to give a more accurate result since it helps eliminates outliers which both sides like to use.

Quoted:
Plus you don't even mention the "95% chance of winning" the electoral college the whole media was talking about on election day.
Of course I didn't mention it because it's not really relevant. It was more "forecasting" (aka propaganda), not polling conducted by polling firms.
Thank you. Drives me crazy seeing people gleefully ignorant towards polling and how it works. For many it's much easier to simply scream out "fake polls!" and dismiss any polling data they don't like.

That and the fact presidential and mid-term polling pre and post 2016 has been extremely accurate. 2016 was just an outlier but the polling was accurate again during the 2018 mid terms.
I dunno man, the poll above is pretty

Even a die hard Northwestern Conservative such as yourself can see that.
I agree, I was just talking specifically about the 2016 election polling.

I usually just go on realclearpolitics to see an overview of multiple polls to get a general idea.
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 6:28:52 PM EST
[#21]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I agree, I was just talking specifically about the 2016 election polling.

I usually just go on realclearpolitics to see an overview of multiple polls to get a general idea.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm pretty sure Trump was polling behind in several of the battleground states he won.
Of the ones that showed battleground state losses, most were almost certainly within the margin of error.

- Pennsylvania won by just 44,292 votes. Aggregate polling indicated Clinton +1.9, actual was Trump +0.7
- Wisconsin won by just 22,748 votes. Aggregate polling indicated Clinton +6.5, actual was Trump +0.7
- Michigan won by just 10,704 votes. Aggregate polling indicated Clinton +3.4, actual was Trump +0.3

Of just those 3, Wisconsin is the only one that could be considered diverging significantly from the polled results in part because they expected a larger showing for Stein and Johnson. Given that it's Wisconsin, that's not really going that far out on a limb I don't think.

Polling also showed Trump winning Ohio decently, which he did, and eeking out a win in Florida, which he also did.

Again, aside from the 5.8% divergence in Wisconsin, polling for battleground states was, no surprise, pretty close.

So, again, ignore them if you want but I wouldn't recommend it. I would, however, recommend keeping an eye on Real Clear Politics for the aggregate polling which tends to give a more accurate result since it helps eliminates outliers which both sides like to use.

Quoted:
Plus you don't even mention the "95% chance of winning" the electoral college the whole media was talking about on election day.
Of course I didn't mention it because it's not really relevant. It was more "forecasting" (aka propaganda), not polling conducted by polling firms.
Thank you. Drives me crazy seeing people gleefully ignorant towards polling and how it works. For many it's much easier to simply scream out "fake polls!" and dismiss any polling data they don't like.

That and the fact presidential and mid-term polling pre and post 2016 has been extremely accurate. 2016 was just an outlier but the polling was accurate again during the 2018 mid terms.
I dunno man, the poll above is pretty

Even a die hard Northwestern Conservative such as yourself can see that.
I agree, I was just talking specifically about the 2016 election polling.

I usually just go on realclearpolitics to see an overview of multiple polls to get a general idea.
2016 was an interesting year in that regard
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 7:05:05 PM EST
[#22]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
This is supposed to be the sampling data for the Fox news poll.

https://i.redd.it/96a4nbxnhpr31.jpg
View Quote
I hate to be the bearer of more bad news but, "oversampling" of Democrats isn't necessarily incorrect.

I mentioned this in a previous post but there is not an even breakdown in numbers in the political parties.

Take a look around at the state of our society and culture. In terms of raw numbers, Republicans are assuredly outnumbered by Dems and Constitutional Conservatives even more so.

You're talking about an electorate that just gave a hardcore Maxist not one but two Presidential terms. That doesn't happen in a center-right nation.

The damage has been done by the Left and we're on the wrong side of demographics.

You all should be preparing accordingly.
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 7:54:24 PM EST
[#23]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

I hate to be the bearer of more bad news but, "oversampling" of Democrats isn't necessarily incorrect.

I mentioned this in a previous post but there is not an even breakdown in numbers in the political parties.

Take a look around at the state of our society and culture. In terms of raw numbers, Republicans are assuredly outnumbered by Dems and Constitutional Conservatives even more so.

You're talking about an electorate that just gave a hardcore Maxist not one but two Presidential terms. That doesn't happen in a center-right nation.

The damage has been done by the Left and we're on the wrong side of demographics.

You all should be preparing accordingly.
View Quote
As much as I'd like to call you crazy, I don't disagree.  We are indeed the minority.  
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 7:59:44 PM EST
[#24]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

I hate to be the bearer of more bad news but, "oversampling" of Democrats isn't necessarily incorrect.

I mentioned this in a previous post but there is not an even breakdown in numbers in the political parties.

Take a look around at the state of our society and culture. In terms of raw numbers, Republicans are assuredly outnumbered by Dems and Constitutional Conservatives even more so.

You're talking about an electorate that just gave a hardcore Maxist not one but two Presidential terms. That doesn't happen in a center-right nation.

The damage has been done by the Left and we're on the wrong side of demographics.

You all should be preparing accordingly.
View Quote
Democrats are 31 percent not 48, but keep on never trumping
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 9:02:34 PM EST
[#25]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Democrats are 31 percent not 48, but keep on never trumping
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

I hate to be the bearer of more bad news but, "oversampling" of Democrats isn't necessarily incorrect.

I mentioned this in a previous post but there is not an even breakdown in numbers in the political parties.

Take a look around at the state of our society and culture. In terms of raw numbers, Republicans are assuredly outnumbered by Dems and Constitutional Conservatives even more so.

You're talking about an electorate that just gave a hardcore Maxist not one but two Presidential terms. That doesn't happen in a center-right nation.

The damage has been done by the Left and we're on the wrong side of demographics.

You all should be preparing accordingly.
Democrats are 31 percent not 48, but keep on never trumping
Please, don't back up your numbers with any citations or anything useful.

And I'm never what-ing now?

Attachment Attached File


I'm wondering if you actually know what the word "never" means or, if you're just as reactionary as the left with throwing "racist" out at everything that hurts your feelings, thus rendering it completely meaningless.

As for the demographics side of things, how's the view in that sand you've got your head in? I'm sure Texas really isn't turning purple right before our eyes and it's all just a bad dream... Sleep tight.
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 9:43:20 PM EST
[#26]
It was Joe.

Attachment Attached File
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 10:02:59 PM EST
[#28]
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 10:17:14 PM EST
[#29]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
You know how I know it is all bullshit?

The Democrats won't even come back for recess to vote in favor of an inquiry. If they were confident in the votes, they would come back from recess today and vote.

If by this time next week, there isn't a full House vote to start an inquiry - there won't ever be an impeachment vote.

Actions speak louder than words (and polls).
View Quote
You are not wrong.  Part of their strategy was to use the recess to drum up support and of course the media was going to go and help them do it...which of course means clicks/likes for them.

The problem was their case is so garbage and weak it was quickly refuted and a lot of the public aren't interested.  They don't need Bezos and Soros to support them, they already have that.  They need enough of the electorate and from what I've seen a lot of non-political people are rolling their eyes at yet another muh-Russia.
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 10:19:40 PM EST
[#30]
BTW rogue cops and prosecutors arresting these two "Guliani" guys.

It it reads more like the usual IC operation we've gotten to see along with NSA database abuses.

Pathetic.
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 10:47:42 PM EST
[#31]
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 10:54:35 PM EST
[#32]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
I suspect this news coming out largely has to do with the hard Left's efforts to continue to push Biden out.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
It would be a lot less successful if he weren't, you know, a criminal.
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 11:11:41 PM EST
[#33]
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 11:24:37 PM EST
[#34]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Please, don't back up your numbers with any citations or anything useful.

And I'm never what-ing now?

https://www.AR15.Com/media/mediaFiles/102941/my_2016_election_ballot_filled_JPG-1119888.JPG

I'm wondering if you actually know what the word "never" means or, if you're just as reactionary as the left with throwing "racist" out at everything that hurts your feelings, thus rendering it completely meaningless.

As for the demographics side of things, how's the view in that sand you've got your head in? I'm sure Texas really isn't turning purple right before our eyes and it's all just a bad dream... Sleep tight.
View Quote
The fact that you voted for him means little considering you trash the man non-stop on a conservative (more or less) forum of which the majority of the members feel he is doing a good job considering the hostile environment he works in.

I believe Kangaroo dude voted for him too.
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 11:28:24 PM EST
[#35]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
If that is accurate, then it's little wonder the results are what they are.

Republicans as sampled against Democrats:

Total Number: -29%
Men: -15%
Women: -38%
White: +2.5%
Black: -87%
Non-White: -78%
White Men: +27%
White Women: -25%
Non-White Men: -73%
Non-White Women: -83%
Under 45: -52%
45+: -4%

In the second section, they sampled Democrats that more strongly identified with the Democrat Party than Republicans that identified with the Republican Party. If I'm reading that correctly. Would also like to see the rest of this section

Again, Republicans vs Democrats sampled.

Urban: -55%
Suburban: -38%
Rural: +25.7%
Suburban Women: -49%

Section three. Also want to see the rest.

White College Degree: -20%
White No Degree: +22%
White Men Degree: +10%
White Men No Degree: +48%
White Women Degree: -49%
White Women No Degree: +11%

Of an interesting note is the Lib/Mod/Cons stats.

Democrats 80%/44%/20%  There is a pretty strong indicator of the fractures in the Democrat party, between the hardcore liberals and the more moderate, even occasionally conservative Democrats.

Republicans 9%/18%/62% Here, while the Republicans don't as strongly identify as conservative, there is drastically less of split in positions.

Overall, a great example of how to abuse statistics.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
This is supposed to be the sampling data for the Fox news poll.

https://i.redd.it/96a4nbxnhpr31.jpg
If that is accurate, then it's little wonder the results are what they are.

Republicans as sampled against Democrats:

Total Number: -29%
Men: -15%
Women: -38%
White: +2.5%
Black: -87%
Non-White: -78%
White Men: +27%
White Women: -25%
Non-White Men: -73%
Non-White Women: -83%
Under 45: -52%
45+: -4%

In the second section, they sampled Democrats that more strongly identified with the Democrat Party than Republicans that identified with the Republican Party. If I'm reading that correctly. Would also like to see the rest of this section

Again, Republicans vs Democrats sampled.

Urban: -55%
Suburban: -38%
Rural: +25.7%
Suburban Women: -49%

Section three. Also want to see the rest.

White College Degree: -20%
White No Degree: +22%
White Men Degree: +10%
White Men No Degree: +48%
White Women Degree: -49%
White Women No Degree: +11%

Of an interesting note is the Lib/Mod/Cons stats.

Democrats 80%/44%/20%  There is a pretty strong indicator of the fractures in the Democrat party, between the hardcore liberals and the more moderate, even occasionally conservative Democrats.

Republicans 9%/18%/62% Here, while the Republicans don't as strongly identify as conservative, there is drastically less of split in positions.

Overall, a great example of how to abuse statistics.
Lies, damn lies and polling data
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 11:38:40 PM EST
[#36]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Another rogue prosecutor on the loose.
View Quote
Same exact Prosecutor that just went to court to block Dems from getting Trump's taxes. But you knew that, right?
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 11:40:20 PM EST
[#37]
Quoted:

It would be a lot less successful if he weren't, you know, a criminal.
View Quote
He's a Dem so, it kinda goes with the territory.

Quoted:

The fact that you voted for him means little considering you trash the man non-stop on a conservative (more or less) forum of which the majority of the members feel he is doing a good job considering the hostile environment he works in.

I believe Kangaroo dude voted for him too.
View Quote
I don't think you actually know what "Conservative" means.

Hint: It's not a Republican President politically equivalent to a Democrat from 50-60 years ago. The fact you think it is, is why we're screwed.
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 11:49:15 PM EST
[#38]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
You seem worried, tovarishch.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

Not an excuse...your ability to discern criminality is not to be trusted.

You are anti Trump so you don't count.
You seem worried, tovarishch.
Link Posted: 10/10/2019 11:57:26 PM EST
[#39]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Same exact Prosecutor that just went to court to block Dems from getting Trump's taxes. But you knew that, right?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

Another rogue prosecutor on the loose.
Same exact Prosecutor that just went to court to block Dems from getting Trump's taxes. But you knew that, right?
Ouch...that's going to sting.
Link Posted: 10/11/2019 12:01:58 AM EST
[#40]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

If that is accurate, then it's little wonder the results are what they are.

Republicans as sampled against Democrats:

Total Number: -29%
Men: -15%
Women: -38%
White: +2.5%
Black: -87%
Non-White: -78%
White Men: +27%
White Women: -25%
Non-White Men: -73%
Non-White Women: -83%
Under 45: -52%
45+: -4%

In the second section, they sampled Democrats that more strongly identified with the Democrat Party than Republicans that identified with the Republican Party. If I'm reading that correctly. Would also like to see the rest of this section

Again, Republicans vs Democrats sampled.

Urban: -55%
Suburban: -38%
Rural: +25.7%
Suburban Women: -49%

Section three. Also want to see the rest.

White College Degree: -20%
White No Degree: +22%
White Men Degree: +10%
White Men No Degree: +48%
White Women Degree: -49%
White Women No Degree: +11%

Of an interesting note is the Lib/Mod/Cons stats.

Democrats 80%/44%/20%  There is a pretty strong indicator of the fractures in the Democrat party, between the hardcore liberals and the more moderate, even occasionally conservative Democrats.

Republicans 9%/18%/62% Here, while the Republicans don't as strongly identify as conservative, there is drastically less of split in positions.

Overall, a great example of how to abuse statistics.
View Quote
Shit like this is exactly how they got those ABC Hillary +12 polls in early October.

I think NBC had the  +14 one.
Naturally Nate Cheapsilver, RCP,  and all the others kept those polls in there, ruining the averages.

The message: "Omg guise he cant win srsly.
...stay home plz.. dont donate and tell everyone else to quit.."
Link Posted: 10/11/2019 7:46:08 AM EST
[#41]
Link Posted: 10/11/2019 7:59:26 AM EST
[#42]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Another rogue prosecutor on the loose.
View Quote
Link Posted: 10/11/2019 8:01:50 AM EST
[#43]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Ouch...that's going to sting.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

Another rogue prosecutor on the loose.
Same exact Prosecutor that just went to court to block Dems from getting Trump's taxes. But you knew that, right?
Ouch...that's going to sting.
Did I forget to mention AG Barr was informed of the investigation back in February and strongly supported it? But, yes, obviously it's a "rogue" prosecutor.
Link Posted: 10/11/2019 8:38:04 AM EST
[#44]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

Another rogue prosecutor on the loose.
That's strange

Wonder when they had contact with Adam Schiff.  Could this be another setup
Link Posted: 10/11/2019 8:54:25 AM EST
[#45]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Did I forget to mention AG Barr was informed of the investigation back in February and strongly supported it? But, yes, obviously it's a "rogue" prosecutor.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:

Another rogue prosecutor on the loose.
Same exact Prosecutor that just went to court to block Dems from getting Trump's taxes. But you knew that, right?
Ouch...that's going to sting.
Did I forget to mention AG Barr was informed of the investigation back in February and strongly supported it? But, yes, obviously it's a "rogue" prosecutor.
Hate to be a a skeptic but have you noticed all the BS indictments and allegations levied against Trump and his campaign?

My faith in any prosecutor, Trump appointee or not, is non existent. From what I've seen, Democrats and the GOPe have managed to sneak a few of their own into the mix of these appointments and they later on become part of the resistance brigade.
Link Posted: 10/11/2019 9:02:06 AM EST
[#46]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Hate to be a a skeptic but have you noticed all the BS indictments and allegations levied against Trump and his campaign?

My faith in any prosecutor, Trump appointee or not, is non existent. From what I've seen, Democrats and the GOPe have managed to sneak a few of their own into the mix of these appointments and they later on become part of the resistance brigade.
View Quote
Well at least there are Hannity's "bombshells".
Link Posted: 10/11/2019 9:08:33 AM EST
[#47]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Well at least there are Hannity's "bombshells".
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:

Hate to be a a skeptic but have you noticed all the BS indictments and allegations levied against Trump and his campaign?

My faith in any prosecutor, Trump appointee or not, is non existent. From what I've seen, Democrats and the GOPe have managed to sneak a few of their own into the mix of these appointments and they later on become part of the resistance brigade.
Well at least there are Hannity's "bombshells".
Hannity is a low-IQ conservative grifter boomer with those stupid “tick tock” tweets that turn out to be nothing burgers.
Link Posted: 10/11/2019 9:13:32 AM EST
[#48]
Impeachment 9 11 2019 10 10
Link Posted: 10/11/2019 10:06:22 AM EST
[#49]
Link Posted: 10/11/2019 10:09:19 AM EST
[#50]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

Hannity is a low-IQ conservative grifter boomer with those stupid “tick tock” tweets that turn out to be nothing burgers.
View Quote
The "record" for "bombshells" I remember seeing on Hannity (might be far more but I don't watch him that often) was 4 of them.

You know how many resulted in ANYTHING prosecutorial or Grand Jury actions?

NONE!!!
Page / 47
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top