What do you guys think of LongRoom?

Found this self-reported 'unbiased' polling aggregate. I like it because Trump is winning and I like Trump
longroom.com/polls/

Other urls found in this thread:

nytimes.com/2015/06/21/opinion/sunday/whats-the-matter-with-polling.html
nytimes.com/2016/06/10/upshot/there-are-more-white-voters-than-people-think-thats-good-news-for-trump.html?_r=0
latimes.com/politics/la-na-trump-polls-20151221-story.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

...

>Has earings
Pls no

The new Unskewed Polls. Their "staff" is comprised of fictitious people with completely unverifiable credentials.

the last bastion of trumpism?

bernie math tier

Also, wouldn't really call them the forefront of hard hitting journalism.

WOW, WHEN YOU GIVE THEM EQUAL DEMOGRAPHICS THEY'RE VIRTUALLY TIED.

The political demographics of a country are never split evenly.

>MUH DEMOCRAT OVERSAMPLING
Respondents are chosen randomly, it just shows there are more Democrats country wide then Republicans.

If that were the case, you'd have to worry about Republican oversampling in states like Texas.

>media is inherently liberal
>Trump also against conservative grain
>both sides of media spectrum lean away from Trump
No one is surprised by this.

>more Democrats country wide then Republicans.
yea no shit so you agree the polling isn't what it should be, good job.
It all matters about the electoral anyways, doesn't matter if there are more dems than reds, as long as Trump is neck tied with hillary in Ohio, Florida, NC, Iowa (Which he already is) national polls don't mean shit.

lmao

If they were using fake people they would have included some token minorities.

They're legit. I remember playing sports ball with old Mikey Ellis back at College State University '98

Republicans? Minorities? Hello??????

You must have fucking autism if you don't understand that political organizations desperately want to appear diverse, even if they aren't.

>THEY'RE NOT LEGIT
Can anyone give me one legitimate news source these days? No seriously, if you're still willing to gobble MSM cock after this election you deserve to be hung.

Yeah I remember eating at the food bar in that city with good ol' Chris Moore back in that year long ago when they first started Longroom

Hello???? PC principal get in here!!!

Democrats tend to be dumber and less educated and therefore more interested in answering "online surveys" because they think there's a prize at the end. Republicans have jobs, businesses to run, and better things to do with their time. In the age of cellphones they can see who's calling and just don't answer the phone.

>The second unsettling trend is the rapidly declining response rate. When I first started doing telephone surveys in New Jersey in the late 1970s, we considered an 80 percent response rate acceptable, and even then we worried if the 20 percent we missed were different in attitudes and behaviors than the 80 percent we got. Enter answering machines and other technologies. By 1997, Pew’s response rate was 36 percent, and the decline has accelerated. By 2014 the response rate had fallen to 8 percent. As Nate Silver of fivethirtyeight.com recently observed, “The problem is simple but daunting. The foundation of opinion research has historically been the ability to draw a random sample of the population. That’s become much harder to do.”

>What’s the Matter With Polling?
nytimes.com/2015/06/21/opinion/sunday/whats-the-matter-with-polling.html

And Longroom is not giving them "equal" demographics -- just ACCURATE demographics. Just take it from this highly informative New York Times article -- a heavily liberal biased newspaper.

>There Are More White Voters Than People Think. That’s Good News for Trump.
nytimes.com/2016/06/10/upshot/there-are-more-white-voters-than-people-think-thats-good-news-for-trump.html?_r=0

Or take it from this other heavily liberal biased newspaper, the LA Times:

>Polls may actually underestimate Trump's support, study finds
latimes.com/politics/la-na-trump-polls-20151221-story.html

Holy shit lotta butthurt going on about the incoming Trump victory

You really think a shill site run by stormweenies is gonna put a black man on their imaginary poll staff?

I think it is the last refuge of hive mind losers who can't accept any flaws in their God Emperor.

Nothing wrong with earrings, but plugs are indicative of a cunt

>that Clinton surge

LMAO they're not even trying to be subtle. Trump must have them terrified.

>butt plugs
>cunt
Wrong orifice

I think if they were faking the whole thing they would include at least one shitskin in their pretend staff just to stop people like you from accusing them of being "stormweenies".

If they faked it, they really didn't try very hard.

shutup shill, no one ever said trump is perfect, he's far from fucking perfect but he's the best candidate we got.

cunt

>Not putting bum plugs in your pee hole

I don't know if the LA times is heavily liberal, they've been the poll that favored Trump the most.

Go home, refugee

>I don't know if the LA times is heavily liberal
Correct, you don't seem to know about that.

Only if you suck off a dog on livestream

>Democrats
>Dumber and less educated

Really makes you think.

I'm going to be honest, these polls are terrifying me. It's so much that they tell me Trump will lose, but that if I reject them I have to basically reject the entire media and won't have anyone to trust for information. However, with all the evidence that they're trying to fuck things up for Trump, I can't choose to trust them. We're flying blind until November 10th, I'm going to be pretty high strung until then.

My dog is male-to-female trans, is that ok??

You disgust me, you binary gender enforcing shitlord

Oh, I was just quoting the New York Times.

>Since Democrats are on average less well educated and less affluent than Republicans, and less likely to vote, a low turnout would be disproportionately Republican, as fewer occasional voters (who are disproportionately Democratic) participated.

is that pic supposed to mean there uneducated?

>(((Jew York Times)))

Probably a fake site, but if their claim that they predicted the last three elections within a 0.3 margin error is true, then I would take them seriously. But it's probably just click-bait bullshit.

Get lost, Torontofag, guy on the left is having a good time. Democrats shebeasts can't even figure out how to wax their upper lip

Fair. It looks like they are, but I'd heard it both ways.

Exactly, the Jew York Times. So if they're telling you Dems are less educated and less affluent than Republicans, you KNOW it's true.

I don't live in a city.

The very definition of a safe space.

wtf I hate gender now

How's that any worse than people with "verified" "credentials" if they are caught lying left and right?

do you work for CTR?

>Lives in a helicopter
And that's supposed to better somehow?

Dumbshit there are only 1% more dems than republicans, and they vastly undersample independents who are our largest group

They've always been liberal over the years and have already put out multiple hit jobs on Trump. One of their editors drove up to a dilapidated area near me (Oildale, CA) just to interview the most toothless hicks they could find and then label it "the closest thing to Trump country" in California. That's a hilarious lie and misrepresentation. This entire county is Trump country along with many other red counties in California. Did they come to the affluent areas, the middle class areas to interview anybody? No, not a single one. They want to portray poverty stricken meth addicts as the average Trump supporter.

People are getting sick of the level of propaganda routinely employed by the left and passed off as "news."

They literally didn't exist prior to 2016. All their previous elections are backmodeled. It's embarrassing.

Polls are definitely biased towards Democrats, even liberals admit this (another user made a post about that) however Longroom is definitely just stormweenies. I personally believe that Trump is at least slightly behind but not nearly as much as the polls depict (and certainly not what 538 depicts) as the polls definitely understated what the DNC email leak did and SEVERELY overstated what Trump's fumbles did.

Personally I am pretty meh on both of them but I really want conservative Supreme court justices rather than liberal ones so I want Trump over Clinton.

Ok there Mr. Schrödinger's shill

>say I want Trump over Hilldog
>say I think the polls definitely are biased
>I'm a shill
I thought I was on Sup Forums

You need to accept Trump as Jesus incarnate in order to not be a shill

>I like it because Trump is winning and I like Trump

I don't care if Trump is behind, I want honesty above all but those CTR horse fuckers were getting me hella mad spamming their corrupted polls none stop where Trump was down by ludicrous numbers.

Earings are fine and can be very elegant, they are a long standing tradition for the aristocratic race of man.

Though yes, plugs are fucking degenerate as FUCK

Right. I'm the shill. And yet Trump is changing the American landscape: he's turning red states blue. Keep plugging your ears and ignore all the signs of a sinking ship - you'll all disown Trump on election night anyway.

Keep telling yourself that Trumpfag. He is turning red states blue and you will all abandon him come election night just like you did to Romney.

>posts same thing twice, slightly different wording My Record feels Correcter already :^)

>posts twice thing same, slightly wording different
My Record feels Correcter already :^)

Fox news has a Liberal bias.

Yes? Trump isn't a true conservative.

Not a liberal bias. An anti-Trump bias. Did you watch their primary coverage of Trump? Incredibly negative. O'Reilly, Chris Stirewalt, Karl Rove, Megyn Kelly, Brit Hume, Bret Baier all 100% negative on Trump.

a fucking leaf

The most cucked site on the entire internet.

a fucking cross

...

I would say that Hannity as been positive. Megyn Kelly hates his gut though it oozes from her pores or wherever

Greg Gutfeld, Chris Wallace, Howard Kurtz, Meghan McCain, Charles Krauthammer, Neil Cavuto, Dana Perino...

all 100% anti-Trump and super obvious about it.
It's the only split network for sure. There's a few pro-Trump anchors. Greta seems to have come around eventually. But they're heavily outnumbered.

Its a pathetic trumpshill organization that has zero credibility

The longroom at least looks like credible bump after a convention and not some exponential growth model from a base rallying event.

> independents are the largest part of the elctorate
> polls routinely have them as 3rd
> nothing fishy

You really made me think with that one

It's an immediate sociopath flag if you're lying for money off of easily manipulable people.