IT'S HAPPENING

THE ABSOLUTE MADMAN!

Other urls found in this thread:

ig.ft.com/sites/brexit-polling/
ig.ft.com/sites/brexit-polling
cesrusc.org/election/
peoplespunditdaily.com/latest-polls/election-2016/us-presidential-election-daily-tracking-poll/
realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html
realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2004/president/us/general_election_bush_vs_kerry-939.html#polls
youtube.com/watch?v=QdpGd74DrBM
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Nobody should be surprised I'm expecting a landslide victory in November already. If there is one thing americans hate it is liars especially when they are more wealthy than them.

SHUT IT DOWN

watch how CTR shills show up pointing the "undecided" rate which are future trump voters anyway

eat shit ctr

The goyim know!! Shut it down!!

Did Hillary run out of rigged polls money???

oh man the OP that keeps posting this poll is going all out its alright though, I can ctrl+v too

inb4 CTR Shill

>LA Times constantly has them battling very close, Trump wins lots of polls in LA Times, more than Rasmussen Reports
>All other polls still showing a significant Clinton lead

>Historical Numbers from 2004, 2008, and 2012 all show the winning Candidates having a LOWER lead than Clinton has over Trump

Picture Related. Polls Do Not Lie.

Inb4 Brexit BREXIT REEE

Brexit was extremely close: ig.ft.com/sites/brexit-polling/

> polls do not lie

hello schlomo silvergoldstein

Fuck off shill. Polls do lie. Luckily we have one of the good ones telling the truth that Trump is actually winning. Fucking faggot.

JUST

kys faggot gypo

>No actual response to any of what I posted
>Literal Ad Hominem Attacks

Did I hurt your feefees :(

You wrote alot, but said nothing

What are you trying to convey exactly?

Polls are unreliable and nowadays bought and paid for?

>SHOCKER

Brexit was not close m8 Your site does no account for all media shilling and polls released
keep clinging to it.

we were all here m8 we all seen what happened you liberal fucks were as sure of yourself as you are here and look where it got you
HAHAHAHA

>ig.ft.com/sites/brexit-polling

A blog m8

...

>Brexit polls had a twelve point difference between online and phone polls
>Online showed a slight leave lead while phone showed 10 point remain lead
>This is likely due to the social undesirability of being a leave voter
>That's multiplied by 50 with Trump
>Almost every US poll is conducted by phone for some reason
>All except these ones which show the race as tied during the best time for Clinton:
cesrusc.org/election/
peoplespunditdaily.com/latest-polls/election-2016/us-presidential-election-daily-tracking-poll/
>The first is based on one of the most accurate 2012 election polls
>The second was the most accurate poll in 2014
>Both still use 2012 demographics though even though black turnout will be down and working-class white will be up
Stay nervous, shill.

Point A: LA Times has Trump tied or winning against Hillary since they were both Nominated, even a bit before. This poll shouldn't be a HYPE moment for anyone. Its the status quo, which has Trump losing in the overall picture.

Point B: The polls are not rigged. They never were. We went through this in 2012 too. Is this your first Amerifat Election, Hitler?

Its an aggregate for the Financial Times. Not a blog. Nice try though. Brexit was close for very long periods of time with ups and downs for both sides until the end. The few polls you saw on here in favor of one side or the other were what we like to call you shitposting. People, like the OP of this thread who keeps spamming this poll all over the damn site, are really good at it, I would think you would recognize it by now.

Did I hurt your feefees user :(

Triggered.

Oh, and here is some data from the UK 2015 election. It claimed the election was "too close to call". In the end, the Conservatives won by 7 points and absolutely crushed Labour.

>B-But muh polls!

Are you hard of reading? I just refuted your statement that polls don't lie. It's just that they're so skewed in Hillary's favor that even liberal rag LA times can't hide it anymore. In reality Trump is probably like 12 points ahead.

>dat "area of uncertainty"
Nothing's happening you dolt. Might just as well claim it on quantum fluctuations.

Factually incorrect. Rasmussen is the only one who uses the same Phone Polling Methods, and strange enough, they have Trump leading most of the time.

LA Times isn't liberal. Its a NATIONAL Poll not a STATE Poll. I am sure you are incapable of understanding that though if you think you have blown me the fuck out at all.

>The polls are not rigged. They never were.

Let me play devil's advocate. Let's say it was Trump that was winning all these polls and hillary was running to catch up. Would you claim the same things?

Do you think it's that crazy that media sources, which are owned by a handful of conglomerates, would purposefully fudge the numbers at the beginning and report it widely? Do you really place that much trust in the media and their interests to be honest if it works against them?

Trump receives a level of scrutiny that Hillary does not.

genuinely interested in your answer.

>LA Times isn't liberal.
>Most liberal city in America
>not liberal
I rest my case.

LAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANDSLIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIDE

Didn't Trump drop by like 7-8% a few days ago? Well it's only 3 months to the election so we can only know for sure then.

>pic unrelated

HOLY SHIT
CAN'T STUMP THE TRUMP
#CROOKEDHILLARY

I agree with you that Trump receives much more scrutiny than Shillary. I also agree that a select few (talking 5% of the polls) are biased. I am using multiple aggregate sites, with varying rules to determine if the polls are rigged. Considering both sites I use (538 and RCP) both have Trump consistently behind Hillary unless a Terrorist Attack happens I would say they are truthful. This is especially important to note, because as you sit here and spew how much you hate the media, they do nothing but HELP him by reporting on the Attacks. So if the polls and election really were rigged would they not just completely avoid that discussion?

The polls and election are not rigged. Trump is just unlikable.

The Poll is National. They call people all over the country and ask who people want. They get results. They post and parse the results in LA, where they are based.

Are you actually this dumb user?

It's LA Times that did it though you fucking faggot.

This message has been provided by Correct the Record.
"I'm Hillary Clinton and I approve this message."

What are you trying to say?

What the fuck are you saying?

Yes. Its the LA Times. The LA Times Pollsters use varying polling methods to get into contact with people all over the country. They ask who they support for the election. They parse the results of there findings in the LA Times, based in LA.

Trump lives in New York. Therefore he is a Liberal by your retarded logic user.

LA Times is a liberal newspaper you dumb fuck.

So, what I am hearing then, is that the polls are taken with a different methodology than several other polls?

They have ALWAYS had Trump ahead or tied with Hillary. ALWAYS. What the fuck are you trying to say you blithering retard? Them being based in LA and showcasing polling that is unbiased has nothing to do with anything. Literally nothing.

Kek is with us ?

Actually I don't "hate" the (((media))) I'm just aware that several large congloms have similar interests and similar holdings and their money would have a better time in a hillary presidency, as trump throws in way too much volatility for them to be okay. That's all.

So, If I'm summarising correctly, you think Hillary genuinely has that support, and the media bias is little, and Sup Forums is delusional thinking that Trump has more grassroots/silent majority support. Am I correct?

By the by, I don't think if both polls and elections were rigged they'd ignore it, they couldn't. How could you be an american outlet and not report daily anything related to the election?

I don't really care one way or another, but I don't trust in the ambivalence and good-nautredness of government goons invested in making sure another democrat becomes president. Not when the President's office and the democrats themselves support measures to suppress voter fraud, despite them saying for 8 (52?) years that "voter fraud is a non-issue that barely exists". That part seems fishy

>Brexit was extremely close

No it wasn't faget

realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

REEEEEEE
FUCK FUCK FUCK
DRUMPF
>DRUMPF
DRUMPF
>DRUMPF
DRUMPF
>DRUMPF
DRUMPF
>DRUMPF
DRUMPF
>DRUMPF
DRUMPF
>DRUMPF
DRUMPF
>DRUMPF
DRUMPF

They have Trump ahead because despite being a liberal rag they can't hide just how much he's ahead by. I'd say he's more like 18 pts ahead if LA Times is claiming he's 2 pts ahead.

>Polls are rigged
not because someone intentionally rigs them, but because all those fucktards have their pool of respondents who will participate, and in most cases those aren't representative. Failure quotas of 0.05 my ass, more like 0.45-0.80

Can I fugg Ivanka?

Don't be surprised that people on pol haven't taken one stats class, let alone several.

To respond to your retardation more. CTRL+F for them in 2004

realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2004/president/us/general_election_bush_vs_kerry-939.html#polls

WOAH. The polling had them tied or Kerry leading. Its almost like its the methodology they use.

>Sup Forums is delusional thinking that Trump has more grassroots/silent majority support. Am I correct?

You are absolutely correct. You can feel free to screencap this and laugh at me in some montage in November, but I am about 95% sure Clinton already won just because of Trump's perception.

In polling, yes it was you double nigger. Actual results try and predict winners, not complete results. If you want that you use, in America's Case, Prediction services like 538, which have a pretty alright track record.

They really are representative bud. Polls do not lie and they never have.

Can anyone tell me how many US election polls are internet vs phone?

BTW I can tell you why phone polls were so wrong during Brexit - pollsters employed asians living in London to poll conservatives living in the shires (typical brexit voters). The only other asians from "London" who call at random like that are scammers. Pollsters really don't understand their own demographics at all desu senpai.

Kerry lost because he was a Mormon cuck. No whites voted for him.

I hear that. I don't necessarily agree but I understand. It's still August, so I wouldn't feel comfortable saying any candidate has it in the bag just yet. Thanks for being reasonable and answering my questions.

Too often this board is a sound-off for sperg reactions and displays of name-calling autism.

Some poll sites will bullshit otherwise.

1. There's a new terror attack in October
2. New Hillary e-mail leaks in October

Trump wins

If you use an aggregate like RCP or 538 they typically list poll names that they base things on. If you search up the polls they tell you how they get information. In the US typically only Rasmussen Reports uses Landline Telephones and Small Predetermined groups for polling. The strange part is, however, that unlike the UK, the opposite side of the political spectrum tend to over inflate the Rasmussen Polls. Most other polls, as far as I know, this includes the one presented in OP, include a number of source types of random and predetermined groups at the same time of landline, cellular, and internet polling. None of these polls can be rigged unless someone is physically changing the results, which would only hurt methodologies, or if someone is holding someone at gunpoint forcing people into a response, which is unreasonable because most polls "interview" at least 500 people all over the country.

You are completely missing my point that they showed him tied or winning most of the race, just like Trump. its there polling style causing his minor lead.

I would like to thank you actually for being the reasonable one. Threads like these are always full of people calling me a shill when I am just being practical.

Romney should have actually won if it wasn't for rampant voter/election fraud.

>they do nothing but help him by reporting on the attacks
>if the polls and election really were rigged would they not just completely avoid that discussion

They can't simply not report the attacks. The attacks are too high profile and public is very interested in hearing about them.

Even if one or two of them decided not to broadcast anything about it they would lose viewers and advertisement revenue to those that did.

The only accused cases of Voter Fraud in 2012 were in Florida and SURPRISE after much investigation it ended in nothing because it simply wasn't true. I like your new tactic by the way, moving the goal post is a good one to keep people on there toes.

If that were the case then none of the stations would ever reveal Identities, Ethnicity, or anything relating to the attackers. Even CNN, in all its race baiting glory, doesn't do that.

>SURPRISE after much investigation it ended in nothing
It's because Romney was too cucked to push the issue. Did you see how he excoriated Trump for suggesting that the election could be rigged?

Actually. The Republican did push the issue, its how the investigation happened. It was a big happening back in 2012 on Sup Forums I remember. I was here. Everyone kept saying the voting machines, if i remember correctly in Miami, were rigged. It ended up not being true at all. It had nothing to do with Romney and his beta status. He lost by much more than Florida too. He excoriated Trump for it because Trump is pushing the issue about POLLING, we aren't even at the final step and Trump is already crying its rigged. He isn't doing it because he thinks it is either. He is doing it because he is trying to gain sympathy votes. Donald Trump has gone on record as saying Gallup Polls were great when they were giving him a lead over Clinton. Ever since they stopped giving him leads they have been accused of being rigged. Oddly enough, Trump seems to act a lot like this board. The second a single poll shows Trump leading the polls are not rigged and vice versa. Its annoying and untrue.

>if that were the case then none of the stations would ever reveal Identities

They're compelled to report on these events due to a desire for advertisement revenue.

Once they start giving over a portion of their news cycle to them they're in a competition with the other outlets to provide details.

If they have details and choose to withhold them while other stations are reporting about it they look like they aren't doing a bad job and lose viewers.

Ah, so you are saying that they aren't biased then and they are reporting info as they should so they keep viewers and ratings?

What about this?
youtube.com/watch?v=QdpGd74DrBM
Why does the Romney family have ties to the voting machine producers?
Why does nboody care? Oh right, because Obama won anyway.
It's time to give up your voting machines. They have no advantage over ballots. Their whole existence proves that somebody wants to rig it.

will you win?

Amazing how polls become relevant and trustworthy again once Trump starts winning.

That is actually a touch screen malfunction and that was a widely reported on video. The booth was fixed if I remember correctly. If this happens where you poll then you tell the people running the show and they will direct you to another booth.

This isn't selecting it POST or rigging it. This is an obvious malfunction. Huge difference.

For the record, when I voted in 2012, my machine was just fine and I was able to press each button and get the candidate I wanted.

Will Hillary die before the election?

No. These are particular things which they are compelled to do and will do regardless of whether or not it helps Trump.

If they are biased against Trump it may very well show in other ways, but they won't risk their bottom line for it.

Fucking finally, now let's hope he keeps this lead until the first debate

So what other evidence to you have to support your world view?

Keep in mind linking specific anchors statements or talkshows hosted on news networks (EG: O'Reily) is a pretty bad practice as each person has a right to there opinion and a personal opinion is not a media conspiracy. Another thing to keep in mind; Hillary or Trump owning a specific media group or company is not a sign of corruption. You have to show me direct proof of some form of corruption or bias. If you can do that, you can have your cake.

>Brexit was extremely close

What is the point of a voting machine? At best it's just extremely expensive paper. But there are so many ways they can be rigged, it's just unacceptable.

>there are literally Crooked shills on Sup Forums
I think CTR got a lot more than 6 mil. Probably back table type shit.

Hi user who didn't read the rest of the thread. We are talking about the polling numbers, which were all very close, much closer than the US Election Polling. Not the actual Brexit end results, which were not close. The purpose of polling is to determine a winner, not determine the margin by which that victor wins.

To be fair, my state is using paper this year and did in 2008 too. I agree it is less susceptible to cheating but there is 0 Proof that any general election polling was rigged in 2012, just as, as far as I know, there is 0 proof of any media polling is rigged.

pic related

CTR is the one spamming this poll so then they can accuse Sup Forums of having a double standard later. At least it's what I would do if I wanted to undermine belief in rigged polls.

I haven't presented a world view.

My singular point was that your argument about news outlets reporting on attacks being proof that they aren't biased against Trump does not follow.

I do fine it quite interesting that you have constructed some position which you feel I am arguing from and feel it is appropriate to make absurd demands from me to support it followed by smug remarks about my having cake.

will i ever find a grill?

I know, they gotta change the polling strategy again.

Like after the DNC.

These goys won't notice.

Can I get some of your money?

>pic related
not an argument

>$0.15 has been deposited into your account

This is really what you are doing on a Sunday morning? Don't you get a day off?

SCHLONGED

user, I really hate to do this, but CTR doesn't post here. There is not a single shred of proof. The original group that claimed to be doing it was found out to be a group of otherchan shitposters from otherchan Sup Forums and beyond that every pro-hillary anti-trump post without actual fact backing them up, is just very obvious shitposting.

>Fucking captchas getting out of hand because of all the posting
>HURR select all the apartment buildings
>all of the pictures are high rises

Nothing smug about it. If you can show there is actual media bias, go for it. I am not an average Sup Forumstard my view can be swayed.

Neither is what you said you little shit.

>there is 0 Proof that any general election polling was rigged in 2012
I think the state should prove to the voters that it's not rigged, not the other way around. And just by having voting machines they are making the process a lot less transparent.

Are you serious?

This is the definition of delusion.

I am actually having a great Sunday user. I went for an early morning run and got to pet a cat. He followed me till I was about a mile from home!

That really isn't how it works in our systems for judgement in the US. Regardless of that, the election is typically determined by the Electoral College anyway, regardless of popular vote, although as far as I know Popular vote has always matched with the college's decision, 2000 Election included.

not an argument

reported

>user, I really hate to do this, but CTR doesn't post here.
What sites do they post on? Think yourself which sites you would target in their place. reddit, twitter, facebook, Sup Forums and mainstream news sites comments sections would be at the top of my list.

>more than 1m votes difference
>close

ok

Am I gonna make it?

This place isn't fucking reddit. Here it's a free market of ideas. The good ones get bumped and the shitty ones get refuted into obscurity.

The only reason anyone calls people shills or CTR is because most people come here to literally shill/troll rather than refute our points. It's usually shit like "DRUMPH BTFO" or slide threads. We aren't going to take you seriously if you won't. Put up a real argument and you'll get a serious response.

>user, I really hate to do this, but CTR doesn't post here

Oh boy, you just couldn't hold on not exposing yourself as CTR, huh? Shame, you were doing quite well up to now.

Alright user. Have a SAFE and SHELTERED day :^)
They target Social Media. They mention that directly in there shitty little mission statement. Sup Forums is fully anonymous except for namefags. It is also known to the MSM as a Nazi Hub. Why would you come here and try and convince people you believe to be Nazi's to vote Hillary? user it makes no sense. Twitter, Reddit, Instagram, Facebook, Youtube, even MSM Comment Sections are almost fully named at this point. They are also not really that "violent" in the way they think. It makes no sense for any group, other than MAYBE the JIDF to target Sup Forums, specifically Sup Forums

See

>Have a SAFE and SHELTERED day :^)
where are you arguments?

This is it. We are doing it. God bless you Sup Forums

c...can i come back to trump generals.... i hate to be here when he's in a slump........

if the good one gets bumped then the free market of ideas would be the first idea to be gotten rid of.

will my girlfreiend bitch if i go shoot today instead of go to some party with her?

Trump lagging in polls is a good thing anons. It will make millions of dem voters complacent/too confident and will stay home on election day.

What are yours user? You haven't presented any. You just called me a shill. Give me something to argue with you about and I will do it. No point in responding to your accusation because there is no way I can prove who I am without showing you actual information that I am not comfortable putting on Sup Forums. Would it help you if I said I live in a Red State and voted Romney in 2012? What to do you wanna talk about user?

What do you want me to argue user? You guys are not presenting an argument to any of my post other than calling me a shill, which is not an argument, its an ad hominem attack.

>They target Social Media

It's "we", user. You're really not fooling anyone anymore.

>It is also known to the MSM as a Nazi Hub

The MSM name-drops us quite often recently. Makes sense CTR would send 10-15 of you dedicated shitposters here to disrupt the place, not convince anyone. Though, I imagine if you were relegated to Sup Forums, your boss probably doesn't like you very much. ;^)

>if you can show there is actual media bias

I have no desire to do that. I was merely pointing out that one particular argument of yours did not logically follow.

Instead of addressing my point you contrived some bizarre world view, ascribed it to me, and then demanded I support it in order to receive a reward from you.

Sooo.. What pol is this, Is this state or national?

Never gonna make it brah

Having your cake is an expression user. I apologize for misunderstanding what you were saying. You are right, I was misplacing my argument into the wrong area. You are right.

If you wanna have a discussion, go for it. Using Ad Hominem to attack someone who views things differently doesn't help anyone and just puts this thread on the front page.

This is a National Poll conducted by the LA Times. The LA Times uses varying methods included Phone Calls, both landline and cell, along with internet polling of random and preselected people to get results. In the past 6 months they have had Hillary and Trump tied or with either one 1 point ahead.

Basically the poll has always been like this but Sup Forumsacks are so desperate for a decent poll that shows Trump leading they latched onto it.