>"Hillary Clinton is leading in the polls"
How come /pol/ isn't interested in this?
The American media is portraying these results as if Clinton is clearly winning, but we can see that Trump is doing a lot better among independents, which are the largest group of voters in the general election
DELET THIS
>>79181432
THE TRUTH MUST BE SHARED
Seriously though, why haven't I seen anyone call the media out on this?
>>79180855
Because pollsters know that you have to win among all voters, not just some random cherry-picked subset and that 'independent' is a bullshit classification.
>>79180050
Can someone combine and edit these into a neat little package like pic related?
>>79181889
Like Clinton polls do? Nate Silver made a career out of proving RNC polls wrong. Now the shoe is on the other foot.
Fucking christ STOP MAKING THREADS ABOUT POLLS
THERE SHOULD BE A FUCKING POLLS GENERAL FOR YOU FAGGOTS
>>79181889
But that's not entirely true is it?
Winning the vote in any state is dependent on getting the majority support. The majority of the American people are not registered Democrats or Republicans, they're Independent - i.e. registered with neither party. Since a Party nominee already has most of the support of their party and is very unlikely to gain support from the other party, the independents are the voters they will attempt to pull to their side (which is where the concept of Swing States come in - states where neither party is guaranteed to be the majority and independents decide the vote).
So to overrepresent Democrats, underrepresent Republicans and not highlight Independents, the pollsters/media are being disingenuous about the results of these polls.
>>79182266
what the fuck is wrong with you? this is the only poll thread that isn't shitposting
>>79181858
It would take a (((media))) outlet to do it. I feel like Trumps waiting to lull them into a false sense of security so that he can troll them into spilling the beans. It's how he's done it every time so far.
Trump wins among independents but most polls give them like 23% share.
They should be at least 29% based on 2012 exit polls, but most of the time these "independents" usually get lumped into one side or the other in polls.
>>79180050
Hey Netherlands, want to fuck at your place again?
>>79182555
Also these polls are way oversampling democrats, I doubt dem turnout is gonna be that high this year.
>>79182765
anon pls
>>79180050
how does one determine the margin of error?
>>79181858
Doesnt fit the narrative
>>79182925
come on bae, just like after ww2. we made so many beautiful children!
>>79180050
I think that most Trump supporters know this.
>>79183016
if preferred_candidate < disliked_candidate:
(disliked_candidate - preferred_candidate)+1%
else
(preferred_candidate - disliked_candidate)-1%
trump is going to win
>>79183323
what
>>79183016
You assume some general pattern of distribution (based on previous data collection), you fit the parameters of the pattern to your findings, you look at your sample size and you should be able to determine the margin of error at a given percentage.
When they say 2.5% of margin of error, they probably mean a 2.5% margin for 95% probability.
Meaning, assuming the given pattern and the sample size, you have 95% chance of the results being in the interval [value-2.5%, value+2.5%].
>>79183595
it's a joke, it means that the margin error either shows that the preferred candidate can still be winning or that they've secured the lead
>>79183641
>>79183713
noice
>>79182862
I doubt that as well, but we can't underestimate them.
the biggest things conservatives need to start doing is pulling the same sociopath tactics that the left does
we need to start accusing them of doing what we do. That's what they do. Say I go on tv "John Blokenstein embezzled your tax money for his gold course!!" (even though I am the one who did it) and there's a couple rallies for weeks, it goes through the news cycle, there seems to be hundreds of people demanding answers.
do you think John Blokenstein going on tv and saying "No, it was actually, Steven Ladheim" that would have any effect? No! The truth doesn't matter. What matters is getting the word out that your opponent has done the thing. Accuse them of doing it, even if you yourself do it.
conservatives are typically against this because "it's lying" or "it's hypocritical." No! Politics at this point is a competition, and it is your fuckin DIVINE DUTY to win
If there is power up for grabs, it is YOUR DUTY to get that power at all costs, less someone more evil than you gets it because you wouldn't psychologically allow yourself to.
>>79183174
>>79183129
>>79183016
>>79182925
>>79182555
>>79182369
>>79182266
>>79182123
Take some (you)s and read my post.
>opinion polls
Trump don't need no polls, he has meme magic on his side!
>>79180050
Was wondering why I kept having "poll results" jammed into my feed so fucking early before the race.
They need to start this early to disinfo people to make their numbers accurate.
Or to correct the record
>>79180855
>>79180093
>>79180050
>>79180130
>>79180157
>>79180176
>>79180217
>>79180194
Romney won independents by 5% and lost nationally by 4% you dumbass
>>79184308
Trump used polls to his favor, I think they've learned from it and are now using it against him.
They're fabricating polls favorable to Clinton to try and manipulate the voters into supporting her
>>79184323
well obviously its more important in the swing states, i've already said that earlier
>>79184323
all of these polls are total bullshit
everyone answers how they WOULD vote, only 50% of people DO vote
they always assume that everyone will vote in the same proportion that opinions happen
>Labour and Conservatives neck and neck
>Conservatives get majority
>Remain winning over leave
>Leave wins by 4%
If we assume that the opposite of the polls is the result, trump wins.
>>79184482
I think they are especially manipulating the polls right now because they want to cause trouble at the Republican national convention.
I think later on, they will make polls that are neck in neck, so the dems can act like the underdogs who are "JUST TRYING TO STOP TRUMP"
>>79184607
>British polls are the same as American polls
>>79184698
whatever they're trying to do, what they're doing is disgusting and someone needs to call them out on it. as a dutchie i can't really do much, but you americans can spread this to friends and family and possibly someone with more reach
>>79184607
hey britain, have you noticed this trend on /pol/, too?
>pre-brexit
>everyone claims "brexit will lose, it's ogre!!"
>brexit wins
>suddenly everyone is now claiming that brexit winning was on purpose and we should have voted remain
I really really wanted to convince myself that /pol/ wasn't just a majority population of le edgy alarmist contrarians
>>79184810
>>79184323
>if I post enough laughing faces, surely the opposition will weaken their position
why are you wasting your time like this?
Trump does better with independents, middle aged / old folks, and men. Hillary has far more support from younger people and niggers.
However, brexit showed that young people don't bother to vote and everyone knows niggers can't be bothered to vote.
Trump just has to win with independents and older people in Virginia or Pennsylvania and he wins the presidency
>>79184847
I've seen a huge surge in EU&Clinton positivity over the past 2 months. Maybe it's just summer shitposting, but it could be more malicious and planned than that.
>>79184841
any voice calling them out would appear weak and be drowned out
as long as Trump gets through the national convention, it's a good thing for us; it motivates normal americans to go out and vote
trust me, everyone who isn't plugged into the matrix completely is shitting their pants over Hillary, especially if they have read the new Demokrat party platform
like that Idaho thing "spreading falsehoods about this crime can be a federal crime"
thanks ministry of truth.
>>79180050
Brought to you by the same ppl who said "no way brexit will win".
>>79184323
Romney lost because Republicans stayed home, he was a complete failure of a canidate.
>>79185061
it is definitely trolls, but the trolls get their language from the nefarious shitposting entities
it's funny when people claim that "there is no way the CIA, or clinton campaign, would pay people to post here"
Oh? with the literally over a billion dollars in funding they have, you don't think they can spare 3 dollars an hour to some dudes in bangladesh to post a shitload of slide threads?
You've posted here alot before right?
I think it would only take 10 people to completely SHUTITDOWN
you can post what? 1 new thread every 2 minutes? every minute? 10 people could post 20 new threads a minute. Not to mention if they had virtual PC's on their PC's. That would be the most effective action to fulfill the prime directive, and frankly, that is why that's what we see. It would cost 30 bucks an hour. 30 bucks an hour to severely hinder the place where multiple twitter raids have effectively altered the narrative from what it was (((meant))) to be in the wake of habbenings
>>79185522
see >>79184073
it's pretty much confirmed at this point
>>79184953
Niggers get rallied to vote by free church bussing to the polls and BBQ after.
>>79185790
I am hoping that Trump has a ton of dirt on Hillary, and he is just going to release it fairly close to the elections, so that the Dems can't put Biden forth
I am really putting my hopes in Trump that he is (still) a brilliant strategist, and hasn't lost the edge in old age.
