Serious Question

This morning I saw this and thought that it just couldn't be true.

Rasmussen Reports ‏@Rasmussen_Poll  3h3 hours ago
#WhiteHouseWatch: #Trump 43%, #Clinton 41%, #Johnson 6%, #Stein 2% http://tinyurl.com/zcj4xw6  #Election2016

According to 538.com Rasmussen has an in house R bias of 2.0%.   So based on that the race is essentially tied.   NBC had a
poll out in the last couple days that showed a very close race too unlike most of the state level polls.

Then this comes into my Twitter this morning....

Ted Carroll ‏@mediainvestors  2h2 hours ago
Black Likely Voters for TRUMP @Rasmussen_Poll
Oct 3 - 9%
Oct 6 - 12%
Oct 7 - 13%
Oct 10 - 14%
Oct 11 - 19%
Oct 12 - 19%
Oct 13 - 24% !

How can that be true?   That said, suspend reality for a moment and if we accept it is true....does anyone have any serious conjecture on what would be driving that?

it absolutely could be true. Probably isn't, but could be. Remember, mainstream media has long been in Trump's corner and they need a close race.

and, as for what could be driving that, Americans are stupid.

Considering Trump's views on women abv little girls it appears we are trending towards a radical Islamic state.

kingstonlake wrote:Considering Trump's views on women abv little girls it appears we are trending towards a radical Islamic state.

And Black voters like that? I really really can't think of a plausible thing that's changed that would drive black voters to Trump.

The only conjecture I have so far is that there is some sort of sympathy thing going on for the beating he's taking?

kingstonlake wrote:Considering Trump's views on women abv little girls it appears we are trending towards a radical Islamic state.

proving once again what I've been saying all along.. religion is very dangerous.

It's not the whole what do you have to lose thing ? If dems are always spouting off on equality and improving their lives but never actually doing it ...?

Reminder: this is where I get my news. don't fuck with other outlets besides swill.

LooseGoose wrote:This morning I saw this and thought that it just couldn't be true.

Rasmussen Reports ‏@Rasmussen_Poll  3h3 hours ago
#WhiteHouseWatch: #Trump 43%, #Clinton 41%, #Johnson 6%, #Stein 2% http://tinyurl.com/zcj4xw6  #Election2016

According to 538.com Rasmussen has an in house R bias of 2.0%.   So based on that the race is essentially tied.   NBC had a
poll out in the last couple days that showed a very close race too unlike most of the state level polls.

Then this comes into my Twitter this morning....

Ted Carroll ‏@mediainvestors  2h2 hours ago
Black Likely Voters for TRUMP @Rasmussen_Poll
Oct 3 - 9%
Oct 6 - 12%
Oct 7 - 13%
Oct 10 - 14%
Oct 11 - 19%
Oct 12 - 19%
Oct 13 - 24% !

How can that be true?   That said, suspend reality for a moment and if we accept it is true....does anyone have any serious conjecture on what would be driving that?

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/post-debate-poll-shows-clinton-holding-9-point-lead-over-n664541

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:
Reminder: this is where I get my news. don't fuck with other outlets besides swill.

hey man, we're as accurate as any other mainstream media news outlet out there..

Robert J Sakimano wrote:it absolutely could be true. Probably isn't, but could be. Remember, mainstream media has long been in Trump's corner and they need a close race.

and, as for what could be driving that, Americans are stupid.

I think part of their (Rasmussen) polling is done by on line survey.  Not sure how accurate that would be.  

Their poll is grade C+, which I'm guessing is some sort of measure of how accurate it might be.

NigelUno wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:it absolutely could be true. Probably isn't, but could be. Remember, mainstream media has long been in Trump's corner and they need a close race.

and, as for what could be driving that, Americans are stupid.

I think part of their (Rasmussen) polling is done by on line survey.  Not sure how accurate that would be.  

Their poll is grade C+, which I'm guessing is some sort of measure of how accurate it might be.

yeah, Rasmussen is a conservative, right wing poll - advertised on Fox News and right wing hate websites. So, kinda like certain people here at tSwill, you can only take them seriously to a certain extent.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

NigelUno wrote:

I think part of their (Rasmussen) polling is done by on line survey.  Not sure how accurate that would be.  

Their poll is grade C+, which I'm guessing is some sort of measure of how accurate it might be.

yeah, Rasmussen is a conservative, right wing poll - advertised on Fox News and right wing hate websites. So, kinda like certain people here at tSwill, you can only take them seriously to a certain extent.

I kind of doubt that black voters for Trump have gone from (roughly) 1/10 to 1/4 in the last 10 days.

Just sayin'.

NigelUno wrote:
I think part of their (Rasmussen) polling is done by on line survey.  Not sure how accurate that would be.  

Their poll is grade C+, which I'm guessing is some sort of measure of how accurate it might be.

I pointed out in my post that they have an in house R+2 bias so I wasn't hiding anything.

But the responses here are nearly proof again that you can't have a discussion here at all.

I was asking about the black voter #'s in part 2 and so far I don't think there's been a single response to that question.

NigelUno wrote:I kind of doubt that black voters for Trump have gone from (roughly) 1/10 to 1/4 in the last 10 days.

Just sayin'.

Sorry if this was too tough for you.

How can that be true?   That said, suspend reality for a moment

I responded to that question goose.

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:I responded to that question goose.

You did. Thank you.

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:It's not the whole what do you have to lose thing ? If dems are always spouting off on equality and improving their lives but never actually doing it ...?

It would be amazing if Trump were breaking through with that message when no other candidate has been able to.

NigelUno wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:yeah, Rasmussen is a conservative, right wing poll - advertised on Fox News and right wing hate websites. So, kinda like certain people here at tSwill, you can only take them seriously to a certain extent.

I kind of doubt that black voters for Trump have gone from (roughly) 1/10 to 1/4 in the last 10 days.

Just sayin'.

like all of the mainstream media, Rasmussen likely stacked the polls in order to frame it's results in a better light for Trump, especially with the groundswell of African American support he's historically attracted.

LooseGoose wrote:This morning I saw this and thought that it just couldn't be true.

Rasmussen Reports ‏@Rasmussen_Poll  3h3 hours ago
#WhiteHouseWatch: #Trump 43%, #Clinton 41%, #Johnson 6%, #Stein 2% http://tinyurl.com/zcj4xw6  #Election2016

According to 538.com Rasmussen has an in house R bias of 2.0%.   So based on that the race is essentially tied.   NBC had a
poll out in the last couple days that showed a very close race too unlike most of the state level polls.

Then this comes into my Twitter this morning....

Ted Carroll ‏@mediainvestors  2h2 hours ago
Black Likely Voters for TRUMP @Rasmussen_Poll
Oct 3 - 9%
Oct 6 - 12%
Oct 7 - 13%
Oct 10 - 14%
Oct 11 - 19%
Oct 12 - 19%
Oct 13 - 24% !

How can that be true?   That said, suspend reality for a moment and if we accept it is true....does anyone have any serious conjecture on what would be driving that?

Maybe they manipulated the definition of likely voter. How likely voter is defined can vary from poll to poll. I feel like that is a typo or an error, but could otherwise be some serious manipulation.

I like Nate Silver's method of using multiple polls that includes outliers like the USC poll.

Rasmussen had Romney winning four years s ago with an Ohio surge and historically their methodology has predicted outcomes that didn't come to fruition.

Before it's over Trump will have closed the popular vote gap but will lose too many states. He 's not going to overcome the gender gap. If only men voted Trump wins easily but that electoral map still loses to the same map if only women voted.

LooseGoose wrote:

NigelUno wrote:
I think part of their (Rasmussen) polling is done by on line survey.  Not sure how accurate that would be.  

Their poll is grade C+, which I'm guessing is some sort of measure of how accurate it might be.

I pointed out in my post that they have an in house R+2 bias so I wasn't hiding anything.

But the responses here are nearly proof again that you can't have a discussion here at all.

I was asking about the black voter #'s in part 2 and so far I don't think there's been a single response to that question.

I didn't say YOU were hiding anything.

And my "serious conjecture" on those black voter %'s is that they aren't accurate (which I thought I clearly explained in a post).

Sorry if that was too tough for you to understand.

LooseGoose wrote:

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:I responded to that question goose.

You did. Thank you.

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:It's not the whole what do you have to lose thing ? If dems are always spouting off on equality and improving their lives but never actually doing it ...?

It would be amazing if Trump were breaking through with that message when no other candidate has been able to.

It would be amazing...if you suspend reality.

GRR Spartan wrote:I like Nate Silver's method of using multiple polls that includes outliers like the USC poll.

Rasmussen had Romney winning four years s ago with an Ohio surge and historically their methodology has predicted outcomes that didn't come to fruition.

Before it's over Trump will have closed the popular vote gap but will lose too many states. He 's not going to overcome the gender gap. If only men voted Trump wins easily but that electoral map still loses to the same map if only women voted.

Nate has it going on..

plus he's a proud graduate of East Lansing High School.