[johnforbes]

Pretty much every poll but CNN's said Trump won.

CNN sampled 41 percent Democrats to 26 percent Republicans, and this method allowed them to say Hillary won.

The problem for CNN was that almost everybody else reached the opposite conclusion.

[Clownkicker]

Then stop paying so much attention to polls, johnny.
That's so simple even your wasted brain should be able to understand it.

You claim they don't matter any more, but you keep harping on how important the whole thing is.
The only people who care about them are RealTool, Insipid, and elklindo.
Does that tell you ANYTHING at all, fer cripes sake?

But you still started another thread about things that don't matter. :shock:
Do you really think Trump or Clinton will win or lose based on one poll or ten polls?
Let it go already.

[Grog]

Good lord, Forbes. :lol:

Even Fox's own Prince of Darkness, Charles Krauthammer, knows those online snap polls are utterly meaningless because you've got people like JustFreedManIntrepidMe who vote countless times.

http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/09/27/k ... mp-clinton" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[johnforbes]

No, those online polls prevent multiple voting.

For example, Grog has logged on 3,148,198 times under 24,180 different logins.

That sort of lunacy is prevented.

But nothing prevents CNN's dishonesty in tilting the vote by pretending, e.g., that blacks will vote for Hillary as overwhelmingly as they did for 1/2 black Obama.

[Grog]

No. Once again you prove yourself to be a liar or an ignoramus or, most accurately, both. :lol:

Most of the time on online polls you people can click to your voter fraud content. Some of them give a cookie to block conservatives from voting again and again, but all you have to is delete the cookie. Even the idiot Trump Deplorables, as genuinely dumb as you people are, have obviously figured that out, probably via Teamail. lol

[johnforbes]

No, once again Grog is an ignorant liar.

Or an ignorant person who lies.

Or a liar with little intellect.

Any way you slice it, Grog's post was baloney.

[Grog]

No, again.

Even the conservative archfiend (or maybe it's archfiend conservative) Charles Krauthammer knows the transparent stunt you people tried to pull. I gave you the Fox link to him acknowledging it. :lol:

[johnforbes]

Be serious, Grog.

You know, and I know, that no real person is named "Krauthammer."

Admit it, you registered as "Krauthammer" at cheap motels all throughout the 1960s.

[Grog]

There you go again, Forbes. Your jackassery is as relentless as it is nakedly buffoonish. :lol:

Here's even more icing on the cake from Fox. (It seems now that serial sexual predator Roger Ailes has been fired, they might be trying to become Fair and Balanced.)

http://www.businessinsider.com/fox-news ... dge-2016-9" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"A Fox News executive sent a memo to television producers and the politics team on Tuesday afternoon reminding employees that unscientific online polls "do not meet our editorial standards."

The online polls must be pretty bad if they don't rise to the level of Fox's "standards". :lol:

[johnforbes]

Grog has almost made me want to own a sailboat called "Naked Buffoon."

Alas, that would be the name of Bill Clinton's sailboat.

[Grog]

O no! :o

Even The Weekly Standard is picking on Forbes and Dumb Donnie.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/which-pos ... le/2004568" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



:lol:

[johnforbes]

The point, of course, is that the "scientific" polls vastly over-sample Democrats.

CNN's, e.g., gave 41 percent to Dems and 26 to Repubs, naturally resulting in a Clinton "win."

Ask yourself:

1) Are blacks as loyal to Hillary as they were to bro Barry?

2) Does anybody like Hillary? Even Dems dislike her.

[Clownkicker]

What dimwitted johnforbes continues to fail to understand is that the polls are about who voters are going to VOTE FOR, not who voters "like".

What dimwitted johnforbes in his la-la-land of denial still doesn't get is that Republicans don't like Trump either.

[johnforbes]

No, most polls thus far attempt to measure registered voters, not likely.

But there are many problems with polls.

Who answers landline calls from poll people?

[Clownkicker]

What difference do land lines make, johnny? People who have landlines still answer them.
I know this for a fact because I have one and I answer it.

Methodology has been adapted to deal with random calling of cell phone numbers.

You keep presenting landlines as some sort of insurmountable problem when they aren't.

[johnforbes]

You would pick up a landline and then answer, question by question, a poll?

These days, who does that?

You see what I mean, that's some sort of odd self-selection going on there, eh?