Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Presidential Polls - State by State
Author Message
Max Power Offline
Not Rod Carey
*

Posts: 10,059
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation: 261
I Root For: NIU, Bradley
Location: Peoria
Post: #61
RE: Presidential Polls - State by State
(06-30-2016 12:44 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  
(06-30-2016 12:34 PM)Max Power Wrote:  Nate Silver and his team on Twitter say they see no reason to discount the poll. In particular, Nate says that in a 7%-Clinton lead environment these polls aren't even outliers with the Margin of Error. Another person on his team said that other swing state polls have had long response times and no one objected, probably because the results were a tight race. Furthermore, they believe the polling firm is a perfectly fine organization.

Realclearpolitics is a right wing organization.

all you do is run your twat with that clapper.....your avAtar says it all...your weakness in prose says more...

you never explain a position of matter....

you're a simple 12 yr old w/o a clue

well done....it must be long enough to reach both bung-holies-holes....we call that the 'gag effect'....

disclaimer: poll thread does deserve op-ed....however, that's why the real gay folks create poll threads....

This from the author of the site's barely coherent stream of consciousness rants? I'll take it as a compliment.
06-30-2016 01:28 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Max Power Offline
Not Rod Carey
*

Posts: 10,059
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation: 261
I Root For: NIU, Bradley
Location: Peoria
Post: #62
RE: Presidential Polls - State by State
(06-30-2016 01:27 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  
(06-30-2016 01:24 PM)Max Power Wrote:  
(06-30-2016 01:16 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(06-30-2016 12:34 PM)Max Power Wrote:  Nate Silver and his team on Twitter say they see no reason to discount the poll. In particular, Nate says that in a 7%-Clinton lead environment these polls aren't even outliers with the Margin of Error. Another person on his team said that other swing state polls have had long response times and no one objected, probably because the results were a tight race. Furthermore, they believe the polling firm is a perfectly fine organization.

Realclearpolitics is a right wing organization.

You must be a Crooked Hillary supporter with your lies about everything that doesn't support your views 100% being a "vast right wing" conspiracy.

Calling realclearpoltics a right wing organization is either a lie on your part or an effort to win the award for the most ridiculous post of the month.

They are balanced. Its hard to find an article without one with the opposite point of view also on there.

Uh the founders of the site ******* admit it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RealClearPolitics

Philosophy[edit]
In an interview with the Chicago Tribune, McIntyre said, "We're trying to pull together the best political stories, op-eds, news analyses, editorials out there. The proliferation of content is enormous. Part of what we're trying to do is distill it in a clear, simple way for people who don't have hours to spend searching the Net".[13] He told the Chicago Sun-Times that RealClearPolitics strives to feature "serious intellectual pieces" and that they're "not looking for the over-the-top, vitriolic, red-meat craziness on either side".[14]

Patrick Stack of Time magazine has described the site's commentary section as "right-leaning".[15] The site has been described as being run by conservatives, and containing "opinion pieces from multiple media sources".[16] In 2009 RealClearPolitics was described as a weblog "in the conservative pantheon" by Richard Davis (OF OXFORD).[17][18]

In an interview with the conservative magazine Human Events, (SITE FOUNDER) McIntyre described the philosophy behind the Web site as based on "freedom" and "common-sense values". Said Bevan, "We think debate on the issues is a very important thing. We post a variety of opinions". He further stated, "we have a frustration all conservatives have", which is "the bias in media against conservatives, religious conservatives, [and] Christian conservatives".[3]

In a 2001 article for Princeton Alumni Weekly, which noted that "The articles selected invariably demonstrate McIntyre and Bevan's political bent, about which they are unabashedly forthcoming." McIntyre said, "I'm not really a die-hard Republican because my interests are less on social issues, more on taxing and spending...But I definitely don't want the government telling me what to do with my property...Nevertheless, any political junkie—even a liberal—would enjoy our site because the topics we choose are current."[19]

RealClearPolitics was listed among conservative political weblogs in a 2005 conference paper on mapping the political blogosphere by Robert Ackland of the Australian Centre for Social Research.[20]

This doesn't make it bias. It is a good site to read articles and check on polling.

That doesn't make it non biased. Look, I've read RCP for years. And I agree it's a good place to check articles and polling. But their selection of polling and the house-published articles betray a right wing bent, sometimes very clearly. Guys like Carl Cannon and Sean Trende don't take pains to hide them.
06-30-2016 01:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,074
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3251
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #63
RE: Presidential Polls - State by State
(06-30-2016 01:27 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  
(06-30-2016 01:24 PM)Max Power Wrote:  
(06-30-2016 01:16 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(06-30-2016 12:34 PM)Max Power Wrote:  Nate Silver and his team on Twitter say they see no reason to discount the poll. In particular, Nate says that in a 7%-Clinton lead environment these polls aren't even outliers with the Margin of Error. Another person on his team said that other swing state polls have had long response times and no one objected, probably because the results were a tight race. Furthermore, they believe the polling firm is a perfectly fine organization.

Realclearpolitics is a right wing organization.

You must be a Crooked Hillary supporter with your lies about everything that doesn't support your views 100% being a "vast right wing" conspiracy.

Calling realclearpoltics a right wing organization is either a lie on your part or an effort to win the award for the most ridiculous post of the month.

They are balanced. Its hard to find an article without one with the opposite point of view also on there.

Uh the founders of the site ******* admit it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RealClearPolitics

Philosophy[edit]
In an interview with the Chicago Tribune, McIntyre said, "We're trying to pull together the best political stories, op-eds, news analyses, editorials out there. The proliferation of content is enormous. Part of what we're trying to do is distill it in a clear, simple way for people who don't have hours to spend searching the Net".[13] He told the Chicago Sun-Times that RealClearPolitics strives to feature "serious intellectual pieces" and that they're "not looking for the over-the-top, vitriolic, red-meat craziness on either side".[14]

Patrick Stack of Time magazine has described the site's commentary section as "right-leaning".[15] The site has been described as being run by conservatives, and containing "opinion pieces from multiple media sources".[16] In 2009 RealClearPolitics was described as a weblog "in the conservative pantheon" by Richard Davis (OF OXFORD).[17][18]

In an interview with the conservative magazine Human Events, (SITE FOUNDER) McIntyre described the philosophy behind the Web site as based on "freedom" and "common-sense values". Said Bevan, "We think debate on the issues is a very important thing. We post a variety of opinions". He further stated, "we have a frustration all conservatives have", which is "the bias in media against conservatives, religious conservatives, [and] Christian conservatives".[3]

In a 2001 article for Princeton Alumni Weekly, which noted that "The articles selected invariably demonstrate McIntyre and Bevan's political bent, about which they are unabashedly forthcoming." McIntyre said, "I'm not really a die-hard Republican because my interests are less on social issues, more on taxing and spending...But I definitely don't want the government telling me what to do with my property...Nevertheless, any political junkie—even a liberal—would enjoy our site because the topics we choose are current."[19]

RealClearPolitics was listed among conservative political weblogs in a 2005 conference paper on mapping the political blogosphere by Robert Ackland of the Australian Centre for Social Research.[20]

This doesn't make it bias. It is a good site to read articles and check on polling.

#1 Those links are all 10-15 years old.
#2 They have articles from across the spectrum and a balance of right and left. And they carry polls from a huge number of pollsters, including all the major ones.
06-30-2016 01:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Max Power Offline
Not Rod Carey
*

Posts: 10,059
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation: 261
I Root For: NIU, Bradley
Location: Peoria
Post: #64
RE: Presidential Polls - State by State
It's also in the way they frame the information. For example, they show PPP results but always remember to put a "(D)" next to them, to remind people it's a Democratic polling firm. Which is fine! But they neglect to do so with Rasmussen and other GOP polling firms. You don't see "( R )" next to anything. You can also tell by the pictures of Obama they use, and the exclusively right wing cartoons they feature.

Again, not to say it's useless, even for liberals. I can find a Paul Krugman link that's useful and look for the most recent polls. But you have to be kidding me if you really think they play it straight down the middle, especially if you're a Dem. The bias isn't in your face like with Drudge, but it's clearly there.
(This post was last modified: 06-30-2016 01:36 PM by Max Power.)
06-30-2016 01:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dawgitall Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,052
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 195
I Root For: ECU/ASU/NCSU
Location:
Post: #65
RE: Presidential Polls - State by State
There is another poll out today. It is from IBD/TIPP.

Trump 40 Clinton 44 H2H (C +4)
Trump 36 Clinton 37 Johnson 9 Stein 5 (C+1)
06-30-2016 01:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dawgitall Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,052
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 195
I Root For: ECU/ASU/NCSU
Location:
Post: #66
RE: Presidential Polls - State by State
(06-30-2016 01:36 PM)Max Power Wrote:  It's also in the way they frame the information. For example, they show PPP results but always remember to put a "(D)" next to them, to remind people it's a Democratic polling firm. Which is fine! But they neglect to do so with Rasmussen and other GOP polling firms. You don't see "( R )" next to anything. You can also tell by the pictures of Obama they use, and the exclusively right wing cartoons they feature.

Again, not to say it's useless, even for liberals. I can find a Paul Krugman link that's useful and look for the most recent polls. But you have to be kidding me if you really think they play it straight down the middle, especially if you're a Dem. The bias isn't in your face like with Drudge, but it's clearly there.

It just doesn't concern me. We all have to think critically when we read anything.
(This post was last modified: 06-30-2016 01:42 PM by dawgitall.)
06-30-2016 01:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
green Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,198
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 389
I Root For: Miami
Location:
Post: #67
RE: Presidential Polls - State by State
(06-30-2016 01:36 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  There is another poll out today. It is from IBD/TIPP.

Trump 40 Clinton 44 H2H (C +4)
Trump 36 Clinton 37 Johnson 9 Stein 5 (C+1)

63% prefer someone else ...

DEVASTATING
06-30-2016 01:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Max Power Offline
Not Rod Carey
*

Posts: 10,059
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation: 261
I Root For: NIU, Bradley
Location: Peoria
Post: #68
RE: Presidential Polls - State by State
(06-30-2016 01:42 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  
(06-30-2016 01:36 PM)Max Power Wrote:  It's also in the way they frame the information. For example, they show PPP results but always remember to put a "(D)" next to them, to remind people it's a Democratic polling firm. Which is fine! But they neglect to do so with Rasmussen and other GOP polling firms. You don't see "( R )" next to anything. You can also tell by the pictures of Obama they use, and the exclusively right wing cartoons they feature.

Again, not to say it's useless, even for liberals. I can find a Paul Krugman link that's useful and look for the most recent polls. But you have to be kidding me if you really think they play it straight down the middle, especially if you're a Dem. The bias isn't in your face like with Drudge, but it's clearly there.

It just doesn't concern me. We all have to think critically when we read anything.

It doesn't concern me either. I think RCP is fine and I visit it occasionally but also take it with a grain of salt for the reasons I stated above. I like to think of them as conservatives who make an effort to hew to the center.
06-30-2016 01:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dawgitall Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,052
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 195
I Root For: ECU/ASU/NCSU
Location:
Post: #69
RE: Presidential Polls - State by State
An Iowa poll from Loras College Trump 34 Clinton 48 (C +14) H2H, and Trump 31 Clinton 44 Johnson 6 Stein 2 in 4 way (Clinton +13)
06-30-2016 02:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,074
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3251
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #70
RE: Presidential Polls - State by State
(06-30-2016 01:30 PM)Max Power Wrote:  
(06-30-2016 01:27 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  
(06-30-2016 01:24 PM)Max Power Wrote:  
(06-30-2016 01:16 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(06-30-2016 12:34 PM)Max Power Wrote:  Nate Silver and his team on Twitter say they see no reason to discount the poll. In particular, Nate says that in a 7%-Clinton lead environment these polls aren't even outliers with the Margin of Error. Another person on his team said that other swing state polls have had long response times and no one objected, probably because the results were a tight race. Furthermore, they believe the polling firm is a perfectly fine organization.

Realclearpolitics is a right wing organization.

You must be a Crooked Hillary supporter with your lies about everything that doesn't support your views 100% being a "vast right wing" conspiracy.

Calling realclearpoltics a right wing organization is either a lie on your part or an effort to win the award for the most ridiculous post of the month.

They are balanced. Its hard to find an article without one with the opposite point of view also on there.

Uh the founders of the site ******* admit it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RealClearPolitics

Philosophy[edit]
In an interview with the Chicago Tribune, McIntyre said, "We're trying to pull together the best political stories, op-eds, news analyses, editorials out there. The proliferation of content is enormous. Part of what we're trying to do is distill it in a clear, simple way for people who don't have hours to spend searching the Net".[13] He told the Chicago Sun-Times that RealClearPolitics strives to feature "serious intellectual pieces" and that they're "not looking for the over-the-top, vitriolic, red-meat craziness on either side".[14]

Patrick Stack of Time magazine has described the site's commentary section as "right-leaning".[15] The site has been described as being run by conservatives, and containing "opinion pieces from multiple media sources".[16] In 2009 RealClearPolitics was described as a weblog "in the conservative pantheon" by Richard Davis (OF OXFORD).[17][18]

In an interview with the conservative magazine Human Events, (SITE FOUNDER) McIntyre described the philosophy behind the Web site as based on "freedom" and "common-sense values". Said Bevan, "We think debate on the issues is a very important thing. We post a variety of opinions". He further stated, "we have a frustration all conservatives have", which is "the bias in media against conservatives, religious conservatives, [and] Christian conservatives".[3]

In a 2001 article for Princeton Alumni Weekly, which noted that "The articles selected invariably demonstrate McIntyre and Bevan's political bent, about which they are unabashedly forthcoming." McIntyre said, "I'm not really a die-hard Republican because my interests are less on social issues, more on taxing and spending...But I definitely don't want the government telling me what to do with my property...Nevertheless, any political junkie—even a liberal—would enjoy our site because the topics we choose are current."[19]

RealClearPolitics was listed among conservative political weblogs in a 2005 conference paper on mapping the political blogosphere by Robert Ackland of the Australian Centre for Social Research.[20]

This doesn't make it bias. It is a good site to read articles and check on polling.

That doesn't make it non biased. Look, I've read RCP for years. And I agree it's a good place to check articles and polling. But their selection of polling and the house-published articles betray a right wing bent, sometimes very clearly. Guys like Carl Cannon and Sean Trende don't take pains to hide them.

I counted 14 polls real quickly-CBS, ABC, NBC/WSJ, CNN, Fox, Gallup, PPP, IDB, Rasmussen, Reuters....basically anybody you could think of or who ever gets quoted by the MSM. The idea that their selection of polling is biased is nonsensical.

I haven't detected a pattern on their "house-published" articles, but there aren't very many of them. Do they even have one a day? But they post about 20-30 articles a day from all over, including NY Times, Washington Post, Salon and Slate and other liberal sources.
06-30-2016 04:02 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,074
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3251
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #71
RE: Presidential Polls - State by State
(06-30-2016 01:36 PM)Max Power Wrote:  It's also in the way they frame the information. For example, they show PPP results but always remember to put a "(D)" next to them, to remind people it's a Democratic polling firm. Which is fine! But they neglect to do so with Rasmussen and other GOP polling firms. You don't see "( R )" next to anything. You can also tell by the pictures of Obama they use, and the exclusively right wing cartoons they feature.

Again, not to say it's useless, even for liberals. I can find a Paul Krugman link that's useful and look for the most recent polls. But you have to be kidding me if you really think they play it straight down the middle, especially if you're a Dem. The bias isn't in your face like with Drudge, but it's clearly there.

I thought I had seen ®. Just look at June 29th, the Civitas poll in NC. They have an ® by them.
06-30-2016 04:07 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Max Power Offline
Not Rod Carey
*

Posts: 10,059
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation: 261
I Root For: NIU, Bradley
Location: Peoria
Post: #72
RE: Presidential Polls - State by State
If they use the ® now, great. They didn't in 2012 after which I stopped reading them regularly.

As for which polls they choose, they ignore NBC/SurveyMonkey (Clinton +5), Morning Consult (Clinton +8) and ARG (Clinton +9), and that poll today showing Clinton up big.

Okay, let's look at today's sampling:

Thursday, June 30
Culture Replacing Class as the Key Political Divide Ron Brownstein, The Atlantic
Anti-Brexit Elites Don't Suffer From Their Policies Victor Davis Hanson, NRO
Tory Shocker: How Boris Got Knifed by Michael Gove Mason & Stewart, The Guardian
Obama Reveals His Populist Blind Spot David Von Drehle, Time
Hillary Risks Losing Ohio & the Working Class Over Trade John Russo, Plain Dealer
The Democrats' Bernie Sanders Schism Karl Rove, Wall Street Journal
Jesse Williams's Essential History of Social Justice Kevin Fallon, The Daily Beast
Racist Speech at BET Awards Attacks White People Stacey Dash, Patheos
Assessing the Trump V.P. Career-Suicide Pact T.A. Frank, Vanity Fair
Bill & Loretta: It's Not an 'Optics' Problem, It's Corruption David Harsanyi, Federalist

I bolded the only two liberal pieces I see. And it's filled with GOP hit pieces. Hey, 2 is more than Drudge! And to be fair a couple of them are international pieces (though one is by the conservative NRO). They don't shut liberal voices out. But come on, be honest. And IIRC every cartoon was from the NR or Weekly Standard, by that Ramirez guy. It's not a HUGE bias, but it's definitely there.
06-30-2016 04:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fitbud Offline
Banned

Posts: 30,983
Joined: Dec 2011
I Root For: PAC 12
Location:
Post: #73
Re: RE: Presidential Polls - State by State
(06-28-2016 12:31 PM)Pyrizzo Wrote:  Geez, what a terrible state our country is in. Trump and Clinton are the two biggest shitbags to ever run for president. I don't care what y'all say, even if I lived in a swing state id still vote Johnson.

Some people just like Johnson I guess. I prefer the female.
06-30-2016 04:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
UTSAMarineVet09 Offline
Corporal of the Board.
*

Posts: 16,346
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 1268
I Root For: UTSA
Location: West Michigan
Post: #74
RE: Presidential Polls - State by State
(06-30-2016 04:48 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  
(06-28-2016 12:31 PM)Pyrizzo Wrote:  Geez, what a terrible state our country is in. Trump and Clinton are the two biggest shitbags to ever run for president. I don't care what y'all say, even if I lived in a swing state id still vote Johnson.

Some people just like Johnson I guess. I prefer the female.

why do you always have gay thoughts?

03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao
06-30-2016 04:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fitbud Offline
Banned

Posts: 30,983
Joined: Dec 2011
I Root For: PAC 12
Location:
Post: #75
Re: RE: Presidential Polls - State by State
(06-30-2016 04:59 PM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  
(06-30-2016 04:48 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  
(06-28-2016 12:31 PM)Pyrizzo Wrote:  Geez, what a terrible state our country is in. Trump and Clinton are the two biggest shitbags to ever run for president. I don't care what y'all say, even if I lived in a swing state id still vote Johnson.

Some people just like Johnson I guess. I prefer the female.

why do you always have gay thoughts?

03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao03-lmfao

What?
06-30-2016 05:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,074
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3251
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #76
RE: Presidential Polls - State by State
(06-30-2016 04:23 PM)Max Power Wrote:  If they use the ® now, great. They didn't in 2012 after which I stopped reading them regularly.

As for which polls they choose, they ignore NBC/SurveyMonkey (Clinton +5), Morning Consult (Clinton +8) and ARG (Clinton +9), and that poll today showing Clinton up big.

Okay, let's look at today's sampling:

Thursday, June 30
Culture Replacing Class as the Key Political Divide Ron Brownstein, The Atlantic
Anti-Brexit Elites Don't Suffer From Their Policies Victor Davis Hanson, NRO
Tory Shocker: How Boris Got Knifed by Michael Gove Mason & Stewart, The Guardian
Obama Reveals His Populist Blind Spot David Von Drehle, Time
Hillary Risks Losing Ohio & the Working Class Over Trade John Russo, Plain Dealer
The Democrats' Bernie Sanders Schism Karl Rove, Wall Street Journal
Jesse Williams's Essential History of Social Justice Kevin Fallon, The Daily Beast
Racist Speech at BET Awards Attacks White People Stacey Dash, Patheos
Assessing the Trump V.P. Career-Suicide Pact T.A. Frank, Vanity Fair
Bill & Loretta: It's Not an 'Optics' Problem, It's Corruption David Harsanyi, Federalist

I bolded the only two liberal pieces I see. And it's filled with GOP hit pieces. Hey, 2 is more than Drudge! And to be fair a couple of them are international pieces (though one is by the conservative NRO). They don't shut liberal voices out. But come on, be honest. And IIRC every cartoon was from the NR or Weekly Standard, by that Ramirez guy. It's not a HUGE bias, but it's definitely there.

ARG is regularly on there. If ARG is left biased, some of their extreme results this primary season make sense. They include NBC/WSJ which would be NBC's serious poll. No reason to include a "survey monkey."
06-30-2016 05:23 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,074
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3251
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #77
RE: Presidential Polls - State by State
(06-30-2016 05:23 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(06-30-2016 04:23 PM)Max Power Wrote:  If they use the ® now, great. They didn't in 2012 after which I stopped reading them regularly.

As for which polls they choose, they ignore NBC/SurveyMonkey (Clinton +5), Morning Consult (Clinton +8) and ARG (Clinton +9), and that poll today showing Clinton up big.

Okay, let's look at today's sampling:

Thursday, June 30
Culture Replacing Class as the Key Political Divide Ron Brownstein, The Atlantic
Anti-Brexit Elites Don't Suffer From Their Policies Victor Davis Hanson, NRO
Tory Shocker: How Boris Got Knifed by Michael Gove Mason & Stewart, The Guardian
Obama Reveals His Populist Blind Spot David Von Drehle, Time
Hillary Risks Losing Ohio & the Working Class Over Trade John Russo, Plain Dealer
The Democrats' Bernie Sanders Schism Karl Rove, Wall Street Journal
Jesse Williams's Essential History of Social Justice Kevin Fallon, The Daily Beast
Racist Speech at BET Awards Attacks White People Stacey Dash, Patheos
Assessing the Trump V.P. Career-Suicide Pact T.A. Frank, Vanity Fair
Bill & Loretta: It's Not an 'Optics' Problem, It's Corruption David Harsanyi, Federalist

I bolded the only two liberal pieces I see. And it's filled with GOP hit pieces. Hey, 2 is more than Drudge! And to be fair a couple of them are international pieces (though one is by the conservative NRO). They don't shut liberal voices out. But come on, be honest. And IIRC every cartoon was from the NR or Weekly Standard, by that Ramirez guy. It's not a HUGE bias, but it's definitely there.

ARG is regularly on there. If ARG is left biased, some of their extreme results this primary season make sense. They include NBC/WSJ which would be NBC's serious poll. No reason to include a "survey monkey."

Filled with GOP hit pieces? John Russo is "attacking" Clinton for being too conservative. He reads like a Sanders supporter. He is a professor for "working class studies."

The Time piece is not a hit piece. It is a discussion of what American populism is. It is definitely not favorable towards Trump although it never mentions him by name. The author might well be a Democrat.

The Atlantic piece is not clearly partisan, but it makes it sound like things are grim for Trump and Republicans.

You've got two European pieces.

Then you have Rove, the Federalist, Dash and two liberal pieces.

So 3 liberal, 3 conservative and 2 that aren't necessarily partisan, but are negative towards Republicans. Possibly a liberal tilt.
06-30-2016 05:37 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
stinkfist Offline
nuts zongo's in the house
*

Posts: 68,152
Joined: Nov 2011
Reputation: 6775
I Root For: Mustard Buzzards
Location: who knows?
Post: #78
RE: Presidential Polls - State by State
(06-30-2016 08:20 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  I've given up even paying attention to polls. Its a five point swing every 3 days anymore.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_c...ouse_watch

only a fk'n moron pays att'n to that shite to begin with....

but morons get the same voting right as the most brilliant.....

yepperdy jeopardy scooby dookie.......

fk'n polls.....you gotta just be a dumbarse to even think about 'em.....
06-30-2016 11:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
dawgitall Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,052
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 195
I Root For: ECU/ASU/NCSU
Location:
Post: #79
RE: Presidential Polls - State by State
California poll from Field, Trump 28 Clinton 58 (C + 30)
07-07-2016 07:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Pyrizzo Offline
Eyes in the Sky
*

Posts: 3,642
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 235
I Root For: nothing
Location:
Post: #80
RE: Presidential Polls - State by State
(07-07-2016 07:13 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  California poll from Field, Trump 28 Clinton 58 (C + 30)

I don't think you could ever find any worse candidates than these two. Whoever wins will not win a second term.
07-07-2016 07:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.