Donald Trump expanded his lead over Hillary Clinton in a four-way race to two points, 42%-40%, in day 4 of the IBD/TIPP presidential tracking poll, with Trump moving past his Democratic rival in a head-to-head match-up for the first time.....
Meanwhile, in a 2-way race, Trump leads Clinton by a half-point -- 42.2% to 41.7%. Previously, Clinton had led by two or three points in a 2-way race vs. Trump.

http://www.investors.com/politics/trump-ibdtipp-poll/

BUT MUH NATE

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

(10-22-2016 07:13 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  Donald Trump expanded his lead over Hillary Clinton in a four-way race to two points, 42%-40%, in day 4 of the IBD/TIPP presidential tracking poll, with Trump moving past his Democratic rival in a head-to-head match-up for the first time.....
Meanwhile, in a 2-way race, Trump leads Clinton by a half-point -- 42.2% to 41.7%. Previously, Clinton had led by two or three points in a 2-way race vs. Trump.

http://www.investors.com/politics/trump-ibdtipp-poll/

BUT MUH NATE

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

Sorry but I'm not one of the cool internet kids. Could someone translate the bolded phrase. I know it references Nate Silver negatively but what the heck is "MUH"?

You know…Clinton would fit in that locker room pic perfectly.
Actually he could be their coach.

That has been the most accurate poll the last two elections. What might be helping Trump...

The rigged message is being effective...

Quote:NEWTOWN, Pa./CLEVELAND (Reuters) – Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump gained on his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton among American voters this week, cutting her lead nearly in half, according to Reuters/Ipsos polling released on Friday.

The polling data showed Trump’s argument that the Nov. 8 election is “rigged” against him has resonated with members of his party.

“Remember folks, it’s a rigged system,” Trump told a Pennsylvania rally on Friday. “That’s why you’ve got to get out and vote, you’ve got to watch. Because this system is totally rigged.”

Clinton led Trump 44 percent to 40 percent, according to the Oct. 14-20 Reuters/Ipsos poll, a 4-point lead. That compared with 44 percent for Clinton and 37 percent for Trump in the Oct. 7-13 poll released last week.

An average of national opinion polls by RealClearPolitics shows Clinton currently 6.2 percentage points ahead at 48.1 percent support to Trump’s 41.9 percent.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-clinton...soc_trk=tw

It's just some dumb internet slang from Trumpmos who like to mock our reliance on math.

(10-22-2016 11:12 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 07:13 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  Donald Trump expanded his lead over Hillary Clinton in a four-way race to two points, 42%-40%, in day 4 of the IBD/TIPP presidential tracking poll, with Trump moving past his Democratic rival in a head-to-head match-up for the first time.....
Meanwhile, in a 2-way race, Trump leads Clinton by a half-point -- 42.2% to 41.7%. Previously, Clinton had led by two or three points in a 2-way race vs. Trump.

http://www.investors.com/politics/trump-ibdtipp-poll/

BUT MUH NATE

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

Sorry but I'm not one of the cool internet kids. Could someone translate the bolded phrase. I know it references Nate Silver negatively but what the heck is "MUH"?

MUH DANK MEMES!!1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(10-22-2016 11:45 AM)Max Power Wrote:  It's just some dumb internet slang from Trumpmos who like to mock our reliance on math.

MUH NATE'S model is garbage in, garbage out. All he does is plug in the rigged polls, then sprinkles in some "proprietary information", which is is nothing more than an arbitrary way to extend Hillary's fake leads.

Again, I can't wait to see the explanation when Hillary's probabilities begin to plummet as the puzzygate polls that are propping her up fall off the moving averages.

MUH MICHIGAN

MUH BREMAIN

(10-22-2016 12:03 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 11:12 AM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 07:13 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  Donald Trump expanded his lead over Hillary Clinton in a four-way race to two points, 42%-40%, in day 4 of the IBD/TIPP presidential tracking poll, with Trump moving past his Democratic rival in a head-to-head match-up for the first time.....
Meanwhile, in a 2-way race, Trump leads Clinton by a half-point -- 42.2% to 41.7%. Previously, Clinton had led by two or three points in a 2-way race vs. Trump.

http://www.investors.com/politics/trump-ibdtipp-poll/

BUT MUH NATE

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

Sorry but I'm not one of the cool internet kids. Could someone translate the bolded phrase. I know it references Nate Silver negatively but what the heck is "MUH"?

MUH DANK MEMES!!1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

huh?You cool internet kids speak in code. Type English....or Spanish or something that makes sense.

(10-22-2016 12:10 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 11:45 AM)Max Power Wrote:  It's just some dumb internet slang from Trumpmos who like to mock our reliance on math.

MUH NATE'S model is garbage in, garbage out. All he does is plug in the rigged polls, then sprinkles in some "proprietary information", which is is nothing more than an arbitrary way to extend Hillary's fake leads.

Again, I can't wait to see the explanation when Hillary's probabilities begin to plummet as the puzzygate polls that are propping her up fall off the moving averages.

MUH MICHIGAN

MUH BREMAIN

Do you really believe that the polls are rigged or are you just talking junk? For the record Silver says there is currently a 1 in 7 chance that Trump wins, or in one presidential election every 28 years the candidate in Trumps position would win. So this could be that election. I wouldn't bet on it but it could happen.

(10-22-2016 12:34 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 12:10 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 11:45 AM)Max Power Wrote:  It's just some dumb internet slang from Trumpmos who like to mock our reliance on math.

MUH NATE'S model is garbage in, garbage out. All he does is plug in the rigged polls, then sprinkles in some "proprietary information", which is is nothing more than an arbitrary way to extend Hillary's fake leads.

Again, I can't wait to see the explanation when Hillary's probabilities begin to plummet as the puzzygate polls that are propping her up fall off the moving averages.

MUH MICHIGAN

MUH BREMAIN

Do you really believe that the polls are rigged or are you just talking junk? For the record Silver says there is currently a 1 in 7 chance that Trump wins, or in one presidential election every 28 years the candidate in Trumps position would win. So this could be that election. I wouldn't bet on it but it could happen.

538 currently has Trump at 14%, up from 11.9% a few days ago, so what I'm saying has already began to happen.

The puzzygate polls (that have proven to be rigged, see below video) that show Clinton at ridiculous margins, +15, etc., are currently propping Hillary up in MUH NATE's model. As they begin to drop off the moving averages (meaning whenever they become 3-4 weeks old, and therefore no longer accurately reflect the temperature of the voting public), Hillary's probability is going to plummet.

On 11/8, whenever MUH NATE (not so) suddenly says Trump is 40-45% to win, feel free to bump this thread to tell me that I was right.

(10-22-2016 12:34 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 12:10 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 11:45 AM)Max Power Wrote:  It's just some dumb internet slang from Trumpmos who like to mock our reliance on math.

MUH NATE'S model is garbage in, garbage out. All he does is plug in the rigged polls, then sprinkles in some "proprietary information", which is is nothing more than an arbitrary way to extend Hillary's fake leads.

Again, I can't wait to see the explanation when Hillary's probabilities begin to plummet as the puzzygate polls that are propping her up fall off the moving averages.

MUH MICHIGAN

MUH BREMAIN

Do you really believe that the polls are rigged or are you just talking junk? For the record Silver says there is currently a 1 in 7 chance that Trump wins, or in one presidential election every 28 years the candidate in Trumps position would win. So this could be that election. I wouldn't bet on it but it could happen.

I take it you did not read the leaked internal Monmouth email where they describe in detail how they would comb certain areas of Florida where the person answering the phone would like be a Hillary supporter?

(10-22-2016 01:38 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 12:34 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 12:10 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 11:45 AM)Max Power Wrote:  It's just some dumb internet slang from Trumpmos who like to mock our reliance on math.

MUH NATE'S model is garbage in, garbage out. All he does is plug in the rigged polls, then sprinkles in some "proprietary information", which is is nothing more than an arbitrary way to extend Hillary's fake leads.

Again, I can't wait to see the explanation when Hillary's probabilities begin to plummet as the puzzygate polls that are propping her up fall off the moving averages.

MUH MICHIGAN

MUH BREMAIN

Do you really believe that the polls are rigged or are you just talking junk? For the record Silver says there is currently a 1 in 7 chance that Trump wins, or in one presidential election every 28 years the candidate in Trumps position would win. So this could be that election. I wouldn't bet on it but it could happen.

I take it you did not read the leaked internal Monmouth email where they describe in detail how they would comb certain areas of Florida where the person answering the phone would like be a Hillary supporter?

LOL, I missed that one.

You often don't even have to dig for leaked emails, they tell you right there in the methodology, i.e. CNN polling as much as 60% more D's than R's. I saw a "polling expert" on CNN then explain that they do that because "sometimes" there are more self-identifying D's than R's and vice-versa, but admitted there was no way to project a party's advantage in any given election, given that not everyone is required to register.

So there's no way to project affiliation, but they ALWAYS give the benefit of the doubt to Hillary. Has anyone EVER seen a poll where more R's are polled than D's? The only one I've ever seen as 50/50 is the IBD, and of course, it's one that Trump leads in right now.

(10-22-2016 01:47 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 01:38 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 12:34 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 12:10 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 11:45 AM)Max Power Wrote:  It's just some dumb internet slang from Trumpmos who like to mock our reliance on math.

MUH NATE'S model is garbage in, garbage out. All he does is plug in the rigged polls, then sprinkles in some "proprietary information", which is is nothing more than an arbitrary way to extend Hillary's fake leads.

Again, I can't wait to see the explanation when Hillary's probabilities begin to plummet as the puzzygate polls that are propping her up fall off the moving averages.

MUH MICHIGAN

MUH BREMAIN

Do you really believe that the polls are rigged or are you just talking junk? For the record Silver says there is currently a 1 in 7 chance that Trump wins, or in one presidential election every 28 years the candidate in Trumps position would win. So this could be that election. I wouldn't bet on it but it could happen.

I take it you did not read the leaked internal Monmouth email where they describe in detail how they would comb certain areas of Florida where the person answering the phone would like be a Hillary supporter?

LOL, I missed that one.

You often don't even have to dig for leaked emails, they tell you right there in the methodology, i.e. CNN polling as much as 60% more D's than R's. I saw a "polling expert" on CNN then explain that they do that because "sometimes" there are more self-identifying D's than R's and vice-versa, but admitted there was no way to project a party's advantage in any given election, given that not everyone is required to register.

So there's no way to project affiliation, but they ALWAYS give the benefit of the doubt to Hillary. Has anyone EVER seen a poll where more R's are polled than D's? The only one I've ever seen as 50/50 is the IBD, and of course, it's one that Trump leads in right now.

That just isn't how it works.

(10-22-2016 12:50 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 12:34 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 12:10 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 11:45 AM)Max Power Wrote:  It's just some dumb internet slang from Trumpmos who like to mock our reliance on math.

MUH NATE'S model is garbage in, garbage out. All he does is plug in the rigged polls, then sprinkles in some "proprietary information", which is is nothing more than an arbitrary way to extend Hillary's fake leads.

Again, I can't wait to see the explanation when Hillary's probabilities begin to plummet as the puzzygate polls that are propping her up fall off the moving averages.

MUH MICHIGAN

MUH BREMAIN

Do you really believe that the polls are rigged or are you just talking junk? For the record Silver says there is currently a 1 in 7 chance that Trump wins, or in one presidential election every 28 years the candidate in Trumps position would win. So this could be that election. I wouldn't bet on it but it could happen.

538 currently has Trump at 14%, up from 11.9% a few days ago, so what I'm saying has already began to happen.

The puzzygate polls (that have proven to be rigged, see below video) that show Clinton at ridiculous margins, +15, etc., are currently propping Hillary up in MUH NATE's model. As they begin to drop off the moving averages (meaning whenever they become 3-4 weeks old, and therefore no longer accurately reflect the temperature of the voting public), Hillary's probability is going to plummet.

On 11/8, whenever MUH NATE (not so) suddenly says Trump is 40-45% to win, feel free to bump this thread to tell me that I was right.

good gracious.......polls simply reflect moments in time. Morning Joe segment simply illustrates that. But just believe whatever makes you happy. If circumstances change then of course Trump's chances could change. That doesn't make anything rigged.

(10-22-2016 04:55 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 12:50 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 12:34 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 12:10 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 11:45 AM)Max Power Wrote:  It's just some dumb internet slang from Trumpmos who like to mock our reliance on math.

MUH NATE'S model is garbage in, garbage out. All he does is plug in the rigged polls, then sprinkles in some "proprietary information", which is is nothing more than an arbitrary way to extend Hillary's fake leads.

Again, I can't wait to see the explanation when Hillary's probabilities begin to plummet as the puzzygate polls that are propping her up fall off the moving averages.

MUH MICHIGAN

MUH BREMAIN

Do you really believe that the polls are rigged or are you just talking junk? For the record Silver says there is currently a 1 in 7 chance that Trump wins, or in one presidential election every 28 years the candidate in Trumps position would win. So this could be that election. I wouldn't bet on it but it could happen.

538 currently has Trump at 14%, up from 11.9% a few days ago, so what I'm saying has already began to happen.

The puzzygate polls (that have proven to be rigged, see below video) that show Clinton at ridiculous margins, +15, etc., are currently propping Hillary up in MUH NATE's model. As they begin to drop off the moving averages (meaning whenever they become 3-4 weeks old, and therefore no longer accurately reflect the temperature of the voting public), Hillary's probability is going to plummet.

On 11/8, whenever MUH NATE (not so) suddenly says Trump is 40-45% to win, feel free to bump this thread to tell me that I was right.

good gracious

Well refuted.

(10-22-2016 04:51 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 01:47 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 01:38 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 12:34 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 12:10 PM)Kronke Wrote:  MUH NATE'S model is garbage in, garbage out. All he does is plug in the rigged polls, then sprinkles in some "proprietary information", which is is nothing more than an arbitrary way to extend Hillary's fake leads.

Again, I can't wait to see the explanation when Hillary's probabilities begin to plummet as the puzzygate polls that are propping her up fall off the moving averages.

MUH MICHIGAN

MUH BREMAIN

Do you really believe that the polls are rigged or are you just talking junk? For the record Silver says there is currently a 1 in 7 chance that Trump wins, or in one presidential election every 28 years the candidate in Trumps position would win. So this could be that election. I wouldn't bet on it but it could happen.

I take it you did not read the leaked internal Monmouth email where they describe in detail how they would comb certain areas of Florida where the person answering the phone would like be a Hillary supporter?

LOL, I missed that one.

You often don't even have to dig for leaked emails, they tell you right there in the methodology, i.e. CNN polling as much as 60% more D's than R's. I saw a "polling expert" on CNN then explain that they do that because "sometimes" there are more self-identifying D's than R's and vice-versa, but admitted there was no way to project a party's advantage in any given election, given that not everyone is required to register.

So there's no way to project affiliation, but they ALWAYS give the benefit of the doubt to Hillary. Has anyone EVER seen a poll where more R's are polled than D's? The only one I've ever seen as 50/50 is the IBD, and of course, it's one that Trump leads in right now.

That just isn't how it works.

Then why don't you tell me how it works? You seem to think you know it all, but are unable to explain much of anything. Let's hear it.

(10-22-2016 05:11 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 04:51 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 01:47 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 01:38 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 12:34 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  Do you really believe that the polls are rigged or are you just talking junk? For the record Silver says there is currently a 1 in 7 chance that Trump wins, or in one presidential election every 28 years the candidate in Trumps position would win. So this could be that election. I wouldn't bet on it but it could happen.

I take it you did not read the leaked internal Monmouth email where they describe in detail how they would comb certain areas of Florida where the person answering the phone would like be a Hillary supporter?

LOL, I missed that one.

You often don't even have to dig for leaked emails, they tell you right there in the methodology, i.e. CNN polling as much as 60% more D's than R's. I saw a "polling expert" on CNN then explain that they do that because "sometimes" there are more self-identifying D's than R's and vice-versa, but admitted there was no way to project a party's advantage in any given election, given that not everyone is required to register.

So there's no way to project affiliation, but they ALWAYS give the benefit of the doubt to Hillary. Has anyone EVER seen a poll where more R's are polled than D's? The only one I've ever seen as 50/50 is the IBD, and of course, it's one that Trump leads in right now.

That just isn't how it works.

Then why don't you tell me how it works? You seem to think you know it all, but are unable to explain much of anything. Let's hear it.

This has been gone over repeatedly. There isn't much I can say that hasn't already been said.

(10-22-2016 05:00 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 04:55 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 12:50 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 12:34 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(10-22-2016 12:10 PM)Kronke Wrote:  MUH NATE'S model is garbage in, garbage out. All he does is plug in the rigged polls, then sprinkles in some "proprietary information", which is is nothing more than an arbitrary way to extend Hillary's fake leads.

Again, I can't wait to see the explanation when Hillary's probabilities begin to plummet as the puzzygate polls that are propping her up fall off the moving averages.

MUH MICHIGAN

MUH BREMAIN

Do you really believe that the polls are rigged or are you just talking junk? For the record Silver says there is currently a 1 in 7 chance that Trump wins, or in one presidential election every 28 years the candidate in Trumps position would win. So this could be that election. I wouldn't bet on it but it could happen.

538 currently has Trump at 14%, up from 11.9% a few days ago, so what I'm saying has already began to happen.

The puzzygate polls (that have proven to be rigged, see below video) that show Clinton at ridiculous margins, +15, etc., are currently propping Hillary up in MUH NATE's model. As they begin to drop off the moving averages (meaning whenever they become 3-4 weeks old, and therefore no longer accurately reflect the temperature of the voting public), Hillary's probability is going to plummet.

On 11/8, whenever MUH NATE (not so) suddenly says Trump is 40-45% to win, feel free to bump this thread to tell me that I was right.

good gracious

Well refuted.

Scroll back up to the post.

You're wasting your time. Conservatives are superstitious by their nature and are convinced the following are conspiring against them, including but not limited to,

Polling firms
Academia
Evolutionary scientists
Climate scientists
Economists
The media
The Bureau of Labor Statistics
17 US intelligence agencies
Republican FBI directors
Republican CBO Directors
Former Republican presidents
Fox News debate moderators
Math

So they desperately need to construct alternate realities where their **** candidate isn't hated by most of America and is actually winning, just like in 2012. They construct their own polling firms, their own math.