The news media are infotainment. For one, they don't tell us how big corporations are ripping us off.
Lol.... look at the idiots that are running fot the dems nominee. No they wont make the same mistakes...
I don't support Trump. I just confront people when they try to smear him with falsehoods. A fact which i have stated dozens of times and which you have read before. You know it's possible to not support a president you dislike and still be against the opposition party.
Only Rasmussen is not polling a negative double digits on Trump's job approval. Polling Data Poll Date Sample Approve Disapprove Spread RCP Average 7/31 - 8/15 -- 44.0 54.1 -10.1 FOX News 8/11 - 8/13 1013 RV 43 56 -13 Rasmussen Reports 8/13 - 8/15 1500 LV 46 52 -6 Reuters/Ipsos 8/12 - 8/13 980 RV 43 53 -10 Economist/YouGov 8/10 - 8/13 1127 RV 44 54 -10 Politico/Morning Consult 8/9 - 8/11 1993 RV 42 54 -12 The Hill/HarrisX 8/5 - 8/6 1001 RV 45 55 -10 Harvard-Harris 7/31 - 8/1 816 RV 45 55 -10
Unions protect their members, not all workers. Why should workers have to work with nonunion workers? Of course, right-to-work laws are anti-worker. Why shouldn't workers be allowed to quit en masse if the employer hires someone who won't join the union? They aren't, by law. Russia was trying to keep the price of uranium high bu buying Uranium One, a Canadian corporation.
And this from Fox General Election: Trump vs. Biden FOX News Biden 50, Trump 38 Biden +12 General Election: Trump vs. Warren FOX News Warren 46, Trump 39 Warren +7 General Election: Trump vs. Sanders FOX News Sanders 48, Trump 39 Sanders +9 General Election: Trump vs. Harris FOX News Harris 45, Trump 39 Harris +6
Fox has Trump losing to Harris??? Wow. I would say the bloom has come off the rose at last, but what rose? You should make a new thread. Those numbers are jaw-dropping.
1. because they don't own the company and it's none of their business who the company hires 2. workers are allowed to quit in as big of numbers they want any time they want for any reason they want 3. Uranium 1 was a Canadian company operating in America.
From what I've seen of the polls, I don't think it's possible for tRump to lose more of his base. Biden is the only top candidate who leans towards the middle enough to be attractive to right-wing supporters and that isn't saying much. The way I look at it is conservatives and libertarians might consider tRump their only choice, so I would expect a solid 39% or so base that would be difficult to reduce much, even if the economic news turns sour. The key to defeating tRump is attracting the undecided votes and increasing the Democrat's base with voter registration. It's my understanding the tRump campaign is concerned about the polls in those critical Midwest states and economic news.
Most of the Pro-Trump pundits routinely engage Trump's harshest opponents. That is the difference. Anyone who really wants to hear from the hard left should tune into Fox. The rest of the MSM generally ignores them. The exchanges between Ingraham and Cornel West are especially interesting.
So, you are calling Vanity Fair, Poynter and the NYT "Fake News"? Well, that's certainly a refreshing change.
Me too. Nate Silver spared the goat. “Inside scoop on Silver's forecasting model “IN CASE I, NATE SILVER, DIE, FOLLOW THESE STEPS TO UPDATE THE FIVETHIRTYEIGHT ELECTIONS FORECAST MODEL” writes Tao Yang in McSweeney's: -"Navigate to these coordinates (40.731014, -74.303500) on the night of a waxing moon. Bring a white goat. Once there you will see a keypad.” -Enter the probability of a sample mean being two standard deviations from the population mean at a 95% confidence level. -To enter the chamber where the model resides you must pass three trials: shouting out certain baseball metrics; find four stone tablets with a scatterplot etched on each and press the one with a correlation of 0.6; and then find an old Compaq desktop in the final of three chambers, turn it on and boot up to PokerStars with a $10 bankroll you turn into $10,000 to enter the final chamber. Finally, select 'Update Model' and find an altar appearing behind you. "Chant the new poll results while performing a blood sacrifice with the white goat on the altar.” VANITY FAIR/POYNTER, THE PRESS BLAMES ITSELF FOR TRUMP’S WIN, As election polling blows it, press self-flagellation begins. BY JAMES WARREN, CHIEF MEDIA WRITER, POYNTER.ORG, NOVEMBER 10, 2016. http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/11/the-press-blames-itself-for-trumps-win
No, I'm calling you wrong. Polls don't predict the election winner. They predict the popular vote winner. People THEN take that and make predictions. How many times do we have to go over this?
How many times do the pollsters have to admit that they got it wrong before you believe them? "It's a bleak moment for polling and, in particular, the media's increasing reliance on it (often for faux news stories) and the decreasing use of reporters to actually spend gobs of time with voters on their terms. There will be many symposia on this topic in the year ahead, and for good reason, though it's early to wax all-knowing about what happened even as one try to figure it out. (The Atlantic) Many have reached a precarious stage with mediocre response rates, respondents lying, some underfunded, at times questionable methodologies, too many robo calls — and media outlets that believe all you need do is find a calculator and average a bunch of polls to bring a patina of utilitarian coherence to an inherent mishmash." VANITY FAIR/POYNTER, THE PRESS BLAMES ITSELF FOR TRUMP’S WIN, As election polling blows it, press self-flagellation begins. BY JAMES WARREN, CHIEF MEDIA WRITER, POYNTER.ORG, NOVEMBER 10, 2016. http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/11/the-press-blames-itself-for-trumps-win
Ddyad, your interpretation is wrong Period. The polls predicted the PV, and they got the winner right. The fluke was the 77k in PA, Mi, and WI that through it to Trump. That won't happen again. More than 14 MILLION VOTED AGAINST Trump than for him. It will be over 20 MILLION next year.
