TOTD 2018/02/01: Bias

We’re all aware how much it pervades the MSM but I was surprised by the extent it has affected the hundreds of American polling organizations as well. After all, these people are paid to win elections and their reputations used to depend upon accuracy.

I alluded in Dime’s post “TOTD 2018/1/27: Never Feed a Troll” to Trump’s intention to make polling a truly reputable tool. His campaign chose to change the nature of sample questions based upon the fact that many people are reluctant to express their true opinions for fear of repercussions. This was a brilliant strategy indeed as I was about to discover after reading the best of the Trump books out there so far, How Trump Won by Joel Pollak and Larry Schweikart.

What I was not prepared to discover was the disingenuous and manipulative nature of the majority of pollsters in this country who were determined to navigate a Clinton victory. Nearly 90% of them distorted their samples to enhance the Clinton campaign.

Here is a sample of Machiavellian tactics at work:

  1. Polling question #1: Can we speak to the youngest voter in the household?
  2. After determining the registered status of the individual, they chose to represent 26% of Republicans in the samples.
  3. They chose to over-represent women by 60%.

The list goes on but what has become apparent is that pollsters actively skewed questions and results in order to present a Clinton presidency as a fait accompli that would discourage Trump supporters from turning out to vote.

God Bless the Trumpsters because this only infuriated and energized them.

But the greatest irony of all:

They misled the Clinton campaign so thoroughly that they spent millions of dollars unwisely. Clinton didn’t step foot in Wisconsin, Michigan, or Pennsylvania in the last months of her campaign. As a former Michigan native, even I knew what would happen there and I was right. (Trump should have hired me to work that state!)

Trump won Michigan by only 10,000 votes but this is how it went down:

There are only 3 counties that matter.

  1. Wayne- urban Detroit but turnout was half what it was for Obama. Quelle surprise!
  2. Oakland- (where I grew up) is primarily composed of affluent car execs and soccer moms. Trump only won 35% here as to be expected. People who live there have the luxury to worry more about PETA than real issues.
  3. MACOMB- the land of the highly skilled working class automakers (tool and die makers for example) who have been out of work for a decade. This county was the deciding factor in the state win and even in the national election. Kudos to them because this has been a socio-economic demographic so discouraged by government, many hadn’t voted for 20 years.

Trump seemed to find an entirely new network of voters that Democrats apparently didn’t realize existed- eligible, but disinterested!

I don’t do the book How Trump Won true justice but please try to read it; it is a significant educational tool to use when making future political decisions.

 

4+

Users who have liked this post:

  • avatar
  • avatar
  • avatar
  • avatar

14 thoughts on “TOTD 2018/02/01: Bias”

  1. Hope it’s ok I posted a day early, Dime. Realized (after the fact) I have a root canal to endure tomorrow and thought it best to publish today. 🙂

    2+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
  2. Haven’t read that one yet, so pls be sure to post your reactions. I may be over- Trumped regarding my book selection- four so far so I’ll happily leave this one to you for analysis!

    1+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
  3. Yes, Corey Lewandowski and David Bossie did write that book. I own it but haven’t gotten a chance to read it yet. My political brain needs a break to be sure!

    Would be interested, as I mentioned previously, to read TW’s take on this one.

    1+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
  4. It is an excellent read. Not for the prose, but for the first hand observation and inside view not reported elsewhere.

    It shows that ‘conventional wisdom’ is a double oxymoron

    2+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
  5. Not only looking forward to it Mikey, but am concerned that it is necessary to complete the transformation from a socialist to a capitalist state.

    1+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
  6. I am guessing this is the piece you wanted me to address. If so, I apologize for taking so long getting to this.

    I think you are absolutely correct in the context of 2016. Why did Trump win? That question has been flummoxing Never Trumpers and Democrats since November 2016. Trump beat the GOP because the GOP is fractured. It is fractured because the DC GOP does not want to govern the way they tell their constituents that they will govern. The base of the GOP now knows this and it has created an opening for some one with a sliver of credibility and no connections to the DC GOP to fill that void. This is why I think Cruz was not the nominee. I have zero doubt that Cruz would be just as good, if not better than Trump has been as president (that is if he could have beaten Hillary, which I will get to momentarily). Despite Cruz’s very public butting heads with McConnell and the rest of the Gutless Wonders, he was still viewed as from within the group causing the problems. All Trump needed was 20 to 25 percent of the primary vote until it widdled down the numbers and he could present himself as inevitable, as having all the momentum.

    Limited government types have been looking for someone who will speak for us on the national stage–this is why it was Trump and Cruz who were the final two. National Review does not speak for liberty (I am of the opinion they never did) because they would rather speak for “sensible government.” This goes the same for the WSJ, Weakling Standard, FoxNews, Commentary, Con Inc, the Neo-Con cabal that is running the party, etc. There is a massive gap between what we have raised as concerns as American citizens and what Con Inc has told us those concerns should be. Just read Jonah Goldberg now at any point in the last year. He blasts Trump for many of the same things he merely raised as concerns under Obama or Bush, and yet, when it came to starting a Never Bush movement, Jonah was nowhere to be found. Nor were any of the other vampires at NR.

    I have raised this point time and again on that other site, but I will do so again here. Why did McConnell want to bloody the nose of the Tea Party, but only attempt to make Obama a one term president? Why was the Tea Party characterized as “hobits” by McCain, but he wouldn’t even allow his campaign to mention Obama’s middle name? Why was Sarah Palin treated like less than human by Con Inc just as they slobber all over Mike Pence when Pence and Palin have the same policy goals–or so we are to believe? Unless you are from the Approved Section of the GOP, your opinions are no good. You are to shut the hell up and vote for who they tell you to vote for. That’s why the magazine dedicated to “Standing Athwart History Yelling Stop” is able to endorse without batting an eyelash the man who brought us Obamacare.

    Now why did Trump beat Hillary. This one is a little easier to answer. First, she just is not a likable person. No matter what credibility her husband had, she just could not pull it off. Second, I think the electorate under Obama was misread by both sides. Obama was elected president for one reason–he was cool. In the black community there was no way they weren’t going to show up for one of their own, so their turnout was increased over what it was in 04. Millennials were not going to miss out on voting for the man who “slow jammed the news” with Jimmy Fallon. He could talk cool, walk cool, dress cool (aside from the mom jeans). He was cool and he could credibly pull it off. So when the Democrats went back to the typical politician, those voters walked away. The Obama coalition was a combination of racist blacks and pop-culture brainwashed youths. All Hillary brought to the table was the fact that she had a vagina, and women just don’t have the same motivations as blacks. Third, Trump was able to do to her that Obama was able to do to Romney. He snarked her to death. This had an added effect of preventing her from appealing to the “cool” vote.

    I don’t know if Trump beats Obama. But I do know that Trump could beat any generic Democrat prior to 2017. Now? Who knows. Now he is taken seriously as a threat by the Left (media) and thus their weapons of character assassination are all on the table for use. I will say this, that if Trump has to continue to fight both Con Inc AND the Left, he is going to have a hard time getting re-elected. He must hammer Con Inc just as hard as he hammers the Left. He has to show to those folks in Michigan and Pennsylvania, etc, who sat out elections for some twenty years that he is not going to cave to the pressure of the globalist financiers who have zero sense of patriotism or fealty to the very country that allows them to become rich beyond imagination.

    2+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
  7. Thanks for the reply, Robert. I’d only reiterate that the Trump campaign (with special kudos for Kellyanne Conway) polled far more accurately using, in many cases, non-professionals who knew their own backyards and was able to identify the heart of the matter in those traditionally blue states: WI, MI, and PA. Trump could not have won without those three.

    1+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
  8. Trump’s victory was a very narrow escape.  The 2020 election is also likely to be razor thin.   We still have a heavy lift ahead of us to convince American voters that conservative solutions are not mean or hateful, which is how mass media portrays things.

    2+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
  9.  Obama was elected president for one reason–he was cool.

    Had to respond to this comment Robert to reiterate Mitch Daniel’s observation on the 2008 election :

    “Voting for Obama was a fashion statement.”

    2+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
  10. EThompson:
     Obama was elected president for one reason–he was cool.

    Had to respond to this comment Robert to reiterate Mitch Daniel’s observation on the 2008 election :

    “Voting for Obama was a fashion statement.”

    Yes it very much was. Which is why when the economy continued to suck, he was still fairly liked. He was the designer politician. The GOP has two in the primaries but one was an old 1990s retread and the other a knock off of the Versace Obama. Those would be JEB and Marco.

    1+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
  11. What makes me giggle is that The Donald (married to and father of the most impressive fashionistas in this country) has not been convinced to hire a new hairdresser.

    BTW, as a former private label designer for S5A and lucky attendant of many runway shows in Milan and Paris, I can assure you my homeboy Marco Rubio is no Versace. In fact, nobody in D.C. is and I have always been amazed at the lack of style and taste in our nation’s capital. I no longer admire him as I once did, but Mitt Romney always did look physically fit and positively smashing in his $12-$20k Zegna and Brioni suits.

    Two of the most embarrassing images I have ever seen included Michelle Obama standing next to former French First Lady Carla Bruni Sarkozy and the Duchess of Cambridge. Mon Dieu and Blimey!

    Thank goodness for Melania. SOTU: Anyone else appreciate that beautiful yet understated Dior pantsuit with the Dolce & Gabbana blouse? Not to mention the Louboutin pumps which are damn difficult to walk in. Apparently, 12 year old Preston Sharp seemed to appreciate the ensemble. 🙂

    1+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar

Leave a Reply