August 10, 2016
The media pundits have been very busy claiming that Donald Trump is dropping dramatically in the polls. They claim that Hillary Clinton is skyrocketing even after the emails that show that she stole the primary election from Bernie Sanders. The polls are all over the place. The McClatchy Marist poll, for example, has Trump losing by 15 points. In contrast, the LA Times/USC poll has him down by only 1 point. Obviously, as Shakespeare once said “Something’s rotten in Denmark!” It is not possible for these two polls to be telling the truth because they are too far apart.
The methodology used by each polling organization can be used to create a prefabricated result. Few, if any people, least of all those reporting the news, ever actually look deep enough into the “fine print” to discover how the results were fabricated. That is what we are going to do today. The techniques used to lie while “telling the truth” are generally very simple ones. I’ve seen it a thousand times in courts of law where one side has no case but, somehow, miraculously, managed to win. Discovering what the game is, generally speaking, simply requires an inquiring mind and a careful look beneath the hood.
My investigation shows that a majority of the mainstream media polls, during this Presidential election cycle, have been falsified. Before I share how I know this, however, let’s take a moment to understand the American electorate. In its most recent survey of party affiliation, done from July 13-17, 2016, Gallup found that the registered electorate is 28% Republican, 28% Democrat and 42% Independents. This is the key fact you need to understand before we turn our attention to what the pollsters are doing to manufacture the results.
We’ll take a quick but careful look at the methodology used by each polling organization, one at a time, to find out why most of the polls are showing that Hillary Clinton has moved strongly into the lead in this election cycle.
1) The NBC/Survey Monkey poll claims Hillary Clinton is leading by 10 points. But, you should always read the “fine print”. NBC’s “methodology report” states that they polled a selection of voters, and that 3,451 of them reported themselves as registered Republicans, 3,974 registered Democrats, and 3,915 Independents. The pool is comprised of approximately 30% registered Republicans, 35% registered Democrats, and 35% Independents. An excess of 5% Democrats over Republicans, when 81% of Democrats support Hillary Clinton and most of the rest support third party candidates is significant. We can assume that this excess of Democratic party member voters accounts for about 5% of Trump’s deficit in the poll. Other polls show that Trump leads with Independent voters by an average of about 14%. So, the 7% deficiency in Independents turns into another percentage point that should have gone to Trump. A more honest poll would have shown Trump down by 4%, which is within the margin of error in polling.
2) The ABC News/Washington Post poll claims Hillary Clinton is leading by 8 points. However, their methodology report shows that they call landline and cellular telephones and ask to speak with the youngest adult member of the household. The pollsters are, of course, well aware of the fact that the older people are more likely to support both Republicans and Mr. Trump. The poll deliberately favors whoever the Democratic candidate may be, although the bias is particularly strong here, because Trump does so much better with the older demographic. These pollsters also used a voter sample consisting of 33% registered Democrats, 27% registered Republicans, and 35% Independents. To make this poll reasonably reflect the real electorate, we need to subtract 5% worth of excess Democrats and another 1% or so because of the deficit of Independents. Adjusting this poll to the real electorate, therefore, means that Clinton leads by only 2%. That does not account for the fact that they seek out younger voters. Add that in, and Trump would probably end up being shown in the lead. The exact amount of that lead is not ascertainable because we don’t know how many young people, beyond their natural percentage, were added to the pool of potential voters.
3) The Mclatchy/Marist Poll claims Hillary Clinton is leading Donald Trump by 15 points! Once we examine the methodology, it again appears to be a deliberate attempt to falsify the result. The company claims to have polled a total of 1,132 people, including 36% registered Democrats, 27% Republican and 37% Independent. They included 8% more Democrats than exist in the real electorate, 1% less Republicans, and 5% less Independents. If we lop 10% off the top, Clinton is left with only a 5% lead. But, there’s more. This pollster also sought the youngest members of each household. The Harris Poll found that 61% of young people age 18-29 want Hillary Clinton to win the 2016 election, whereas only 33% want the Republican to win. Again, it is impossible to put an exact number on how much this skewered the poll, but the number could be 5% or more, depending on how many excess people in the 18-29 year age group were included.
4) The Bloomberg poll claims that Hillary Clinton is leading by 6 points. However, like the other pollsters, Bloomberg used an inaccurate sample of the electorate. Their sample was 25% Republican, 27% Democrat and 42% Independent. Add back in the 3% deficiency of Republicans, minus the 1% deficiency of Democrats, and you can subtract 2% from the 6%, resulting in a 4% lead for Mrs. Clinton, which is not far from the margin of error.
5) The Fox News poll shows Hillary Clinton leading by 10 points. Once we disassemble its methodology, we find the same problem. The Fox pollsters interviewed 1,022 potential voters. Of those, 42% were registered Democrats, 36% were Republican and only 18% were Independents. Subtract the 6% worth of excess Democrats, and the lead gets cut to 4%. The bias in the Fox New poll, however, is surprising. Most of the talking heads at Fox say that they support Trump. However, talking heads do not run the station. A few “never Trumpers” seem to have survived and managed to get control over the polling. The avid supporters of Bush and Romney seem more than willing to hand the keys to the White House and the Supreme Court over to the Democrats if it means denying it to Donald Trump. Such people must be in control of the polling at Fox.
6) According to the Reuters/IPSOS poll, Hillary Clinton is now leading Trump by 3%. However, the IPSOS polling methodology shares the same weaknesses as that described in the preceding polls. As in the other polls, the organization seems to have intentionally caused Democrats to be vastly over-represented in the sample pool. The pool is composed of 43% Democrats, 35% Republicans, and only 12% Independents. If you adjust this poll by the over-representation of Democrats and the severe under-representation of Independents, the result is a lead of about 6.5% in favor of Trump.
7) The LA Times/USC poll is now showing Hillary Clinton leading Trump by 1%. This particular poll is very different from the others. For one thing, it uses the same pool of about 2,000 randomly chosen people, repeatedly, to see how their view of the election changes over time. After careful examination, I cannot find hard information about the balance of preexisting political affiliation. Thus, it is impossible to determine whether the poll’s sample pool is in conflict with real world conditions. Accordingly, I cannot critique or praise this particular poll, except to say that when the other polls are normalized to the real world, a difference of 1% seems reasonably in line with reality.
The question is not whether or not the pollsters are falsifying the polls. The real question is simply why? Why work so hard to create a fantasy that will come crashing down when voters enter the voting booth?There are several reasons.
First, considerable time remains before the general election. Few people take the trouble to examine the methodology behind the polling. The pollsters can change the polls to be closer to reality, closer to the election, while avoiding losing all their credibility. If Hillary Clinton campaign contributors are mostly the “pay-for-play” contributors Republicans says they are, then the media knows that a poor showing in polls will cause contributions to dry up. Pay for play contributors make an investment, and they don’t want to make a losing one.
Most of the mainstream media, as well as all the entrenched special interests inside the beltway, support Hillary Clinton. In fact, an editor at the New York Times virtually admitted he would be willing to write false stories to prevent Trump from winning. The false polls make Trump look much weaker than he is, and this may have prevented Hillary Clinton’s donations from drying up. By disseminating these false polls, the media has also succeeded in peeling away support for Trump among several “on-the-fence” Republican elected officials. These elected officials are now afraid to link their fate to a person they view as a weak candidate.
Once you examine the real facts, and move outside the fantasy world, the two candidates are running neck and neck. A good debate performance or a few more damaging Hillary Clinton emails would catapult Trump into the lead. This is a horse race that anyone can still win.
The Synod is a conspiracy of 8 large international banks who seek to control gold, stock, bond and commodity markets all over the world. Jack Severs runs for his life when he learns too much, as the most sophisticated surveillance system ever built is deployed to track him down. As the ever-tightening noose closes, he struggles to uncover evidence to save himself and his world from collapsing! An exciting, fictional, fun and educational thriller about the banking cartel, and how it affects business, politics and daily life.