Bernie Sanders
Related: About this forumPollsters manipulated NY Polls -- suddenly it all makes sense
The NY polls over the last several weeks frankly didn't make sense to me. Then I saw this just a few minutes ago:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/4/16/1516313/-There-s-Something-Rotten-in-the-State-of-New-York
There's Something Rotten in the State of New York
by Phil Creek
After just a couple hours of research and going over polling procedures I started to become troubled. It appeared some of the polling in the last week or so taken in New York was done so in order to give a false appearance of majority support for Hillary Clinton. CNN as well as an NBC affiliate, the Wall Street Journal, and Marist all apparently targeted area's in New York which heavily favored Sec. Clinton in previous races including her Senate runs and the 2008 primary. Instead of having a broad base to poll, these organizations had apparently, and purposely, only polled in counties and demographic populations they knew had favored Clinton in the past.... I realized that if this turned out to be true, it would prove blatant manipulation of the process and polling data in order to misinform and suppress turnout for Bernie Sanders.
What my queries and research revealed was that Marist, after the knowledge of the Reuters poll showing Bernie pulling ahead nationally by a single point, conducted a poll inside upper-income precincts of New York City, select counties in western New York, and upper New York state. Polling was mostly targeted in the Counties of St. Lawrence and Herkimer (where Hillary won the 2008 primary by 70% in each), Nassau and Suffolk counties (each 62%), Fulton County ( 77%), Orleans county ( 76%), Cattaraugus county ( 69%) and Yates county ( 70%).
After doing some investigative journalism, making a few phone calls, and researching polling data for the last couple of nights (as I said, I have insomnia anyway ) the conclusion is that the polling data is being manipulated and presented in a direct bias in the favor of Sec. Clinton. It appears to have been done for two reasons; one, to depress and demoralize voter turn-out for Bernie Sanders in the crucial New York primary (a loss for Hillary there would put her electability in the general election in November into serious question), and two, to use the polling data average to suppress the Reuters polling of April 12th which gave Bernie Sanders a 1 point national lead over Hillary Clinton... And that part has worked. In the April 15th poll, the positions had slightly changed thanks to the manipulated New York polling data. Hillary had a point-7% lead over Bernie Sanders nation wide. Whether this rather underhanded and unethical tactic to manipulate polling data will achieve its goal of suppressing turnout for Bernie Sanders in the New York primary has yet to be seen…
Interesting note to add.... According to what I consider a reliable and trustworthy source ( someone I've known for 25 years and works in the New York broadcast media ) out of 62 counties in New York, polling was mostly conducted in certain upper-income residential areas plus 12 counties, and only counties where Hillary had won the 2008 primary by at least 60% of the vote. The average that Hillary won those recently polled counties in 2008 was 65.7%...
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
berniepdx420
(1,784 posts)the election... how come we never here about the cyber security being used to safe guard our Democratic elections... this has got to change
snot
(10,530 posts)I don't suppose there's any independent exit polling happening, is there?
polichick
(37,152 posts)
FlatBaroque
(3,160 posts)there are twenty more that they will get away with.
PeoViejo
(2,178 posts)If this all came to light after she was sworn-in, a quick self-Pardon would be in order.
Quote compliments of Bill Clinton.
peacebird
(14,195 posts)
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Hopefully it just makes them wrong. I don't think Bernie supporters would not show up because of poll numbers. We know it's more than just winning, it's about showing up and making our voices heard until the system hears them and changes.
,
dchill
(38,502 posts)any of those locations tomorrow.
SmittynMo
(3,544 posts)Creating and feeding false and misleading information to the media, who question nothing!!!!
Naw, nothing corrupt there!!!!
Establishments answer: Move on, nothing to see here.
LiberalArkie
(15,719 posts)Beware of those who count the vote.
monmouth4
(9,708 posts)
nxylas
(6,440 posts)Forgive me if I'm being cynical here.
monmouth4
(9,708 posts)
agracie
(950 posts)
thereismore
(13,326 posts)
awake
(3,226 posts)we know Bernie's people can not wait to vote, I hope that this tacit backfire because if Bernie pulls off a win or even a close tie it will be HUGE for him.
thesquanderer
(11,989 posts)RoccoR5955
(12,471 posts)I wondered, because I drove the long way back from Watkins Glen this past weekend. Along the way, I saw 15 Bernie yard signs, and only 4 Clinton yard signs. I went through Schuyler, Tompkins, Tioga, Broome, Delaware and Ulster Counties. I live in Ulster.
I was wondering where she was getting ahead in these polls. Thanks for the info.
Off topic, but FYI- I went to Watkins Glen to take part in the annual Green Grand Prix. You can find out more about that at http://www.greengrandprix.com
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)4ricksren
(72 posts)bernie voters know they are voting for an america of economic and cultural equality
sooner or later, superdelegates must run for reelection, and every superdelegate vote for bernie, is thousands of loyal, dedicated, enthusiastic, generous, passionate, principled voters for each superdelegate
win or lose, bernie's america rules!
4ricksren
(72 posts)bernie voters know they are voting for an america of economic and cultural equality
sooner or later, superdelegates must run for reelection, and every superdelegate vote for bernie, is thousands of loyal, dedicated, enthusiastic, generous, passionate, principled voters for each superdelegate supporting bernie
win or lose, bernie's america rules!
passy
(853 posts)Scuba
(53,475 posts)
GreatGazoo
(3,937 posts)The media drumbeat that Hillary Clinton has the election in the bag has been going on for months now. A few weeks ago, New York Times Washington correspondent Nate Cohn confirmed Hillary’s coronation in a column titled, “Hillary Clinton and Inevitability: This Time Is Different.” Cohn looked at the delegate count and compared Clinton’s performance in 2008 with how she was doing this year, and concluded, “If a candidate has ever been inevitable — for the nomination — it is Mrs. Clinton today.”
Media experts like Cohn point to an abundance of polls masquerading as news as the basis upon which they inform voters that Hillary Clinton will be winning the primary election. Poll results translate into conventional wisdom and until the startling Sanders upsets during the past few weeks, become a sort of self-fulfilling prophesy. The March 6 press release by the Mitchell/FOX 2 Detroit Poll, viewable in its entirely here, is a great example of how this was supposed to work in Michigan.
...
The message to be conveyed to readers, viewers and listeners the day before the big presidential election was clear: Pack it in, would-be Sanders voters. You’re dreaming if you think your puny vote will make a difference! Might as well stay home.
But a funny thing happened in Michigan. Bernie voters didn’t listen to the polls, or the pundits. They turned out anyway, as they did in Kansas, Minnesota, and Colorado. And during next week’s big primaries, the purportedly scientific polls that today show a big Hillary sweep in every state are going to seem a lot less scientific.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jonathan-greenberg/polldefying-pattern-predi_b_9434118.html