• Print
• Email

No, The Polls "Weren't" Wrong - the Pundits Were

Details

Created: Wednesday, 09 November 2016 13:30

Published: Wednesday, 09 November 2016 13:30

Written by Ax D. WhiteMan

As election results came in, talking heads yammered in unison, "the polls were completely wrong."

But they weren't.

As we pointed out here in late August, an objective reading of the polls (with 10 weeks remaining) was that the election outcome was hovering around the margin of error. Yet, pundit after pundit, on both sides, were sprinting to the closest available microphone to declare "It's Over" for Trump. We were not gifted with some special insight. There was simply NO WAY the empirical data showed anything but a very competitive race.

Again on October 13, in response to the Weekly Standards pseudo-intellectual Nathan Last article declaring the race over, we pointed out once again - that the data simply did not support that conclusion.

As the final polls were published yesterday, the average of the polls as aggregated by RCP showed the race in a virtual dead heat - both in popular and electoral vote. I posted and tweeted the final electoral map pictured above - and was promptly labeled a #TrumpTard. 

That is essentially how the pundit class treated anyone attempting to make an objective analysis of polling data that showed a very close race; and perhaps more importantly showed a consistent trend in Trumps favor for the final two weeks.

Last night was surprise to most, but not because of incorrect polls - because they refused to read them without the bias of their own prejudice. 

• Print
• Email

FBI Probe Helping Hillary in Florida ?

Details

Created: Friday, 04 November 2016 12:52

Published: Friday, 04 November 2016 12:52

Written by Ax D. WhiteMan

We typically try to keep polling results in perspective. That is, polling is an imperfect science, and should be viewed in relative terms. That is, when compared to previous polls, likely indicative of trends, but very possibly inaccurate as predicting results.

But the trend of Florida polling is more than a little puzzling. If one is to believe the currently published polls in Florida, the announcement that Hillary Clinton was under criminal investigation by the FBI caused her popularity to increase in Florida by about 3%. This seems especially puzzling when during the same period, Hillary's popularity has fallen precipitously nationally, and in every other State. 

Is there something that Florida knows that the rest of the country doesn't?

Is this a "last gasp" of the media polling industry to attempt to push Trump into campaigning in Florida rather than newly found "swing states" like Pennsylvania and Michigan?

Don't know. Just pointing out, it seems very odd that the rest of the country goes in one direction, and Florida goes the other. Then again, it is Florida.

• Print
• Email

The Early Latino Vote - Suppression Strategy

Details

Created: Monday, 07 November 2016 12:28

Published: Monday, 07 November 2016 12:28

Written by Ax D. WhiteMan

The media has begun repeating an alleged micro fact that a "surge in early voting Latinos"  spells doom for Trump.

This is highly likely to be overly hyped insignificance. It actually sounds a lot like GOP promoting analysts of 2012 supposedly "unskewing" polling data.

The fact is that 100% of this information is provided by a single source. Catalist, an organization by it's own description dedicated "exclusively to progressive organizations." This is a data mining firm that is largely contending that it has mined significant data from results that have yet to be released.

Even if one believes that they have unpublished sources to early voting data and the Latino vote now makes up 15% of the early vote instead of 10% of the early vote as in 2012; it's statistically ignorant to believe that signifies some level of direct ratcheting of Latino voting. This "surge" could be the result of an effective early voting strategy, and it is only a guess as to whether or not these are voters that would have normally voted on election day. 

I guess it's no surprise that this alleged micro granule of fact has echoed throughout the major media news as if to proclaim to Trump voters - never mind, the votes are in - you lose.  Let's try to keep this in perspective. It's likely not true, if it is true, its not likely to be significant, if it is significant, it would only be decisive in a very close election.

So, if you're a Trump supporter it's more important than ever, that you vote.

• Print
• Email

Trump Right NOT to Pre-Concede the Election

Details

Created: Thursday, 20 October 2016 13:50

Published: Thursday, 20 October 2016 13:50

Written by Ax D. WhiteMan

The hysteria over Trumps refusal to accept results that are not yet rendered is retarded - and if you're one of those who are hyper-ventilating over it - you too, are retarded.

This is not much different than the hysteria over Trumps refusal to commit to supporting the eventual GOP nominee. Trump answered that honestly. Many of the others didn't.

Now the fact that Trump hasn't committed to accept the results of a system that reveals deeper and more corrupt flaws every day, before the facts are even known - it's somehow controversial?

Please...

Hillary could answer that question easily - because she lied, everyone knows she lied, and no one will even think of bringing it up again. If Trump wins this - the Hillary and the Democrats will be filing lawsuits all over the country, demanding recounts, creating non-issues like confusing ballots, hanging chads, new found missing ballots in the backs of trunks - you name it - they'll do it. They'll demand the votes be counted over and over until they get the outcome they want.

And nobody even expects anything different.

But because Hillary is a Politician, her answer is discounted as political speak. Since Trump answered like a person - like any person would - the idiots on the left, coupled by retards on the right (yeah that's you Hugh Hewitt) have gone hysterical - over nothing.