http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/26/big-time-backlash-when-all-polling-on-donald-trump-is-dismissed-as-fake.html
A Fox News poll came out the other night, and I tweeted some of the findings about President Trump.
No analysis, no commentary. Just a few numbers.
"Trump approval at 40%, down from 45% last month. 53% say his agenda is coming apart; 44% say he's shaking up Washington."
And: "68% approve of DOJ naming a special counsel, 29% disapprove."
Well, you'd have thought I had called for the president's impeachment.
I practically got buried under an avalanche of angry tweets.
Most of them didn't seem to want to engage in an actual discussion. They just attacked me, Fox, and polling in general.
Have they already forgotten the last time they trusted (((polls)))?
89% of the public believe that journalists should be pushed down a flight of stairs.
Because
1. Polling led highly esteemed Princeton "scientist" Sam Wang to give Hillary a 99% chance of winning the election.
2. The left's stalking and violence have caused Trump supporters to be wary of giving honest answers to pollsters.
Polls don't matter anymore. Good or bad they don't reflect reality any longer because it's impossible for them to poll everybody equally. 2000 cum sipping faggots in LA and New York don't reflect reality even if they were randomly selected.
>>127220580
Every poll on Nate Coppers site except LA Times predicted a Hillary landslide. Even Nate Copper put it at 99.8% Hillary winning.
Think about that for a minute...
1 out of 100s of polls was correct.
1
And you still trust polls?
The polls no longer have any credibility. They may be accurate, but we have no way of being assured of that.
>>127220580
Maybe they shouldn't lie and deceive people so much
>>127221575
No, that was Sam Wang.
Nate Copper spent over a year with totally wrong headlines, confessed to acting like a pundit, and then gave Hillary a 70% chance. Of course, there's no way to verify the 70% figure, so Nate gets to be "right" no matter who won. Even Sam Wang could've claimed Trump got lucky with his 1% win, but thankfully he had some level of integrity.
>>127221575
No, they just want US to beLIEve their polls.
I fully supported Trump until the Saudi arms deal and him bombing Syria. Now I only like 20% support him
I'd definitely vote for him again, but I want Senators like Rand Paul to stand up to his neocon actions
Well yeah, people don't forget it when you get caught on multiple lies..... that shit is forever. It's not helping their case either when their defense in summed up as:
>no bro, no bro, you didn't catch us lying to you.... y-you're just acting like a big jerk!
No mercy for liars, even the professional ones.
>>127220580
Well jeez as much as I think Trump is a moron, I believe he might be just, a little bit, justified on calling bullshit on any kind of pool.
>>127221055
And here's someone from the other 11%.
>>127220580
>we asked 1000 or so people that we already know and reflect their opinion on the entirety of the country
Polling is bullshit.
>>127220580
>people no longer trust the media
Wow, who would have thought.
>>127220580
There's no way for polls to be accurate anymore. Both sides are too extreme so you'll get a bias anywhere you conduct polls.