Reuters has taken some heat in recent months for “tweaking” their polling methodology seemingly every time the data reveals “inconvenient” results for Hillary (see our previous posts on the topic here and here). But the latest Reuters/Ipsos polling “tweak” is truly amazing. Having run out of options for slyly “tweaking” questions and categories to sway respondents in their preferred direction, Reuters has apparnetly resorted to blatant poll tampering by altering their polling samples to include a disproportionate number of democrats.
In their latest poll, released just two days ago, Reuters found Hillary to have a 6 point lead in a head-to-head contest with Trump. But, when you dig a little deeper you find that Reuters’ polling sample included 44% democrats and only 33% republicans. Which would be fine, of course, if it had any basis in reality. But, as The Pew Research Center points out very clearly (see table below), registered democrats represent about 33% of the electorate while republicans are 29%…a modest 4 point gap versus the 11 point advantage in the Reuters sample.
Of course, this is significant because, as any reasonable person would expect, democrats swing toward Hillary by an overwhelming margin of 84% and, vice-versa, 78% of republicans swing toward Trump.
Now, using Reuters’ data, Hillary supposedly has a 6-point lead over Trump. However, if we alter the sample data to reflect what Pew says is the real distribution of democrats versus republicans (i.e. 33% vs. 29%, respectively) and apply the same support levels by party affiliation it results in an 8.5% swing toward Trump who would have a 2.5% lead….very inconvenient.
And just to confirm, here is how The Pew Research Center says that the distribution of party affiliation has trended over time. At least since 1992, democrats have never enjoyed an 11 point registration gap that Reuters decided to include in its poll.
Finally, we also checked the polling data of the latest McClatchy-Marist Poll to make sure we weren’t missing something. And sure enough, their sample includes just a 5 point advantage for democrats…slightly larger than the 4 point gap measured by Pew but no where near the 11 point Reuters gap.
And that’s how you rig some polling data…
More evidence that both parties are going to fix the election and use these polls to justify it.
Sanders drew massive crowds and he lost. Trump drew massive crowds and he lost.
Are the people to believe a record voter turnout will result in Clinton.
Anything other than a landslide can be plausibly rigged. A close vote would not attract the amount of scrutiny a landslide one would and could be successfully rigged.
In the news, the Seattle mall attacker, a non citizen from an Islamic country, not mentioned much in the MSM, is a Hillary supporter who has registered and voted illegally at least three times. Don’t expect a great deal of honesty in voting, the dead and illegal vote alone could swing things and never be mentioned in public MSM controlled discussions.
Any way, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/
Had lunch with my liberal buddies today, and they honestly believe Hillary is up big, like 60-30. Of course they get their “news” in different places from me.
This article has a misunderstanding of the purpose of these polls. They have little to nothing to do with trying to find out what people think and feel. They have everything to do with shaping what people think and feel. In other words these are not outputs that provide insight into the mood of the electorate, but rather they are inputs that provide direction and guidance that shape the mood of the electorate.
The polls have to remain close enough so they can give the election to Hillary despite what the voters say.