Trump wants Ann Selzer punished for her Iowa poll Predicition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s clearly nothing wrong with a poll shifting 7 points two days before the election and then being 16 points off.

Move along folks. There’s nothing to see here.

She was certainly lying for political gain. While campaign finance laws are wholly unconstitutional, they've been upheld. Her acts should be treated as an undisclosed political contribution and punished accordingly.

Any Dem who disagrees better be on the record saying Mackey should not have gone to jail for publishing a meme. Otherwise, your views are based on your politics and not the law. As such, they're not rational.

Sincere question for the group:
Did this board get infiltrated with idiots ( like the above poster) or has the entire country gotten really dumb?
This forum used to be filled with insight and now you have to wade through crap ( see post above) to get to anything meaningful.

Your post would be better received if you posted a substantive criticism instead of appealing to some illusory group consensus.

Post something substantive, or heck… something grounded in fact and reality, and I’ll be happy to criticize it😉

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think Selzer allowed her political bias to affect the results of her poll. There is no way an unbiased political observer would think Harris was beating Trump in Iowa. There was nothing that indicated that a state that voted for Trump by 8 points in 2020 and has only become more Republican by registration since would vote for a Democrat candidate. Indeed, the state shifted further red, voting for Trump by 13 points in the election. Another sign that the poll was wildly off is that neither campaign spent time or money campaigning in the state. Neither candidate thought the state was competitive.

Jon Ralston was another one who allowed his political bias to infect his prediction that Harris would beat Trump in Nevada by something like 0.2%. He had commented for weeks that Republican turnout in early voting would likely be too much for Harris to overcome. Yet, he predicted, based on no evidence, that independent voters would break wildly in favor of Harris.

Even if true that doesn't amount to election fraud nor does it warrant an investigation

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He wants her investigated for fraud.

What are we doing here?
It; 's not enough for him to win.
He needs to have question support.
He's also sicing his supporters on her.


https://nypost.com/2024/11/18/us-news/trump-slams-pollster-j-ann-selzer-whose-totally-fake-poll-showed-harris-winning-iowa-calls-for-probe/


President-elect Donald Trump slammed retiring election pollster J. Ann Selzer and called for an investigation after her last pre-Election Day survey showed Vice President Kamala Harris topping the Republican in Iowa — a state he ultimately won.

Trump slammed Selzer and the now-ridiculed Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa poll hours after she announced she was calling it quits from election polling.

Her last poll indicated Trump would lose to Harris by as much as three points in Iowa, but the future 47th president ended up winning the red state by a whopping 13 points on the way to recapturing the presidency.

absolutely agree, all political polls should have close scrutiny as they can cause election interference, scrutiny of the funding and if they are bias

This poll moved betting markets towards Harris. She released the poll, looking for attention on herself, momentum for her preferred candidate and moving the betting markets towards her preferred candidate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s clearly nothing wrong with a poll shifting 7 points two days before the election and then being 16 points off.

Move along folks. There’s nothing to see here.

She was certainly lying for political gain. While campaign finance laws are wholly unconstitutional, they've been upheld. Her acts should be treated as an undisclosed political contribution and punished accordingly.

Any Dem who disagrees better be on the record saying Mackey should not have gone to jail for publishing a meme. Otherwise, your views are based on your politics and not the law. As such, they're not rational.

Sincere question for the group:
Did this board get infiltrated with idiots ( like the above poster) or has the entire country gotten really dumb?
This forum used to be filled with insight and now you have to wade through crap ( see post above) to get to anything meaningful.

Your post would be better received if you posted a substantive criticism instead of appealing to some illusory group consensus.

Post something substantive, or heck… something grounded in fact and reality, and I’ll be happy to criticize it😉

Please try to stick to the topic at hand don't let them muddy the waters with nonsense.

The topic, Trump thinks it's appropriate to target anyone who didn't support him as winning in a landslide

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He wants her investigated for fraud.

What are we doing here?
It; 's not enough for him to win.
He needs to have question support.
He's also sicing his supporters on her.


https://nypost.com/2024/11/18/us-news/trump-slams-pollster-j-ann-selzer-whose-totally-fake-poll-showed-harris-winning-iowa-calls-for-probe/


President-elect Donald Trump slammed retiring election pollster J. Ann Selzer and called for an investigation after her last pre-Election Day survey showed Vice President Kamala Harris topping the Republican in Iowa — a state he ultimately won.

Trump slammed Selzer and the now-ridiculed Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa poll hours after she announced she was calling it quits from election polling.

Her last poll indicated Trump would lose to Harris by as much as three points in Iowa, but the future 47th president ended up winning the red state by a whopping 13 points on the way to recapturing the presidency.

absolutely agree, all political polls should have close scrutiny as they can cause election interference, scrutiny of the funding and if they are bias

This poll moved betting markets towards Harris. She released the poll, looking for attention on herself, momentum for her preferred candidate and moving the betting markets towards her preferred candidate.

And what law was broken in regards to election fraud warranting an investigation?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think he is right.

Pollsters should do their best to be non biased. It definitely look like she released intentionally skewed results into order to bolster Harris’s momentum and change the media narrative for democrats to positive

She doesn’t weight her polls. Her methods aren’t a secret.

She refused to release her cross tabs.

Wait - refusing to release cross tabs is a crime?! I had no idea

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He wants her investigated for fraud.

What are we doing here?
It; 's not enough for him to win.
He needs to have question support.
He's also sicing his supporters on her.


https://nypost.com/2024/11/18/us-news/trump-slams-pollster-j-ann-selzer-whose-totally-fake-poll-showed-harris-winning-iowa-calls-for-probe/


President-elect Donald Trump slammed retiring election pollster J. Ann Selzer and called for an investigation after her last pre-Election Day survey showed Vice President Kamala Harris topping the Republican in Iowa — a state he ultimately won.

Trump slammed Selzer and the now-ridiculed Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa poll hours after she announced she was calling it quits from election polling.

Her last poll indicated Trump would lose to Harris by as much as three points in Iowa, but the future 47th president ended up winning the red state by a whopping 13 points on the way to recapturing the presidency.

absolutely agree, all political polls should have close scrutiny as they can cause election interference, scrutiny of the funding and if they are bias

This poll moved betting markets towards Harris. She released the poll, looking for attention on herself, momentum for her preferred candidate and moving the betting markets towards her preferred candidate.

That means anyone who bet on Harris lost more money, and anyone who bet on Trump won more. How does that help Harris, exactly?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think Selzer allowed her political bias to affect the results of her poll. There is no way an unbiased political observer would think Harris was beating Trump in Iowa. There was nothing that indicated that a state that voted for Trump by 8 points in 2020 and has only become more Republican by registration since would vote for a Democrat candidate. Indeed, the state shifted further red, voting for Trump by 13 points in the election. Another sign that the poll was wildly off is that neither campaign spent time or money campaigning in the state. Neither candidate thought the state was competitive.

Jon Ralston was another one who allowed his political bias to infect his prediction that Harris would beat Trump in Nevada by something like 0.2%. He had commented for weeks that Republican turnout in early voting would likely be too much for Harris to overcome. Yet, he predicted, based on no evidence, that independent voters would break wildly in favor of Harris.

Even if true that doesn't amount to election fraud nor does it warrant an investigation

I dunno, sounds like part of a conspiracy with her, at best, willfully ignorant employer to disseminate fraudulent information to discourage Trump voters from showing up at the poll. DOJ has convicted on a similar theory before.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He wants her investigated for fraud.

What are we doing here?
It; 's not enough for him to win.
He needs to have question support.
He's also sicing his supporters on her.


https://nypost.com/2024/11/18/us-news/trump-slams-pollster-j-ann-selzer-whose-totally-fake-poll-showed-harris-winning-iowa-calls-for-probe/


President-elect Donald Trump slammed retiring election pollster J. Ann Selzer and called for an investigation after her last pre-Election Day survey showed Vice President Kamala Harris topping the Republican in Iowa — a state he ultimately won.

Trump slammed Selzer and the now-ridiculed Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa poll hours after she announced she was calling it quits from election polling.

Her last poll indicated Trump would lose to Harris by as much as three points in Iowa, but the future 47th president ended up winning the red state by a whopping 13 points on the way to recapturing the presidency.

absolutely agree, all political polls should have close scrutiny as they can cause election interference, scrutiny of the funding and if they are bias

This poll moved betting markets towards Harris. She released the poll, looking for attention on herself, momentum for her preferred candidate and moving the betting markets towards her preferred candidate.

And what law was broken in regards to election fraud warranting an investigation?

18 U.S.C. § 241

[Anonymous]

She predicted a 3 point Harris win and Trump won by 16. Her career as a pollster is pretty much over. Move on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He wants her investigated for fraud.

What are we doing here?
It; 's not enough for him to win.
He needs to have question support.
He's also sicing his supporters on her.


https://nypost.com/2024/11/18/us-news/trump-slams-pollster-j-ann-selzer-whose-totally-fake-poll-showed-harris-winning-iowa-calls-for-probe/


President-elect Donald Trump slammed retiring election pollster J. Ann Selzer and called for an investigation after her last pre-Election Day survey showed Vice President Kamala Harris topping the Republican in Iowa — a state he ultimately won.

Trump slammed Selzer and the now-ridiculed Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa poll hours after she announced she was calling it quits from election polling.

Her last poll indicated Trump would lose to Harris by as much as three points in Iowa, but the future 47th president ended up winning the red state by a whopping 13 points on the way to recapturing the presidency.

absolutely agree, all political polls should have close scrutiny as they can cause election interference, scrutiny of the funding and if they are bias

This poll moved betting markets towards Harris. She released the poll, looking for attention on herself, momentum for her preferred candidate and moving the betting markets towards her preferred candidate.

And what law was broken in regards to election fraud warranting an investigation?

18 U.S.C. § 241

No. try again,

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s clearly nothing wrong with a poll shifting 7 points two days before the election and then being 16 points off.

Move along folks. There’s nothing to see here.

She was certainly lying for political gain. While campaign finance laws are wholly unconstitutional, they've been upheld. Her acts should be treated as an undisclosed political contribution and punished accordingly.

Any Dem who disagrees better be on the record saying Mackey should not have gone to jail for publishing a meme. Otherwise, your views are based on your politics and not the law. As such, they're not rational.

You're insane.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-edny/pr/social-media-influencer-douglass-mackey-sentenced-after-conviction-election

Lots of Dems have published worse than Mackey and not been indicted, let alone prosecuted. Once again, Dems weaponized DOJ and you don't care because you're a partisan. As I said, your views are based on politics and neither the law nor principle.

Feel free to share examples of Democrats who deceived people into throwing their vote away

[Anonymous]

Isn’t this like astroturfing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s clearly nothing wrong with a poll shifting 7 points two days before the election and then being 16 points off.

Move along folks. There’s nothing to see here.

She was certainly lying for political gain. While campaign finance laws are wholly unconstitutional, they've been upheld. Her acts should be treated as an undisclosed political contribution and punished accordingly.

Any Dem who disagrees better be on the record saying Mackey should not have gone to jail for publishing a meme. Otherwise, your views are based on your politics and not the law. As such, they're not rational.

You're insane.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-edny/pr/social-media-influencer-douglass-mackey-sentenced-after-conviction-election

Lots of Dems have published worse than Mackey and not been indicted, let alone prosecuted. Once again, Dems weaponized DOJ and you don't care because you're a partisan. As I said, your views are based on politics and neither the law nor principle.

Feel free to share examples of Democrats who deceived people into throwing their vote away

Seriously? Did you sleep through the 2023-2024 Democratic Presidential primary season?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He wants her investigated for fraud.

What are we doing here?
It; 's not enough for him to win.
He needs to have question support.
He's also sicing his supporters on her.


https://nypost.com/2024/11/18/us-news/trump-slams-pollster-j-ann-selzer-whose-totally-fake-poll-showed-harris-winning-iowa-calls-for-probe/


President-elect Donald Trump slammed retiring election pollster J. Ann Selzer and called for an investigation after her last pre-Election Day survey showed Vice President Kamala Harris topping the Republican in Iowa — a state he ultimately won.

Trump slammed Selzer and the now-ridiculed Des Moines Register/Mediacom Iowa poll hours after she announced she was calling it quits from election polling.

Her last poll indicated Trump would lose to Harris by as much as three points in Iowa, but the future 47th president ended up winning the red state by a whopping 13 points on the way to recapturing the presidency.

absolutely agree, all political polls should have close scrutiny as they can cause election interference, scrutiny of the funding and if they are bias

This poll moved betting markets towards Harris. She released the poll, looking for attention on herself, momentum for her preferred candidate and moving the betting markets towards her preferred candidate.

And what law was broken in regards to election fraud warranting an investigation?

18 U.S.C. § 241

No. try again,

DOJ has already convicted for someone for publishing misleading information under that statute. You may not like it, but the first amendment is dead letter under Garland's DOJ.