Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anybody else have insufferable people in their SM feeds thinking they are professinal pollsters with the only lead on what isgoing to happen?
Sweet Jesus there is a D bag I know from my Duke MBA days that has been spamming evryone's feed with 'in depth' analysis on what is going to happen.
No one asked you, tool. You are just another obnoxious eunuch for Harris.
There's been a bunch of MAGA ones here the last couple of weeks. They're not as noisy right now, though.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This might not translate to MI/WI/PA :
https://x.com/Redistrict/status/1853108021221904510
There are always going to be outlier polls even when they are well designed. Hers is one of them.
Her "outliers" have been right in the past.
Her outlier poll has a margin of error that still allows for Trump beating Harris in Iowa by more than 3 points.
Which would be a horrible result for Trump.
A win is a win. It doesn’t matter how much by.
+1 every time
Do you people not understand what a close result in Iowa would likely mean about the electorate in the 7 swing states?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This might not translate to MI/WI/PA :
https://x.com/Redistrict/status/1853108021221904510
There are always going to be outlier polls even when they are well designed. Hers is one of them.
Her "outliers" have been right in the past.
Her outlier poll has a margin of error that still allows for Trump beating Harris in Iowa by more than 3 points.
Which would be a horrible result for Trump.
A win is a win. It doesn’t matter how much by.
+1 every time
Do you people not understand what a close result in Iowa would likely mean about the electorate in the 7 swing states?
Anonymous wrote:Anybody else have insufferable people in their SM feeds thinking they are professinal pollsters with the only lead on what isgoing to happen?
Sweet Jesus there is a D bag I know from my Duke MBA days that has been spamming evryone's feed with 'in depth' analysis on what is going to happen.
No one asked you, tool. You are just another obnoxious eunuch for Harris.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This might not translate to MI/WI/PA :
https://x.com/Redistrict/status/1853108021221904510
There are always going to be outlier polls even when they are well designed. Hers is one of them.
Her "outliers" have been right in the past.
Her outlier poll has a margin of error that still allows for Trump beating Harris in Iowa by more than 3 points.
Which would be a horrible result for Trump.
A win is a win. It doesn’t matter how much by.
+1 every time
Do you people not understand what a close result in Iowa would likely mean about the electorate in the 7 swing states?
Anonymous wrote:Anybody else have insufferable people in their SM feeds thinking they are professinal pollsters with the only lead on what isgoing to happen?
Sweet Jesus there is a D bag I know from my Duke MBA days that has been spamming evryone's feed with 'in depth' analysis on what is going to happen.
No one asked you, tool. You are just another obnoxious eunuch for Harris.
Anonymous wrote:Trump’s red wall in the Midwest is secure even if he loses Iowa. He’s taking Missouri, Ohio, Indiana, Wisconsin, and Michigan, and I wouldn’t be surprised if he takes Minnesota.
People forget the large Muslim population in Minnesota, namely Somali are not happy with the trans takeover in public schools and the Gaza war. An odd marriage indeed but Trump is gaining in African American support and Muslim support in the Midwest and with Latinos in the Southwest and Jews in the Northeast
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This might not translate to MI/WI/PA :
https://x.com/Redistrict/status/1853108021221904510
There are always going to be outlier polls even when they are well designed. Hers is one of them.
Her "outliers" have been right in the past.
Her outlier poll has a margin of error that still allows for Trump beating Harris in Iowa by more than 3 points.
Which would be a horrible result for Trump.
A win is a win. It doesn’t matter how much by.
+1 every time
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This might not translate to MI/WI/PA :
https://x.com/Redistrict/status/1853108021221904510
There are always going to be outlier polls even when they are well designed. Hers is one of them.
Her "outliers" have been right in the past.
Her outlier poll has a margin of error that still allows for Trump beating Harris in Iowa by more than 3 points.
Which would be a horrible result for Trump.
A win is a win. It doesn’t matter how much by.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This might not translate to MI/WI/PA :
https://x.com/Redistrict/status/1853108021221904510
There are always going to be outlier polls even when they are well designed. Hers is one of them.
Her "outliers" have been right in the past.
Her outlier poll has a margin of error that still allows for Trump beating Harris in Iowa by more than 3 points.
Which would be a horrible result for Trump.