— MsMAGA (@MsMAGA16) October 23, 2016
Now, for all of you out there who still aren’t convinced that the polls are “adjusted”, we present to you the following Podesta email, leaked earlier today, that conveniently spells out, in detail, exactly how to “manufacture” the desired data. The email starts out with a request for recommendations on “oversamples for polling” in order to “maximize what we get out of our media polling.”
[See: Wikileaks tweet above]
The email even includes a handy, 37-page guide with the following poll-rigging recommendations. In Arizona, over sampling of Hispanics and Native Americans is highly recommended:
Research, microtargeting & polling projects
– Over-sample Hispanics
– Use Spanish language interviewing. (Monolingual Spanish-speaking voters are among the lowest turnout Democratic targets)
– Over-sample the Native American population
For Florida, the report recommends “consistently monitoring” samples to makes sure they’re “not too old” and “has enough African American and Hispanic voters.” Meanwhile, “independent” voters in Tampa and Orlando are apparently more dem friendly so the report suggests filling up independent quotas in those cities first.
– Consistently monitor the sample to ensure it is not too old, and that it has enough African American and Hispanic votersto reflect the state.
– On Independents: Tampa and Orlando are better persuasion targets than north or south Florida (check your polls before concluding this). If there are budget questions or oversamples,make sure that Tampa and Orlando are included first.
Meanwhile, it’s suggested that national polls over sample “key districts / regions” and “ethnic” groups “as needed.”
This is why nobody should worry over the polls. Remember, in Great Britain the polls were saying Brexit was going to be defeated, and it wasn’t. I imagine there was some polling tricks used there as well. Typically the media uses these polls to try to persuade and even dissuade voters one way or the other. And has been found so many times in the past, the polling questions are generally worded very wrongly in order to not get an authentic answer, but an enticed one to suit their agenda.
And while the Clinton campaign operatives and her sycophant MSM try to use the old kill the messenger deflection tactic by refusing to address the fucking content and context of the Wikileaks emails, especially Podesta’s emails…
— This Week (@ThisWeekABC) October 23, 2016
It's slimy enough to insinuate the emails are fake when you know they're not. This is outright lying https://t.co/9SmRwI5Ith
— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) October 23, 2016
— hugh von (@hughvonN) October 23, 2016
— hugh von (@hughvonN) October 23, 2016
— ChugiakTea (@ChugiakTea) October 23, 2016
The Clinton camp and the MSM are fully blaming the Russians, but yesterday I discovered something that pretty much backs up Wikileaks Julian Assange’s claim that it’s NOT the Russians that have made these mountains of emails available…
During the third and last presidential debate between Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Hillary Clinton, debate moderator Chris Wallace pulled a quote from a speech Clinton had given to Brazilian bankers, noting the information had been made available to the public via WikiLeaks.
Instead of answering the question, Clinton blamed the Russian government for the leaks, alleging “[t]he Russian government has engaged in espionage against Americans,” hacking “American websites, American accounts of private people, of institutions … in an effort, as 17 of our intelligence agencies have confirmed, to influence our election.”
Following the claim, Clinton criticized Trump for saying “[Clinton] has no idea whether it’s Russia, China, or anybody else,” repeating her assertion that 17 U.S. intelligence agencies had determined the Russian government had been behind the Democratic National Committee (DNC) hack.
Despite her claim, reality couldn’t be more different.
Instead of 17 agencies, only the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) haveoffered the public any input on this matter, claiming the DNC attacks “are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts.”
Without offering any evidence, these two — not 17 — agencies hinted that the Kremlin could be behind the cyber attack. But saying they believe the hacks come from the Russians is far short of saying they know the Russians were behind them.