Nation’s Most Accurate Poll Shows Trump Up By Two Points

[SirLinksALot]

SOURCE: THE FEDERALIST PAPERS

URL: http://thefederalistpapers.org/us/nations-most-accurate-poll-shows-trump-up-by-two-points#comment-5407934

By Robert Gehl


There are a lot of polls. Literally hundreds of them.

But the most accurate poll, at least in the last few election cycles, has been the poll released by Investor’s Business Daily and TIPP.

The poll ranked first – or most accurate – of the last three elections, predicting the 2012 election within 0.9 percent.

So the poll carries a lot of weight.



That’s why when IBD released their latest poll, people pay attention.

Just released hours ago, the poll shows Donald Trump up two points nationwide, by 43 to 41 percent for Hillary Clinton.

This poll – like the rest of the ones that IBD perform, are complete polls. They ask about the third party candidates, including “others” and “not sure.”

In that matchup, Donald Trump has 42.6 percent of the vote, Hillary Clinton has 40.8, Libertarian Gary Johnson has 7.2 percent, Green Party candidate Jill Stein has 3.3 percent, “other” has 1.9 percent and there are still 4.2 percent who are undecided.

Trumps support among Republicans – 84% is actually stronger than Clinton’s support among Republicans at 77%. Rural voters overwhelmingly support Trump and Urban voters support Clinton.

Interestingly, Trump’s advantage with people who describe themselves as “lower class” is huge. 68 percent support Trump. Among self-described middle-class voters, the support is split at 41 percent each.

Religious people tend to support Trump, while people who proclaim no religion support Clinton by almost a 2-1 margin.

Fifteen percent of blacks and Hispanics back Trump over Clinton, while she earns 65 percent of those blocs’ support. Broken down, 11 percent of blacks support Trump, and 22 percent of Hispanics support him, Breitbart reports.

The poll has a margin of error of 3.6 percentage points.

[HAPPY2BME]

The majority of the polls are being handled by neocon operatives.  Its called 'profiling.'

Communists are masters at it, and controlling the media.

Here's the bug ..

No Consequences From Media Peers for Reporters Caught Colluding With Hillary

But if you’re a Politico or New York Times scribe or CNBC anchor John Harwood and hacked emails emerge that reveal you outright colluding with Hillary Clinton campaign—by giving advice or providing the communications director “veto” power over what to include from your interview with the candidate or allowing campaign chair John Podesta veto power over your stories—that is another matter.

Your media friends will not censure you or even scold you—in fact, they don’t bother to contact you directly. Instead, you can hide between a crafty spokesman who won’t even answer specific questions but acts like he’s the publicist for some elusive Hollywood star and that a journalist determined to ask standard pointed questions is actually pining to profile him for Vanity Fair.

http://observer.com/2016/10/no-consequences-from-media-peers-for-reporters-caught-colluding-with-hillary/

[geronl]

3rd most accurate

but doesn't have a state  by state component