Social Media Patterns Show Trump Is Looking at a Landslide Victory

[skeeter]

Social Media Patterns Show Trump Is Looking at a Landslide Victory

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/08/evidence-trump-landslide/

Jim Hoft
Aug 7th, 2016


Current polls show the race for President is much tighter than it really is.  Ann Coulter warned us years ago in her best seller Slander that Democrats and the liberal media always use polls to manipulate and discourage conservatives from voting.  Thanks to social media there is more and more evidence that the polls are way off and if things stay as they are, Trump will win in a landslide!

It’s evident Hillary has a hard time filling a Union Hall while Trump regularly turns people away from his stadium and arena venues.

Now this – Analysis from social media provides additional support that Trump is likely to win in a landslide.

So how bad is it?
Evidence from ‘The Truth Division’ shows that if you look at social media, Trump is killing Hillary!

{... snip ...}

Any analysis of the upcoming election must start with the premise that 48% of the voting public would vote for an abscessed tooth if it were running on the democratic ticket.

I have a friend who recently asked me jokingly whether I planned to vote for the lunatic or the crook, and then said it was a no brainer for him - he'd vote for the crook.

So there'll be no landslide for Trump. For him it'll be about nailing down independents. After he convinces enough republicans, of course. Which is still an open question.

[Just_Victor]

Trump being ahead with "Likes" and followers in social media doesn't mean diddly for an election.  There is no verification for social media accounts, that the account owner is, a legal or registered voter, an American citizen, or even an actual human being.  Ghost accounts on Facebook, Twitter, etc are rampant.

This is a silly excuse for analysis.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Interesting.  If anyone cares my Magic 8 Ball says "Outlook not so good."

[XenaLee]

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump  18 Jul 2013
Isn't it crazy that people of little or no talent or success can be so critical of those whose accomplishments are great with no retribution

Hey, Donald....what's really crazy....is that people of little or no talent (like yourself)....can  be handed a successful career and lots and lots of cash (a million dollars)....and then can proceed to go on to take full credit for any future successes, giving no credit at all to the one that got them started (ie Fred Trump).

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Seeing is believing.

Don't I know it!  I've watched every episode of Ancient Aliens.

[XenaLee]

Any analysis of the upcoming election must start with the premise that 48% of the voting public would vote for an abscessed tooth if it were running on the democratic ticket.

I have a friend who recently asked me jokingly whether I planned to vote for the lunatic or the crook, and then said it was a no brainer for him - he'd vote for the crook.

So there'll be no landslide for Trump. For him it'll be about nailing down independents. After he convinces enough republicans, of course. Which is still an open question.

The problem Trump has (or one of them)....is that he has already burned bridges between him and Cruz supporters and conservatives....and quite intentionally so.  He will never get those votes back.  They will either go to third party candidates or will dissolve in the ether of the cosmos this year.  After which, Trump will, naturally, blame those voters on his massive loss this November.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

This is nothing to scoff at. This social media measurement predicted Nixon's easy reelection and Reagan's '84 landslide. I will also remind you that Bush had a massive number of Facebook likes over Dukakis in '88.

Does anyone still do Facebook in the age of Pokemon Go?

[r9etb]

This twaddle looks like a modern-day reprise of the famous Literary Digest poll in the 1936 election, which predicted Alf Landon defeating Roosevelt in a landslide (https://www.math.upenn.edu/~deturck/m170/wk4/lecture/case1.html).

The Literary Digest poll is a seminal example of polling bias -- it was a huge, telephone-only poll; they contacted tens of thousands of people nationwide ... at a time when not everybody had phones in their homes, and among those who did, they leaned heavily Republican.

The apparently never-correct Mr. Hoft is engaged in the same sort of error: just for starters, he's assuming that the social media habits of Trump and Hillary supporters are the same; they're almost certainly not.