Another Polling Update For Today

Two new polls out this morning giving further indication that Donald Trump has essentially drawn even and possibly slightly ahead of Hillary Clinton nationally leading into the GOP National Convention next week:

• A CBS/NYTimes poll that has the race tied at 40/40; and
• A new Rasmussen survey that shows Trump leading, 44/37.

The RealClearPolitics average of recent polls, which goes all the way back to June 24, now shows Ms. Clinton with a 3.1% overall lead.  If one considers only those polls taken during July, and thus more likely to give us an accurate snapshot of the race, that lead falls to 1.2%.

Further, if one factors out the wildly outlying Reuters/Ipsos survey, you end up with Trump leading by .67%.  So basically, the race is a tie.

Interestingly, RCP has still not chosen to include Reuters/Ipsos's most recent update that results in Hillary holding a 13% lead in the race.  So I suppose the folks at RCP may have decided that that poll is just too ludicrous even for their purposes.

Whatever, we basically now have a tied race, and it is very likely that the polls will swing in favor of Trump as he gets the traditional bounce out of his convention.  After that, it is equally likely that they will swing back Ms. Clinton's way over the following two weeks as she gets the traditional bounce out of her convention.

After that, this race will ultimately boil down to whether Trump is able to convince enough voters that he is not dangerous.  More on that tomorrow.

More Thoughts on Polling Data - UPDATED

Following on to  yesterday's bashing of the Reuters/Ipsos poll and the recent decision by RealClearPolitics.com to include this clearly fake, clear outlier in its daily polling average, we have these results this morning:

• A national McClatchy poll showing the race at Hillary 42, Trump 39, right in line with every other recent national poll - well, other than Reuters/Ipsos;
• State polls from Quinnipiac that show the following results:  Ohio - Trump and Clinton tied; Florida - Trump +3; Pennsylvania - Trump +2; 
• An Iowa poll from Monmouth that has the race at Trump +2;
• A Nevada poll from Monmouth that has it Hillary +4;
• Another Florida poll from JMC Analytics that has it Trump +5;

And where is this morning's latest update on Reuters/Ipsos?  Hillary 46, Trump 33.

As I write this, RCP has yet to include this latest clearly fake Reuters/Ipsos result in its daily average.  If they do, well, shame on them, and it's time to stop relying on RCP for anything real.

Have a great day.

UPDATE:  Now at mid-day, we have new results from the YouGov/Economist national tracking poll - another tracking poll which RCP chooses not to include in its average for mysterious reasons - that shows the race at Hillary 40, Trump 37.

At this point, the data is overwhelming that this is a 2-3 point race at this moment in time, yet Reuters/Ipsos comes up with a 13 point margin for Hillary.

Why is the Reuters/Ipsos national tracking poll the only such tracking poll that RCP chooses to include in its average?  This is a question that needs to be answered.

Thoughts on Recent Polling Data

If you, like much of our fake national news media, follow the RealClearPolitics.com average of recent polls, you likely believe that Hillary Clinton has a modest, but consistent lead in that measure of somewhere around 4-5 percentage points over Donald Trump in a head-to-head race.  When polls add in the Libertarian and Green party candidates, the lead shrinks by about a percentage point.  That's been pretty consistent over the last few weeks, though it has narrowed somewhat from a month ago.

What you need to know is this:  In early June - June 4 to be exact - RCP, for whatever reason, chose to start including the Reuters/Ipsos daily tracking poll results in its average.  As we detailed here several weeks back, that poll consistently and obviously intentionally over-samples Democrat voters in its' surveys by a huge amount.  Because of this, it consistently produces a skewed result that heavily favors the Democrat candidate.  This is not a secret - it is something everyone has been aware of for a long, long time.

The folks at RCP appeared to realize this reality from the outset of that tracking poll a year ago, and for ten months studiously refused to include its results in its average.  That changed, as mentioned above, six weeks ago, just as Trump had closed what had been an 8-10 point Clinton lead.  I inquired via email with RCP as to the reasons behind their decision, but received no reply.

This morning, another tracking poll - the NBC/SurveyMonkey daily tracking poll - shows the race has narrowed to a Clinton lead of 47-44.  This compares to the Reuters/Ipsos result of Clinton 44, Trump 33.

Guess what?  RCP does not include the NBC/SurveyMonkey poll in its average.

So let's play a little game:  If one factors out the Reuters/Ipsos clear outlier from the current RCP average of polls going all the way back to June 24, you come out with an average Clinton lead of 3.5%, right in line with the NBC/SurveyMonkey poll.

Further, if one includes only those polls released in July, and thus far more reflective of current events, the average result comes out to a Clinton lead of 2.3%, well within the margin of error of all the polls taken.

Again, I have no idea why, after having ignored the Reuters/Ipsos poll for ten solid months, RCP chose to begin including it in its average at a particularly fortuitous time for Ms. Clinton.  I've asked, and RCP chooses not to reply.

But if you rely on the RCP average for your info on where the polls currently stand, just be aware that its results are significantly skewed by the inclusion of a poll that intentionally uses a widely skewed sample.

100% Corruption

Yesterday I posted the following on my Facebook page:

If you still labor under the illusion that the fix wasn't in for Hillary, consider this: it is a felony punishable by prison time to lie to the FBI. Hillary Clinton, a person who is so pathologically disposed to lying that she likely does it in her sleep, was interviewed on Saturday morning by the FBI for 3 and a half hours. It is simply not possible that the FBI determined by Tuesday morning that everything Ms. Clinton said to them on Saturday was truthful.

Hillary is part of the ruling class and thus exempt from the law. A vote for her is a vote for that ruling class. If you vote for her in November, you are voting for your own subjugation. This really is not complicated.


Well, in his testimony this morning, FBI Director James Comey solved this particular matter conclusively when he told a congressional committee that his six agents who "interviewed" Ms. Clinton did not even bother to place her under oath.  Think about that for a second:  This is the target of a year-long criminal investigation that involved at one point about 150 FBI agents.  Those agents spent a year pouring through records and interviewing dozens of witnesses, all of whom were forced to testify under oath.

Yet, when it came down to the final act, the questioning of the actual target of the investigation, the FBI chose not to put her under oath.  Why?  Because whenever someone testifies under oath in a criminal investigation, the FBI must record the testimony and produce a transcript of it that is subject to request under the Freedom of Information Act.

Thus, by failing to place Ms. Clinton - the ostensible TARGET of the investigation - under oath, the FBI ensures that no record of her testimony can become public.  This in turn relieves the FBI of having to compare the target's testimony to all the mountain of evidence their 150 agents had compiled during their investigation to determine whether or not she had lied to them, which, as mentioned above, is a felony.

This is 100% corruption of our federal government.  The process is complete, and they're no longer even trying to hide it.  President Obama promised to "transform this country", and he has succeeded.  100%.

Now would be a good time to pray for the future of your children and grandchildren.

The Tragedy of James Comey

The tragedy of James Comey is one of lost opportunity. He and he alone had a chance - possibly the last chance anyone will ever have if Hillary is elected in November - to demonstrate that one of the foundational principles of the American Experiment still applies.

That foundational principle is that we are a country in which all people are indeed created equal. That this is a country that has no ruling class. That this is a nation of laws, not of men, and that the laws that apply to the lowest among us apply equally to those who attain the highest public status.

James Comey alone could have become a true American hero by showing that this principle still applies in our society. Because he lacked either the character or the courage to do so, he demonstrated, perhaps irrevocably, that the opposite is now true in Barack Obama's fundamentally transformed America. We do now have a ruling class; we are no longer a nation of laws, but a nation of men; the law truly does apply differently to different people depending entirely on their class and political power.

It's a tragedy, plain and simple.  Nothing else matters or need be said.

The Star of David Joke's On Hillary

First, this is not the Star of David:

THIS is the Star of David as it appears on the flag of Israel:

See the difference?  Good, because apparently no one at CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, the NY Times or the Washington Post is capable of making that distinction.

Well, that's not exactly true.  The people at all of those fake media outlets are capable of making that distinction, but when Donald Trump tweeted out the first image late last week, the fake media people saw what they believed was an opportunity to paint Trump as anti-Semitic by pretending he had used the actual Star of David for crass political purposes.  And so, every one of those fake media outlets spent the entire holiday weekend displaying that image for their viewers and pretending it was some great controversy that somehow proves the presumptive nominee of the Republican Party is anti-Semitic.

Do you see why the joke's on Hillary?  If you've been reading my stuff for the last 10 months, I imagine you do.

For the rest of you, here's the deal:  The Trump for President campaign just received about $100 million in free campaign advertising on all of these fake media outlets since last Friday.  The viewers and readers of these fake media outlets have for the last four days been literally inundated with that image and the message that Hillary Clinton is the Most Corrupt Candidate Ever (which coincidentally squares pretty well with my description of her as The Most Corrupt Woman In America).

The joke's on Hillary because about 90% of Americans are mainly visual learners who have the attention span of the average household cat.  Thus, whenever a report about this completely fabricated non-issue began to air, most people saw this image, took the 2 seconds it takes to read those four words, and tuned the rest of the report out.

That the endless repetition of such reports on all of these fake media outlets happened to come on the very weekend during which Ms. Clinton was interrogated by the FBI in connection with her email scandal can only serve to reinforce the already overwhelming feeling among the public that Hillary is indeed a hopelessly corrupt politician.

By the way, not only is Trump NOT anti-Semitic, he in fact spent tons of his own money in the 1990s challenging the city of Palm Beach, Florida's own anti-Jewish policies.

As this reality - and the reality that hundreds, if not thousands of state and local law enforcement agencies use six-sided stars for their badges (are they all anti-Semitic, too?) becomes public knowledge, we will see a backlash against the fake media and Ms. Clinton, and the polling data will reflect that over the next couple of weeks.

So, the joke here is on Hillary.  Her lapdogs at all of these fake media outlets have done her no favors with this phony controversy.

Thoughts on Loretta Lynch/Bill Clinton Meeting

 
First, it is just unimaginable to me that our Attorney General, the chief law enforcement officer of the United States of America, would have this meeting in a public space as the FBI investigation nears its end.  The optics are just horrific for her and for Hillary Clinton, and the immediate thought that enters pretty much everyone's mind will be "well, the fix is in on that deal."

That sure was my first thought.

However, the other side of this is that it is just as likely that the AG was giving Mr. Clinton a head's up that there probably will be an indictment as it is that there will not be one. He is an ex-President, after all, and the office is deserving of deference and respect even if the person who  held it isn't. 

If I were in her position on this thing, I know I would be more likely to want to deliver bad news in person than good news.  I think I'd want to give that level of deference to anyone who had held the office.

I'm kind of like Fox Mulder where the AG is concerned: I want to believe Ms. Lynch will turn out to be an honorable person on this matter, and much of her background encourages optimism in that regard.  But we all have to understand that she is no doubt under tremendous pressure from her President to quash any criminal referral the FBI brings forth for purely partisan political reasons.

So, assuming the FBI does bring down such a referral, Ms. Lynch is likely to be faced with a choice of keeping her job or her integrity intact.  Her admirers would contend she would choose the later.  Only time will tell.

But the bottom line on this ill-advised meeting is that one should not assume she was delivering news that Mr. Clinton wanted to hear.  That could have just as easily been done over the phone with no prying eyes looking in.