We have the fact that 96% of the 64 million folks voting for Trump last November would vote for him again. That's 61.4 million folks.
How about the ABC/WaPost poll that found that Trump would beat Hillary IN THE POPULAR vote by 3 points (he lost that vote by 2 points --- a 5 point swing since becoming President). Figure that percentage to actual numbering at around 5 million additional votes (three million to tie and 2 million for a 3% win).
Consider the fact that Democrats took only 227 electoral votes when, at one time, they were on track to score 340 electoral votes.
Lets not forget that all major polling firms had Hillary winning the election, on November 5. So much for "scientific" polling.
Keep in mind that as many a 40% of those called in any of these survey's hang up and refuse to be poll. If 25% of these hang-ups (a likely guess), Add their numbers to the 62 million currently supporting the Prez and he just won the popular vote !!
You should, also, know that many of the major polls survey 28% MORE folks as Democrats than as Republicans or Independents, and all major polls weight their conclusions in favor of the Democrat Party by at least 8 to10 points.
Let's not forget that the Dems are doing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to win Middle America.
Gallup - 38%
ReplyDeleteQuinnipiac - 36%
"Lets not forget that all major polling firms had Hillary winning the election, on November 5"
This talking point is BOGUS. Polling was correct. RCP poll of polls had Hillary winning the popular vote by 3.2%, she won by 2.1% .... being off by 1% is considered a VERY accurate poll... so stop bringing up a tired old debunked point which proves ZERO, except that polls are generally accurate.
You left off the 53% voter approval poll as detailed in the main post.
Delete“We want this to come to its conclusion. We think that we’ve actually, by removing Director Comey, taken steps to make that happen” -- Sarah Huckabee Sanders, commenting on the FBI’s Russia / Trump investigation, WH Press Briefing, 5/11/17
ReplyDeleteTEXTBOOK definition of Obstruction of Justice
I find myself having to ask a state funded "intellectual" this question more often than I should: "What the hell are you talking about?"
Delete"TEXTBOOK definition of Obstruction of Justice," is something you are charging after a 10 month investigation, four of those months on Trump's time. There is not "end game standard" for the Democrats. How many times have we heard these words, "There is no evidence of collusion at this time." Are we going to be hearing this rhetorical crap 10 years from now. Enough is enough. There IS NO EVIDENCE of collusion and why does the party that promised "greater flexibility after the elections" even pretend they care? What a joke you people have become.
Again you prove you're not the sharpest tool. Firing the head of the FBI because he's investigation Trump is Obstruction of Justice
DeleteWho said Comey was investigating Trump, per se? Answer: Exactly no one. Hence no obstruction of justice.
Delete