Hey SPEED this poll is for you...DEM POLL!!

Hey speed the poll leaked of swing state voters isn't looking good for your new party. You have been pinning you hopes on the "SWING STATES"!!
That's the bad news...sorry I don't have any good new.
P.S. This is a poll from your party speed...it could mean a total loss...Presidency and Congress.

https://www.axios.com/alexandria-oca...d569dfdf9.html

Hey speed the poll leaked of swing state voters isn't looking good for your new party. You have been pinning you hopes on the "SWING STATES"!!
That's the bad news...sorry I don't have any good new.
P.S. This is a poll from your party speed...it could mean a total loss...Presidency and Congress.

https://www.axios.com/alexandria-oca...d569dfdf9.html Originally Posted by bb1961

It is always important to understand which voters are included in the sample:

"The poll — taken in May, before Speaker Pelosi's latest run-in with AOC and the three other liberal House freshmen known as "The Squad" — included 1,003 likely general-election voters who are white and have two years or less of college education.

These are the "white, non-college voters" who embraced Donald Trump in 2016 but are needed by Democrats in swing House districts."


So the sample consisted of voters solidly in Trump's base. White. Non-college. Not what I would call an unbiased sample.

I agree that AOC is a distraction and is getting far more air time than she should as a first year House rep.

Not what I would call an unbiased sample. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

And as the story alludes to, it's not an unbiased sample that should be taken in this particular instance.

The goal of it was to apparently mine into the "swing" vote that cost 2016 and is very important to the 2020 House races in swing districts.

And accordingly, AOC is not helping the cause in any of those areas. The Dems certainly need to eat their own in her case if they don't want to screw up moving forward.

that Poll is at least a year too early to have any meaning. 20 years ago, that Poll would have been scoffed at, for being immaterial. today Politics is a blood sport, so meaningless polls (and ECCIE Political Threads) are afforded significance to those who engage in the sport.

that Poll is at least a year too early to have any meaning. 20 years ago, that Poll would have been scoffed at, for being immaterial. today Politics is a blood sport, so meaningless polls (and ECCIE Political Threads) are afforded significance to those who engage in the sport. Originally Posted by Chung Tran

It does illustrate Trumps strategy. He came out guns blaring again today. He wants Pelosi to own the squad and their anti American views. He’s painting the Democrats as AOC. Looks like it’s working.

It is always important to understand which voters are included in the sample:

"The poll — taken in May, before Speaker Pelosi's latest run-in with AOC and the three other liberal House freshmen known as "The Squad" — included 1,003 likely general-election voters who are white and have two years or less of college education.

These are the "white, non-college voters" who embraced Donald Trump in 2016 but are needed by Democrats in swing House districts."


So the sample consisted of voters solidly in Trump's base. White. Non-college. Not what I would call an unbiased sample.

I agree that AOC is a distraction and is getting far more air time than she should as a first year House rep. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

You try and explain away everything you disagree with SPEED.

-- Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was recognized by 74% of voters in the poll; 22% had a favorable view.

-- Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota — another member of The Squad — was recognized by 53% of the voters; 9% (not a typo) had a favorable view.

-- Socialism was viewed favorably by 18% of the voters and unfavorably by 69%.

-- Capitalism was 56% favorable; 32% unfavorable.


This video from PMSNBC and DEM contributors sure doesn't see it the same way you do. They are worried about this poll hurting the DEMS into the 2020 election. This radical group(4 members) of American hating commies doesn't appeal to any American loving voter...their full of hate,racism and divisiveness.

https://www.mrctv.org/videos/ex-news...s-through-2020

These skulls full of mush in the schools of liberal learning are already indoctrinated to the socialist philosophy...they are a lost cause. Please don't let delusional thoughts cloud your understanding of the dislike of the ideology of the left.
The website...the fact that it's a DEM site and the DEM pundits are wringing their hand...where there's smoke there's FIRE!!

Mike Allen of Axios added:

"If all voters hear about is AOC, it could put the [House] majority at risk," said a top Democrat who is involved in 2020 congressional races. "[S]he's getting all the news and defining everyone else’s races."

And that BITCH can't stop...it's in her nature.
KEEP IT COMING AOC.
Your precious HOUSE speed!!

This doesn't help your party....the Presidential hopefuls are running as liberal as possible...WTF!!

PS: Right after Alter, former Hillary Clinton publicist Philippe Reines insisted that Democrats are "too feckless for a circular firing squad."
Ya think...

It is always important to understand which voters are included in the sample:

"The poll — taken in May, before Speaker Pelosi's latest run-in with AOC and the three other liberal House freshmen known as "The Squad" — included 1,003 likely general-election voters who are white and have two years or less of college education.

These are the "white, non-college voters" who embraced Donald Trump in 2016 but are needed by Democrats in swing House districts."


So the sample consisted of voters solidly in Trump's base. White. Non-college. Not what I would call an unbiased sample.

I agree that AOC is a distraction and is getting far more air time than she should as a first year House rep. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Maybe AOC is a political infiltrator planted by Republicans to fuck up the Democratic party. Because that's basically whats she's doing.

It is always important to understand which voters are included in the sample:

"The poll — taken in May, before Speaker Pelosi's latest run-in with AOC and the three other liberal House freshmen known as "The Squad" — included 1,003 likely general-election voters who are white and have two years or less of college education.

These are the "white, non-college voters" who embraced Donald Trump in 2016 but are needed by Democrats in swing House districts."


So the sample consisted of voters solidly in Trump's base. White. Non-college. Not what I would call an unbiased sample.

I agree that AOC is a distraction and is getting far more air time than she should as a first year House rep. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Maybe AOC is a political infiltrator planted by Republicans to fuck up the Democratic party. Because that's basically whats she's doing. Originally Posted by Levianon17

one wishes that the republican party were smart tactically.. like that with a bag of dirty tricks. something the dems do regular basis.



they're not capable of pulling that off; hence the stupid party moniker.

And as the story alludes to, it's not an unbiased sample that should be taken in this particular instance.

The goal of it was to apparently mine into the "swing" vote that cost 2016 and is very important to the 2020 House races in swing districts.

And accordingly, AOC is not helping the cause in any of those areas. The Dems certainly need to eat their own in her case if they don't want to screw up moving forward. Originally Posted by eccielover

The poll sample was biased but it was supposed to be biased. The poll may have or may not have met its intent of mining into the swing vote in certain House districts.

My main point is that the poll told us nothing about who certain swing states prefer for POTUS, as BB implied it did.

1,003 samples?
Then extrapolated to the nation?
Although I agree with some of the conclusions, the professional business guy in me has to say: Invalid due to insufficient sample size.
However, put the slam squad in a room with those 1,003 sample folks and I'll bring the dust collector (dustpan not needed).

1,003 samples?
Then extrapolated to the nation?
Although I agree with some of the conclusions, the professional business guy in me has to say: Invalid due to insufficient sample size.
However, put the slam squad in a room with those 1,003 sample folks and I'll bring the dust collector (dustpan not needed). Originally Posted by Unique_Carpenter

Take a course in Market Research 101 and it will explain all about required sample sizes to make the results of a survey valid within a specific margin of error.

So the sample consisted of voters solidly in Trump's base. White. Non-college. Not what I would call an unbiased sample. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

The article refers to them as swing voters, not the same as "Trump's base". I agree that the sample size is small and limited. But even broad random polls show AOC and Omar are highly unpopular. In this case, the 9% favorable number for Omar is jaw-droppingly low.

The article refers to them as swing voters, not the same as "Trump's base". I agree that the sample size is small and limited. But even broad random polls show AOC and Omar are highly unpopular. In this case, that 9% favorable number for Omar is jaw-droppingly low. Originally Posted by lustylad

They are also unpopular with me. Had I been in AOC's congressional district and been able to vote in the Democratic primary in 2018, I'm fairly certain I would have voted for Joe Crowley. But AOC, Omar and the others won their seats and I am not going to question the voters of their districts. It will be interesting to see what happens to them in 2020.