For months, I’ve been debating people about Clinton and Trump in another arena. I voted against Clinton. With 17 candidates on the Republican side, I thought I would vote for someone. Didn’t happen.
For the last eight years, I’ve watched polls, the big kid polls… Pew, Rasmussen, etc. Brexit, the last few US elections, and other elections in various countries, all are proving the polls and media wrong, again and again. So, what’s with the polls and media?
We have seen the media In the US and Europe be wrong time and again. Hugely wrong in this US election and significantly so in Brexit. The big names like NYT, WP, LA Times, ABC, BBC, CBS, NBC, and CNN have been repeatedly shown to have strong political bias toward the Left by numerous studies by ‘progressive’ institutions. We won’t even count the conservative groups reporting media bias. (If you want to argue that point with me, find the studies and explain why they are wrong.) So, I was discounting the media’s reporting all along, even FNC, Drudge, OAN, and number of supposed conservative outlets, which were wrong too.
So… how does one know if they were not hearing the truth? Who, when and why do we doubt? For me it was a string of little things. But, I had an edge because my dad used the 2003 California recall election to teach us about media corruption, which debatably forced Sen Issa out of the race by misrepresenting his past. It is an excellent example as the records about Issa are public.
So, when the first Clinton-Trump debate was over the Internet online polls, those like Time’s, NYT’s, etc., saying Trump won while the media setting up the polls said he lost, it became a major red flag waving in a brisk breeze. In previous elections those online polls, nearly all of them, were dominated by Liberals. But, not this time. This is the first time I know of this happening.
Liberals are supposed to make better use of computer tech and online media. So, how is it these online polls being bastions of Liberal voices got over whelmed by conservatives? I doubt they were, but something was up.
Then there are the political rallies. No network was willing to show the crowds, or lack of them. There are photos from individuals posted here and there. The few do show crowd size and enthusiasm to some extent. There just aren’t enough and they are too inconsistent to make quantifiable estimates.
However, during the early part of the race the sound tracks of audience applause were telling a story. In the last months of the race, the networks appear to have started doctoring the sound tracks. Was it to make the voice easier to understand? Or hide crowd size? There is no proof but, there is evidence via WikiLeaks and personal stories that strongly suggest it was for political purpose, not quality. But, without solid evidence it remains debatable opinion.
By all reasonably reputable accounts the rally crowd size and excitement was for Bernie and Trump. The media kept claiming otherwise or ignoring the issue. Those looking and attending multiple candidate’s rallies noticed. Bernie and Trump had the excitement.
Then there are the minorities. The number of minority voters posting in various places in favor of Trump was growing. I was meeting Latinos, Blacks, and Asians planning to vote Trump. (Notice I didn’t say “for”.) But, I found no way to get a sense of how large that movement was during the race.
As the election results are analyzed we are finding Trump took more of the minority vote than Romney, which surprises me. The Daily Caller during the race was saying Trump was expected to get 26% of the black vote. (Reference – Sept) But, that is another poll so I was salting it. Pew is saying their exit polls show 21% of Blacks went for Trump. But, even the exit polls are called into question by the Soros-Clinton corruption revealed by WikiLeaks and Project Veritas. It will be some time before the academics and historians publish what they find and allow us to figure out what actually happened.
Consider, we are in the 3rd and 4th generation of Democrat voters in Chicago, LA, NO, and Detroit living in worsening poverty. No one can prove the Dem’s or Repub’s are responsible for the poverty. There are plenty of good arguments going either way as for which party is more to blame. The final responsibility however, is in the hands of the voter.
What we can do to decide where the problem lies is look at states and cities controlled by Republicans or Democrats and compare the poverty, crime, murder, and unemployment rates. The adjusted data is almost always misleading as those currently in power spin the adjustments in their favor. Getting the raw data or the ‘adjustment algorithms’ is challenging. But, the raw data allows us to form opinions based on actual facts. The adjustment algorithms or changes in algorithms show how those in power are spinning the data.
If a family has been voting Democrat for 50 years and is still living in poverty, why wouldn’t they try voting for the other party? Consider. Detroit was the world’s greatest, ever in history, manufacturing power. As the Democrat party took control of the city and moved farther Left toward to socialism the city crumbled and manufacturers moved away. The city is bankrupt and government there is unbelievably corrupt. Why would anyone living there continue to vote Democrat? Oh… yeah, free stuff…
From videos appearing on YouTube, I’ve seen more and more minority voters are asking that question. Get them to watch the movie Hillary’s America and if they can recover from the shock, they abandon the Dem party.
Both sides of the political landscape have their rabid dog haters. But, as I read through the news, check the social networks, political blogs, … prior to and after the election, the number of hateful things said seem to come mostly from one side.
Try this experiment at Google. Search for “vile liberal comments” and then search again for “vile conservative comments”. In the first page of results open each hit and see what the article is about. The first page (of 6.5 million hits) is what you would probably expect, talk about comments being made by Liberals. The second search (4.4 million hits) will reveal articles likely to surprise you. The majority of the articles are still about Liberal’s comments…
There is a reason there is more ‘apparent’ hate from the Left. Consider a statement by one of the icons of Liberalism:
Hatred as the central element of our struggle! Hatred that is intransigent…hatred so violent that it propels a human being beyond his natural limitations, making him violent and cold-blooded killing machine…We reject any peaceful approach. Violence is inevitable. To establish Socialism rivers of blood must flow! The imperialist enemy must feel like a hunted animal wherever he moves. Thus we’ll destroy him! These hyenas are fit only for extermination. We must keep our hatred alive and fan it to paroxysm! The victory of Socialism is well worth millions of atomic victims!
Source: Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara speaking about Americans in his 1966 Message to the Tricontinental Conference in Havana, Cuba.
The basic Alinsky philosophy used by the Left is: the ends justify the means.
So, when reading the WikiLeaks releases of Hillary, Huma, and Podesta emails… I am not surprised to find people talking about whether or not Pres Obama will provide a number of big Democrat names pardons before leaving office. I believe he will. The near mutiny in the FBI and NSA tells us this is not over. More is coming.
In Second Life…
So, what are we seeing in Second Life? My personal experience is the majority of users are NOT haters but, they lean liberal. There are plenty of haters in SL. But, I don’t know everyone so I cannot quantify how many of which type there are.
Hamlet Au has a poll showing 61% of ‘VR’ users are Clinton supporters. See: Clinton Gets Strong Support from VR Blog Readers in Poll. As best I can tell this is a poll of New World Notes readers. So, it is like many think of the Drudge Report polls… from a biased audience. That is probably true in both cases.
Hamlet has bought into the Left’s depiction of Trump. So, his readers are likely of a similar mind.
In SL it is hard to get a realistic sense of what the user base is really like. Especially when it comes to opinion. The Lab can provide definitive demographics on sex, age, logon frequency, hours in game, etc. But, opinion? Especially political opinion… No metric for that. No pro-Clinton or pro-Trump button in the viewer.
We can try to figure it out by looking at the SL Forum and the comments in the threads. A couple of times on very controversial topics I have counted through the posts to see how many pro-con opinions there are on a subject. But, even in a highly inflammatory discussion a thousand posts in a thread is unusual and even then the number of people posting in the thread is only a few hundred at most. Seldom more than 200 peeps, if that many. With several hundred thousand people logging in each day we have very small samples on which to decide what SL peeps think.
Hamlet’s poll had 55 people participating… My best poll ever got <300 responses and most of mine got 20 to 30 responses. So, his poll and my polls are way not representative of the users in SL. We just don’t know what opinions the majority of SL users have. We can’t get a representative or significant number of samples. They aren’t even a good sample of the blog’s readers…
I suspect Hamlet, like mainstream media, wants to gin up controversy to increase clicks. It appears most of the polls used by the media were for no other purpose. Whatever, we can’t know whether Hamlet’s poll is correct, much less accurate, or reversed, upside down as the election polling was. So much so, the US election polls and media coverage are being referred to in various places as a “historic failure”. I tend to think Hamlet’s is somewhat correct from personal experience. No proof, just opinion. But, that opinion is based on experiences from the circles I run in.
My experience with Liberals is they see a poll like Hamlet’s or Rasmussen’s that agrees with what they believe and they reinforce their beliefs without ever questioning either. We saw that happen with the Dems in this election. Clinton was a preference and foregone conclusion for most. Some of my friends had >=US$1,000 bets on Hillary. In hindsight I wish I had taken a couple. Everything in the media supported what they wanted to believe. So, Wednesday morning: shock.
How many will learn anything from the experience? I think few.
So, most will continue to believe the majority SL users are liberal Clinton supporters. They may be right. But, I suspect there are more free market conservatives in SL than Hamlet’s poll suggests because the US & Brexit elections show how WRONG everyone has been. So, why not Hamlet too?
My suspicion comes from those people in SL I see living, promoting, or using free market ideas and avoiding the Che Guevara hate philosophy. They have, however, learned to duck and avoid the vile hate spewed by liberals that can’t tolerate diversity of thinking or disagreement with their personal philosophy.