- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Trump calls for investigation into Ann Selzer
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:07 am to LegalEazyE
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:07 am to LegalEazyE
None of that is illegal as far as I know.
Just look at AGW and the "facts" that are massaged to get the numbers desired. Bad math is not a crime for scientists and pollsters.
Just look at AGW and the "facts" that are massaged to get the numbers desired. Bad math is not a crime for scientists and pollsters.
0
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:08 am to deltaland
quote:
Not worth the time to investigate this, it just comes across as petty.
There’s nothing petty about blatant election interference
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:11 am to John Barron
I fail to see how this helps Dems. The best I can guess is that they think people will want to be on the "winning side" and that pushing their side as the winner will flip some votes.
But is there any real evidence of this? It might be true. If it isn't, it just makes everyone involved look incompetent.
But is there any real evidence of this? It might be true. If it isn't, it just makes everyone involved look incompetent.
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:11 am to cadillacattack
quote:
There’s nothing petty about blatant election interference
Please tell me how this qualifies as election interference much less blatant
a Des Moines Iowa newspaper owned by Gannett Publishing paid a pollster to do a poll
it was a shite poll. perhaps influenced by a yet unknown entity for financial compensation
Please tell me how that interfered with the election
I've asked this simple question multiple times in this very thread not one person has even pretended to offer an answer
blatantly
This post was edited on 11/18/24 at 10:18 am
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:17 am to POTUS2024
quote:
No one cares about Ann Selzer.
I care about holding that lying, paid election interferer accountable. It's okay if you think pollsters being paid by a Presidential candidate's campaign to lie about the numbers to help influence the results of the election is fine... But I don't. Nor do millions of other people.
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:20 am to LegalEazyE
quote:
It's okay if you think pollsters being paid by a Presidential candidate's campaign to lie about the numbers to help influence the results of the election is fine... But I don't. Nor do millions of other people
Pollsters have been paid by someone to give them poll results that they want forever
this is nothing new
Happens at every level of elections it's a private business transaction if you were to look in the notes of the poll in the details that are required to be published along with the poll result you can see that
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:22 am to Mandtgr47
quote:
it had zero to do with the outcome....
Not for lack of trying. The intent of that poll was to influence election outcome. And it was knowingly false, published with those intentions. It's election interference.
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:25 am to SaintsTiger
quote:
She obviously got paid off the create a fake voter suppression poll in Iowa. Or at least very likely did. An election interference investigation is warranted.
100%
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:26 am to LegalEazyE
quote:Every poll has the intent of influence in election whether it's used to raise money to improve public opinion or to help people decide where to place their bets
Not for lack of trying. The intent of that poll was to influence election outcome. And it was knowingly false, published with those intentions. It's election interference.
It's only interference as long as weak-minded people are influenced by one random poll and one piss-ant state on whether they are going to vote or not
That is less influential than the weather Day whether they're going to go vote
It probably has less influence on whether someone's going to go vote than what Oprah says
How is it election interference election interference means you kept someone from voting
or made it physically more difficult for them to vote
etc
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:26 am to deltaland
quote:
Eh there are bigger fish to fry. Her punishment is she lost all credibility Not worth the time to investigate this, it just comes across as petty. Go after those breaking the law and committing real election fraud
100% but the board is gonna roast you anyhow
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:30 am to OWLFAN86
quote:
what was the crime
who is the offended party
are they asking for an investigation
ELECTION INTERFERENCE. And even if she did nothing that rises to the level of a prosecutable crime, it doesn't mean there was not an ethics violation... or at the very least, exposing her corruption that she was paid by the Kamala campaign to create a completely false, fairytale poll--not just fudge data little bit--which was not at all backed up by the data, would be worth it for people to know. Not just, "whoopsy. I made a mistake." bullshite, it wasn't a mistake... it was a contrived, bought and paid for intentional misrepresentation meant to suppress Trump votes by making them think they had already lost Iowa.
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:34 am to TN Tygah
quote:
Because of a wrong poll?
A wrong/mistaken/finessed poll vs. a bought and paid for (by a Presidential candidate) intentional, egregious misrepresentation of polling published in the largest newspaper in the state meant to suppress the votes of Trump supporters by falsely representing that Trump was going to lose the state...
Is NOT the same thing.
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:36 am to OWLFAN86
quote:
Every poll has the intent of influence in election
No, every poll does not. I work in politics, lobbying, government affairs, policy, campaigns... You're wrong.
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:36 am to LegalEazyE
You keep saying that I don't think you know what it means
Whom did she interfere from voting what election did she interfere with
Every poll missed the mark if your argument that hers was way off and the timing of it okay
then the other polls are going to be prosecuted under the same violation and serve less time in a nicer jail
otherwise its selective prosecution which is wrong and Trump and the Republicans can play that card and not be hypocritical
Not that that matters in the voters mind but it might matter in the courts because if you're going to pursue it in the courts you want to win
Not lose
a good lawyer tells you don't prosecute a case don't ask a question unless you know the outcome in the answer
Look don't be upset with me i'm just trying to provide you a few facts on the way it works and some perspective
just consider what I'm saying think about it use your own brain
if it stars to smell open a window
Whom did she interfere from voting what election did she interfere with
Every poll missed the mark if your argument that hers was way off and the timing of it okay
then the other polls are going to be prosecuted under the same violation and serve less time in a nicer jail
otherwise its selective prosecution which is wrong and Trump and the Republicans can play that card and not be hypocritical
Not that that matters in the voters mind but it might matter in the courts because if you're going to pursue it in the courts you want to win
Not lose
a good lawyer tells you don't prosecute a case don't ask a question unless you know the outcome in the answer
Look don't be upset with me i'm just trying to provide you a few facts on the way it works and some perspective
just consider what I'm saying think about it use your own brain
if it stars to smell open a window
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:37 am to LegalEazyE
quote:Yeah same here for forty years let's have this debate
I work in politics, lobbying, government affairs, policy, campaigns... You're wrong.
I leave for lunch in about 30 minutes to meet with an appellate court judge let me know when this afternoon or evening
I say that every poll has the intent of influencing an election
You're saying that they don't
Do you agree to the debate parameters?
This post was edited on 11/18/24 at 10:41 am
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:39 am to OWLFAN86
quote:
e's trolling and you cucked male nurses are lapping it up cause of your low-T revenge fantasies
Some of us never stopped acting like men
I feel like there has been a decline in dudes becoming murses over the last 10 years. Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel like I havent seen as many of these limp wristed fellas walking around lately in scrubs.
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:40 am to John Barron
quote:
When you blatantly lie to the public that requires severe consequences
So all those college coaches who like to say in the media "I plan to remain head coach of ______ next season" only to leave a week later....
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:41 am to deltaland
quote:
Eh there are bigger fish to fry. Her punishment is she lost all credibility
Not worth the time to investigate this, it just comes across as petty.
bullshite. It is time to show these lying, unethical pieces of shite that there are consequences for their actions. They have had a free ride for far too long.
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:41 am to OWLFAN86
quote:
Whom did she interfere from voting what election did she interfere with
Dumb arse. Remember the 51 intelligence officials who knowingly lied and issued a public statement published in tons of mainstream media outlets days before the election claiming that Hunter's laptop was "Russian disinformation." What they did, the knowingly false statements and information they made that it was proven to have suppressed the vote for Trump... That was prosecutable level election interference. This is no fricking different, really.
Posted on 11/18/24 at 10:46 am to LegalEazyE
quote:
Dumb arse. Remember the 51 intelligence officials who knowingly lied and issued a public statement published in tons of mainstream media outlets days before the election claiming that Hunter's laptop was "Russian disinformation." What they did, the knowingly false statements and information they made that it was proven to have suppressed the vote for Trump... That was prosecutable level election interference. This is no fricking different, really.
So 51 intelligence officers who swore to uphold the constitution of the United States gave an opinion about an investigation
Is the same as one pollster who is paid to run a poll by a newspaper and has a contract with them, not an Oath on the Constitution publishing the results of her poll
Again since you seem to think a law was broken point to the law that was broken
You've worked in elections I'm sure you know election law
Page 7 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News