Monmouth University Pollster Patrick Murray Busted Manipulating Poll Data, then Lying About It…

patrick murray 1By now most CTH readers are familiar with the more notoriously biased polling manipulators.

One of those is Patrick Murray from Monmouth University [@PollsterPatrick on Twitter].

If you want to know where his political affiliations lie, you only need to read his twitter feed. Murray has also been on Fox News with Bill O’Reilly several times selling his polling results to the unwitting audience.

Today, Monmouth via Patrick Murray presents a presidential poll of Ohio voters. The actual raw data (pdf available here – see pg, 6 and 7) showed Donald Trump with a lead in the result; however, Murray changed the data through weighting to show Hillary Clinton with a lead.

GOUSAAMER114” pointed out the manipulation:

Monmouth just announced that Clinton leads Trump 43-39 in Ohio. But Pollster Patrick actually laid out what he did on pages 6 and 7 of the PDF.

He sampled 402 voters. In the unweighted sample, the split was 33.3R/29.3D/35.6I. With that split, Trump leads Clinton 41-39 in Ohio. But Pollster Patrick re-weighted it to a 29R/33D/37I split. Nothing else was re-weighted.

It’s obvious Murray didn’t expect to be called out on it – because when confronted with what he did, pollster Patrick Murray flat out lied.

pollster patrick lie

You can do the math yourself and see that no “weighting” was done by “region, age, race, or gender” only by party ID.

Just as a reminder “weighting” is the term used for actually changing the raw data to reflect the “assumptions” the pollster puts into the anticipated turnout of the election.

Depending on the “assumptions” (guesses about who will vote), and the “weighting” therein, the entire poll outcome can be severely manipulated and even reversed.

Personally, I like to tell these pollsters  to just “show their work“, you know – like your math teacher used to force you to do in school in order to get full credit for the assignment.  At that point most of the pollsters run and hide because essentially their argument is reduced to “trust me“.   Yeah, good luck with that… LOL.

This is not the first time Monmouth, via Patrick Murray, has intentionally done this; and it won’t be the first time Murray has been gobsmackingly wrong as an outcome when the election actually takes place.  Just ask president Mondale.

But hey, it feeds a media narrative for a cycle or two… and, after all, that’s really the intent here.



This entry was posted in Desperately Seeking Hillary, Donald Trump, Election 2016, media bias, Notorious Liars, Professional Idiots, propaganda. Bookmark the permalink.

274 Responses to Monmouth University Pollster Patrick Murray Busted Manipulating Poll Data, then Lying About It…

  1. kingjulianx says:


    Liked by 13 people

  2. Anti-Zionist says:

    This blog is always ahead of the curve.

    Now the hot steaming piece of garbage YouTube video series “The Still Report”, which is better known as total bullcrap, and for some reason users here link to it, will take this and run with it as if it was his own story.

    Liked by 8 people

    • cheri54 says:

      I like Bill Still. Your nic is offensive.

      Liked by 2 people

    • 2x4x8 says:

      the more alternative sites putting out the info the better, i still check out bill

      let me see if i am following you correctly,

      CTH got the info from GOUSAAmer114 and shared it, and they are “ahead of the curve”, if/when Bill Still covers the poll story he is a “hot steaming piece of garbage”

      total bullcrap

      Liked by 1 person

    • georgiafl says:

      The best basis of civilization is GOD’s True Law of Love, Truth and Life that came out of Zion – Isaiah 2:3 That makes all Christians Zionists.

      Sharia and every other form of law fails to create stable, humane, loving nations. They are all oppressive oligarchies.


    • Bill reaches people that others cannot reach. He is on the side of America.

      Besides, ideas and knowledge belong to no one, they come from God and they are meant to be SHARED.

      Unless they are using it to make money then it can become a trademark or copyright issue.

      As a creative person, I enjoy sharing my ideas and see them being used, sometimes verbatim, a true communicator knows it’s more important to get your ideas out there than receive credit for them. All truth and creativity and good ideas come from God. No one owns them.

      As long as Bill Still is not against us he is for us. Wake up, we are at WAR. This ain’t no pajama party baby! 😀

      Liked by 8 people

    • Bert Darrell says:

      I’m not one who respects Anti-Zionists because the anti-anything people usually hate someone or something while contributing very little, if anything that is positive and constructive. So, I’ll only say: if you don’t like the Still videos don’t watch them … and who cares what you think about them, anyway?

      Liked by 1 person

    • robertnotsowise says:

      Why are you an Anti-Zionist?


    • Trumped says:

      As long as the story is shared…
      You act like a clinton response team member trying to make us look bad? anti zionist is easily misunderstood.


    • Mike says:

      I noticed the same. I thought Still did good work but you can just find his stuff on sites like this and Twitter. Hell just go to “Always Trump” on twitter and you see some stuff there before Still reports it. I do occasionally check him out though cause it’s easier than running through all the sites and twitter feeds. He went off the rails recently quoting 4chan. Might as well get it off a bathroom wall.


    • Wayne Robinson says:

      Anti Zionist your pos Bill Still has more integrity in his little finger than you have in your whole body . He may not always be right but he is honest and owns his mistakes so go gig yourself


    • Notmeagain says:

      Do you actually troll specifically to find Bill Still and trash him? Because I never see you here except to say pretty much exactly the same thing about The Still Report. Same adjectives even. Maybe it’s part of your anti-Zion thing?
      Regardless, there’s already a breakdown on another thread, in the form: A reports on a Person, B doesn’t like the Person and sniffs (but didn’t really get offensive as you have), soon A, B, C, D, and a few more have wasted a bunch of space debating whether everyone should get to mention the Person/Topic/News they are interested in, or if some doyenne of taste should set up The Right Kind of Standards to keep the CTH “thoughtful and interesting” and censor everyone else. Yet varied polite opinions are what makes the Treehouse interesting.


    • golfmann says:

      Cheap shot!
      Where’s your blog or video series?


  3. Huh. Does being a democrat mean you HAVE to lie? It seems that’s all they do.

    Liked by 8 people

  4. CrankyinAZ says:

    I read an interesting series of articles about how that same sort of “weighing” can be used to manipulate electronic voting results. Doesn’t surprise me one bit.

    Liked by 3 people

  5. treeper1956 says:

    Thank you GOUSA great investigative work.
    You are awesome!

    Liked by 20 people

  6. Unprotected Class says:

    Doesn’t matter why they weight it, the results are the results no matter how much they want to change them.

    Liked by 3 people

  7. Director says:

    That’s shady!

    Liked by 2 people

  8. Chip Bennett says:

    Weighting, per se, isn’t problematic (as you know, of course). It is merely part of the science (art) of polling, with the intent of making the raw data most closely resemble the expected electorate.

    The issue is the rationale behind the assumptions used to perform the weighting – and therein lies the problem. In that regard, many of these polls are a lot like “climate change” models: no matter what data you input, the model outputs a fake hockey stick.

    Liked by 12 people

    • sanj says:

      Very well articulated. Pollsters are paid to use weighting based on various objective factors, however, the polls I’ve seen don’t show any rationale for the weighting they use. How for example is VA +11D? If they just disclose the ‘black box’ they use to come up with their weighting, their polls would be exposed as ‘agenda’. I’d like to know what Trump’s internal polls are, however, I’m sure they keep that close to the vest for good reason.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Paco Loco says:

      Pooling is definitely an art, not a science.


    • Ono says:

      I was approached (and agreed) to help do polling for a local city project (in a very liberal SoCal Community) in my early twenties. I was told that my efforts were needed to render an across the board opinion on a controversial topic. I agreed! Civic duty! part of the solution not the problem. Door to door in a tight community and neighborhoods I knew well.

      I was given a list of addresses and a list of questions. I set out and returned with my results. I was given another list and a modified list of questions, then again, then again.

      Talking to the members of my community I knew they didn’t want this project. Talking with the other pollsters they agreed. It was a costly, un-necessary , and the community did not like the design.

      Only a fraction of polling participants were selected for the poll. Rather than a vote the city council decided the outcome…Project passed

      Gin Rummy …discard the negative results. Keep the cards that win the hand.

      Trump landslide 2016

      Liked by 1 person

      • Coldeadhands says:

        Thanks for the anecdote. What a marvelous example of real world outcome of malfeasance in polling.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Ono says:

          I was young, impressionable, was basically a perfect candidate to do the research I was being paid to do.

          My shame is I signed off, to get my check, that I needed, at that time to survive in a community that had out priced my existence. In their minds eye.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Your tour guide says:

          It’s how we keep getting unnecessary sports stadiums every 15 years in Atlanta. Fake
          public input and enthusiasm to justify the done deal end results.


    • Sentient says:

      15% of this poll’s respondents were black. OH is only 12-13% black. And black turnout is usually lower than average – unless there’s a black candidate for president. So if Murray oversampled blacks and then over-weighted their (presumably democrat) preference, that adds even more to Clinton’s support than is warranted.

      Liked by 2 people

    • No One says:

      As a statistician, I agree, but one has to justify every assumption. For a numerical weighting, one should have a strong argument about why you assume a given weighting. You should also come up with numerical checks on your methodology. Finally, you should sensitivity analyses where you present your results under a variety of different realistic weighting assumptions, and then present a final result based on a weighted average of the different scenarios. This kind of thing would get a very bad grade from me.


    • Notmeagain says:

      Exactly. Numbers don’t lie, but the conclusions you get in math are only as good as your initial conditions. And if they aren’t real world conditions, then you get an answer which is true, but not in the real world.


  9. ginaswo says:

    gonna be a landslide peeps
    ive never seen the media so unhinged

    Liked by 13 people

  10. Director says:

    Can anyone explain the massive undecideds?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Terz says:

      Could be ‘shy’ Trump supporters who don’t want to ‘admit’ that they back the ‘socially unacceptable’ (according to the media) candidate.

      Liked by 5 people

      • on the phone they may not admit their Trump vote but on line they will.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Betty says:

        I don’t believe that “shy” stuff. Why would anyone lie to someone over the phone? It seems to me they would just hang up before they lied.

        So if we take for truth that there are a massive number of ‘undecideds’ it tells us we need to get out into our neighborhoods and get to work. I don’t think it is a good idea to decide all those “undecideds’ really support our candidate but are shy, that seems like a boobie trap.


        • Tom says:

          With the deranged behavior of the anti Trumpers, why would you tell a stranger who has your name and address how you intend to vote ? I wouldn’t.

          Liked by 2 people

          • Pam says:

            That’s a valid point because I don’t answer the phone if I don’t recognize the number on the caller ID anyways. Polling in some instances (not necessarily all of them) isn’t accurate since many have cell phones instead of landline service these days.


            • sarrask says:

              They need to add these questions to a poll sometime:
              A. Did the phone you just answered have Caller ID?
              B. If so, did you check it before you picked up the phone?

              Liked by 1 person

        • 2x4x8 says:

          boy are you missing it

          well, its like this, would you like to wake up the next day after the poll and read in the newspaper, the list of names of the people who polled for Trump?

          you may remember the newspaper in Massachusetts that published the names of gun owners

          by the way, David Duke is running for the Senate in LA, when he ran for President a couple decades ago, the Liberals got the list of his contributors names and addresses and passed it around to the local street thugs

          get the picture how commies work?

          Liked by 1 person

        • Your tour guide says:

          Look up “Bradley effect”. People have their mind made up who they want to vote for, but
          will lie about who they really want to avoid PC blowback.


    • John Galt says:

      40% of Berners are #NeverHillary.

      Liked by 3 people

    • gawntrail says:

      Polling data is 100% at the mercy of the person recording the data. Who knows how accurate, biased, or malicious that particular person is. ‘Trust me’ doesn’t mean what it used to.


  11. golfmann says:

    I’ll say it:
    Just a reminder…
    weighting equals rigging by another name.

    Liked by 12 people

    • I know, what’s the point of having polling if you can change the results to whatever you want them to be based on your fantasy of how YOU see the outcome.

      Total BS!

      You ask people questions, you write the results, you give the results. Period.

      If your sample is too low, ASK MORE PEOPLE! Don’t guess or use your predictions, because if all the experts predicted correctly…

      Jeb Bush would be the GOP nominee. Totals Frauds…

      Liked by 1 person

      • sarrask says:

        There’s still a problem with getting 8% response that can’t be fixed by calling 10x more people. When you have low response rates, the chances are better that your sample will be skewed. If you call 1000 people and only 80 people who are too busy to answer a long list of poll questions answer the phone, calling 10k people will get you 800 of that same type of person. The type of people who will answer a poll are different than the type of people who won’t, even comparing people who match each other’s demographic pockets.


      • Coldeadhands says:

        As Ono said earlier in the thread, if you don’t like the results, modify the questions then re-poll till you get desired results.


      • Stinky-Inky says:

        The point of having polls is to condition you to the result they want/will fradulently get in the voting booth. That’s the only point of polling.


  12. susiepuma says:

    This is a confirmation of what I just posted on the Florida thread……………………………….

    Liked by 1 person

  13. joanfoster says:

    If one could gather all of the liars and deceivers in this election cycle and put them in one place, how large a state or country do suppose we would have created. Does integrity matter to anyone any more?

    Liked by 5 people

  14. Voltaire's Crack says:

    In September, the pollsters typically shift from registered to likely voter models, which typically results in a swing of a few points for the Republican.

    How the heck are they going to hide the decline then?

    Liked by 1 person

  15. The guy also weighted the age range instead of transcribing the unweighted #. He gave the 18-49 age range an extra 4% weighting (48%) as opposed to the unweighted results of (44%). In other words, he took away 4% from the 50+ voting block. The race and the gender were left unweighted.

    Liked by 2 people

    • WSB says:

      I am finding this in a lot of polls, not to mention the percentage of landline to cell phones. Just as SD has found, the electorate is older and whiter than thought…IMHO, that would mean a greater number of landlines to cell phones. Not the other way around.

      Liked by 1 person

    • shaun wood says:

      I noticed it too, but isn’t it odd he did that. Taking 4 or 5% from the +50 demographic favors Trump, not Clinton. millennial

      Interestingly enough, Johnson isn’t pulling from Trump, but Clinton. Trump has the same amount of support across age range. That means the disparity from 35 % younger to 50% older support of clinton (15%) is about Johnson’s level of support in the younger demographic. (the 6% moderate liberal male demographic) I wonder if other polls show this?


  16. The Devilbat says:

    The reason for the mass polling manipulation is to legitimize the massive fraud in November.

    Liked by 4 people

    • ginaswo says:

      yes, and that was the purpose of the polling in the primaries as well.
      but it failed then and it fails now
      monster vote overwhelms the margin for 7 million votes or more
      #MAGA !!!!!

      Liked by 6 people

    • Remington says:

      There is no question. The only question is what happens if they throw it to paips….Just a what if….what would Americans do. What is the avenue of redress from our team (read Donald & Co). I’d like to think we are prepared for all eventualities


      • Deb says:

        Offense is the best defense. I read Donald has hired something like 7,000 lawyers across the country to deal with the polls and potential voter fraud. If that’s true, it’s a good start.

        We all need to volunteer, knock on doors, make phone calls, get out the vote. Try and convince everyone we know in any way we can go vote Trump.


      • dutzie60 says:

        I’ve been wondering the same thing. What?


  17. Unprotected Class says:

    The other thing to look at is the margin of error, because the sample size is so small it is at 4.9%.

    Liked by 3 people

  18. eric says:


    Liked by 3 people

  19. p'odwats says:

    Crooked Hillary. Crooked media. Crooked pollsters. Crooked leftists. Everything about and in league with the Democratic Party is flat out CROOKED. Let’s just start calling them the DUMBACROOK PARTY!😠

    Liked by 2 people

  20. nole2016 says:

    The carnage will only end when Trump is elected POTUS…until then Sundance and others will continue to call out the charlatans and liars, but their ranks are shrinking, as Perino, Levin, Cruz, Kasich, and others have defected to the other side….this must end before they destroy the Country. Continue to spread the truth, Treepers….we are the last line in the battle against Clinton’s agenda against America.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Gerald Belton says:

    I’m a grad student in Statistics.

    Here’s the thing: even WITH the weighting, note that the margin of error is reported as 4.9%. That means the 95% confidence interval for Clinton is from 38.1% to 47.9% of the vote. And the 95% confidence interval for Trump is from 34.1% to 43.9%.

    Note that those confidence intervals have considerable overlap. This means that based on this poll we can NOT say that either candidate has an advantage; it is, statistically, a dead heat.

    Liked by 7 people

    • Trumped says:

      Maybe a dead heat with the 400 hand picked participants.
      As per above numbers 44 to 38 for Trump seems about right. 100% confidence

      Liked by 1 person

    • kriseton says:

      Please continue to weigh in on poll analysis, so we can get a more educated look at what is going on. I am no polling expert, so I am merely comparing old polling samples from 2012 to see if 2016 polling looks ‘fair’ in its distribution of Ds and Rs.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Jeff Coley says:

      Stop making sense. If the man behind the curtain tells me Hillary is ahead then she is ahead and anyhow he also told us pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Brad Smith says:

      Between the Margin of Error and the length of time left before the election, this poll itself is non-predictive. If done well, large enough sample, properly weighted, etc., at best you can hope to get a snapshot of what the election outcome would be if held Today. This is true of any close race. Polls could, even at this early date be predictive, IF the polls were truly showing a landslide one way or another. They don’t so it’s about “Trends” or cherry picking data for discussion.

      However, when you have a non-predictive poll done such as this, the more interesting thing to look at is how the poll itself was conducted.

      In this case they got busted, which is surely more informative, than the poll.

      Liked by 2 people

  22. kriseton says:

    Especially when you look at the data for Ohio on Gallup. The electorate in OH was almost evenly split for Democrats and Republicans earlier this year. So to give Democrats a HUGE boost in the poll is pretty scummy.

    They cannot keep this up for long. In October they will want to look ‘right,’ so that they aren’t rejected as ‘bad’ pollsters.

    I also like to go back to RCP data from 2012 to get a feeling for how off the polling is. In August of 2012, most polls used a D+4 or D+5 sample to get their polling. We are seeing national polls this August that use a D+10 or D+12 or even higher sample.

    Same is true if you look at Ohio polling. Hard to find all the raw data for old polls, but just looking at one that had it pretty close (Obama +3 in September 2012), they used an R38/D40/I17 sample. This is pretty realisitc, since the Gallup numbers show Ds and Rs very even this year (around 40% each). So to suddenly weight the poll with D+4 makes no sense. At most, you could maybe try +2? But really it should be closer to even.

    Liked by 2 people

  23. Jeff Coley says:

    Pat Caddell discussed media polling. From Breitbart:

    “Caddell turned his attention to the polls, pointing out that there are so many polls—and so many of them use what he called “horrifying” methodology, or lacked “any depth”—that “we’re just overwhelmed by them.”

    He said these polls were part of a “media drumbeat,” ”

    I reiterate what I’ve always said about polls so far out from the election: They’re basically meaningless. It’s no different than knowing who is leading on lap 5 of the Indy 500, or the score after 3 innings of play. Lots of campaign yet to unfold between now and November.

    Ignore the noise.

    Liked by 5 people

  24. ryan says:

    Anybody have an email for him?


  25. Shevtsova251 says:

    Watching livestream Mike Pence rallye in Cedar Rapids, Iowa.
    Presumptive Vice-President Pence is a great asset for President Donald Trump and the Movement.

    Liked by 1 person

  26. Geri Smith says:

    Eveeryone should post on the twit Patrick Murray’s twitter that he’s busted.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Remington says:

      These guys always have a certain look about them. Not the kind of guys you’d want to drink beer with. It’s that awful metro sexual tinge. Gotta be in the genes or something. As opposed to Donald- a real man.


  27. cjzak says:

    Polls are just the most unreliable piece of the election puzzle that there is. Bet this clown didn’t correct himself yet did he? Yeah I thought so. Nobody will know the truth who doesn’t follow CTH or others like it. So he spins the info and Trump takes an unnecessary false hit in the public media which most of the voting public sees. They lie and get away with it all the time. Pass this on to everybody you can and keep this info moving. Make a difference and I hope somebody gets him to fess up eventually.


  28. Garrison Hall says:

    “This means that based on this poll . . .”

    You’ve identified the fundamental dilemma faced by poll-takers in this political environment. An increasingly politicized target population has caused survey research to become inherently unreliable—so much so that the usual statistical controls become unreliable. Let’s fact it, this is a miserable time for somebody trying to earn a living off opinion polls. No wonder these guys are increasingly resorted to a statistical version of a shuck-and-jive.


  29. Gary says:

    Personally, I think we’d better start acting like these polls are true. I mean, we can not relent, even for a second.

    It is the fourth quarter and we need to play like we are 8 points down.

    Liked by 2 people

    • NCPatrick says:

      Gary, I don’t know about everybody else, but I’ve never been a person to ease off even if the score is 21-3 … fight, fight, keep fighting as there are many insane things that can happen in the last quarter. (Take a look at the NC Panthers last year if you doubt me!)

      The bottom line seems to me that this election, so vital for the future of our country, is in God’s hands. Remember Brexit? Nobody thought it would pass, and the joy we all felt when we woke up that morning? (None of us will sleep election night of course, but I hope I’m not watching the results from a hospital bed.) Bless our brave warriors .. what a brutal battle we are in to save this nation!

      Liked by 1 person

      • Coldeadhands says:

        I DO remember going to bed the night before and working at not getting ahead of myself…then the feeling in the morning that wow! The British did what no one thought they would!


  30. patrickhenryrevisited says:

    Voter fraud causes climate change.
    Settled science.

    Liked by 3 people

  31. unseen1 says:

    So we know this. MY question is why has the right not started their own polling companies to fight this? We started the right media to fight the MSM why doesn’t the right start polling companies to fight these liberal polling companies?

    Liked by 1 person

  32. Geri Smith says:

    @MonmouthPoll @PollsterPatrick @TheLastRefuge2 @realDonaldTrump 100% dump on Trump tweets by Fat Pat=100% poll bull.

    Liked by 1 person

  33. Thank you very much Sundance and GousaAmer114!! We shouldn’t ignore these polls…we should scrutinize them.

    These pollsters are dishonest to the bone.


  34. Brian Drake says:

    Maybe it’s been said elsewhere, but I’ll echo it if so. Even with all the weighting, they can’t get Hillary to 50%. To me, that says a lot.

    Liked by 1 person

  35. Paco Loco says:

    The only poll that matters is taken on November 8, 2016. Most of the pollsters are manipulating the meme that Trump is behind but it’s a close race. When we look closely we find that their polls are rigged and a setup for the massive vote fraud that the Dems are planning. They are up to their old dirty tricks and will criminally try to steal the election from Trump. The Republican Party has to throw everything that they have on a GOTV, have poll watchers at all polls, have observers at each states elections board to look for fraud during the tabulation process, and make voting fraud a big issue this election and start the drum beat now.


  36. scott says:

    Attached is an article about how many registered Dem and Repubs there are in Ohio. Strongly Dems. but they get their % of Dems v Reps only going by county instead of including indies. Individual counties are trending demorat, but what they ignore is that isn’t true. The counties are moving towards undeclared.

    Total # of registered voters(at the time) was 2,319,714 Democrats, 1,449,435 Republicans, and 4,533,333 undeclared.

    What is overwhelming, and what is being overlooked is over 50% of the registered voters in Ohio are not even being considered! So any Ohio poll should reflect this total according to these numbers: 27.9 Dems, 17.5 Reps, and 54.6 undeclared. So the original Monmouth poll overstated Reps but ignored the “indie” vote that Trump is overwhelmingly winning.

    Liked by 1 person

  37. unseen1 says:

    From my understanding you can fake the final numbers but it is very hard to fake the trend lines of the polls. All polls this week show Trump surging.


    • scott says:

      When your original poll showing a certain someone is ahead is openly altered which then shows him losing, you are admitting to falsifying the data. Why did he go with the first set of numbers? How does he explain that? So was he lying then or is he lying now? Either way he goes, he is lying.


  38. Geri Smith says:

    Patrick Murray ‏@PollsterPatrick 13 minutes ago
    “Many people are saying I’m a highly respected pollster. I don’t know, but people are saying it…”

    When Patrick fails at polling, “The Tonight Show” needs a new comedian.


    • NCPatrick says:

      When Patrick fails at polling, “The Tonight Show” needs a new comedian.”

      Bless your heart, Geri. I needed a laugh.


    • Liked by 6 people

    • jeans2nd says:

      Many people are saying Patrick Murray is a highly rejected pollster.
      And I do know. (teehee)


    • ikarukuni says:

      Pollsters routinely weight results to make up for groups over and under-representation in their initial samples. And Murray’s poll does show it was weighted for age. For instance, 176, or 44 percent, of the 402 respondents in the unweighted sample were under 50. In the weighted sample, they accounted for for 48 percent.

      Not seen in the methodology Murray published, but shown in data Murray provided to POLITICO New Jersey, is that the most underrepresented age in the initial data was under 35 — the most Democratic-leaning age subgroup. Voters over 65 — those most likely to vote for Trump — were over-represented in the initial sample, accounting for 32 percent of respondents. In the weighted sample, they made up 24 percent.

      “You’re not seeing we’re weighting the under 35s higher because we’re grouping them with the under 50s, who don’t get weighted as much. But it’s enough to move self-reported party IDs for Democrats a couple points,” Murray said.

      Also weighted in Murray’s poll, but not apparent in the published methodology, is voter race and regions of the state.

      “In Ohio, we had a significant under-representation of voters from the northern part of the state by the lake,” Murray said. “We’re talking about Cleveland and Cuyahoga County, the biggest Democratic county in the state.”



  39. eubykdisop says:

    ROFL!!!! Hilarious!!!! The only thing that people like Patrick Murray are accomplishing to is prove that liberal Democrats and their minions are incompetent cheats and liars. They couldn’t earn a living if they had to produce a legitimate product. Donald Trump, on the other hand, has numerous examples of actual, tangible, concrete, real world accomplishments. What businesses has Hillary Clinton run? What jobs has Hillary Clinton created, other than for people in her security detail?


  40. Hey Sundance, thanks for listing his twitter, makes it so much easier to click and respond to him in the “moment of passion” as I was reading of his treachery to Americans. I encourage others to leave him a response.

    Liked by 1 person

  41. Sedanka says:

    First Murray lied in his Twitter response, then went completely silent as the lie was pointed out, disproven and discussed. Next time he won’t respond in the first place.


  42. Bull Durham says:

    The purpose of the creation of a lie is to deceive.

    Their numbers deceive. That is the goal.

    Their numbers become “truth” and memes.
    We’ve had it since the conventions.

    They need to keep lying.

    They are Lying organizations that issue lies.

    Monmouth Lies. Pew Lies, etc. Just use the correct nomenclature.

    All this deconstruction of the Lies is a waste of time and effort.

    Trump is obviously doing well. Clinton is not.

    Now, let’s bury the bitch. Roll her flat. Destroy the Media and Lies.

    The power of truth is with the People. Make the sights and sounds overwhelm the Lies.
    Bigger, faster, bigger, faster. Mow them down.
    The weather is good. Build huge crowds.
    Everything is on our side.
    Break their spine.
    Rent a big venue and show them what has never been seen before.
    A rock festival rally: Spirit of America.

    Liked by 2 people

  43. Sedanka says:

    To my fellow centipedes who have been linked to this article from Reddit – join the discussions here too!


  44. Truthfilter says:

    Hey Patrick-all that filthy lying has made your teeth yellow.


  45. barton2016 says:

    He has a future with Lyin Ted’s office


  46. Keln says:

    Yep saw that earlier. More proof to ignore the polls people. They are being purposely manipulated.

    If you really want to talk about assumptions when it comes to who will show up to the election, take a gander at these numbers:

    •’12 Primary R – 1,213,879
    •’08 Primary D – 2,315,389
    ‘•16 Primary R – 1,988,960
    •’16 Primary D – 1,241,478
    •Δ% R – +60%
    •Δ% D – -50%

    Yes, you are reading that correctly. Ohio is a key state in any primary that always has a high turnout in primaries because it, along with Florida, is so important in terms of delegates for both parties. This year both parties also had a contentious contest going on by the time Ohio voted in mid-March. So one would expect high turnout for both Republicans and Democrats.

    But that is not what happened.

    There was a 50% drop in turnout for the Democratic primary compared to 2008. 50%!

    And on the Republican side, there was a 60% increase. There were actually close to three quarters of a million more people voting in the Republican primary this year than people voting in the Democrat contest.

    So if you are going to weight a poll based on assumptions of who might show up to the election, which assumption are you going to make? It seems leaning Republican might be a safe bet if the primaries are any indication.

    (Numbers from Popular Vote in Presidential Primary spreadsheet)


  47. Eris says:

    The basic problem is there is currently no consequence for these lyin’ pollsters.

    Their customers keep buying their lies and distortions since they’re protected by Sullivan vs. New York Times.

    Exposing and publicizing their lies and distortions is the best we can do at the moment.


  48. Somebody get this article to Lou Dobbs and Sean Hannity.

    Liked by 1 person

  49. In AZ says:

    I tell everyone about this blog. Wonderful work!
    And commenters give really good information that I use. So thanks to everyone.

    I said this before but here goes again…..

    We are tired of the Communist S!!#$T!!!

    They have been outed, exposed, and yet they continue to lie, deceive, project, deny, deflect, manipulate, bully, murder, and all the other things Communist scum do.


  50. John22 says:

    I would love to see this clown try to actually debate sundance on what he did. He would get eaten alive.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s