Nov 11, 2016

The Morning Call Almost Mentioned On CNN

The Morning Call/Muhlenberg College poll was almost mentioned by name on CNN last night.  Kellyanne Conway referred to a poll in eastern Pennsylvania,  where Ivanka had campaigned, which had gotten it very wrong.  The college poll had Hillary up by 6 points.  Of course, this is the same paper that wrote a story on the Wehr's Dam Referendum passing,  quoting someone who hasn't been recently active on the issue, but never mentioned yours truly.

Getting back to Muhlenberg, lets discuss these college fueled protests occurring across the country. You protest decisions by government, such as a particular war or policy. To protest the results of a fair, democratically held election is inappropriate.  I heard that at least one institution of higher learning was offering grief counseling.  I'm beginning to think that the problem in America is too much education. Maybe they should charge more interest on those student loans.

ADDENDUM: An article in Saturday's Morning Call tries to explain their poll errors.  Their pollster and Muhlenberg political science professor, Chris Borick,  now revises that he had Hillary ahead by 4, instead of 6.  At least the pollster at Franklin & Marshall conceded mistakes in his method.


Scott Armstrong said...


Put the following on Facebook last night after viewing coverage of today's youth in crisis.

Hitler Youth

The one benefit of growing up in the conflict ridden sixties and seventies was the exposure to multiple points of view. One dynamic of that time period was that as young people we automatically rejected all the precepts of our elders. Though that had its downsides it did instill critical thinking into some of us. After all, if we were to reject all the thinking of our parents and the status quo, what were we to believe? Fast forward to today’s students, what critical thinking is involved in buying hook, line, and sinker what your elders have told you is the truth. Yet that is the new norm and it is disturbing to witness. Evidence their response to the Trump win; a state of total shock and disbelief and the need to commiserate and be comforted because what they were told could, and should never happen actually occurred. How could a racist, xenophobic, misogynist, homophobic, Ebenezer Scrooge be elected president of the United States?
Today’s students accept this view of Trump without question. Why? Because that is what they are taught, and yes, far too many of them believe everything their teachers/professors tell them. The indoctrination starts early in America, from the tender years of grade school through graduate classes, those charged to educate the next generation are instructing students not on how to think but what to think. Then they are taught that those who disagree are ignorant, corrupt, or self serving. The effects of this type of indoctrination are presently plain to see. The world view of today’s young people, carefully implanted by their instructors, was challenged and their reaction demonstrates they can’t accept it. For them there is no tolerance for alternatives and contrary opinions. They have been instructed to reject all opinions that don’t match the ones they have been instructed to believe.
Scary isn’t it.

doug_b said...

CNN = Communist News Network.

These 'snowflakes' are afraid, afraid that they will have to grow up and support themselves. The obvious is that this is a republic / democracy and the election has been decided. These are not demonstrations, they are tantrums. The sad part is that they don't even know what they are protesting for.

They have been brain-washed by the government schools, media, and left-wing / communist leaning professors.

+1 to Scott @7:19

Jamie Kelton said...

As far as I'm concerned, the White House will need a total gut renovation to get the stink out of it that the Obama's left inside with the corruption of America they caused.

Now the Democrats are rioting in the streets in the same way they accused the Tea Party would if Trump had lost the election. And Obama is completely silent while the streets of our major cities are turned into anarchy.

michael molovinsky said...

The Morning Call has a damage control report in Saturday's paper, where Chris Borick of the Muhlenberg Poll, claims that he had Clinton by 4. Sorry Chris, you had her at 6, and you're poll is consistently off.

in a previous comment on another post, i revealed my votes last tuesday. I failed to mention that i also voted for charlie dent.

Scott Armstrong said...

Mike, Love the headline of your post.

Robert Trotner said...

Michael, the last Muhlenberg College Poll had Hillary up by less than 2 points, not 6.
Her lead was 6 points right before Comey's November surprise.

The final Muhlenberg poll put Hillary up "within the margin of error." Polls can never predict an exact final vote - they can only predict a range of possible results. The Muhlenberg poll had a margin of error of either 3 or 4 points, which means all the poll could do was predict the result within 3 points either way. So that the final poll showed Hillary up by 1.7. All that meant was the almost certain result was that Hillary would win by as much as 4.7% or that Trump would win by as much as 1.3%. People and so called pundits always forget to mention that.

Please bear this in mind and realize that Hillary's drop from 6 points - WELL OUTSIDE THE MARGIN OF ERROR - to 1.7 was either caused by Comey's earth shaking letter or it was a hell of a coincidence. Facts are stubborn things.

TRENT HALL said...

Best estimate right now is that after the NY, California & Washington state absentee ballots are counted (by next Wednesday) Clinton will have won the nation wide popular vote by 2%.....right on where some of the national polls had her. She will probably end up receiving about the same number of votes that Obama did in 2012,

Of course, running up the numbers in those states is meaningless since it doesn't change the Electoral College. What it does show is that Trump didn't so much win the election, as Clinton lost it, by her not achieving the numbers expected from the increased population growth in the cities.

Actual over all percentage of eligible voters DECLINED from 2012; 50 million people didn't vote, who could have. This illustrates two things......both candidates were extraordinarily unpopular, and Trump's voters were more motivated, though Clinton had probably two million more votes than Trump (when all are counted). However, Trump's voters were more strategically placed in the electoral college.