Tuesday, June 5, 2012

Wisconsin and CNN: The Liar Network Lies (John King, Liar)

The Maverick Conservative, 9,999 (approaching the landmark 10,000 mark), Media 0.  Yep. The recall vote in Wisconsin, won EASILY by Scott Walkter, again PROVED this blog right.  No, I am not talking aobut Walker winning, although I thought that likely.  I am talking abut EXIT POLLS.  This blog has correctly told you that exit polls are USELESS, and yuyet the media keeps using them.  Even the unfair and unbalanced network, while expressing dubt abuot exit poll "performance" in the past, consistentlyl goes ahead and USES the "internal" "information" in those SAME erroneous exit plls as if that "information" has not already been shown to be a LIE. 

Look at tonight.  Exit polls--accroding to CNN and MSNBC, and the reason the unfair and unbalanced network did not "call" the race earlier--"showed" an almost EVEN result: with maybe a 1% or 2% edge to Walker. Walker actually won by 8 or 9 percentage points.  In other words, Walker had a BIGGER victory than Obama had in deefating John McCain.  Walker had a BIGGER margin than Obama had in 2008.,  and The media described Obama as having a "massive" victory. 

The entire mmedia also LIES in the way they report pre-election polls.  This has been a crusade of this blog from the very beginning, and never has this blog been proven more right than in this elecino season.  Look at what almost ALL of the media people were saying about Wisconsin.  Wisconsin is "polarized", and EQUALLY DIVIDED.  All Walker and the unions are "gihting" over is about 3% in the middle.  This was, and is, absurd, and a lesson for Mitt Romney.  No, the Walker case is not a case where the pre-eleciton plls were that far wring. Coompared with the exit polls, the pre-election polls--while varying all ofver the map, as usual--showed a clear Walker margin.  But it was still a margni very close to within the "margin of error".  Just how much of a LIE is it for the media to rely so heavily on polls, when polls RIGHT BEFORE AN ELECTION can be said to either "signal" a LANDSLIDE (the actual Walker victory margin), or might signal a close race (the actaul media expectatin, although there is an element of sef-interest for the media to LIE in this directin to "gin up" interest in their coverage). This whole election season, polls a month in advance of an electin are reported as if they mean something, even as they disagree with one another, and then the polls CHANGE by 10 or 20 percent in a WEEK OR TWO.  The lesson for Romney is NOT to assume that he is "fighting" over only 5% of the country that is"undecided".  Romney shuld pay no attentin, certainly at this point, to polls (although I will never convince him, or any other olitician influenced by the liars of the medai, not to pay way too much attentin to polls).  What Romney needs to do is set out to CONVINCE EVERYONE (excpet the hopeless people of MSNBC and CNN).  No.  That does not mean Romney needs to spend massive amounts of money in Californi, when he is pretty sure he is going to lose the state (without any polls).  But it means taht Romney should have a "strategy" of having a MESAGE that he can get across to every single voter. Wlker showed what you can do with a MESSAGE in a supposedly "evenly divided" state. Romney should have the RESPECT for voters (women, men, Hispanics, African-Americans, Native Americans, union members, and eveyrone else) to believe that they CAN be CONVINCED that Romney is on the right track for the COUNTRY--so long as Romney presents his case in the correct way.  I have heard MSNBC talk about Michael Dukakis LEADING George Bush by 18% someting like two months before the electin, and then LOSING in a LANDSLIED.  John McCain wa EVEN with Barack Obama, until the economy collapsed (with no real response from McCain to show he wouuld go in a different directino). Yet, the media keeps repoting polls matching Romney and Obama six months ahead of the lection, as if such polls MEAN ANYTHING.  They don't.  They mean NOTHING.  Romney needs to hone the MESSAGE (using plls if he must)--not a message aimed totally at "battleground" states or at particular voters, but a message aimed at EVERYONE.  No. Romney (not to mention Obama) is not going to convince ME.  But it is a bad mistake to assume that there are all of those "independents" (like ME--lol) that constitute the "battleground" in jsut a few states, whilke the vawst majority of peole have alr3eady made up their minds.  That is simply not true.  People CHANGE THEIR MINDS (if they have not thought abut things as long and extgensively as I have).  EVENTS (like the economic collapse that really elected Obama) change people's minds, unless the candiddate has a MESSAGE that can convince peole he is capable of meeting the event.  Polls disagre, and CHANGE, and yet the media reports each poll (months ahead of time) as if that poll MEANS SOMETHIHNG.  This ellection season has shown conclusively that such polls mean nothing at all. Yes, I am saying you could have a LANDSLIDE either way between Obama and Romney, although this blog has predicted a Romney vicotry IF the econmy remains in its present state (unless Romney blows it by not really convincing peopole he rally has a MESSAGE as to what he will do as President that they are willing to buy into). Enough on pre-electin olls, as this article is really more about exit plls, and CNN LIES. 

The entire TV media lies about exit polls.  They will, as stated, "report" that the exit poll is unreliable, and then reort "informatin" from the exit poll as if that informatin is "reliable" ("news").  That is an objective LIE.  "But, Skip, you just said that essentially all of the TV media does this.  Why have you picked out CNN and John King?" 

I am glad you asked that.  John King is one of the worst liars who has ever lived, and he proved it again tonight.  He went the extra mile.  It was obvius early on that the exit polls tonight were hopelessly WRONG.  Yet King had nothing else to really talk about other than the exit poll 'informatin".  He even resisted admitting just how far wrong the exit polls were.  The race was "called" before 50% of the vote had been counted, when Scott Walker had about a 19 percentage pint lead. There was no way that the race would have been "called",unless Walker was toing to win by at least 5 percentage points.  Yet John King, LIAR, tried to say that the end result would be "close" (despite the huge apparent margin, and the early "call", and desite the fact that the exit polls had obviusly been DISCREDITED).  There is NO excuse for King being this much of a LIAR.  Or maybe you think he is jsut that stupid.  I vote forBOTH. I am about to get to conclusive evidence that it is not jsut that he is stupid. There was NO basis for King to still be using the exit olls to suggest that the race would end up "close", when the exit polls shoiuld no longer have been a factor in anything he said.

There was a reason that King wanted to keep some sort of credibility for the exit polls.  King wanted to try to make these "points" from the "surveys" of the exit plls.  For example, people who filled out the entire surveys were asked to choose between Romney and Obama (a ridiculous question).  King wanted to PUSH the CNN AGENDA that Obama is still the big favorite to win Wisconsin.  Thus, King kept making a pont of how this "survey"  of votersshowed that Obama was still favored by abut 10% by Wisconsin voters, even though that every saeme exit poll had just been DISCREDITED.  There was all kinds of other informatin that King wanted to talk about, FOROM THE EXIT POLLS.  CNN, as The Liar Network, was obviusly determined to go with their 'storyline", based on the exit poll, and they were not going to let mere facts stand in their way.  Thus, yuou got this analysis, based on DISCREWDITED INFORAMTINON, about what percentates of the voters "trusted" Romney more than Obama on the economy; what voters in different income groups voted, and how Walker did among union households.  CNN hasd all of this "analysis' based on exit polls showing the vote to be basically a TIE,, and they were not ging to change that analysis just because that exit pol had already been shown to be WRONG.  In otehr words, the "sample" was NOT REPRESENTATIVE of teh actual voters. Thus, all of these percentages came from an INVALID SAMPLE.  "But, Skip, maybe John King really does not understnad that ALL of his percentages were rendered invalid by the fact that the "sample" was not representative of all of the people who actually voted."

Ahj.  This is where John King, LIAR, really exposed himself.  I actually thought I wuld see him drop his pantgs on national TV, which is why I kpet watching this exercise in deceit with horrified eys and ears ("horrified" for you poor peole who might not know what John King is, on The Liar Netwoork, although gloating because King was proving this blog right abut HIM). John King kept REPEATING this "exit poll" "informatin", as if it were valid, and he even asked Ari Fleischer (a CNN "conservative", which bears the same relationship to a real conservative that a Cooper Indian bore to a real Native Americann--according to Mark Twain) if Fleischer did not thinnk that the exit poll informatin showing Obama still "beating" Romney (in a electin 6 months away) did not show Obama wuld still likely win Wisconsin.  Flesicher has actually shown some signs of not being totally brain dead lately, in contradicting the CNN "party line".  Here, Flesicher pointed out the obvius: "Wll, John, I don't think that the exit poll informatin is reliable, since the exit poll seems to have been obviusly wrong."  In other words, Fleischer tried to bring to King's attentin the very pknt that I make above.  King IGNORED the pont--went right by it as if Fleischer had not just eviscerated King's whole approach. Kin gmumbled something about the margin going to "close" :(as it did, but not to the point of actually being CLOSE, as the exit poll had "predicted")., and Knig went right ahead putting ut MORE exit poll "information" as if Fleischer had not spoken.  John King is a LIAR, on The Liar Network.

Haed enough? There is more.  Later, as I surfed back, Knig was trying to "explain" why the exit pll had been so WRONG (obvius to everyone, at that point, although King was still holding out "hope" that the margni would stil "close" dramaticazlly). No.  King did not stop reporting exit oll INFORMATIN as if it wer reliable. King would continue that to the very end., LIAR that he is.  But King did take a stab at why the exit oll was so very wrong on the MARGIN of the Walker victory. King said:  "We do the best we can, and hire the best peopele we can.  However, you have to realize that this is NOT a scientifically chosen sample, which is what a professional polling organizatin tries to make sure is a REPRESENTATIVE sample.  This is really a "self-selected' sample, where pople coose themselves.  They have to be willing to fill out this survey for a media person with a clipboard.  Maybe Republicans don't turst the media, and don't want to participate in the survey as much as Democrats.  And unin members felt real strongly. They may have been anxuus to take the survey.  That is why we wait for the raw vote to start coming in to compare it with the exit poll data.  We don't simply trust the exit poll.' 

Say what?  Can you doubt that John King is a WORLD CLASS LIAR, on The Liar Network?  So CNN does not accept the exit poll data as necessarily correct, and checks it with the raw vote? And CNN realizes that the exit poll "sample" is likely to be UNREPRESENTATIVE of  all of the people who vorted?  Tell me then, Mr. King, why does that not make you a LIAR, and CNN The Liar Network, for "reporting' sukpposedly detailed informatin from this UNREPRESENTATIVE sample as if it is representative of the people who voted in Wisconsi?  If you "throw out" the exit poll as far as the election result is conerned, then you HAVE to throw out the exit poll TOTALLY.  The "raw vote" haS PROVEN that the sample is NOT properly representative of the entire electorate.  You, John King, jsut told me that GOP voters were the ones likely LEFT OUT of the survey because they do not (for good reason) "trust the media'.  The actual result SHOWS that GOP voters were left out of the exit polls, which used a "self-selected" sample including a greater percentage of Democrat voters than in the actual electin result.  This means your "conclusin" on Wisconsin stil being likely "safe" for Obama is deeply FLAWWED.  Almost EVERY GOP voter, althouigh not every Walke voter, would likely vote for Romney.  This means that the ROMNEY percentage culd be "off" by as much as 7%.  What it really means, of curfse, is that the entire POLL is simply invalid.  The sample is NOT REPRESENTATIVE. 

Segue to Rachel Maddow, on MSNBC.  She noted that the exit poll was WRONG, but withyout "vouching for' the other "informatin" in the exit poll.  In fact, she noted that the exit poll showed Walker's OPPONENT "winning" among WOMNE:  55% to 47%.  Rachel Maddow is one of the most BIASED, leftist people on all of television.  But she is NOT as DSIHONEST as John King.  She did not tell the viewers that the exit poll "showed" taht Scott Waker "lost" the women vote by 6%, even though that fits the MSNBC narrative.  Ven Rahcel Maddow knew that was RIDICULOUS.  Wlaker culd not WIN the electin by 8 or 9 percentage points, and LOSE the vote of women by 6%.  That is simply IMPOSSIBLE. It just means that the exit poll "informatin" was UNRELIABLE.  ALL of the exit poll informatin was unreliabe--not just some of it.  John King obvusly knew this.  Ari Fleischer told him, if king is really not even as "smart" as Rachel Maddow.  But King kept "reporting" the exit pll "inforamatino" as if it were "accurate", long after it waas discredited.  This is a DISHONEST man on The Liar Network.

Message to John King: This blog has previusly shown that you are one of the most DISHONEST men to ever appear on television.  The Liar Network is the appropriate place for you.  No, I no longer even "surf" you r program, because there is a level of EVIL I jsut refuse to support in any way.  By rights, I should not have even surfed the CNN electin coerage tonight, when I realized that you were sort of "in charge".  Hwoever, I againgave myself an Obama waiver, because I wanted to see just how much of a LIAR you really are.  I did.  You are even WORSE than I thought, and CNN is even more of The Liar Network than I thought.  Cnsider how BAD you and your network had ot be to exceed my expectatioins!!!!!!  Mr. King, you truly are one of the WORST LIARS to ever appear as a suposed "news" person on TV. True, CNN is The Liar Network, and yu fit in.  But, even for CNN you STAND OUT. 

P.S  No proofreading or spell checking (bad eyesight).  Tink of how bad it is for ALL of these media peole to KNOW that exit poll informatin is unreliable, and yet contginue to report this "extra" inforamtin on voters as if it is representative of the people who voted--as if it is reliable.  Do you see why I have noting but CONTEMPT for modern "journalists": almsot ALL of them?    Sometime soono, I will again give my caSe against pre-elecitn polls in complete detail (for abut the 10th time).  If you stil pay any attention to ANY exit poll "informatin", then I am sorry for you.  Atlguh I can tell you where to apply for a job:  CNN (or some other mainstream media outfit, if you can't quite see living up to the standard of dishonesty set by John King, Wolf Blitzer, and the rest). 

No comments: