Anyone that watches the news will see some strong disparities. According to many liberal outlets, Hillary Clinton still has a lead over Trump in their polls.
This, of course, flies in the face of reality. We see Trump packing out rallies and uniting people of all backgrounds. We are seeing unprecedented numbers among black voters coming out for Trump. Even blue states are starting to come around.
Compare that to a Clinton campaign that lacks energy, can’t draw crowds, and is cancelling events.
Clearly the mainstream media is trying to rig the election with biased polls. But not every polling firm is trying to distort their facts. One group is predicting a clear win for Trump, despite the large bias in the news.
And this group knows what they’re talking about, they predicted Brexit, after all.
On Friday, Predata gave Trump a digital campaign score of 89.3% compared to Hillary Clinton’s 15.8%. In fact, except for a brief period in August, during which Donald Trump feuded with Gold Star father Khizr Khan, Trump’s campaign has been dominant, with a campaign score as high as 94.66% in mid-July…
This isn’t the first time Predata has used its campaign score algorithm to conclude something radically different from that of mainstream pollsters.
Before the Brexit vote in late June, when most pundits predicted the Remain camp had an edge, Timms saw something else in his numbers. “There was a very clear message that was coming out of our signals and that wasn’t reflected in the polls,” he said.
While traditional polling can produce distorted results, thanks to cherry-picking the people they question, Predata’s methods are far more comprehensive. They are using modern methods to gauge people’s opinions, using popular sources online as clear indicators.
For the US election, Predata is computing “campaign scores” for Trump and Clinton by measuring the correlation of engagement with each campaign’s message online—comments on YouTube videos, edits to Wikipedia articles and followers of Twitter accounts—to engagement with general election-related material online. If a campaign’s message tracks well with the overall digital conversation, that score approaches 100%. If a campaign’s message seems unrelated to the overall digital conversation, the score approaches 0%.
It makes sense that a firm will look are real factors in an election, like online engagement, rather than randomly asking 1000 people their opinion (as do old fashion polls). In an age where everyone’s online expressing their opinion, it’s shocking to think the media refuses to use this huge resource.
It’s only further proof that mainstream media outlets refuse to acknowledge the truth: that Donald Trump is dominating this election and will win handedly.
Their polls may say something else, but they like the rest of their content, have long lost their credibility.