Another meaningless poll. Whip that horse TPM, whip that horse. Faster, faster.
What really IS telling is that HRC is spending a boat load of money on negative attack adds and the polls are slowly turning the other way towards Trump who has spent very little in terms of attack adds. Once the attack adds start flying in her direction as well as the “Clinton Cash” movie is released the weeks leading up to the Democratic convention we will see what the polls say at that point.
Hillary’s ad buys so far have been positive. Her superpacs are wasting money on attack ads. Attack ads are just about useless in this campaign. Both candidates have very high negatives. Both need to spend money selling themselves.
I don’t think Trump has any intention of buying a lot of traditional media. He plans to continue using the amazing free media that the broadcasters have showered on him. So far the networks have been working overtime to keep Trump in the race.
Tacky wingnut shit. Son of Clinton Chronicles. Take a look:
Good entertainment for the mouth-breathers.That’s about it.
First Fox clip is 100% false.
Not sure what exactly was false…Perhaps you can be more specific? Anything that is in print and shown to be false is open for litigation…I have yet to hear of ANY complaint of any falsehoods from the HRC campaign.
There have been black balled authors and those responsible for books and films from being interviewed on CNN, and MSNBC and such…I wonder why? SMH
Adjust your tin foil hat.
I agree that they want him around in the short haul. Trump is responsible for millions of dollars in advertising…HRC does not sell much of anything. Dont get me wrong though, they want HRC to win but she aint as good for their bottom line in the meantime…
Yea really, survey monkey didn’t get that name for no reason. A voluntary poll with bananas for an incentive.
Here, wingnut:
Considering all of the organizations affiliated with the Clinton Foundation, CharityWatch concluded about 89 percent of its budget is spent on programs. That’s the amount it spent on charity in 2013.
We looked at the consolidated financial statements (see page 4) and calculated that in 2013, 88.3 percent of spending was designated as going toward program services — $196.6 million out of $222.6 million in reported expenses.
We can’t vouch for the effectiveness of the programming expenses listed in the report, but it is clear that the claim that the Clinton Foundation only steers 6 percent of its donations to charity is wrong, and amounts to a misunderstanding of how public charities work.
Enjoy the movie.
FBI —No charges against HRC