Dem voters prefer "someone entirely new" for 2020

Kamala got her start as Willie Brown, then San Fran Mayor, mistress.
She's a mattress and slept her way to the top.

Attached: Whore.jpg (628x409, 46K)

Booker did the same thing in NYC. Both have far too many skeletons

Booker just seems weird and has low charisma
At this point the dems need a high charisma person, but outside of maybe Beto I'm not sure who might fit the role.

> 689 voters
falling for the percentage jew

H I C K E N L O O P E R

Not NEARLY enough people. Even 6,000 would be pretty damn measly. Even that would be only 120 people per state, or have overly lopsided info for one state. Even if you perfectly spread it out across guaranteed democrat states you only get a couple hundred people PER STATE. This is why polls are so gay. You need like a million people for anywhere near reliable sample data, and even those data are subject to misinterpreting the question, social pressure, etc. Polls are a meme to control public perception.

Attached: biden-squeeze.jpg (1124x1536, 196K)

Fucking this, whatever initiate to the pedophile blood cult of the deep state would suffice but even that is pretty limited.

Attached: REPENT.png (493x463, 249K)

In terms of candidates with realistic shots; Gillibrand with Brown as VP.

She's not known for doing what people want.

typical pol:
- Are you racist? [no]
- Do you like death ? [no]
> they want open borders !

This. Honestly folks including myself should have been doing serious background investigations before they have a chance to “change” the past.

t. never took a stats course. You don't need a sample size in the millions. A thousand registered, likely voters in each state should give you a pretty reliable poll.

This. I'll tear out my left nut if she doesn't run. She will. What the plebians want or think make exactly zero difference to this.

> falling for the statisical jew
t. engineer

Doesn't matter who they prefer they will vote for whomever the DNC picks even if it's Hillary again

Ivanka should run in 2020. It would be best timeline.

The dems will have to run a nigger, at this point there just aren't enough idiot whites to let them win elections. It is going to be Trump vs. some Nigger woman and it is going to be the nastiest election in history.

It's never accurate though. I'm aware that the common saying is that 2-3000 is a good sample size, but it's just nonsense, especially when it comes to politics, as 2016 showed.

Oprah would win I think. She can talk both white and black depending on the crowd like Obama did, has a shitton of money and mass appeal. Would definitely be prone to SJW liberal shit on everything though.

>shooting? cop is racist
>we must ban guns
>only point out racism happening to non-whites
>would be pro-immigration
>pro welfare
>would always talk about women and women's rights

She would definitely win imo though, Dems would love her and no one would be allowed to criticize her.

>Ivanka should run in 2020
>women in politics
have you learned nothing user

Those polls were flawed for reasons other than sample size
>overestimated Democrat turnout
>underestimated Republican turnout
>thought Hillary would get as much minority voter turnout/support as Obama did
>thought women would vote for Hillary like a fucking hivemind so they could go "we wuz prezident and shit" the way blacks did for Obama

The Dems will run a sellout capitalist candidate, and Trump will run on fake and utterly unachievable promises.

The reason why Trump won was because he admitted there's a problem in our society. Granted, his view is warped and he wouldn't fix any of the fundamental issues in our society even if he could. But at least he admits that all is not well with the status quo.

The Dems by and large have not learned this lesson. It's a toss up in my opinion between Trump and the inevitable sellout Dem, though I'm leaning towards another Trump term.

Wow Amy Klobuchar blown the fuck out

What kind of sad fuck gets excited for Joe Biden?

An okay approximation of your margin of error is 1/(sample size)^(1/2).
Got 100 people? +/-10%. 400? +/-5%. 1600? +/-2.5%. 6000 would be just above 1%
Using a 95% confidence level, an infinitely large population, a normal distribution, 687 voters has a confident interval of 3.74. what's more important is method of data collection, aka if there are biases or bad methodology rather than sample size. Also looking for if there's underlying reasons for responders to lie. A big one of these is in the 2016 election, admitting to liking/voting for Trump was very socially awkward and even dangerous. This poll shouldn't have those bias, except Hillary or Bernie might be skewed

Me, he touches me in my happy place

Underage b&