Rasmussen Manipulating Polls

So I look at this latest Rasmussen poll:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2012/election_2012_presidential_election/election_2012_republican_presidential_primary

And it has (you ain't gonna believe it):

Romney 29%
Cain 29%
Gingrich 10%
Perry 9%
Paul 5%

So they know that Perry is done and that Cain is getting hammered and exposed as a Federal Reserve shill promoting more taxes on the poor and middle class. They know that no one else is entering the race. So what do they do? They throw in the CFR Prize Fighter, the man that stopped a true investigation into treason by Bill Clinton (as ROn Paul was at the same time). The transhumanist lying homebreaker who continues to stab the GOP in the back again and again and again...Newt Gingrich. They bump him up to third place so they can get away with not even mentioning Dr. Paul after he won the Bloomberg Poll by 88% (it was a complete smackdown!)

So after just accepting these polls as if they were true for years, I decided to do a little investigating.

---

In Rasmussen's own words they admit the following:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/about_us/methodology

---

TEXT:

---

All Rasmussen Reports' survey questions are digitally recorded and fed to a calling program that determines question order, branching options, and other factors. Calls are placed to randomly-selected phone numbers through a process that insures appropriate geographic representation. Typically, calls are placed from 5 pm to 9 pm local time during the week. Saturday calls are made from 11 am to 6 pm local time and Sunday calls from 1 pm to 9 pm local time. To reach those who have abandoned traditional landline telephones, Rasmussen Reports uses an online survey tool to interview randomly selected participants from a demographically diverse panel. After the surveys are completed, the raw data is processed through a weighting program to insure that the sample reflects the overall population in terms of age, race, gender, political party, and other factors. The processing step is required because different segments of the population answer the phone in different ways. For example, women answer the phone more than men, older people are home more and answer more than younger people, and rural residents typically answer the phone more frequently than urban residents. For surveys of all adults, the population targets are determined by census bureau data. For political surveys, census bureau data provides a starting point and a series of screening questions are used to determine likely voters. The questions involve voting history, interest in the current campaign, and likely voting intentions. Rasmussen Reports determines its partisan weighting targets through a dynamic weighting system that takes into account the state’s voting history, national trends, and recent polling in a particular state or geographic area.

---

IMPORTANT TEXT HIGHLIGHTED:

---

All Rasmussen Reports' survey questions are digitally recorded and fed to a calling program that determines question order, branching options, and other factors. Calls are placed to randomly-selected phone numbers through a process that insures appropriate geographic representation. Typically, calls are placed from 5 pm to 9 pm local time during the week. Saturday calls are made from 11 am to 6 pm local time and Sunday calls from 1 pm to 9 pm local time. To reach those who have abandoned traditional landline telephones, Rasmussen Reports uses an online survey tool to interview randomly selected participants from a demographically diverse panel. After the surveys are completed, the raw data is processed through a weighting program to insure that the sample reflects the overall population in terms of age, race, gender, political party, and other factors. The processing step is required because different segments of the population answer the phone in different ways. For example, women answer the phone more than men, older people are home more and answer more than younger people, and rural residents typically answer the phone more frequently than urban residents. For surveys of all adults, the population targets are determined by census bureau data. For political surveys, census bureau data provides a starting point and a series of screening questions are used to determine likely voters. The questions involve voting history, interest in the current campaign, and likely voting intentions. Rasmussen Reports determines its partisan weighting targets through a dynamic weighting system that takes into account the state’s voting history, national trends, and recent polling in a particular state or geographic area.

---

LET US GO THROUGH EACH POINT ONE BY ONE:

---

randomly-selected phone numbers through a process that insures appropriate geographic representation.

What is the process? Who is in control of the process? Is the process autonomous? Is Ptech software involved with the architecture for risk management processing that can easily be manipulated to shift "RANDOM" to "TARGETED AND DELIBEATE WITH EXTREME PREJUDICE".
---------------------------------------

an online survey tool to interview randomly selected participants

Who is in control of this tool? Same questions as above.
---------------------------------------

the raw data is processed through a weighting program to insure that the sample reflects the overall population in terms of age, race, gender, political party, and other factors.

A weighting program? Are you guys for real? How can you get away with saying "Out of 1,000 people surveyed, 29% said they prefere candidate A" when you change all of the numbers based on a weighting program which takes into consideration "OTHER FACTORS". And who is in control of that weighting program? Is it a Ptech type system or a STUXNET type system built to assist in risk management simulations (which can therefore be manipulated behind the scenes without anyone knowing)? Same questions above and are all of these systems part of a interwoven tapestry with a central command control over it for easier manipulation by the ones paying for the poll (or by others)?
---------------------------------------

a series of screening questions are used to determine likely voters. The questions involve voting history, interest in the current campaign, and likely voting intentions.

YOU SCREEN PEOPLE BASED ON HOW THEY ARE LIKELY TO VOTE?

IS THIS FOR REAL?

WHAT ARE THE CHANCES THAT PEOPLE WERE SCREENED WHO WERE LIKELY TO VOTE FOR RON PAUL YET ONLY 5% DID VOTE FOR RON PAUL? DOESN'T THAT SEEM UNLIKELY? WHAT ABOUT THE CHANCES THAT PEOPLE WERE SCREENED BASED ON 29% BEING LIKELY TO VOTE FOR ROMNEY, 29% LIKELY TO VOTE FOR CAIN, 10% LIKELY TO VOTE FOR GINGRICH AND NO ONE LIKELY TO VOTE FOR PAUL?

I WOULD SAY THE CHANCES ARE BETWEEN 80-100%!

SCREENING PEOPLE BASED ON THEIR LIKELY VOTING INTENSIONS? HOW IS THAT EVEN POSSIBLE AS A REQUIREMENT?

Also the same questions, how is the data transfered, who is in control of the algorithms, etc. These are not scientific polls, these are highly biased polls with dozens of remote manipulation stress points that would allow NWO operatives an opportunity to shift entire results.
-----------------------------------

determines its partisan weighting targets through a dynamic weighting system that takes into account the state’s voting history, national trends, and recent polling in a particular state or geographic area.

Another weighting system? There is so much manipulation of the raw data it is absolutely amazing. Also, the method to get the raw data is compromised by design.

---

They say the provide more detailed info if you subscribe. Maybe it is all on the up and up, but the admissions of total manipulation of all entry points of data, distribution points of data, and reporting systems for data presentations seems very suspect. Now when you add the absolute impossibility that Newt Gingrich soared in the polls for no reason whatsoever and you got a clear case of insisting on all of the raw data including the screening process along with all conversations during the screening process to either expose the fraud going on or to strengthen to confidence in these highly controversial and very suspect polls.