I don't think Hillary's racist, and that's not what it says up there at the top of the thread. I referenced her racial spin. Okay I'll admit the word "exposed" kinda maybe implies racism. Sorry for the exaggeration--that's not what I meant. I meant that her false claim is exposed. Its well known that she's pushing the narrative that white people in swing states won't vote for a black guy. I just talked to a Hillary supporter today who said the same thing. Okay, he's not an official surrogate, but this is the buzz. Is it wrong?

About polls, yes, it's healthy to be skeptical about polls. But the ones that are done scientifically are real, hard data. They are statistics and one should be careful in their interpretation, but dismissing them out of hand is no more prudent than overinterpreting them. In this case, I put them up because Hillary's camp made the claim that Barack enjoys less of the white vote and thus will be a weaker general election candidate. There's nothing wrong with that claim, because it is falsifiable. These data suggest--but do not prove--that her claim is flat out wrong. They also imply that the opposite may be true. More evidence may come to light which shows something different, but until then, you can't simply discard real data because you don't like polls. Are you suggesting we trade opinions ad nauseum until one of us is forced to change our minds on the basis of the other having a more forceful opinion?