What are you talking about? Hillary is not leading. The media is owned by Clinton forces and they lie. You need to get off the media fantasy bandwagon of the CCN-types. They are lying. Try Drudge or Brietbart for some true pole results.
I'm not talking about poll results. I'm referring to one of the main prediction markets (see link in post). Historically, they tend to be more accurate. I don't think the prediction markets are "biased" in the same way that much of the media is. But if you think they're biased, then bet on Trump and you'll triple your money in two months. :)
We heard the same thing 4 years ago and guess what the predictors that showed Obama winning were right. Most polls are not driven by the media and do lots of research and analysis to create their sample size and who they will poll. When you aggregate a bunch of polls to create an average you can get a fairly honest representation of the current data. One thing on Trump's side is that there is the potential that many of his supporters may not regularly vote so they are likely not to be screened. However, many of these supporters may or may not be registered either, and quite frankly Trump's ground game is rather pathetic so those are potential lost votes. Remember one thing regarding using your own partisan sources (especially Breitbart which has led the Trump charge since before the primaries), they have their own biases and those are reflected in how they choose to sample a population. Thus they can get a rosier result to confirm that bias. I'm not saying this to be pessimistic but to remain realistic and that there is a lot of work left to defeat Clinton. I bought into the hype of a Romney landslide 4 years ago, so I would caution against not trusting prediction models.
What we need is a 'Proud to be Deplorable' bumper sticker or something like that.
or how about "proud to be a basket-case!"
...and yes, I am voting for Trump!