24 hours later, and the air is still hot. It was a huge night, biggest debate night since Reagan-Carter in 1980. Trump and Hillary broke records last night in their 90 minute debate, 80 million viewers according to Nielsen.

In the past 24 hours, you have the people who will tell you both sides won, no matter what counter you try to make. If you watch CNN and nothing else, you'd be in belief that Hillary won. If you find polls conducted by demographic bias, you may not be getting a fair analysis of the results.

Luckily we have this beautiful technology called the Internet, and many media and social media sites to conduct unbiased, open polling. I'm going to present to you multiple polls from various media outlets, mainly conducted on Twitter, but a couple polls will be from just the websites themselves.

C-SPAN:

I wanted to drop the C-SPAN one first, because C-SPAN really doesn't have any political bias. This was retweeted over 2.5K times, so it did reach plenty of people. 1 hour left, C-SPAN Twitter poll gives Trump the W by 14%.

ABC7:

​

ABC7 is Washington D.C's ABC local news station. The reason this one was shared second is, well, it's from D.C and was shared 1.5K times, and Trump takes the W by 40% with under an hour left in the poll duration.

Political Polls @PpollingNumbers:
​

Political Polls is one of the top Polling sources on Twitter for the 2016 Election, in my opinion at least. They're very accurate, and bring together many sources. Tweet was retweeted 1.7K times, and Trump wins this poll by 30%.

​WikiLeaks:

Many different people follow WikiLeaks, and with it being retweeted over 4,000 times, Trump wins by 32%.

USA Today:

This is one of the closer ones, but Trump still comes out by 2%.

TIME:

Hillary takes the L on TIME by 10%. This is big league!

ABC News:

62% win for Trump on ABC News, and this isn't the first time Trump has crushed an open internet poll on ABC before. Huge numbers.

DRUDGE REPORT:
​

DRUDGE is visited by millions a day, and for this big of a win for Trump, beats Hillary by 64%.

Now CNN conducted a good ol' CNN/ORC poll which concluded that Hillary won 62% to Trump's 27%, and guess what, it was not a open poll via the internet. I swear CNN or CNNPolitics had a Twitter poll up, or even one on their website, but it does not exist.

I'm from Pittsburgh, and only one of our local news stations conducted Twitter poll, that station being KDKA. WTAE did conduct a poll, but was conducted oddly by replying to the tweet saying either "Donald/Trump" or "Hillary/Clinton". WPXI did not conduct one all together, Twitter or website.

Anyhow, here are the KDKA results:​

Hillary beats Trump by 18% in the Steel City, but Hillary is expected to win in the urban areas, right?

There are certainly more mixed polls out there, but as you saw above, some pretty big names in the media industry have Trump winning. He isn't wrong when he says he won nearly every poll, because really he did. The mainstream media wants you to believe their closed doors polls, which are either mixed or skewed towards one side or the other.

My previous post on here about open and unbiased internet polls, explained how when major media outlets release poll results their demographically biased and often deemed the "correct" polls. They are also the most noticed it seems, *cough CNN cough*, but open internet polls show a much different side of the story.

Trump is clearly a winner in my opinion, polls could keep being posted on Twitter and various websites for the next week, and Trump would probably come out with a W after they close. Polling done on Twitter, and just open to everyone in genera,l give a much larger and accurate sample rather than polling being done based on certain age groups, races, income, education, region, etc. 

I'm going to conclude with this @ForAmerica poll:

For America is a verified Twitter account that pushes American values and excepitonalism via social media. Trump wins huge, but note the "Not Lester Holt" choice, Lester certainly gave Hillary a free pass in this debate, he never followed up with her, nor challenged her. Huge topics were missed such as her email scandal and Benghazi. Lester also failed to bring up immigration, which would have been a big win for Trump, so maybe that is why it was not brought up. Lester pressed and challenged Trump the whole 90 minutes, but Trump took the the hits and dished them right back at both Hillary and Lester.

In my fair opinion, Trump did win, but it wasn't pretty and he could have done better. There were times he was throwing hit after hit on Hillary, but would either fail to land the KO, or talk when he didn't have to. Hillary on the outside seemed to take it well, but it was clear Trump was in control the whole time, acted strong, and came across like he wanted to be President of the United States of America.

Trump has the momentum, and the polls are really starting to go in his favor all around. Hillary has been tanking, but may have got a slight spike of energy from this debate. 

Some of the polls you see could be misleading and skewed, big surprise. The reason behind that is because who they are conducted by and how they are conducted. Most these polls are done by newspapers and mainstream media companies, so I did a little digging.

I've noticed this trend before, it seems as if polls conducted on the Internet, completely open to everyone and anyone have much different results than the majority of mainstream polls that you see.

I'm focusing mainly on ISideWith.com polling, because I see some HUGE numbers for Mr. Donald J. Trump. I am however going to drop a screenshot of something else I found quite interesting, maybe two, scroll down and find out.

Like I said above, open Internet polling produces different results than the majority of mainstream ones we see, going in Trump's favor. Most Twitter polling even goes in Trump's favor. Reason being is, they are not demographically biased.

Let's start with some states that you'd assume are in Hillary's favor shall we.

Please be advised that these polls did include those who did not win the primaries, but it's strictly a "Who Would You Vote For if the Election was Held Today?" poll.
​
California:

Close to 600,000 votes and Trump is up by 2 points in California.

New York:

Trump up 6 points in New York.

Minnesota (though this is a stretch in reality, much like Cali):

A little over 116,000 votes and Trump is up 6 points.

Illinois:

Trump up by 7 points in Obama's home state.

Connecticut:

​

Trump up by 9 points in liberal locked Connecticut.

Now let's look at a couple swing states.

Pennsylvania:

I know, I didn't cross out the other candidates, but Trump up 12 points in PA, big league!

Ohio:
​

YUGE! 16 points in crucial Ohio.

Florida and Virginia:

Trump up by 18 points in Florida and 10 in Virginia, huge as well.

Now, your probably saying, oh this looks biased to Trump, but really it isn't, it's unbiased open polling.
 
Here is a couple where Hillary has the lead:

Massachusetts:

Washington D.C:
​

Hillary, is still gettin' some love on ISideWith, but many other states on that site fall in Trump's favor. Maryland, Oregon, Washington, Wisconsin, and a few others go Trump's way.

Still not buying it? Here is another completely unbaised and open poll:

​

Jill Stein doesn't even count in this poll to be completely honest, so she missed out on the posting. Trump up by 16,000 votes to Clinton. Now ABC did conduct an unbiased open Internet poll a few months ago, and here are those results:
​

As you see, Hillary gets less votes than both Jill Stein and Gary Johnson, but the crowns goes to Donald J. Trump.

I'm really starting to believe my theory is correct on polling, and there is plenty of evidence above to back that up. We're in for a landslide victory for Trump folks, it's going to happen. We are taking our country back!

Trump Pence 2016.

In 1969 the US Depertment of Defense Defense/Advance Research Project Agency created what would become the Internet we all love and know today, it was called ARPANET. Created to keep ongoing government communication after a catastrophic nuclear attack knocking out all land based telecommunications, ARPANET was a major milestone in not only the military, but technology in general. Little did its creators know what it would eventually turn into.

Using this technology, and creating new tech along the way, the Internet became fully commercialized in the US by 1995. Before then the US government had a strong grasp on the Internet, but in the present day the Internet is as we know, open and free. Anyone who has connection to this beautiful technology can do whatever they please, legal or illegal (until you get caught). Although it seems many people are running into censorship problems by companies that run websites and networks on the Internet, mainly conservatives and those critical of government. This is the road I'm going down.

There is this not so little non-profit organization called ICANN. ICANN mainly controls and manages Domain Name System and Internet Protocols around the globe, which is a lot already. This organization is a direct result of a proposal from the US National Telecommunications and Information Administration, a sub-division of the US Department of Commerce. Known as "The Green Paper" NTIA called to privatize the management of the Internet Domain Name System, and in 1998 along came ICANN.

Now from the moment of ICANN's creation to present day, the US has maintained authority over ICANN in a Memorandum of Understanding between the US Department of Commerce and ICANN. President Barack Obama is about to shred this deal, and let ICANN do whatever they please and are in a way "for sale". This is leaving many to worry the UN, EU, China, or even Russia will make a deal, or multiple, with ICANN. Trust me there is plenty of reasons to be worried.

The UN would be the most likely to assume authority, or make some deals with ICANN, and those deals could ruin the Internet we know and love today. ICANN can control nearly any website and any server connected to the Internet, and the US constitution and values have long protected users, innovation, and creativity on the Internet, and let's not forget about cyber security.

Other nations may and could influence censorship and biased algorithms throughout the Internet and there will be nothing the US can do about it. As you know some nations hate the idea of an open and free Internet such as: China, Russia, Iran, Turkey, and a few nations in the EU are catching on slowly, but surely like France and Germany. The EU has already made several antitrust cases against US companies that operate websites and networks on the Internet, and some fear more will follow once the US cedes control of the Internet. A new memorandum of agreement will probably be drafted, if this transition is done, between ICANN and the International Telecommunications Union.

​The ITU is the UN's NTIA. Simple as that.

Why should we as Americans want other nations influencing the way we experience the Internet? We'll have no say in it, we'll juts have to accept it how it is. The US controlling the Internet now has always protected the freedom of the Internet.

Listen I know, the Internet spans the globe, but why cease control of it to the globe when it's already controlled by the land of liberty? Let nations to continue to decide for themselves how the run the Internet in their country, and not have the power to push that influence on others.

As much as I hate to say it, after what he did to Trump at the Republican Convention, but Ted Cruz may be our only voice to stop Obama. Congress can act to block Obama's plan if they can get enough votes to do so. It looks good on the GOP side, which I see no reason why any GOP congressman would not vote for it. Unless they're the typical cucks that really don't care and have the companies lobbying for it in their pockets, that's always a problem. 99.9% of the time the democratic congressman love wahetever Obama proposes.

Here is Ted Cruz making the case at the Protecting Internet Freedom Subcommittee Hearing:

I mentioned companies that lobby for this above, and the ones that do shouldn't really surprise anyone. Twitter, Facebook, and Google have urged congress, in a signed letter, to support Obama's plan, and all three of them have one thing in common, censorship. It's like it's all connected to the globalist elite agenda, and the biggest medium to share and create ideas is the Internet. The letter from the companies, according to Reuters, said "it's imperative" that Congress let's Obama cease authority of the Internet. That is fishy if you ask me.

Other companies that signed the letter were: Amazon, Cloudflare, Yahoo, and several other technology trade firms according to Reuters.

Sadly, it's all in the hands of Congress now, because Obama is going to pull the trigger on this if left unchallenged. Another sad thing is, like a bullet, once you pull the trigger and shoot you can't get it back, and I mean if Trump gets elected I don't think there will be anything he can do to get the Internet back. With Trump though, anything for America is possible.

This is not a good thing, with something as big and powerful as the Internet, which has been protected by the United States since it's birth is about to be absorbed by globalist forces. To think ICANN is going to stay neutral is a stretch in the type of world we live in right now, but it is possible nothing will happen, and if Congress can't block this, then that's all we can rely on, is hope.

We must hope that Ted Cruz, the GOP, and any uncucked Democrats block this transition. The globalist elites on both sides of the aisle need to get on board and realize the risks of this transition. That is the thing too, there is no actual benefit to the US or really even the globe. When ICANN came about due to the NTIA's proposal in 1998, the US has kept authority over ICANN and the Internet, and the Internet has been a free, open, and creative place for all in any nation that allows it that way. Why give it away if there is no reason to do so?

President Obama needs to listen the people on this matter too, and not the special interest groups that want this to happen. After all he is the president for the people by people. A recent Rasmussen Reports survey found that the majority of Americans oppose this move, but to think Obama cares about the American people is a joke within itself. Another poll, conducted by Breitbart/Gravis found only 14% support the transition while 41% do not support it.

Our great nation invented this great piece of technology we call the Internet, we are the reasons ICANN exists, and to just give it all up without even a debate or discussion about it, is not only wrong, but very suspicious. It just seems like something is going on here. We're going to have to sit and see what happens, and if the worse does happen, all we can do is hope that nothing changes.

Sources:
http://www.livinginternet.com/i/ii_arpanet.htm
http://www.livinginternet.com/i/ii_darpa.htm
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/legacy/ntiahome/domainname/domainname130.htmhttp://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/august_2016/most_still_oppose_end_to_u_s_control_of_internet
https://www.icann.org/resources/unthemed-pages/icann-mou-1998-11-25-en
https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/09/freedom-fighter-ted-cruz-leads-charge-to-keep-the-internet-away-from-liberal-censors
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-governance-idUSKCN11I2OT
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/08/30/exclusive-breitbartgravis-poll-reveals-americans-strongly-oppose-obamas-internet-handover/