The Trump Campaign #2: The Best Thread On The GB, Believe Me

[Rachel_X]

Again, I think the country will survive. And again, I'm not young and wet behind the ears on this topic.

Keep saying it. That will make it true.

 

[sr71plt]

Keep saying it. That will make it true.

Shall we make a date for, say Christmas, to check on it? I'm game.

I don't think you understand the power and steadiness of the bureaucracy.

 

[Wrong Element]

Apparently, Bill Clinton has a black love child.....Hillary's health is front and center, I mean, this isnt a rock slide, its a down right avalanche of media frenzy...

The "black love child" thing was debunked a good 20 years ago. In fact, Matt Drudge, who had this "scoop," has passed along so much bullshit over the years that he apparently forgot he broke the news of the original debunking.


Clinton went back over 70 percent Monday in the Five Thirty Eight odds, for the first time since September 11 and the pneumonia incident.

 

[underguy1]

Again, I think the country will survive. And again, I'm not young and wet behind the ears on this topic.

But how many other countries won't survive the heinous warmonger?

That's assuming her bellicose stupidity doesn't lead to war with Russia and/or China.

 

[toubab]

USC/LA Times poll

http://cesrusc.org/election/

Trump 46.6

Clinton 42.7


The above averages come 100% from seven days of post-debate polling. Trump was at 46.2 before the debate, and Clinton was at 42.7, meaning there has been a slight post-debate gain for Trump, and no gain for Clinton.

 

[Hypoxia]

Polls: Are these of likely voters, or the general populace? Polling people who won't vote is, feh.

I read that Clinton's campaign is using powerful tools (software and people) from the Obama organization to micro-target approachable voters, filtering Big Data to find what buttons to push. They won't even bother with the national and regional polls except as spin material, polls that are just a blur this campaign cycle. It's an information war and Tromp is outgunned.

Notice how none of the big polls mention likely voters? Feh.

 

[LadyFunkenstein]

How precious that you don't know what the reference to "dupe for a shyster" is. Are you sure you're not a natural blonde?

I have never ever heard the phrase and I have no idea what you are talking about. Intelligent people look inward for a correction. when they are unable to communicate with their intended audience. Low IQ types such as yourself lash out with snark an insults.

 

[LadyFunkenstein]

To be fair, "shyster" is a term for an unscrupulous lawyer, and Donald Trump is no such thing.

I have only heard the term applied to Jews specifically.

 

[LadyFunkenstein]

To be fair, "shyster" is a term for an unscrupulous lawyer, and Donald Trump is no such thing.

I've only heard the term applied to Jews.

So what does a "dupe for Trump" mean, that I copy him? Makes no sense. I'm not even voting for the guy, yet I am his carbon copy?

 

[Disgustipated]

I have never ever heard the phrase and I have no idea what you are talking about. Intelligent people look inward for a correction. when they are unable to communicate with their intended audience. Low IQ types such as yourself lash out with snark an insults.

I have only heard the term applied to Jews specifically.

I've only heard the term applied to Jews.

So what does a "dupe for Trump" mean, that I copy him? Makes no sense. I'm not even voting for the guy, yet I am his carbon copy?

Tell us more about "intelligent people", Funk.

 

[backdoor_bandit19]

Tell us more about "intelligent people", Funk.

I don't care if YOU are intelligent or not.
I still miss you, SugarCheeks.

 

[Adre]

It looks like Trump is winning in Ohio.

And losing in FL, PA, CO, NC, VA, NH

 

[Aglaopheme]

Assange has also cancelled the "October Surprise" - coincidence?

http://www.infomine.com/ChartsAndData/GraphEngine.ashx?z=f&gf=145510.USD.t&dr=1w

What a let down that was.

 

[Liar]

Assange is blue balling the Trump camp so hard right now that I almost feel sorry for them.

 

[Aglaopheme]

He's definitely trying to keep them on the hook. They ought to know better after the wild success the Convention was.

 

[xbb]

http://cesrusc.org/election/

Trump 46.6

Clinton 42.7


The above averages come 100% from seven days of post-debate polling. Trump was at 46.2 before the debate, and Clinton was at 42.7, meaning there has been a slight post-debate gain for Trump, and no gain for Clinton.

they are wrong

 

[Adre]

they are wrong

2boob will not be convinced until November 9th.

 

[toubab]

Polls: Are these of likely voters, or the general populace? Polling people who won't vote is, feh.

I read that Clinton's campaign is using powerful tools (software and people) from the Obama organization to micro-target approachable voters, filtering Big Data to find what buttons to push. They won't even bother with the national and regional polls except as spin material, polls that are just a blur this campaign cycle. It's an information war and Tromp is outgunned.

Notice how none of the big polls mention likely voters? Feh.

Nate Silver considers the USC/LA Times poll to be a likely voter poll, as does RealClearPolitics. The poll is designed to find people who are likely to vote.

I do not expect Trump's current lead in this poll to last all the way to election day, but if it does I think Trump will win the popular vote in the election.

 

[Wrong Element]

Polls: Are these of likely voters, or the general populace? Polling people who won't vote is, feh.

Most polls switch over to "likely voters" around Labor Day or so, though that's usually only publicized in the fine print.


Pollsters usually know what they're doing, but there are exceptions. Take Bloomberg's poll of North Carolina released yesterday, showing Clinton with a 1-point lead over Trump. This poll also had Stein with 2 percent in NC, which would be quite an accomplishment considering she's not on the ballot there.

 

[ryan8558]

Nate Silver considers the USC/LA Times poll to be a likely voter poll, as does RealClearPolitics. The poll is designed to find people who are likely to vote.

I do not expect Trump's current lead in this poll to last all the way to election day, but if it does I think Trump will win the popular vote in the election.

Which does nothing. Just ask Al.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2000

 

[Liar]

Nate Silver considers the USC/LA Times poll to be a likely voter poll, as does RealClearPolitics. The poll is designed to find people who are likely to vote.

I do not expect Trump's current lead in this poll to last all the way to election day, but if it does I think Trump will win the popular vote in the election.

It's not the poll aggreagators that decide if a poll is likely voters or registered voters. It's the pollster themselves. And what is likely is a guess. You have decided that USC's guess is the right guess, and that the vast majority of other pollsters who also use likely-methodology, and who differ greatly from USC, guess wrong.

Can outliers be right? Sure. They're just not very likely (heh) to.

 

[toubab]

Which does nothing. Just ask Al.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2000

National polls are interesting, but can be deceptive as to the probability of someone winning in the Electoral College. I do recall, however, that Nate Silver has opined that it is nearly impossible for someone to win the national popular vote by more than a point or two and lose in the EC.

 

[toubab]

It's not the poll aggreagators that decide if a poll is likely voters or registered voters. It's the pollster themselves. And what is likely is a guess. You have decided that USC's guess is the right guess, and that the vast majority of other pollsters who also use likely-methodology, and who differ greatly from USC, guess wrong.

Can outliers be right? Sure. They're just not very likely (heh) to.

I'm basing my opinion on whether the USC/LA Times poll is a likely voter poll on their methodology. It has nothing to do with guessing.

 

[Liar]

I'm basing my opinion on whether the USC/LA Times poll is a likely voter poll on their methodology. It has nothing to do with guessing.

It's not about you.

It is what it is. "Likely" in "likely voter poll" means "who we assume is likely to vote".

The USC/LA Times likely voter poll makes one assumption, i.e guess. Numerous other likely voter polls makes a vastly different one.

 

[Disgustipated]

http://i.imgur.com/fJ4OofA.jpg