water_wendi
Water is not wet!
Its not the pneumonia. It was the video of her being dragged off into a van. If there had been the exact same video of Trump i would have danced in the fucking street because of how bad it would have made him look.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Race tightens in projected U.S. Electoral College vote: Reuters/Ipsos
- Thread starter 2MF
- Start date
- Status
Its not the pneumonia. It was the video of her being dragged off into a van. If there had been the exact same video of Trump i would have danced in the fucking street because of how bad it would have made him look.
excelsiorlef
Member
Rabbi_Vole
Banned
I might be WAY off on this, but to me it appears Republicans are looking for ANY good justification to vote for Trump while Undecideds are looking for any reason NOT to vote for Hillary.
ManDudeChild
Member
The sky isn't falling U.S. GAF.
.... but don't become complacent and make sure you vote.
.... but don't become complacent and make sure you vote.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Nate Silver said:
We have sufficient evidence to suppose that the state of the race for Clinton right now is bad. She'd still win more often than not, but I don't know if I'm comfortable with Donald Trump having a 40% chance of becoming the next President of the United States - are you?
The question is not "is the picture bad now", it is "will the picture remain bad". Hopefully, the answer is "no". Let's wait a week and find out.
Rabbi_Vole
Banned
I know, but nearly half the country will support the republican nominee and she said a portion of those people are deplorable.. So half the country are going to wonder if they fit her criteria for "deplorable."
eBay Huckster
Member
the basic gist of my posts itt after the first: "the picture will not remain this bad, and here's why"
She didn't call half the country that, she was talking about half of his supporters. Which is being gracious and forgiving to his shit show campaign of bullshit, ignorance, fear and hatred. Of all the criticisms you can throw at Hillary, this is the silliest.
I've yet to meet a Trump supporter who wasn't also a proud racist. Family, friends, literally every person I know, to a T, voting for Trump, loves his racist hate most.
Lightning_Roller
Banned
Can't wait for the debates. No one to shield trump and a need for more structured response so Trump can be seen as the foolish bigot that he is.
kame-sennin
Member
There's an argument to be made that polls are not inherently newsworthy.
Also, a media climate that has suggested otherwise is what allowed Trump to claim he was a legitimate candidate in the first place.
Rabbi_Vole
Banned
I didn't say she called called half the country deplorable.. Nearly Half the country supports Trump, so those people have been put on notice that they may or MAY NOT fit her criteria. Still not a great look.
Manmademan
Member
not in 2012.
Likely voter poll average= Obama +.7
Actual voter turnout= Obama +3.9
I listened to the 538 podcast today, the way they explained the move was that Trump has shored up more Republican and some independent support (probably by not having had a scandal in a while) and Clinton having lost voter enthusiasm (probably due to the pneumonia).
538 also had an article urging some calm to wait and see if it sticks or not:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features...-if-the-polls-still-look-like-this-in-a-week/
Sam Wang over at the PEC also acknowledges the change (somewhat grudgingly, by my impression)
http://election.princeton.edu/2016/09/16/is-a-change-in-the-air/
He still has her at a very high win percentage, though, because he's expecting a regression back to the yearly mean that has had Clinton in a steady lead.
538 also had an article urging some calm to wait and see if it sticks or not:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features...-if-the-polls-still-look-like-this-in-a-week/
Sam Wang over at the PEC also acknowledges the change (somewhat grudgingly, by my impression)
http://election.princeton.edu/2016/09/16/is-a-change-in-the-air/
He still has her at a very high win percentage, though, because he's expecting a regression back to the yearly mean that has had Clinton in a steady lead.
DrForester
Kills Photobucket
Media stopped hitting him back on things. He's pretty much allowed to just say whatever he wants with little repercussion on the news. Some pundits will go all in, but the national news programs pretty much are covering the election on a curve so they seem "balanced". Hillary is far more scrutinized, and Trump can lie to a reporters face without being corrected.
SlickShoesRUCrazy
Member
I'm worried, but will become really worried after the first debate if things go bad for Clinton.
Race has DEFINITELY tightened, no one is arguing that. But it's also important not to get panicky because a few polls showed Trump ahead. That's inevitable. We will probably need to wait more like two weeks for debate fallout to really gauge the race.
And I get what Nate is saying, but he also includes land-line only polls in his model which are universally considered garbage in the polling world. He's been... Odd this year to put it lightly.
He "pivoted".
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
depends what you mean by panicky. If you mean, "losing your head/running around screaming in circles", there's never a time to get panicky. Doesn't help anyone, after all. If you mean "noticing that your current strategy isn't working and thinking about trying a different one", this is probably exactly the time to get panicked.
You and I both know that isn't what she said, but your post perfectly sums up why what she actually said doesn't even really matter.
Manmademan
Member
There is also this explanation, which isn't really mentioned but is significant:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/15/senate-polls_n_6327394.html
*checks calendar* Oh look, we're right on time. That article was from 2014, but still holds true for 2016.
a switch from RV to LV by many posters all at the same time will show a shift towards the republican candidate no matter WHO it was. It's less of an issue in midterms because unlikely voters rarely turn out for low profile congressional races, but in a presidential election it absolutely plays havoc with actually estimating support- as we saw in 2012.
Fox news in particular went from using a 1101RV poll putting clinton at +6 on 8/28-8/30, to an 867 LV Poll on 9/11-9/14 Putting Trump at +1.
There was no news- not even pneumonia gate- that would cause a +7 Trump Shift in that short an amount of time. It's the likely voter screen reducing the amount of democratic turnout.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/15/senate-polls_n_6327394.html
*checks calendar* Oh look, we're right on time. That article was from 2014, but still holds true for 2016.
a switch from RV to LV by many posters all at the same time will show a shift towards the republican candidate no matter WHO it was. It's less of an issue in midterms because unlikely voters rarely turn out for low profile congressional races, but in a presidential election it absolutely plays havoc with actually estimating support- as we saw in 2012.
Fox news in particular went from using a 1101RV poll putting clinton at +6 on 8/28-8/30, to an 867 LV Poll on 9/11-9/14 Putting Trump at +1.
There was no news- not even pneumonia gate- that would cause a +7 Trump Shift in that short an amount of time. It's the likely voter screen reducing the amount of democratic turnout.
This.
Honestly when it's a 60%-40% gap in winning probabilities, it's a great time to panic. If people had similarly "panicked" regarding Brexit maybe it wouldn't have won the referendum.
The only thing I know for sure is that the people claiming to know how the election will end up, are full of shit. Even if Hillary does not disintegrate with another Weekend at Bernie's moment anything could happen. And if she does, insert_your_favorite_deity_here help us.
The deeper problem is that half the country cant face the fact that the country is deeply racist and based on ignorance.
If the point is that its stupid to hold a mirror up to the country... well I guess so. But what she said was highly accurate.
User Name Here
Member
balladofwindfishes
Member
Yea, seems to be the awkward change over to the LV model, along with Hillary's bad weekend, combined into one. Enthusiasm for Democrats seems to be way down, as well, probably because Hillary was gone the entire month of August.
There was actually a small ray of sunshine last week. Towards the end of the week, when Hillary started being out more, and after the forum thing held last week, some of the daily tracking polls were shifting towards Hillary, which seemed to imply she was on the path to go up at that point. Then the weekend happened.
However, the tables are turned this weekend. Trump was on the up, but now he's had a terrible weekend. I think we'll see the bleeding stop and return back to the numbers from a few weeks ago within a week or so, as everything settles and Hillary gets back out there.
Trump needs to poll better than he's polling right now to win. And this is coming off of the worst weekend for Hillary in the entire election. This is the rock bottom of Hillary's polling. And Trump still isn't really winning enough EVs to be president.
Rabbi_Vole
Banned
May or may NOT.. she put half the country on notice that they may or MAY NOT.
Bad wording on my part or reading comprehension issues by others? Honest question.
Manmademan
Member
That's exactly what it is. And making things even worse is this:
That's a snapshot of RCP's poll average putting clinton at 1.5. It is HEAVILY influenced by two completely insane polls by LA Times/USC putting Trump at +6, and the Fox news poll that I mentioned above that switched from RV to LV giving Trump a 7 point swing in his favor. Edit: CNN/ORC, the only other poll having Trump in positive territory ALSO switched from RV to LV, going from Clinton +9 at the end of july/beginning of august to Trump +1 in a month. Again, a ten point swing to Trump in that short of a time isn't plausible.
I already mentioned Fox news, but LA times being completely ridiculous isn't unskewing- that's not a traditional poll (it takes the same sample and questions them over and over again during the campaign season- it's not random) and has produced absolutely off the wall results the entire year.
There is no reason to assume clinton is only at 1.5.
But 90% of GAF argued that it would help her. They even accused those who suggested otherwise of being Trump supporters or apologists for racists. The quality of discourse in GAF has gone down the drain in the last few years such that any nuance in a discussion is lost and saying anything critical of a candidate or his/her strategy = being a supporter of the other side. I'd hope we could get away from that as it is not at all conducive to discussion. Insulting a large group of Americans (particularly when it's a group that people might feel she's putting them in while they don't feel they belong in it) is never good politics, and I was surprised so many thought that it would be.
Hopefully, now that she's feeling better she can reestablish a commanding lead. The debates, one would imagine, will be about as lopsided in her favor as any debate possibly could be. Trump has no idea about any real issues, so I would hope that the American people will finally see through Trump, although given so many opportunities and still keeping him as a viable candidate I can't say my faith in voters is all that high.
Yep. But when you consider how, short, ago Jim crowe was. Well. We just thought better of people. Our bad. It makes sense when you think about it. Tings that takes 100s of years to create, take an equal time to go away. We just jumped the logic gun.
Am I really too in the tank to see last weekend as some absolute rock-bottom weekend for Hillary? Because I don't see it. I don't see how pneumonia or the deplorables line -- on their own or together -- somehow made for a worse time in Hillary's campaign than Comey publicly blasting her for her email handling or getting crushed by Bernie in the NH primary.
AlteredBeast
Fork 'em, Sparky!
All of this continues to be diablosing. There is zero chance that Donald J. Trump becomes our next president. ZERO.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
I don't think that basket of deplorables was bad. I don't think it was good either, mind, but I think it basically had no effect. The number of genuine swing voters in this election is tiny. I've seen academic estimates put it at 3 to 5% of the electorate. There's very few people who were thinking of voting Clinton until she (apparently) called them deplorable. Clinton's numbers have been going down not really because of people switching from Clinton to Trump, but because people who would vote Clinton if they did vote are becoming steadily less likely to vote. Some of that's probably the pneumonia (and the bad handling that by her team), the rest of that is probably because she's been quiet as fuuuuck. She spent like a month and a half out of the eye of the national press and has given young people and minorities very little to feel enthused about lately.
And subsequently in the world I'm living.
Manmademan
Member
yep.
Warm Machine
Member
You could have a lock on a Bernie Sanders presidency right now. Instead you might have a Trump presidency. Good job.
LOL...
This is a surge?
Refuckinglax... Things will always tighten up in a two person race and Clinton has had a terrible few weeks (much of it their fault). The debates are the next big thing and will shape what's next to come, but the difference is Clinton's potential ceiling is a whole lot higher than Donald's. There's always an ebb/flow to these things and Trump's cresting right now, but Clinton will get a debate bounce for sure.
Regardless, I still haven't seen a credible route to 270 for Trump yet and until THAT happens, I think I'm pretty confident HRC will win out.
This is a surge?
Refuckinglax... Things will always tighten up in a two person race and Clinton has had a terrible few weeks (much of it their fault). The debates are the next big thing and will shape what's next to come, but the difference is Clinton's potential ceiling is a whole lot higher than Donald's. There's always an ebb/flow to these things and Trump's cresting right now, but Clinton will get a debate bounce for sure.
Regardless, I still haven't seen a credible route to 270 for Trump yet and until THAT happens, I think I'm pretty confident HRC will win out.
SolidSnakex
Member
The line was perfectly fine. The problem is that she backed off of it. She had to know that the press was going to jump on it. So she should've had her team ready with all the polling that shows that she's right. Point out that these really are the views of his supporters. They're racist, sexist, homophobic, Islamophobic etc. Point out that people should be less upset about her bringing it up and more upset about the fact that a presidential candidate is basically leading a hate group. Also point out that it's not a reflection of the Republican party as polling for Kasich's supporters showed drastically different views compared to Trump. It's specifically about Trump.
She didn't back off the line, she just walked back the "half" part.
Of course she knew the press was going to jump on it, they were invited. It was 1 of only 6 fundraisers she's given all year where the press could attend. It was planned.
He's the only other option on the ballot but ok.
8 days until the debate. I'm quite confident her numbers will improve. I'm really not worried, there isn't an electoral path for him, not really.
That said, shame on the racist people in this country or at the very least, people that are ok with a racist as long as they get what they want.
That said, shame on the racist people in this country or at the very least, people that are ok with a racist as long as they get what they want.
Byakuya769
Member
Media spends almost equal time calling Clinton's health and word usage into question as they do lauding Truno for NOT saying something racist/xenophobic/sexist on any given day.
Waffling Republicans/independents are beggining to think "well, he's not that bad..."
Younger people are flipping the switch for the two joke candidates from third parties.
Manmademan
Member
if "harambe" was the only other option on the ballot would that mean there was a 50% chance of him being president?
entremet
Member
Why poll?
Plus aren't many of these polls sponsored by media outlets themselves? NYT/CBS being a recent tightening poll.
A "democratic socialist" will NEVER have a shot at the presidency, far less a "lock".
Knuckle Sandwich
Member
This is true but it's freak out time for people. There's no containing it. Let them freak. Keep 'em scared and motivated.
If he was running as a republican? Yes. lol
Yeah I'm not sure that's true. Only what 3 million or so less people voted for Sanders over Clinton, which yeah is a lot, but it still means Sanders got 40% and millions of votes. I'm not sure he would be doing any better than Clinton right now, but I doubt he would be doing much worse.
Eventually a Democratic Socialist will be president IMO. Just a matter of when.
- Status