Roland_Gunner
Member
Carson has enough momentum with the populist wing of the Republican party that he could outflank Trump. He's a bigger threat than any of the establishment candidates right now.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2015 |OT2| Pls print
- Thread starter ivysaur12
- Start date
- Status
Carson has enough momentum with the populist wing of the Republican party that he could outflank Trump. He's a bigger threat than any of the establishment candidates right now.
I'm skimming through the Quinnipac poll. There's no real evidence, but looking at the gender distributions I can't help but feel like there's just a bunch of men who won't go for a female candidate.
There's also a bunch of policy questions after all the obligatory election stuff that's a bit more interesting.
Edit: From the CNN poll, it seems like the polled sample thinks Trump will win.
Maybe time for PoliGAF to reassess?
There's also a bunch of policy questions after all the obligatory election stuff that's a bit more interesting.
Code:
88. Do you think abortion should be legal in all cases, legal in most cases, illegal in
most cases or illegal in all cases?
LIBERAL..... Mod/
Tot Very Smwht Cons Men Wom
Legal all cases 46% 68% 43% 32% 37% 53%
Legal most cases 40 29 45 45 47 35
Illegal most cases 8 2 8 13 11 6
Illegal all cases 3 1 2 4 2 3
DK/NA 3 1 2 6 4 3
91. If you agreed with a presidential candidate on other issues, but not on the issue of
abortion, do you think you could still vote for that candidate or not?
LIBERAL..... Mod/
Tot Very Smwht Cons Men Wom
Yes 66% 49% 72% 75% 79% 55%
No 30 48 25 21 19 40
DK/NA 4 3 3 4 3 5Edit: From the CNN poll, it seems like the polled sample thinks Trump will win.
Code:
Question 31
Just your best guess... Regardless of who you support, which Republican candidate do you think is
most likely to win the Republican nomination for president next year?
Base = Registered Voters
Total Men Women White Non-White
Jeb Bush 22% 20% 23% 22% 21%
Ben Carson 9% 9% 9% 8% 10%
Chris Christie 2% 1% 3% 1% 4%
Ted Cruz 3% 2% 3% 3% 2%
Carly Fiorina 1% * 1% 1% *
Lindsey Graham 1% * 1% 1% *
Mike Huckabee 1% * 1% 1% 1%
Bobby Jindal * * 1% * 1%
John Kasich 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%
George Pataki * * * * 1%
Rand Paul 2% 3% 1% 2% 1%
Rick Perry 1% * 1% * 2%
Marco Rubio 4% 3% 5% 4% 5%
Rick Santorum 1% 1% * 1% *
Donald Trump 41% 46% 37% 43% 38%
Scott Walker 1% 2% 1% 1% 1%
Jim Gilmore * * * * *
Someone else 3% 3% 2% 1% 5%
No opinion 8% 7% 8% 8% 7%
Sampling Error +/-3.0 +/-4.5 +/-4.5 +/-3.5 +/-7.5BertramCooper
Banned
But will people unite behind the establishment, or will they unite behind the guy who happens to be in the lead?
Also, which establishment candidate will everyone flock to? Jeb? Kasich? Rubio?
Poodlestrike
Banned
Still feeling comfortable with my pick. Trump's gonna take this thing.
The sample is Republican base voters? The same people that were convinced up until maybe 10pm on election day in 2012 that Romney was going to win? I'm not saying Trump won't be the nominee, I just don't think I'd take seriously predictions from people still not embarrassed enough to not claim the title "Registered Republican".
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Is it just me or is this campaign the stupidest? I don't just mean by polls but people analyzing everything hoping to suss out the entire 14 months before the election and ending up sounding silly.
Its 14 months before the election, can't we relax about from this stuff that means nothing. They're single polls! and yes clinton's lead is slipping. Ok? And Guliani and tompson was leading in September of 2007 (mccain's lead didn't emerge till like january or something), bradley in 1999, clinton in 2008, we had the cain train in 2011. Wasn't reagan leading in 75 or something? These things happen and I kind of hate how the internet and twitter are getting us discussing these flashpoints which mean nothing and get a lot of pseudo experts to making laughably wrong statements.
I feel like poligaf used to be better than this but we literally discuss EVERY SINGLE POLL and not even intelligently.
I'm not playing this game. Its republican antics and the deal will go into effect.
Pat Buchanan, Herman Cain, Newt all lead for the same reason trump did. Perceived "telling it like it is", attacks on the media, crazy statements. Trumps more entertaining and takes up more oxygen but its the same stuff republicans have been flirting with since forever. The wealth of money has made it harder to control but still this trump mania is still only a few months old and its still september of 2015.
I mean yes, scientifically his odds are greater than 0. We both know its not happening. So his odds are in real terms 0.
And_Gignac
Member
This is a trend. Just as in NH, the upcoming polls will probably show a similar result. Of course Hill-GAF will yell "it's just one poll!!!!!", "outlier!!!" while fuming out of their mouths until upcoming polls confirm the trend. Then the goalpost will be moved to Super Tuesday.
RastaMentality
Banned
CNN said:
I'll add myself to give TRUMP list, NeoXChaos. I wasn't a believer either but I actually think republicans will stand behind this guy.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Of course its a trend. But its not portending clinton's demise. A lot of it seems to be bandwagon jumping because of the constant Clinton is doomed stories. I'd say trump is a mirror, good coverage leads to poll boosts which leads to coverage which leads to people wanting to be a part of something.
Saying yes to a poll in september is a very cost-free way to participate politically.
The media claiming this is anything like obama's rise is absurd though
Sander and Trump are rising in the polls and gaining poll responders. I'm not convinced they're gaining voters (both in the sense the people won't pull the trigger in the booth or aren't going to show up)
If old rules still apply and the party(establishment) decides then probably Jeb.
BertramCooper
Banned
I kind of hope Biden runs just to see how Bernie supporters react to Sanders instantly plunging in the polls.
Coriolanus
Banned
Did not see Walker getting #rekt to this extent. Kinda wondering when he'll finally shift his rethoric.
Wouldnt be surprised if they had an easier time supporting DJ over Hills. Even though it wouldn't make a whole lotta sense.
Wouldnt be surprised if they had an easier time supporting DJ over Hills. Even though it wouldn't make a whole lotta sense.
It is still September 2015. It does not show a Clinton demise. Bernie is not Obama. Will these polls translate to votes in turnout and the voting booth in 6 months? Looking at past races no as NYCmetsfan was referring to Cain, Bradley, Dean etc
NYCmetsfan
Banned
This kind of responses (pre-edit) sound more like pop-gaf stans than any type of measured response
NYCmetsfan
Banned
I don't understand how that doesn't make sense. A lot of the growth in sanders seems to be people who don't like clinton, not really super sanders supporters. They are warry of the email, of her ties to wall street, seemingly distrustfulness, etc.
Biden doesn't have many of those flaws
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Rubio really seems like he should obviously be the guy and now he's at 3% and I don't know what's happening here.
Poodlestrike
Banned
It's pretty clear what's happening here: you can't stump the Trump.
Metaphoreus
This is semantics, and nothing more
That's fine. At the very least I've provided additional context so the information in this thread isn't restricted to "Republicans lol amirite guise?"
theprodigy
Member
please, you wouldn't have said shit if they said something similar regarding the Republican primary
BertramCooper
Banned
Have you actually looked at Pop-GAF?
Looking at past races, Hillary is the candidate with a history of failure in national campaigns. Comparing Bernie to Cain, Bradley and Dean is foolhardy and typical for Hil-Gaf - I don't even know what you are attempting to do. Do you purposely want to marginalize Bernie Supporters by comparing them to Paul and Cain supporters at every opportunity. What goodwill exactly are you winning peddling that type of rhetoric.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
>60% of Republicans want to vote for people that have zero connection to reality, this is fascinating.
I have to say if Biden does not get in and if Bernie pulls off both Iowa and NH? Clinton will collapse and Bernie will be the nominee. But I do not see that happening. If Bernie sustains early state leads the party will rally around a white knight candidate like Biden and draft him in.
Pressure is clearly on Clinton to turn around what was a pretty awful summer for her. I think she can do it though, she really has no choice.
I still think she is the odds on favorite nominee, no question. But she has a lot of work to do.
If Clinton turns around what has when a pretty weak start for her she is the nominee. If she doesn't? Hello 2016 nominee Joe Biden.
Pressure is clearly on Clinton to turn around what was a pretty awful summer for her. I think she can do it though, she really has no choice.
I still think she is the odds on favorite nominee, no question. But she has a lot of work to do.
If Clinton turns around what has when a pretty weak start for her she is the nominee. If she doesn't? Hello 2016 nominee Joe Biden.
PlayALLtheGames
Banned
Someone here actually predicted Bobby Jindal would win the GOP nomination? Put down the crack pipe buddy.
BertramCooper
Banned
I don't see how winning Iowa and New Hampshire will somehow make Bernie wildly popular with minority voters.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Trump's already poisoning America.
Both would get delegates in that scenario. Are you expecting an Obama like scenario where his momentum would translate into him being competitive in NV and SC?
From a poll position and not from a supporter position.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
That's what it is though. Its a fools game to try to stop something that has the votes to pass.
Fenderputty
Banned
I like how metsfan just criticized poligaf for discussing every poll, unintelligently at that, and the imidiatly starts discussing polls with Melkr.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
She's run one national campaign. She lost that. Its not much of a history
NYCmetsfan
Banned
I don't sit and post polls everysingle day and pretend to dig into cross tabs to undermine or support the ones I like. I'm not trying to say we shouldn't discuss polls but the discussion over the past few weeks as been really really poor IMO. Weird extrapolating, freaking out, not providing context as to the media coverage.
I guess my biggest complain is it feels like polls aren't being discussed in regards to the campaigns and race but instead as a kind of meta game separate from the rest. And that's were I get the feeling its just boring, and not very constructive.
Fenderputty
Banned
I largely agree that polls are boring, with the exception of the trump phenomenon. My largest posting stints have been about guns and the framing of the Iran nuke deal. I just thought it was funny. Like a self aware polling addict unable to resist.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Clinton's team is banking on her winning other, more diverse states. Sanders could win Iowa or NH - I wouldn't bet on it, but it's possible. But he's not going to beat her in South Carolina or Nevada for instance. He's not the type of candidate capable of building the coalition required to beat Hillary. I think Sanders fans must not have been paying attention to 2007/2008 because Obama's support looked very different from Sanders'. Part of that boils down to certain people simply not giving Sanders the time of day, or even taking 5 minutes to google him; that willful ignorance rears its head in every single Sanders thread on this forum. It's the burden of being a 75yo dude - nobody takes you seriously outside of some white college kids and fellow old people.
if he wins only one of the two I agree, but winning both? Has anyone won both of them and went on to lose the nomination?
I honestly don't think he will win both, but my hypothesis was based on the scenario he somehow wins both. If Hillary wins a single one he is dead in the water of course.
2012:
Romney won 1 of the 2 (NH)
2008:
Obama won 1 of the 2 (Iowa)
McCain won 1 of the 2 (NH)
2004:
Kerry won both
2000:
Gore won both
Bush won 1 of the 2 (Iowa)
1996:
Dole won 1 of the 2 (Iowa)
1992:
Clinton did not win either, but the winner was different in both states (Tsongas and Harkin)
1988:
Bush won 1 of the 2 (NH)
Dukakis won 1 of the 2 (NH)
I am too lazy to keep going back farther but there is a pretty solid track record of the eventual nominee always winning 1 of the 2 in open primaries. Like I said I do not think it will come to Hillary walking away with 0 wins of the two main early states, but it would pretty unprecedented to go on to win if she lost both.
Ironically the only candidate to pull that off in the last 30 years is....Bill Clinton. Would be pretty hilarious if it happened again.
And in 1992 Iowa ddidn't really count because Tom Harkin was the native son. It was largely uncontested.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
That poll seems very positive for Democrats with regards to the general election though. The only guys who would do well in a general election are Rubio and Kasich and they have 5% combined in that poll.
The Lamonster
Member
Hey PoliGAF, should I honestly be worried about Trump?
I never was, but earlier in the week there was a trending story about how he's beating even the dems in a recent poll.
I never was, but earlier in the week there was a trending story about how he's beating even the dems in a recent poll.
I agree entirely. Candidate stanning is not interesting or useful discussion. PoliGAF is not a thread for yelling at each other about which team is going to win, it's a thread for yelling at each other about which model of the American electorate is more accurate and/or which policy position is likely to produce better results.
You should feel the same way about Trump as you would feel about getting hit by a meteor.
You probably used to think it was impossible, but it's definitely not impossible. But in practice, if it does happen, it's not like there was anything you could do about it.
The Lamonster
Member
haha I'm not sure if that makes me feel any better...
Retromelon
Member
I don't smoke crack and I didn't choose Bobby Jindal because I thought he'd win. I did it for all the people who say who? ironically whenever they hear his name. I did it as a show of support. And i don't jump ship at the first negative poll either like so many others in here have.
I ride for Bobby and yall best belee dat.
I'm in a super agnostic place about Trump right now. All the political scientists are saying that there's no possible way Trump will win and his support will inevitably collapse.
But a) they mostly all said it should have ALREADY collapsed and moved back the date, and b) they also all think that nothing particularly different is happening this election cycle, and I don't agree with that. I think there's a realignment happening and party power is very weak until the coalition becomes stronger.
So the answer to the question really depends on how you feel about party power. If the party still has significant power to control what happens in the primaries, then Trump can't possibly win, because the party hates him. But if you think that superPACs, coalition fractures, loss of earmarks, hatred of the establishment, etc. has led to the party losing most of its power to control the primaries, then not only COULD Trump win, it's very likely he will.
The split the difference position, which I'm tending to suspect right now, says that Trump probably can't win, but that some slightly more respectable but still outsider candidate can win with his support. In other words, Ted Cruz. Cruz is buddy-buddy with Trump for a reason, he has the "insane person" bonafides to win the dark end of the Republican base, but he's also, no matter how much the GOP Senate caucus might hate it, a GOP Senator, with campaign experience and government knowledge. The party hates Cruz too, but it just can't hate Cruz as much as it hates Trump, because you can't really throw a sitting Senator out in the cold like that. If you forced me to predict the election, I'd say that Cruz hangs out, sucks up Carson and Trump's support, and ends up with a narrow victory over a more establishment candidate (although they're all sucking so bad right now I don't know which one, probably Jeb!).
The other thing I'd note in support of NYCmetsfan's point is that, like, yes, we used to talk a lot about polls in PoliGAF, but generally we did it about the general, closer to the actual election, because those polls have probative value. And even then, as always, the focus should be on the polling average, not the details of why you don't believe an individual poll is real or whatever.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Carson is the only other guy who I think could overtake him at this point because he's going to have all the evangelical vote by the time this is over. Trump absolutely needs to attack him.
RustyNails
Member
Iran leader said Israel wont exist after 25 years. Ugh. Way to go Ayatollah.
Manmademan
Member
Did you watch the first debate? Carson struggles to put together coherent sentences under the spotlight, let alone any kind of pressure or scrutiny.
He made it out alive only because he was ignored. No one had any expectations for him, so a well timed joke led to favorable impressions of what otherwise was an absolutely miserable showing.
Carson no longer has that luxury and his numbers are going to crater after the second debate, attacked or not.
Edit: as for evangelicals Huckabee had that crew locked up in 2008. That crew is hyper regional and irrelevant outside of the south. All it was good for was spoiling Romney's primary strategy before getting steamrolled by McCain of all people.
I love how Rubio and Kasich seem to be just absolutely mired down in those single digits. The two guys from large, must-win swing states - and voters are effectively ignoring them.
And speaking of Jindal: he seems to be going to his "attack-Trump-and-pray-that-he-responds" strategy:
http://www.ibtimes.com/bobby-jindal...ompares-2016-candidate-kim-kardashian-2091218
And speaking of Jindal: he seems to be going to his "attack-Trump-and-pray-that-he-responds" strategy:
http://www.ibtimes.com/bobby-jindal...ompares-2016-candidate-kim-kardashian-2091218
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
I legit don't know if Trump knows who Jindal is.
Captain Pants
Killed by a goddamned Dredgeling
I think he's got a shot at the nomination, but no shot at the general. Especially if Hillary is the nominee. Women voters and Hispanics will ensure that Trump has no shot at the presidency.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked