That's actually kind of brilliant. Trump doubles down on the anti-immigrant shit, the left just takes it and runs with it.
PoliGAF 2016 |OT10| Jill Stein Inflatable Love Doll
- Thread starter Aaron Strife
- Start date
- Status
That's actually kind of brilliant. Trump doubles down on the anti-immigrant shit, the left just takes it and runs with it.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Hey, fuck you
How else do they get lots of clicks for clickbait polling?
User 85168
Banned
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
Oh I believe there's something very wrong with their poll and it goes both ways. Clinton was not up by 13 in May and it's pretty ridiculous to think that she went from up 12 to tie in 7 days also.
Then there's the state polling which is even more random. Clinton up in Nebraska while Trump is winning by 14 in New Hampshire. The lack of just some standard live polls that call landlines and cellphones this year is insane. Lots of online stuff, experimental methodology, and robopolls instead. At least with the robopolls and online ones they could offer Spanish options but it doesn't seem to be the case.
BotoxAgent
Member
Yea, getting sick of people making threads about garbage polls
TestOfTide
Banned
I know that other people have already brought up how ridiculous those demographic turnout numbers are for that ISPOS poll, but I just wanted to add something to just how it is even more ridiculous:
Every time Clinton's constant lead is brought up in OT, there is always someone who is worried that Trump could win due to a "shy Trump voter" effect, similar to the old "Bradley Effect". The first three problems with this theory are:
- There is no indication that there couldn't also be a shy Clinton voter effect.
- The Bradley Effect was debunked by Obama's win in 2008.
- Clinton's ceiling and floor compared to Trump's show that at least a majority of the population won't even consider Trump, even if some are uneasy about voting for Clinton.
But there is one more factor, which I want to call the "David Duke Effect".
No, I am not referring to the fact that Trump was slow to disavow Duke. What I am more referring to is the fact that whenever David Duke ran for governor of Louisiana in 1991, the race ended up going to a runoff election. People were worried that "shy David Duke voters" might cause Duke, but instead the danger of Duke becoming governor caused a spike in minority turnout.
We see signs of Trump causing a "David Duke Effect" in the polls on which demographics are more excited to vote. White People are very unenthusiastic about this election, but minorities are very excited to use their vote to block Donald Trump. We also see it in stories constantly being reported about Latinos not only being excited to register to vote just to block Donald Trump, but even immigrants wanting to expedite their naturalization process just so they can block Donald Trump.
Combine that with Trump's practically nonexistent groundgame and Hillary's strong groundgame, and you have the signs of not just 2012 or 2008 minority turnout, but possibly even a record percentage of minorities voting this election.
Every time Clinton's constant lead is brought up in OT, there is always someone who is worried that Trump could win due to a "shy Trump voter" effect, similar to the old "Bradley Effect". The first three problems with this theory are:
- There is no indication that there couldn't also be a shy Clinton voter effect.
- The Bradley Effect was debunked by Obama's win in 2008.
- Clinton's ceiling and floor compared to Trump's show that at least a majority of the population won't even consider Trump, even if some are uneasy about voting for Clinton.
But there is one more factor, which I want to call the "David Duke Effect".
No, I am not referring to the fact that Trump was slow to disavow Duke. What I am more referring to is the fact that whenever David Duke ran for governor of Louisiana in 1991, the race ended up going to a runoff election. People were worried that "shy David Duke voters" might cause Duke, but instead the danger of Duke becoming governor caused a spike in minority turnout.
We see signs of Trump causing a "David Duke Effect" in the polls on which demographics are more excited to vote. White People are very unenthusiastic about this election, but minorities are very excited to use their vote to block Donald Trump. We also see it in stories constantly being reported about Latinos not only being excited to register to vote just to block Donald Trump, but even immigrants wanting to expedite their naturalization process just so they can block Donald Trump.
Combine that with Trump's practically nonexistent groundgame and Hillary's strong groundgame, and you have the signs of not just 2012 or 2008 minority turnout, but possibly even a record percentage of minorities voting this election.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Hmm, Breitbart/Trump TV stealing away Hannity and the other wingnuts from Fox while Megyn Kelly and other Fox women go to CNN and O'Reilly retires might be a possibility.
We could be less than 6 months away from the total collapse of Fox.
I mean, to be replaced with something even worse than Fox, but it's still interesting to see.
We could be less than 6 months away from the total collapse of Fox.
I mean, to be replaced with something even worse than Fox, but it's still interesting to see.
a 24 point swing in a week, that sounds about right /s
TestOfTide
Banned
Trump TV would be worse, but it wouldn't be able to dogwhistle enough ignorant people like Fox News sometimes could.
I mean just imagine how many people would be turned off if instead of the O'Reilly Factor, you had the Yianopolis Factor.
Then imagine instead of Cavuto style "We're just asking questions" headlines, you had shit like Trump TV with headlines like "Renegade Jew Bill Kristol Strikes Back" and "Would you rather be an SJW or die of AIDS".
And then you would have the fact that unlike Fox News, no one would want to even be on Trump TV except for the crazies.
And finally, you would have the fact that whereas Fox News is associated with a successful businessman like Rupert Murdock, Trump TV would be associated with the guy who couldn't even win against a constantly attacked Hillary Clinton.
DrForester
Kills Photobucket
User 463088
Banned
The greatest game that doesn't have "-ario" in the title is Binding of Issac.
User 85168
Banned
lets not go down this dark dark path again
Manual... Bruh, it came with in an oversized box, with a strategy guide, that had motherfucking scratch and sniff cards in the back.
Edit: vvvv surprising no one in this thread.
User 463088
Banned
I never played Earthbound.
I just can't do turn based RPGs that aren't Pokemans.
I just can't do turn based RPGs that aren't Pokemans.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
Having said all that, too many polls have come out showing the race closer for me to dismiss it all. Unfortunately, I'm not sure how much more negative coverage Clinton can take before she's right down there with Trump.
What's BM? Or do you literally mean taking a shit?
It's definitely tightened a bit but there have been a number of encouraging polls in the past week as well
+7 Quinnipiac
+7 Monmouth
+7 Suffolk
+5 PPP
+5 YouGov
+4 Survey Monkey
And some decent state polls as well. Tighter race for sure but it still doesn't look close. The +2 from Fox and Tie from IDB are there true but polling is noisy and that's why we have aggregates.
TestOfTide
Banned
It depends on whether or not the media actually calls out any bullshit.
If the media grows a pair and calls out blatant lies, then that combined with a heavily negative Trump campaign will give the optics of "Trump is so desperate that he's pulling this bullshit."
If the media stays complacent about this shit, then the narrative becomes solidified "Total Asshole vs Corrupt Politician".
But even if the narrative becomes the latter, people would rather have a supposedly corrupt politician than someone like Trump.
Not to mention that this negative shit seems to only be affecting how white people feel about Clinton, who will probably just not vote in as many numbers this election.
It may be overly optimistic to say this, but a good bit of me thinks anyone that would be swayed by any of these "scandals" already has been. At this point even those reluctantly voting for Clinton probably just roll their eyes.
Give him the pipe, see if he makes a thread about it
This is decidingly less interesting than including bowel movements in your game ranking lists.
TestOfTide
Banned
Well like I said, the only people this is gonna affect is white people. So worst case scenario we don't end up winning among college educated whites.
But even then, I really doubt that those college educated whites would switch to Trump. They would probably just vote third party or not vote.
Okay.
I think it'll also be good because on GAF next time someone doubts my lovemaking abilities I can refer them to a first hand account
shinra-bansho
Member
The police know who they are. The bad ones. We need to take their guns.
User 463088
Banned
What's a Mother 3?
User 85168
Banned
Your mom's grindr user name. Mother3, Adam387, etc. you know, usernames.
User 463088
Banned
NYCmetsfan
Banned
This is gonna end badly
Amazingly is the word you were looking for there.
aspiegamer
Member
Anyone ever ask Trump how we're supposed to round up The Bad Ones and control them? If you want to get super fussy, deporting "just" the bad ones would be even harder than deporting everyone, since you'd have to screen and investigate them all on top of just arresting. Same thing with any absurd gun control measures. You'd have to go and collect everyone's guns to make sure criminals didn't still have them before everyone else got greenlit.
There are no answers to these things, of course, since it's just racist bullshit. Trump isn't going to take guns away from the dreaded Bad Guys, he's just going to take them from all black people and call it a win. He'd rather deport anyone looking vaguely hispanic and call it a day. Can anyone picture him trying to collect or suppress firearms from rural white people on terror watch lists? Hah. Track down a western europeans here over their visa limits? Hah. But please, someone do ask him how we're going to get rid of the worst people on Day One and casually sort through everyone else at our leisure.
There are no answers to these things, of course, since it's just racist bullshit. Trump isn't going to take guns away from the dreaded Bad Guys, he's just going to take them from all black people and call it a win. He'd rather deport anyone looking vaguely hispanic and call it a day. Can anyone picture him trying to collect or suppress firearms from rural white people on terror watch lists? Hah. Track down a western europeans here over their visa limits? Hah. But please, someone do ask him how we're going to get rid of the worst people on Day One and casually sort through everyone else at our leisure.
VendettaRed07
Member
The only foreign alien Trump can successfully keep out of the USA
Spiritreaver
Member
Completely off topic, but the second nationwide test of the Emergency Alert System is this month, two days after the first debate (Sept 28th). Prepare to get spooked!
The last one was Nov 9, 2011.
The last one was Nov 9, 2011.
There will be a thread in 2 weeks.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
User 463088
Banned
FYI
We're on season 2 of Arrested Development.
I'm a Lucille. But bitchier. And with better hair.
We're on season 2 of Arrested Development.
I'm a Lucille. But bitchier. And with better hair.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
I think Wolfenstein: The New Order is the most patriotic game ever made and there's like one important native born American (depending on if that math woman is a native-born American) in one of the two story options.
Also, the math that the math woman does should have been proofs of theorems that weren't discovered until the 1950s or 1960s. Would have made her character more impressive than her character doing Calc 2 math.
Also, the math that the math woman does should have been proofs of theorems that weren't discovered until the 1950s or 1960s. Would have made her character more impressive than her character doing Calc 2 math.
Lucille One or Two?
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
So do the Republicans in DC even have a plan if Trump were to win? Seems like they are so sure he will lose and they can just bash Clinton for 60 days and come out okay.
But if he doesn't, they can't ignore him for 4 years. The idea that any of them can be a "check" on Trump is outrageous considering how badly they need his base and he's not afraid to call for primary challenges.
But if he doesn't, they can't ignore him for 4 years. The idea that any of them can be a "check" on Trump is outrageous considering how badly they need his base and he's not afraid to call for primary challenges.
Ask him if honour and shame are huge parts of Grindr culture
StopMakingSense
Member
I always figured if they didnt hate the VP choice more they'd be tempted to just impeach him.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked