• 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 2016 |OT11| Well this is exciting

Status
Not open for further replies.
The big unknown this cycle is turn out. That's what's driving these wild polls.

That's why I'm more trusting of internals becuase she knows who she needs and has tons of metrics on it. Trump? He's just hoping white working class turn out.

Turn out is almost all about your GOTV infrastructure. Clinton has perhaps the best ground machine at her disposal. Trump doesn't have anything. That alone makes me confident about turn out.
 

Zukkoyaki

Member
Don't early voter records show there's no surge at all of white voters?

So if there's a massive wave of white people just lining up to vote for Trump... why aren't they manifesting in early voting?
Registrations and early voting have indeed shown that this supposed Trump surge doesn't exist. At least not yet.
 
Few people in America care about abortion or the Supreme Court, no Trump supporter cares about climate change:

FT_16.08.11_debateTopics.png


What the fuck, how is "budget deficit" still treated as serious.

Because it's been rattled into everyone's heads that the big spooky budget deficit is going to kill us all. One of the most effective tactics used was convincing people the budget needs to be like a household income.
 
There's one thing Clinton has going for her this debate, which is that tons of swing voters/millenials/Clinton skeptics haven't actually watched her in action this election. They've watched Trump for the entertainment factor, they've watched videos of Clinton "lying," or read think pieces about how corrupt she is, but they didn't watch her primary debates and speeches. In that sense, the bar for her is also set really low. I'm expecting a lot of my friends (clinton-hating bernie fans) to be impressed by her tonight.

This is what I was getting at. The bar is very low for her as well. People expecting a caricature will get a real, solid candidate (the only one on stage).
 

thebloo

Member
So she's going to bomb the first debate and then end Trump's career in the last two?

edit:

I am Gary Johnson bad at spelling.

I actually would LOVE a reverse by Hillary, as suicidal as it may be.

"Here, tell these people something they don't know about me"

Edit: Benjaminbirdie with the dunk!
 

sazzy

Member
CNN panel discussing zingers, Clinton supporter suggested:

Hey Donald, I know you don't believe in global warming, but where did you get that tan?
 
If anything Hillary's numbers will rise once people on the left realize that she isn't nearly as awful as Bernie convinced them she was. Of course they probably won't admit it.
 
If I recall someone said on twitter a few days ago that there is no indication white voters are registering to vote for trump in large numbers.
https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/779083856146202630

Oh the irony when these people who haven't voted since the 80s get to the booth and they're not registered, and their GOP Governors banned them from same day registration, or they are registered but have no idea what ID they need because of their GOP governor's stupid laws or the GOP governor purged the voter lists.
 

kevin1025

Banned
CNN panel discussing zingers, Clinton supporter suggested:

Hey Donald, I know you don't believe in global warming, but where did you get that tan?

They spent most of last night and all of today talking about the debate, but "Debate Live Coverage" starts at 4pm. I don't know what that means!
 

PBY

Banned
They spent most of last night and all of today talking about the debate, but "Debate Live Coverage" starts at 4pm. I don't know what that means!

Guessing that means that their panel of 20 people will speak at a desk at the debate hall.

So its, you know, totally different and live.
 
Landline only
GOP Firm (Harper)
500 respondents
This was the best they could do

Hillary: 45
Trump: 43
Johnson: 8
Stein 1

McGinty: 42
Toomey: 42

Better luck in 2020.
 
Does anyone else see an issue with the blanket assumption that lower educated people will somehow vote with high intensity? It's always been the case that more education => higher propensity to vote.

I don't want to veer into the dark world of unskewing polls but it feels like people are assuming that Trump's lesser-educated core is going to turn out just as much as the more educated Republican core votes in the past. It flies against what we know about the correlation between education and actual likelyhood of voting.
 

mo60

Member
Oh the irony when these people who haven't voted since the 80s get to the booth and they're not registered, and their GOP Governors banned them from same day registration, or they are registered but have no idea what ID they need because of their GOP governor's stupid laws or the GOP governor purged the voter lists.

This is why I question polls that show trump winning non college educated whites by like 60 points because he is not doing that well with that group unless a ton of them just decide to register to vote against hilary.
 
I think it's relatively even on a national scale - just straight average of the polls is like 43/40 - but Trump still seems to be hitting that ceiling nationally of 40%. It seems pretty apparent that this election is going to come down to turnout - and that is Clinton's goal at the debate IMO. Make people want to vote for her rather than vote against Trump. I think Clinton is in a strong position going into this debate, as it seems if any of the other factors break for her, she should be in the clear.

Also Mamba sorry about not getting back to you about the polling discussion we were having earlier. I would love to see a modified version of the 538 model where they adjust for house effects and LV for a given poll, but then use all of the polls for a given state to determine the trend line (and maybe weigh a given poll 75% of the effect from the change between that same poll before and earlier, and 25% of the weight from the overall trend of all the polls).

Would be curious to see whether the additional data ends up creating a wash out effect or whether it just lowers the magnitude of said trend effect.

There should be 0% from previous poll of a pollster. Each poll is an independent event and should be treated as such.

Don't worry about responding to me; I don't really read this thread during the weekend.

Also, 43-40 isn't close to even. Not with these small errors. Even at 3% error, that's almost 85% to win!


edit: Trump can't clear 43 in a landline only poll of Pa by a GOP firm. He can't win Pa.
 

kevin1025

Banned
Guessing that means that their panel of 20 people will speak at a desk at the debate hall.

So its, you know, totally different and live.

Yeah. I guess it means they'll have Wolf, Anderson and Tapper to do the exact same thing but it's different because it's them!
 

thebloo

Member
Does anyone else see an issue with the blanket assumption that lower educated people will somehow vote with high intensity? It's always been the case that more education => higher propensity to vote.

I don't want to veer into the dark world of unskewing polls but it feels like people are assuming that Trump's lesser-educated core is going to turn out just as much as the more educated Republican core votes in the past. It flies against what we know about the correlation between education and voting.

It's rather similar to the Primary, I suspect. They show high enthusiasm on the surface, but are bogged down by other things. Such as registration. Of course, it's much easier in the GE, but still a problem.
 

Ecotic

Member
CNN panel discussing zingers, Clinton supporter suggested:

Hey Donald, I know you don't believe in global warming, but where did you get that tan?
She better not go for zingers. Her "it's change you can xerox" line in '08 didn't work for her.
 

Hillary has already been de-legitimized. Republicans have laid the groundwork for this for years with the Benghazi nonsense. Mainstream republicans are on record saying that her behavior in the Benghazi situation has "disqualified" her; this was long before Trump.

We're not going to move past a hyper partisan political climate anytime soon. The good thing about Clinton is that she doesn't have to be told any of this, she knows what the game is. There will be no time wasted extending olive branches to people who literally think she should be in jail. IMO this is one of the areas where she is better than Obama politically. Yea I understand voters have to at least see an attempt by the president to "work with the other side" but too much time was wasted on that in 2009. Hillary won't make that mistake.
 
Hillary has already been de-legitimized. Republicans have laid the groundwork for this for years with the Benghazi nonsense. Mainstream republicans are on record saying that her behavior in the Benghazi situation has "disqualified" her; this was long before Trump.

We're not going to move past a hyper partisan political climate anytime soon. The good thing about Clinton is that she doesn't have to be told any of this, she knows what the game is. There will be no time wasted extending olive branches to people who literally think she should be in jail. IMO this is one of the areas where she is better than Obama politically. Yea I understand voters have to at least see an attempt by the president to "work with the other side" but too much time was wasted on that in 2009. Hillary won't make that mistake.

Yeah, she holds no thoughts of the GOP ever helping her. Gonna be lots of closed door meetings with Ryan that amount to "Here's what I'll sign, now fuck off Paul."
 
Her aides said she was coming up with one-liners. So you can guarantee there will be at least one cringeworthy moment.
If it's something about his ties, like before we make america great we need to make things in america, it will work. However if it's ludicrous like going after his tan or something, then that's horrible.
 

Angry Grimace

Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
There's one thing Clinton has going for her this debate, which is that tons of swing voters/millenials/Clinton skeptics haven't actually watched her in action this election. They've watched Trump for the entertainment factor, they've watched videos of Clinton "lying," or read think pieces about how corrupt she is, but they didn't watch her primary debates and speeches. In that sense, the bar for her is also set really low. I'm expecting a lot of my friends (clinton-hating bernie fans) to be impressed by her tonight.

I mean, the thing Clinton has going for her in this debate is that she is a skilled debater and Trump is a comedy act who hasn't prepared.

I mean, that and the fact that Clinton has far less to lose at the debate. There's a very good chance that at least 1 of these debates will be an unmitigated disaster for Trump.
 

Kangi

Member
VA polling basically solid blue and PA still being unobtainable for Republicans still has me confident for November. I'm also pretty bullish on NC; between the solid early voting lead, far better infrastructure, and the lingering effects of HB2, it'd be pretty dang hard for Trump to keep it red.
 

Joeytj

Banned
She better not go for zingers. Her "it's change you can xerox" line in '08 didn't work for her.

She'll end the debate with "Pokemon Go. To. The polls!!!"

Obama isn't much better at them, especially in the first 2012 debate. Everything about that debate the cringiest.

Democrats in general aren't very good at zingers, especially forced ones, and Hillary has some hilariously bad ones too:
 

PantherLotus

Professional Schmuck
Did anyone post these from Nate Silver?

Nate Silver
@NateSilver538
Nat'l polls this weekend: Trump +4, Trump +2, Trump +1, Clinton +1, Clinton +2, Clinton +2, Clinton +3. Dead heat. projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-…

8:38am · 26 Sep 2016 · Twitter for Android

Nate Silver
@NateSilver538
Evidence that the race is a dead heat—or at least dead-ish heat-ish—is starting us in the face. Not some complex conclusion from our model.

9:32am · 26 Sep 2016 · Twitter Web Client

Huh.
 
- Not bedwetting, still confident of Clinton win

Expectations meter:
Code:
     Popular Vote Landslide, D House and Senate, win GA
     Electoral Landslide, D Senate
---> Solid Electoral Win, Senate tossup
     Narrow Electoral Win, R Senate
     Narrow Loss
     WTH, America?  Are you insane?

Given that was was flirting with the idea of the top of that scale after the conventions, I am seriously brought down. But still pretty confident Clinton wins this by a comfortable margin.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom