• 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 |OT9| The Wrath of Khan!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Yassss Debbie! Get it gurl.

What is up with the USC polls? They are always 5 points or so lower for Hillary than every other major polling firm.

Hell, Rasmussen tends to poll Hillary significantly higher than them.

They interview the same group of people over and over and over again. If their initial sample was too pro-Trump, it's going to always revert to more favorable numbers for him. You're correct in that it has a 5 point bias in favor of Trump. Nate and them "fix" it for that very reason. So far as I can tell, you don't even have to be registered to vote to participate, and everyone in the selected household 18 and up is allowed to participate.
 
I mean, in the sense that he's a threat to our economy, would weaken ties with our allies, would make it harder for us to do what we need to do on the world stage, and would lead to a sense of doom and overwhelming regret....ya, he seems like Mr. Brexit to me!
 
That's kind of surprising. I haven't followed that race much, but I thought she was hated by the party as a whole for being a terrible head of the DNC?

I meant to respond to this. Actually, the party doesn't hate her at all. She wasn't a great DNC Chair, but that didn't really cause anyone to hate her, so far as I know. She's well liked in her district, and people really, really hate when outside groups try and affect elections at the local level like a lot of Bernie supporters were trying to do. Her district is filled with a lot of older voters and a lot of Jewish retirees. She's tailor made for that demographic, and she's fairly popular there. Plus, her opponent shit the bed at their debate.
 
I meant to respond to this. Actually, the party doesn't hate her at all. She wasn't a great DNC Chair, but that didn't really cause anyone to hate her, so far as I know. She's well liked in her district, and people really, really hate when outside groups try and affect elections at the local level like a lot of Bernie supporters were trying to do. Her district is filled with a lot of older voters and a lot of Jewish retirees. She's tailor made for that demographic, and she's fairly popular there. Plus, her opponent shit the bed at their debate.

This makes me happy.

Another illustration of just how weak Bernie's movement is.
 
This makes me happy.

Another illustration of just how weak Bernie's movement is.

I mean, it's petty as hell, but the only reason I care if DWS wins is the principle of the thing. His debate performance was just terrible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YffB23acHSA

There's the full debate. Only 10% of Canova's donations came from within Florida. When asked how he would raise the minimum wage to $15, he asked the moderator "You tell me?" and then DWS did. He couldn't name the mayor of Southwest Ranches. (Which DWS called out by name and vocation). So....ya.
 
Wow, Trump AA support TRIPLED in one day in the USC poll.

LOL REAL DEAL

Hahaha, I just noticed that. Since the poll began, Trump has been at 4% support. The last two days, where it has narrowed significantly, he' sup to 14% AA support. That's most ot the change right there, I'd wager.
 
Also, we need a decent poll from Minnesota. Not for any reason other than it would move it into the Safe D column in most models. Because of the lack of polling, it gets a less pretty shade of blue. (Upshot, for example, has Hillary with a better chance in PA than in MN because of the lack of polls.)
 
I mean, it's petty as hell, but the only reason I care if DWS wins is the principle of the thing. His debate performance was just terrible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YffB23acHSA

There's the full debate. Only 10% of Canova's donations came from within Florida. When asked how he would raise the minimum wage to $15, he asked the moderator "You tell me?" and then DWS did. He couldn't name the mayor of Southwest Ranches. (Which DWS called out by name and vocation). So....ya.

although those dumb berniebros continue to shit up the comments section :/
 

jevity

Member
Okay, we are supposed to be up 10, and now this ? What's going on?. Please explain it to me like I was 5...and European. Are the latest polls (USC/RASS) not accurate ? Also, can someone please link to a site or video, that explains the whole polling business, so I dont have to pester you with it the next time a new poll is released :O)
 

Iolo

Member
Okay, we are supposed to be up 10, and now this ? What's going on?. Please explain it to me like I was 5...and European. Are the latest polls (USC/RASS) not accurate ? Also, can someone please link to a site or video, that explains the whole polling business, so I dont have to pester you with it the next time a new poll is released :O)

There's nothing to explain, Trump changed the game in the last couple days through soaring oratory. Hillary has nowhere to go but down now.
 
Okay, we are supposed to be up 10, and now this ? What's going on?. Please explain it to me like I was 5...and European. Are the latest polls (USC/RASS) not accurate ? Also, can someone please link to a site or video, that explains the whole polling business, so I dont have to pester you with it the next time a new poll is released :O)

It might ease your mind more if you look at polling aggregates. 538 'adjusts' each poll they get through pollster ratings, their methodology, and etc. (national trends in cases of state polls) if you look up this particular poll, it skews towards Trump as people have mentioned.
 
Okay, we are supposed to be up 10, and now this ? What's going on?. Please explain it to me like I was 5...and European. Are the latest polls (USC/RASS) not accurate ? Also, can someone please link to a site or video, that explains the whole polling business, so I dont have to pester you with it the next time a new poll is released :O)

We're not up 10. We're up 6 to 7.

The USC poll thing is a mess. Basically, they keep polling the same people over and over and over again. Anyone 18 and over in a household that's selected gets to participate. They've had a heavy Trump bias. A tie in that poll means Hillary is up 5. The movement looks like it's coming from (in part) a large African American support jump for Trump. Now, by their own numbers, Trump has been at 4% of the AA vote since they launched this thing in July, but in the last two days he's jumped to 14%. That's not at all likely. This poll, at one point, had Trump up 7. It's just a bad survey. It's bad when Hillary's winning, and it's bad when she's losing.

As far as Rasmussen, they're known for their heavy Republican bias. They don't sink so low as to just make shit up, but they're a joke. They always have been. They have a history of being very, very pro-Republican right up until the very end....and then they release numbers more in line with everyone else.
 
Okay, we are supposed to be up 10, and now this ? What's going on?. Please explain it to me like I was 5...and European. Are the latest polls (USC/RASS) not accurate ? Also, can someone please link to a site or video, that explains the whole polling business, so I dont have to pester you with it the next time a new poll is released :O)

Check the polling aggregate/trends on pollster.com or 538 every two weeks or so. The end.

Your mainlining of American cable news 16 hours a day is going to kill you before you even get to celebrate a Clinton election.
 

TyrantII

Member
Cohen burn on CNN "seemingly in denial or doing his best impression of an owl".

200_s.gif
 

kirblar

Member
I meant to respond to this. Actually, the party doesn't hate her at all. She wasn't a great DNC Chair, but that didn't really cause anyone to hate her, so far as I know. She's well liked in her district, and people really, really hate when outside groups try and affect elections at the local level like a lot of Bernie supporters were trying to do. Her district is filled with a lot of older voters and a lot of Jewish retirees. She's tailor made for that demographic, and she's fairly popular there. Plus, her opponent shit the bed at their debate.
Given the rumored heat between her and Obama and her behavior at the convention, that takeaway cannot be correct.
 
I don't like DWS at all, but given that Canova has chosen to pander to her district by running to her/Obama's right on Israel, I won't be shedding any tears if (when) he loses.
 
Given the rumored heat between her and Obama and her behavior at the convention, that takeaway cannot be correct.

I think she's probably a nightmare to work with, but I don't think she's hated. But just to clarify, I was speaking more along the lines of rank and file Democrats not hating her more so than anything else.

The anger towards DWS is simply the result of some Bernie supporters needing someone to blame for why he didn't win. She organized a damn good convention, and she gets basically no credit for that because we had to placate certain delegates. Which, I totally get that. I called for her not to be there too. She got thrown under the bus, though. I'm just glad to see her district (hopefully) isn't scapegoating her.

But she was a terrible DNC Chair.
 

jevity

Member
Thanks y'all :O)

On another note, like I wrote earlier, Trump has confirmed he is going to participate in the debates and looking forward to them. After watching him on Hannity yesterday, I'm more certain that ever before, that we will get absolutely annihilated. Even when he is sitting in the most welcoming and safe environment as possible, he is still not saying ANYTHING. When Hannity asks him to explain what Extreme Vetting really means, Trump basically answers " we gotta get smart". His way of assuaging his audience's fears of refugee terrorists is seriously just claiming " you get very smart people, and there are those people, and they are very good at understanding what's going on". There is no way he can win a GE debate, with non-answers like that. No way. Watch the video and tell me if I am wrong ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUm4ar6ic_w
 

thebloo

Member
On another note, like I wrote earlier, Trump has confirmed he is going to participate in the debates and looking forward to them.

This means nothing. He has said a lot of things.

I do think that he'll participate, but his word on this means nothing.
 

jevity

Member
Check the polling aggregate/trends on pollster.com or 538 every two weeks or so. The end.

Your mainlining of American cable news 16 hours a day is going to kill you before you even get to celebrate a Clinton election.

hehe mainlining. I only have so much time to invest, because I have been sick this past week. Come monday, it's back to reality again :O)
 

Bowdz

Member
Thanks y'all :O)

On another note, like I wrote earlier, Trump has confirmed he is going to participate in the debates and looking forward to them. After watching him on Hannity yesterday, I'm more certain that ever before, that we will get absolutely annihilated. Even when he is sitting in the most welcoming and safe environment as possible, he is still not saying ANYTHING. When Hannity asks him to explain what Extreme Vetting really means, Trump basically answers " we gotta get smart". His way of assuaging his audience's fears of refugee terrorists is seriously just claiming " you get very smart people, and there are those people, and they are very good at understanding what's going on". There is no way he can win a GE debate, with non-answers like that. No way. Watch the video and tell me if I am wrong ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUm4ar6ic_w

I agree. I just can't see Trump doing any substantive debate prep and that will be in stark contrast to Clinton who I'm sure is already starting debate prep. He'll probably play well with his core audience, but I don't think he'll do anything to expand his base.
 
So glad I didn't watch the green town hall. I already know the green party is garbage, I don't need Jill Stein telling me that. I did hear a girl at the bar I was at ask why the green party is so anti-semitic which made me laugh. Happy to hear people aren't oblivious to that ugly portion of the party.
 
Also, we need a decent poll from Minnesota. Not for any reason other than it would move it into the Safe D column in most models. Because of the lack of polling, it gets a less pretty shade of blue. (Upshot, for example, has Hillary with a better chance in PA than in MN because of the lack of polls.)
really want to see local mm polling as well
 
NPR: How To Lose The Senate In 82 Days

As FiveThirtyEight noted on Tuesday, six of the eight Republicans running in top-tier Senate races are polling worse since the conventions. Only two Republican incumbents, Ohio Sen. Rob Portman and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, have either maintained or advanced their standings since then.

Clinton is also expanding the map into states once thought of as safe territory for Republicans. In North Carolina, Clinton's recent surge is seriously imperiling two-term GOP Sen. Richard Burr, who recently fell behind little-known Democratic challenger Deborah Ross, 46 percent to 44 percent, in the latest Marist poll.

In Georgia, GOP Sen. Johnny Isakson went on the air this week with his first campaign ad of the cycle. The spot, featuring an older woman who is a lifelong Democrat, is an obvious bid to appeal to a key demographic that Trump has alienated.

Republican and Democratic campaign operatives also agree that races in GOP-held Missouri and Indiana will tighten as Election Day approaches.

Professor David Kimball with the University of Missouri, St. Louis has studied split-ticket voting patterns and is skeptical that a critical mass of voters will split their tickets in enough states to deliver both a Clinton victory and a Senate GOP majority on Election Day.

"Most voters simply intend to be, No. 1, in support of their party and thus aren't receptive to strategic or nuanced arguments," Kimball says. "And if they are going to split their ticket it's going to be for a candidate that is personally appealing to them, or to avoid a candidate that's personally unappealing."

Senate candidates who have successfully outperformed the top of the ticket have generally fallen into two camps. The first are personally popular incumbents like Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia or GOP Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, who have their own distinct brands and regularly outperform their party.

Other senators who have succeeded against the top of the ticket faced fatally flawed opponents, as Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., did in 2012 against Republican Todd Akin, who made controversial statements about rape and pregnancy.

Many of this year's GOP incumbents are first-term senators like Pennsylvania's Pat Toomey and New Hampshire's Kelly Ayotte. Campaign operatives praise both for running strong campaigns, but there is deep skepticism that either can win if Clinton decisively wins their states.

Nothing new here, but a good summary of where the Senate races stand.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom