Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 24, 2014, 08:55:17 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 30
1  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Does Greg Orman have any political future? on: Today at 05:30:14 pm
Hopefully not

yep, this. He was an intolerable moderate hero who was, delightfully, crushed.

Maybe he was a moderate hero, but I bet he would've accomplished more on day one than the DC Fossil did in 34 years of being in Congress.

Yet you support another DC Fossil for President.
2  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Does Greg Orman have any political future? on: Today at 05:26:12 pm
His reference to a Republican clown car did him in. It displayed him as an arrogant, pro-Obama Democrat much clearer than any Roberts' ad could.
3  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Primary Election Polls / Re: NH-Purple Strategies/Bloomberg/Saint Anselm: Romney/Clinton far ahead on: Today at 05:11:21 pm
There must be 'insider' info spreading around that Romney is more likely to run that his public statements would suggest. Why else would he be included in these polls?

They include Romney, because he is the best known Republican of all potential 2016 candidates. It gives you a slightly more realistic picture than polling a 100% known Hillary against any 60-80% known Republican.
4  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Will 2016 be a Referendum on Obama? on: Today at 04:54:14 pm
If Hillary runs a good campaign it won't be, the GOP will try to make it a referendum on Obama and they will win if they succeed. Hillary will try to make it a referendum on the GOP Congress or the GOP candidate whatever flaws they have.

Hillary is not known for running good campaigns.
5  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Obama sinks Hillary on: Today at 03:58:33 pm
He's just giving Hill Dog some good advice... don't coast on your reputation... reintroduce yourself to the American people in a new way. I'm not worried about this.

A new paint job?

Won't hide the mileage. Won't bring that new car smell.
6  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Obama sinks Hillary on: Today at 12:55:32 pm
Since when did Ljube start believing everything Obama says?

Since yesterday!
7  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Obama sinks Hillary on: Today at 12:55:08 pm
He goes on to say she'd make a great President, FWIW.


Yeah. That sounded so sincere. Like Walker saying he'd be president of Paul Ryan fan club.
8  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Obama sinks Hillary on: Today at 11:35:59 am
Yeah, for now, that she is not speaking on her own behalf in prez campaign. She has plenty of time to distance herself. But, Lindsey Graham went out of his way to criticize the Benghazi report as being old news, and nothing new as far as Hillary. I'm not concerned.


OC, did you understand what President Obama said and that it was President Obama who said it?


I can't wait to see what IceSpear has to say about this. Grin
9  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Obama sinks Hillary on: Today at 10:48:12 am
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/can-any-2016-democrat-have-that-new-car-smell/article/2556564


Quote
President Obama set off ripples in the political world Sunday morning when he said voters in the 2016 presidential race will want "that new car smell." Speaking with ABC's George Stephanopoulos, Obama said in picking a new leader, Americans will "want to drive something off the lot that doesn't have as much mileage as me."

And is there anyone that has more mileage than clunker Hillary Clinton?
10  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Three strongest/weakest candidates on: Today at 10:14:38 am
Strongest D:

1) Clinton
2) Webb
3) Warren

Weakest D:

1) Sanders
2) Gore
3) Dean


Strongest R:

1) Walker
2) Christie
3) Paul

Weakest R:

1) Trump
2) Palin
3) Bolton
11  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Former Virginia Senator Jim Webb launches exploratory committee! on: November 23, 2014, 02:56:55 am
One thing is sure: Webb would have been the 60th vote Mary needed.
12  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Is Jim Webb to the left or to the right of Hillary Clinton? on: November 22, 2014, 09:05:38 pm
Both.
13  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Ceilings and floors on: November 22, 2014, 10:43:06 am
Seems right to me.
14  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: NBC Poll: '2016 Field Is Crowded -- and Mostly Unpopular' on: November 22, 2014, 02:35:20 am
What we should be looking at two years from the election is not the polls but positives/negatives of candidates. Hillary has 40% negatives with 100% name recognition. Negatives stay. People who form a negative opinion about somebody will keep that negative opinion.

That's true.  That's why public figures with high name recognition never see their popularity change much over time.  E.g.:




Why were her approvals so low in 2000?  Do we blame wives for he sex scandals of their husbands now? 

The Lewinsky scandal made her extremely popular (see the peak in 1999), but then that quickly faded, and her 2000 Senate race brought her back down to Earth.

Also, *favorability*, not approval.


Yes, favorability, as in I still have a favorable opinion of President Obama, but I disapprove of him.


Aren't first ladies always supposed to have high favorability ratings, though?  Why would a senate run specifically change that? 

While she was considered the first lady, she enjoyed a high popularity. Some of us are old enough to remember. Wink

The first drop in popularity was due to the failure of Hillarycare. She couldn't recover from that and would have been Obama v0.5 if it hadn't been for Bill's infidelity which generated a lot of sympathy for her.

Then, she moved to New York in the second part of 1999, signaling that she would run for the senate in 2000, which quickly erased any sympathy for her (she was a politician again).

She enjoyed solid favorability ratings for a senator, but when she announced that she was running for president, her favorabilities dropped again.

When she became Secretary of State, she enjoyed same high favorabilities that Obama enjoyed, but her favorabilities endured, because she was not perceived a part of Obama's inner circle on domestic policy.

That's it, in a nutshell.
15  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Discuss with maps: Bush/Portman vs Webb/Warren on: November 21, 2014, 07:20:22 pm


All else equal (of course it never is, but this is a hypothetical), Webb wins 298-240.


On second thought, this is a likelier map than mine.
16  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Discuss with maps: Bush/Portman vs Webb/Warren on: November 21, 2014, 07:12:11 pm
Something like this?




Even with Portman, Ohio would go Dem before either Kentucky or West Virginia got even close to being a tossup.


I don't know. Webb is a good cultural fit for both WV and KY.

But he wouldn't need either of those two states. He could win with just NC.



17  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Discuss with maps: Bush/Portman vs Webb/Warren on: November 21, 2014, 05:59:34 pm
Something like this?


18  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: NBC Poll: '2016 Field Is Crowded -- and Mostly Unpopular' on: November 21, 2014, 05:51:25 pm
What we should be looking at two years from the election is not the polls but positives/negatives of candidates. Hillary has 40% negatives with 100% name recognition. Negatives stay. People who form a negative opinion about somebody will keep that negative opinion.

That's true.  That's why public figures with high name recognition never see their popularity change much over time.  E.g.:




Why were her approvals so low in 2000?  Do we blame wives for he sex scandals of their husbands now? 

The Lewinsky scandal made her extremely popular (see the peak in 1999), but then that quickly faded, and her 2000 Senate race brought her back down to Earth.

Also, *favorability*, not approval.


Yes, favorability, as in I still have a favorable opinion of President Obama, but I disapprove of him.
19  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Inevitable question: Who would be the best VP pick for Jim Webb? on: November 21, 2014, 05:48:09 pm
Warren.
20  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Hillary advisor: Bush-Portman ticket could doom Dems in 2016 on: November 21, 2014, 02:46:18 pm
Bull!
21  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Former Virginia Senator Jim Webb launches exploratory committee! on: November 21, 2014, 02:42:33 pm
Is Jim Webb the next Barack Obama?

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/jim-webb-2016s-barack-obama
22  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: NBC Poll: '2016 Field Is Crowded -- and Mostly Unpopular' on: November 21, 2014, 02:27:43 pm
Barack Obama favorabilities:




Hillary Clinton favorabilities:




23  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: NBC Poll: '2016 Field Is Crowded -- and Mostly Unpopular' on: November 21, 2014, 12:39:53 pm
Another point - the most recognized Republican is -7, Jeb would be in trouble from the start.

Yes, DOA.
24  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: NBC Poll: '2016 Field Is Crowded -- and Mostly Unpopular' on: November 21, 2014, 12:39:20 pm
100% name recognition doesn't mean "no one can ever change their opinion or how they describe their opinion of a politician."



No, but it is a lot harder to move the opinion needle on a politician that is the very definition of a known commodity than it is to move the opinion needle on someone who is only now entering the national spotlight.

This is what I was responding to:

"And because she has 100% name recognition, everybody has already heard of her, so she can't get any more positives. So, her ceiling is 43% positive."

I wrote that assuming a negative campaign. If she had a positive message in her campaign and avoided going negative on her opponent, she could increase her positives.
25  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: NBC Poll: '2016 Field Is Crowded -- and Mostly Unpopular' on: November 21, 2014, 08:10:02 am
Hillary is in deep trouble. Only +3 points net positive with 100% name recognition and no campaign. Once the campaign starts, her positives are going down the drain.

This also shows that Jeb is a no starter. His last name is simply too much to swallow (he can't be that negative personally).

Warren at +6 is something to watch. If it holds with the growth of her name recognition, she is going to be formidable.

Webb is conspicuously missing from Dem candidates. I hope he is included in the next batch.

Of the Pubs, Christie looks strongest, followed by Paul and Rubio, while Walker and Kasich low name recognition leaves wide open space for improvement.


What you are saying here is that everybody knows who Hilary Clinton is, and due to universal name recognition, has already made up their mind about her (to top it off, her approvals are in net positive territory). Yet, her approvals are about to drop.

Huh?

What we should be looking at two years from the election is not the polls but positives/negatives of candidates. Hillary has 40% negatives with 100% name recognition. Negatives stay. People who form a negative opinion about somebody will keep that negative opinion.

And because she has 100% name recognition, everybody has already heard of her, so she can't get any more positives. So, her ceiling is 43% positive.

There are 17% undecided. These will be swayed by the campaign. The campaign is going to be negative. The negative ads will be aired by both Clinton and her opponent. There will be nothing that will convince these 17% who have not made up their mind about Hillary to start to like her. It is expected that the majority of these will start to hate her.

And, due to her negative campaigning, some of the people who used to have a positive opinion of her are going to start to view her negatively. I predict that she will end up in a below 40% positive territory. And you don't get elected with such low positives.



But she knows this and might choose not to run because of this.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 30


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines