Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 01, 2016, 12:19:10 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Cast your Ballot in the 2016 Mock Election

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 941
1  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: Mason Dixon - Florida: Clinton +4 on: September 30, 2016, 12:02:25 pm
Isn't Mason-Dixon considered the gold standard of polls in Florida (or am I mistaking it with another)?

Regardless, glorious news!!!

Not anymore, I don't think. But if anything I believe they tend to be Republican friendly so very solid result for Clinton.
2  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: USC Dornsife/L.A. Times Daybreak National Tracking: 9/29 - Trump +5.6 on: September 30, 2016, 11:52:41 am

Oh thanks. Keep them coming, you hack. I was ultimately correct in my assumption. Ohio finished at +3.

Why don't you post my 2014 posts where I was right and you weren't?

You're not even trying now. PPP's poll had Obama +5, the result was Obama +3 - well within the margin of error. You're the one who is a deluded hack arguing over the polls now as well as then.

EDIT: Also, how could he post your 2014 posts when no such posts exist? Are you so deluded you forgot you had no posts here for a 4 year period?
3  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Former Latina Miss Universe: Trump called me "Miss Housekeeping" "Miss Piggy" on: September 30, 2016, 09:37:18 am
This is talking out of both sides of your mouth on a major issue that even Trump couldn't approach.

He contradicts himself on what, a weekly basis? But that is a whole other conversation.

I'm a little bit confused as to your logic here - You said we should treat those women's accusations as credible, but why would should I treat them as credible based on Hillary's blatantly obvious pandering-gone-wrong? Just because someone claims rape doesn't mean I'm going to suspend my burden of proof and immediately assume they are telling the truth. I am sympathetic, but I also have to weigh a multitude of factors. I can't just take everyone at their word. Otherwise, by that standard, I could go out tomorrow and falsely claim that someone who slighted me in the past had recently raped me, and I would be automatically believed and thus destroy that person's life just because of this non-existent burden of proof. We simply do not live in a world where everyone automatically deserves that kind of blind trust. I wish we did, but we don't. Fortunately for Miss Universe, there a whole lot of reason to believe Trump actually did say that given his non-stop name calling and insults this election, and apparently now a new former beauty queen has come forward also backing Miss Universe up on Trump's fat-shaming antics.

I wholeheartedly reject your argument.

You reject my argument because accepting it requires you to consider rejecting your candidate, even if you vote for that candidate. 

I should also state that I'm not for lowering the standard of proof in sexual assault or domestic violence trials.  Of course there are false allegations.  But Kathleen Willey and Juanita Broaddrick were intimidated by the power of the Clinton White House AFTER their victimization.  Their allegations have, by no means, been proven false.

The solution, of course, would be for Bill Clinton to take a polygraph exam on these issues.  There is no shortage of qualified polygraphers who would be able to constitute a test that would produce a valid result.  If he's not facing the possibility of criminal charges and he's not guilty, why wouldn't he do such a thing?

Lol, polygraphs. How ignorant are you?

Stop pretending like you care about rape victims. You support a man who is an active misogynist, who advocates treating women like s**t, who befriends molesters, who openly attacked the Bill Clinton women you pretend to care about.

Drop the self-righteous act. We know you're a bad person who don't care about women and your feeble lies don't help you.
4  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: Mason Dixon - Florida: Clinton +4 on: September 30, 2016, 08:49:16 am
Just noticed that this is RV. Why is anyone doing RV at this stage?

...no?

"A total of 820 registered Florida voters were interviewed statewide by telephone. All indicated they were
likely to vote in the November general election."

A voter's indication that he/she is likely to vote isn't a reliable LV screen.

"Indicated" doesn't necessarily mean "said," it could mean that they answered questions that indicated they were likely voters.

Fair point. I concede.

Seeing someone admit a mistake is pretty rare on here, so kudos. Smiley
5  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: National: Gravis/OANN TIED (2-way); Clinton +4 (4-way) on: September 30, 2016, 08:28:53 am
Gravis thinks Clinton is at her post-convention high point? Sounds good to me.

(Not that I trust anything they put out but still)
6  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump is losing it. on: September 30, 2016, 08:22:21 am
hahahhaha

omg, when I told myself (at the campaign lowpoints) to have faith in the competency of the Clinton team to make clever moves I had no idea...

So a US presidential candidate is telling people to look up sex tapes now?
7  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: Mason Dixon - Florida: Clinton +4 on: September 30, 2016, 07:13:14 am
Just noticed that this is RV. Why is anyone doing RV at this stage?

...no?

"A total of 820 registered Florida voters were interviewed statewide by telephone. All indicated they were
likely to vote in the November general election."
8  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: The absentee/early vote thread on: September 30, 2016, 05:26:24 am
Did StatesPoll ever go to school? Serious question. So far this year only 1,257 people have voted. Per here.

545 Republican
470 Democrat
242 Other/Unaffiliated

He probably went to school in Russia. Tongue
9  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump Names his Favorite Foreign Leader....a German on: September 30, 2016, 05:20:21 am
It still perplexes me that polls show there are people voting for Trump who don't think he can be trusted with nuclear weapons and don't think he's qualified to be president.
10  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: 538 Model Megathread on: September 29, 2016, 07:24:52 am
With the latest PPP poll dumn Nowcast is now up to 68% Clinton and she is breaking 60% in all 3.
11  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: PPP: Clinton up in CO, FL, NC, PA, VA. on: September 29, 2016, 07:05:30 am
This is strong. In a 5 poll sample a couple are going to err on the Trump-friendly side so Clinton being ahead in all 5 looks pretty solid!

Looks like we might be headed back to Clinton ahead by mid-single digits again.

very 'TRUMP friendly'

PPP Polls 9/27-28 sampling
FL: DEM 45% | REP 37% | IND 18%
NC: DEM 41% | REP 32% | IND 27%

Hush, troll.

Seriously?, you got 2012 totally wrong by insisting that we don't trust PPP and that we should unskew polls based on party ID. Maybe you could explain to StatesPoll how this works if you learnt from your mistakes?
12  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: PPP: Clinton up in CO, FL, NC, PA, VA. on: September 29, 2016, 06:42:24 am
Yeah, they kind of blew 2014 but I think most pollsters were to Dem-friendly that year.

PPP is decent, I wouldn't think they're crazy off most of the time.
13  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: PPP: Clinton up in CO, FL, NC, PA, VA. on: September 29, 2016, 06:35:56 am
This is strong. In a 5 poll sample a couple are going to err on the Trump-friendly side so Clinton being ahead in all 5 looks pretty solid!

Looks like we might be headed back to Clinton ahead by mid-single digits again.

Lovely. PA and VA are a little weaker than I'd like, but leads are leads Smiley

I mean this is roughly in line with PPP's national poll I'd say. If we take that as gospel this gives the states as:

Pennsylvania, Virginia, Colorado: D +2
North Carolina, FLorida :             R +2

I'd expect PA and VA to be more D than that and NC to be more R than that but it's all MoE stuff.
14  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: PPP: Clinton up in CO, FL, NC, PA, VA. on: September 29, 2016, 06:30:49 am
This is strong. In a 5 poll sample a couple are going to err on the Trump-friendly side so Clinton being ahead in all 5 looks pretty solid!

Looks like we might be headed back to Clinton ahead by mid-single digits again.
15  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: States where Trump will under and overperform relative to Romney on: September 29, 2016, 06:21:55 am
Is this relative to national average or just in absolute terms?
16  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Let's all laugh at r/the_donald megathread on: September 29, 2016, 01:20:38 am
Seriously? was here in 2012 and left for four years. I like those odds

This made me go back and check. Funny, he did the exact same thing back then citing "data points" unskewing polls and shilling 100% for Romney. I guess some people never learn.

Also amusing given that he tries to pretend to be anti-Romney now doesn't he?
17  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: Echelon Insights Post-Debate Poll: Clinton+5 on: September 29, 2016, 12:35:35 am
Top issues of the debate:

Trump's taxes 38
ISIS 37
Trade deals 35
Immigration 30
Clinton email 28
Inner city crime 23


Clinton

More likely 41
Less likely 27

Trump

More likely 29
Less likely 29



Just wanna note the typo here, it's 39% less likely to vote for Trump as result of debate. (and 40-29 for Clinton)
18  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: 2016 Newspaper Endorsement Thread on: September 28, 2016, 01:42:04 pm
So, for the moment it is

Clinton 12
Johnson 4
None 2
Trump 0

Broken down by 2012 endorsement:

Clinton 12 (Obama 6, Romney 5, None 1)
Johnson 4 (Obama 1, Romney 2, Unknown 1)
None 2 (Romney 1, None 1)
Trump 0


Strictly speaking, Trump does have ONE endorsement.  The Santa Barbara News Press (CA) endorsed him back in June.  Not sure if they will stick with it now though.

Citation please?  If it was an endorsement, I'll add it to the list.

Here you go - you can see the endorsement headline, but to read it you have to register:

http://www.newspress.com/Top/Article/article.jsp?Section=EDITORIALS&ID=567560425525346324

Also note that the News Press is somewhat "controversial":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Barbara_News-Press_controversy

But, it is an endorsement.

Thanks, I'll add it to the list.  I'm not going to make judgement calls on the quality of newspapers; if it's an endorsement, I'll count it.

Interesting, though...in trying to find out who they endorsed in 2012, I didn't find a Presidential endorsement.  But their Senate endorsement was the one-and-only Orly Taitz. (http://www.newspress.com/Top/Article/article.jsp?Section=OPINIONS-LETTERS&ID=566435796928823358&Archive=true)

This brings the running total to:

Clinton 11 (Obama 5, Romney 5, None 1)
Johnson 4 (Obama 1, Romney 2, Unknown 1)
None 2 (Romney 1, None 1)
Trump 1 (Unknown 1)



I guess one could make the case that it makes sense to have a circulation cutoff. This paper is nowhere near the top 100 in the country for example.
19  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: 2016 Newspaper Endorsement Thread on: September 28, 2016, 11:28:58 am
So, for the moment it is

Clinton 12
Johnson 4
None 2
Trump 0

Broken down by 2012 endorsement:

Clinton 12 (Obama 6, Romney 5, None 1)
Johnson 4 (Obama 1, Romney 2, Unknown 1)
None 2 (Romney 1, None 1)
Trump 0


That's off by one from my list (I have 1 fewer Clinton/Obama), which is below.  Do you have one not on this list?

Akron Beacon-Journal   Clinton   Obama   24-Sep
Arizona Republic   Clinton   Romney   27-Sep
Berkshire (MA) Eagle   Clinton   Obama   3-Sep
Caledonian-Record (St Johnsbury VT)   Johnson   Unknown   9-Aug
Canton (OH) Repository   None   None   18-Sep
Cincinnati Enquirer   Clinton   Romney   23-Sep
Dallas Morning News   Clinton   Romney   6-Sep
Houston Chronicle   Clinton   Romney   29-Jul
Los Angeles Times   Clinton   Obama   23-Sep
New York Daily News   Clinton   Romney   28-Jul
New York Times   Clinton   Obama   24-Sep
Portland (ME) Press Herald   Clinton   None   25-Sep
Richmond Time-Dispatch   Johnson   Romney   3-Sep
San Francisco Chronicle   Clinton   Obama   5-Aug
Tulsa World   None   Romney   8-Aug
Union Leader (Manchester NH)   Johnson   Romney   15-Sep
Winston-Salem Journal   Johnson   Obama   11-Sep


You are right, I think I miscalculated.

You leave the tedious work to the mathematicians? Wink
20  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Gender gap vs. education gap among white voters on: September 28, 2016, 10:34:00 am
My impression from the polls has been education gap but I could be wrong.
21  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Demographics and the Electorate on: September 28, 2016, 10:00:59 am
https://morningconsultintelligence.com/public/mc/160915_topline_Topicals_LIKELY_VOTERS_v3_AP.pdf

This is the type of crosstab I'm talking about. Quote: " All statistics are calculated
with demographic post-stratification weights applied."

In this poll, Clinton leads by 3% and if I read it correctly the white vote share is 75%.
22  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Who won the first debate? on: September 28, 2016, 08:50:37 am
Of course a larger number increasing by more in absolute numbers doesn't say much. The Republican ballots increased by 8.9% the Democratic ones by 7.2%. That's just noise.

So even if StatesPolls "point" wasn't idiocy on a conceptual level it's dumb even within his own framework. Again, it's pretty telling how attitudes to Trump correlate strongly with cognitive ability.
23  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Demographics and the Electorate on: September 27, 2016, 05:35:26 pm
LV screens can get thrown when circumstances are weird. If people are disillusioned maybe they drop out of the screens?
24  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: How does this debate affect Johnson? on: September 27, 2016, 08:40:10 am
Hard to tell. He might pick up some Trump support but he might also lose some to Clinton, would be my guess.

Normally you'd expect him to lose by not being in the debates but with the major candidates being so disliked, who knows really.
25  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Political Ad Megathread on: September 27, 2016, 07:47:54 am
Link?
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 941


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines