• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

US President 2016 - the Great Horse Race

Actually, most american's think Clinton is better qualified to cope with terrorists. Terrorist attacks haven't helped him at all, and there have been plenty.
 
maxparrish said:
blastula said:
Of course she could lose. There hasn't been a time in this race where anyone could say she couldn't. Even if a forecast says she has a 90% chance of winning, that still means she could lose. At this point though, she is in a better position than Trump. She has demographics on her side in the states she needs. Trump has a bigger uphill climb and an unlikelier path. He has had a lower ceiling than she has.

A good portion of the uncertainty is the time left to the election. Something unforseen can happen to turn it in either direction, and sure that does include what happens in the debates. But as we get closer to election day that portion of the uncertainty will go down. A 7 point lead in the last minute of a footbal game is much safer than a 7 point lead in the 3rd quarter.

Also, 538 forecasts right now 280+ electoral votes for her.
Click to expand...

The forecast is based on slim probabilities that Nate Silver has warned about. When his calculations showed (about five days ago) it as close as 55/45 for Nov 8, that is nearly a toss-up. His current probs for Clinton is back up to 60/40.

Read Nates article, dated today (the 22nd). He explains why her lead isn't that good.

"Clinton’s Leading In Exactly The States She Needs To Win
Here’s why that isn’t as good as it sounds.
By Nate Silver"

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/clintons-leading-in-exactly-the-states-she-needs-to-win/
Click to expand...

You and I don’t often match up in views, but I wouldn’t have guessed your election choice this year for anything. From the below link, I gather that you won’t be voting for Trump. The only Trump supporters I know are some of my in-laws, and they are hard core evangelical rednecks, so it is not even worth a conversation.
http://talkfreethought.org/showthre...illary-Clinton&p=334961&viewfull=1#post334961

I’m curious as to whether you will be voting for Clinton, or maybe third party (not that it would matter much in California)? FWIW, as Clinton is also safe in Oregon I’ll be sticking with my LP vote. But if I were in a swing state I would be voting for Clinton. One thing for sure, is that this is a strange election cycle. I see few bumper stickers for Clinton, but even far fewer for Trump. And the corner and house signs are also way below normal as we are getting closer to the election, almost as if we had the excitement of Michael Dukakis vs. Bob Dole….

I ask on your personal decision, as I think this election cycle probably has more poll quality issues than other recent elections. Considering that as of 6 Sep, Clinton was still at 59% when people were asked “who they thought would win” instead of who are they for. Clinton’s number is about the same as Obama’s was at this point in the cycle 4 years ago as well for this question. This data has been a far better indicator that popularity polling. Considering that Republicans have had a lock on white male voters for a long time, I don’t see how Trump will improve much at all on this group. This is especially true as we have had another 4 years of our aging white people dying or loosing capacity to vote. The tracking of Jewish political donations shows another area where Trump is in the toilet, not that they make up a large demographic. But I just don’t see Trump doing better among minorities than Romney. Yeah, African American turnout might end up lower this cycle, but what about all those old fashioned Republicans that have openly been turned off by Trump? How can he get enough angry ranters to the polls, that may not vote regularly, to replace all the old fashioned ones who are either going to leave the President slot blank, or vote third party, or even vote for Clinton? Never mind that Trump also needs to replace the middle voters repulsed by his blatant bigotry and sexism.

I wouldn’t claim that the election is in the bag for Clinton, but I think her chance of losing does seem to be a bit over rated. Short of her pooching the debate, or some other debacle, my SWAG is that she is going to do better than current polling indicates. It probably won’t be a slam dunk, but at least a healthy win….I think.
 
funinspace said:
maxparrish said:
The forecast is based on slim probabilities that Nate Silver has warned about. When his calculations showed (about five days ago) it as close as 55/45 for Nov 8, that is nearly a toss-up. His current probs for Clinton is back up to 60/40.

Read Nates article, dated today (the 22nd). He explains why her lead isn't that good.

"Clinton’s Leading In Exactly The States She Needs To Win
Here’s why that isn’t as good as it sounds.
By Nate Silver"

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/clintons-leading-in-exactly-the-states-she-needs-to-win/
Click to expand...

You and I don’t often match up in views, but I wouldn’t have guessed your election choice this year for anything. From the below link, I gather that you won’t be voting for Trump. The only Trump supporters I know are some of my in-laws, and they are hard core evangelical rednecks, so it is not even worth a conversation.
http://talkfreethought.org/showthre...illary-Clinton&p=334961&viewfull=1#post334961

I’m curious as to whether you will be voting for Clinton, or maybe third party (not that it would matter much in California)? FWIW, as Clinton is also safe in Oregon I’ll be sticking with my LP vote. But if I were in a swing state I would be voting for Clinton. One thing for sure, is that this is a strange election cycle. I see few bumper stickers for Clinton, but even far fewer for Trump. And the corner and house signs are also way below normal as we are getting closer to the election, almost as if we had the excitement of Michael Dukakis vs. Bob Dole….

I ask on your personal decision, as I think this election cycle probably has more poll quality issues than other recent elections. Considering that as of 6 Sep, Clinton was still at 59% when people were asked “who they thought would win” instead of who are they for. Clinton’s number is about the same as Obama’s was at this point in the cycle 4 years ago as well for this question. This data has been a far better indicator that popularity polling. Considering that Republicans have had a lock on white male voters for a long time, I don’t see how Trump will improve much at all on this group. This is especially true as we have had another 4 years of our aging white people dying or loosing capacity to vote. The tracking of Jewish political donations shows another area where Trump is in the toilet, not that they make up a large demographic. But I just don’t see Trump doing better among minorities than Romney. Yeah, African American turnout might end up lower this cycle, but what about all those old fashioned Republicans that have openly been turned off by Trump? How can he get enough angry ranters to the polls, that may not vote regularly, to replace all the old fashioned ones who are either going to leave the President slot blank, or vote third party, or even vote for Clinton? Never mind that Trump also needs to replace the middle voters repulsed by his blatant bigotry and sexism.

I wouldn’t claim that the election is in the bag for Clinton, but I think her chance of losing does seem to be a bit over rated. Short of her pooching the debate, or some other debacle, my SWAG is that she is going to do better than current polling indicates. It probably won’t be a slam dunk, but at least a healthy win….I think.
Click to expand...

I won't be voting for anyone, in any office. The fact that I live in a state that has a 99 percent probability of going for Clinton frees me - I can vote (or not vote) based solely on my conscious. So, in short, neither candidate has earned my vote, and while I might have voted for Johnson it is unclear to me (given his comments) if he is really libertarian.

If I lived in a swing state I have no idea what I'd do...there are moments I slightly favor Hillary by a hair followed by moments I slightly favor Trump by a hair. On balance, I can't stand either for different reasons.

My antipathy for Trump is based on several factors:

a) he is a fake an ever shifting mish-mash of left-right opinion.
b) his temperament is that of proto-fascist (without an ideology). "Trumpollini" is nothing more than a pathological narcissist, using "nationalism" as an end in itself (to his election). He knows nothing of, and has no respect, for free speech and sees nothing wrong with policies like stop and frisk.
c) he is the chosen head of the "know-nothing" movement...idiots that spout voodoo economics, half-baked immigration policy, neo-isolationism, Putin love, etc.

Those conservatives who tell me he is 'the lessor of two evils' are deluding themselves. Trump is all about Trump - a fox in the GOP henhouse who wants to destroy anyone who does not bow down, he is likely a greater danger to the long-term future of conservatism than Clinton.

If Clinton wins the thin silver lining is the end of Trump.

When the party nominated the Clown Prince, I quit the party in spirit and in fact.
 
Last edited:
Rhea said:
RavenSky said:
seriously
Click to expand...

Whether she does as well and whether she is _said_ by the media to have done as well are not the same thing, alas.
Click to expand...

I did not follow Clinton in her primary debates. So it was a bit of a shock to see the video of her explaining why she isn't 50 percent ahead of Trump. Her content was okay but her presentation and personae were worse than I could have imagined.

Looking haggard, old, shrunken, etc.. It seemed like she now wears dentures, or has developed a quirk in her mouth. Her voice was raspy and grating. Granny Clinton does not look like she'd last four years.

If Trump, (a tall man) sounds and looks calm and authoritative next to her...well she will lose (no matter how loopy Trump is). Look at the video:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/09/22/hillary_clinton_why_arent_i_50_points_ahead.html
 
maxparrish said:
funinspace said:
You and I don’t often match up in views, but I wouldn’t have guessed your election choice this year for anything. From the below link, I gather that you won’t be voting for Trump. The only Trump supporters I know are some of my in-laws, and they are hard core evangelical rednecks, so it is not even worth a conversation.
http://talkfreethought.org/showthre...illary-Clinton&p=334961&viewfull=1#post334961

I’m curious as to whether you will be voting for Clinton, or maybe third party (not that it would matter much in California)? FWIW, as Clinton is also safe in Oregon I’ll be sticking with my LP vote. But if I were in a swing state I would be voting for Clinton. One thing for sure, is that this is a strange election cycle. I see few bumper stickers for Clinton, but even far fewer for Trump. And the corner and house signs are also way below normal as we are getting closer to the election, almost as if we had the excitement of Michael Dukakis vs. Bob Dole….

I ask on your personal decision, as I think this election cycle probably has more poll quality issues than other recent elections. Considering that as of 6 Sep, Clinton was still at 59% when people were asked “who they thought would win” instead of who are they for. Clinton’s number is about the same as Obama’s was at this point in the cycle 4 years ago as well for this question. This data has been a far better indicator that popularity polling. Considering that Republicans have had a lock on white male voters for a long time, I don’t see how Trump will improve much at all on this group. This is especially true as we have had another 4 years of our aging white people dying or loosing capacity to vote. The tracking of Jewish political donations shows another area where Trump is in the toilet, not that they make up a large demographic. But I just don’t see Trump doing better among minorities than Romney. Yeah, African American turnout might end up lower this cycle, but what about all those old fashioned Republicans that have openly been turned off by Trump? How can he get enough angry ranters to the polls, that may not vote regularly, to replace all the old fashioned ones who are either going to leave the President slot blank, or vote third party, or even vote for Clinton? Never mind that Trump also needs to replace the middle voters repulsed by his blatant bigotry and sexism.

I wouldn’t claim that the election is in the bag for Clinton, but I think her chance of losing does seem to be a bit over rated. Short of her pooching the debate, or some other debacle, my SWAG is that she is going to do better than current polling indicates. It probably won’t be a slam dunk, but at least a healthy win….I think.
Click to expand...

I won't be voting for anyone, in any office. The fact that I live in a state that has a 99 percent probability of going for Clinton frees me - I can vote (or not vote) based solely on my conscious. So, in short, neither candidate has earned my vote, and while I might have voted for Johnson it is unclear to me (given his comments) if he is really libertarian.

If I lived in a swing state I have no idea what I'd do...there are moments I slightly favor Hillary by a hair followed by moments I slightly favor Trump by a hair. On balance, I can't stand either for different reasons.
Click to expand...
I consider my LP vote, as a “none of the above” more than anything else; never mind that I’m not really concerned about ideological purity as much as a general direction to point towards. But I can understand your POV.


My antipathy for Trump is based on several factors:

a) he is a fake an ever shifting mish-mash of left-right opinion.
b) his temperament is that of proto-fascist (without an ideology). "Trumpollini" is nothing more than a pathological narcissist, using "nationalism" as an end in itself (to his election). He knows nothing of, and has no respect, for free speech and sees nothing wrong with policies like stop and frisk.
c) he is the chosen head of the "know-nothing" movement...idiots that spout voodoo economics, half-baked immigration policy, neo-isolationism, Putin love, etc.

Those conservatives who tell me he is 'the lessor of two evils' are deluding themselves. Trump is all about Trump - a fox in the GOP henhouse who wants to destroy anyone who does not bow down, he is likely a greater danger to the long-term future of conservatism than Clinton..
Click to expand...
A good summary as any I could think of...though I would change one part to “a greater danger to the nation”. The above is why I could never vote for him. IMPOV, Clinton is closer to a normative Republican than Trump.


If Clinton wins the thin silver lining is the end of Trump.
Click to expand...
Very true. My other silver lining is watching my in-laws lose their minds (oh the weeping and gnashing of teeth :D ) having to live thru at least 4 years of a Clinton Administration, after 8 years of ‘that Black President’. I guess they will have to switch to ‘that Bitch President’….
 
Elixir said:
maxparrish said:
Clinton has to AT LEAST do as well as Trump in the debates. If not, she could lose.
Click to expand...

If she can't do at least as well as Trump in the debates, she deserves to lose.
Click to expand...

That depends on the quality of the questions and the standards to which the two are held in their answers. It's been pretty clear that Trump has been held to a very low standard given the tepid responses to some of the completely outrageous things he has said. Recent example is him saying that black people have never had it so hard as they do right now <-- why saying something like this hasn't just devastated his chances is beyond me.
 
Shadowy Man said:
... It's been pretty clear that Trump has been held to a very low standard given the tepid responses to some of the completely outrageous things he has said. Recent example is him saying that black people have never had it so hard as they do right now <-- why saying something like this hasn't just devastated his chances is beyond me.
Click to expand...

Yeah, a rational mind has trouble coming to grips with these facts. I think many of us are experiencing cognitive dissonance when completely outrageous and false shit that Trump says gets accepted as "just stuff Trump says" - as if what he says doesn't matter to his viability as a candidate. He was correct when he pointed out that he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and none of his supporters would abandon him. Hopefully he goes into the debate with those unwavering supporters in mind, and forgets that there aren't enough of them to get him elected.
 
Elixir said:
Shadowy Man said:
... It's been pretty clear that Trump has been held to a very low standard given the tepid responses to some of the completely outrageous things he has said. Recent example is him saying that black people have never had it so hard as they do right now <-- why saying something like this hasn't just devastated his chances is beyond me.
Click to expand...

Yeah, a rational mind has trouble coming to grips with these facts. I think many of us are experiencing cognitive dissonance when completely outrageous and false shit that Trump says gets accepted as "just stuff Trump says" - as if what he says doesn't matter to his viability as a candidate. He was correct when he pointed out that he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and none of his supporters would abandon him. Hopefully he goes into the debate with those unwavering supporters in mind, and forgets that there aren't enough of them to get him elected.
Click to expand...

But remember, he won the candidacy with only about 35% of Republicans. Those are "his supporters". Those are the ones who might not give up their vote if he committed murder. But that doesn't explain why he's polling higher than that. Who are these people who didn't vote for him in the primary but are supporting him now?

I don't know who I have less in common with: the people who support Trump completely, or those who can't decide between Trump and Clinton.
 
RavenSky said:
Miami got its very own Naked Donald Trump statue. It had to be moved from its original location because it was visible from I-95 and creating a driving hazard. It now resides in Wynwood, and you just know that you want to see it:




WARNING: You will not be able to unsee this

On a related note, someone at the NYC Parks Department has a wicked sense of humour:

Naked Trump appeared in New York City's Union Square, attracting crowds until it was removed by the city's parks department, which offered this explanation: “NYC Parks stands firmly against any unpermitted erection in city parks, no matter how small.”
Click to expand...
http://www.miaminewtimes.com/arts/a-naked-trump-statue-has-appeared-in-wynwood-updated-8772140 :hysterical:
Click to expand...

Our Trump has been stolen! Someone in a pickup truck climbed up on the building and sawed The Donald off right at his ankles, tossed him in the back of the pickup and took off. Police are circulating a photo of a "person of interest". News reports note that we will know it is Miami's Donald because he will be missing his feet.

:hysterical:
 
RavenSky said:
Our Trump has been stolen! Someone in a pickup truck climbed up on the building and sawed The Donald off right at his ankles, tossed him in the back of the pickup and took off. Police are circulating a photo of a "person of interest". News reports note that we will know it is Miami's Donald because he will be missing his feet.

:hysterical:
Click to expand...
So the emperor has no clothes, no balls, and now no feet. Oh, and no brains and few redeeming qualities.
 
Tom Sawyer said:
blastula said:
Poll: After Trump Tape Revelation, Clinton's Lead Up to Double Digits - NBC News
Click to expand...

That's it? Her lead is that small? I get all the partisan and base bullshit, but y'all are taking it too far with this guy.
Click to expand...
Well Rasmussen has Clinton up by 7 pts, which is pretty notable. Though still, too many idiots supporting this asshole.

I didn't trust W. I wish McCain '08 was McCain '00. Romney wasn't terrible, but he worked for the wrong party. But Trump? He is the first candidate I have despised.
 
Today is Trump's first public event since the "grab her by the pussy" tape was leaked. It's being held in Beaver County, PA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom