Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.

2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

1…115116118120121…314

Comments

  • #3512
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    BorneTobyWilde wrote: »
    IN polls there are so many people who will not admit to voting for Trump, they secretly will vote for him. I know many decent people who will not show any public support but will vote for him and want him to win. I'm sure McCain will also vote for him.
    Polls are false because of this aspect of it .
    Doesn't hold up and you know it from how often it has been pointed out, those same polls showed Trump winning the primaries easily.


    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_Republican_Party_2016_presidential_primaries


  • #3513
    RobertKK
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,775 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    Trent Houseboat wrote: »
    You might be barking up the wrong tree there Robert. I think Trump has white Catholics sewn up. His problem is that most Catholics in the US are Hispanic. And he doesn't stand a chance of if winning them over, no matter how many stages taco eating photos he takes.

    Trump could leave it to the last debate, bring it up when Clinton thinks she and her team have gotten away with that, and ask her why has nothing being done about Jennifer Palmieri given her comments about Catholics as well as Evangelicals.
    Trump just has to say that Hillary's communication director backed up a comment that Catholics have systematic thinking and backward gender relations, and why has Hillary not distanced herself from her communications director, given this has been out for one and a half weeks.
    I can tell you, it would open the eyes of some of her voters.

    On a separate note...

    There is the scripted interview that Hillary did with MSNBC, where Hillary reads from a script.
    https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/786158412119707648

    Then there is Donna Brazile who is the current interim DNC chairperson and CNN contributor gave the Clinton team a question that would be difficult for Hillary at a CNN townhall debate last March with Sanders.
    Brazile said in an email to the Clinton team that she sometimes get the questions in advance.


  • #3514
    BorneTobyWilde
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 38,230 ✭✭✭✭BorneTobyWilde


    gosplan wrote: »
    So the polls are wrong because people you know (are you in Ireland) are closet Trump fans but would tell you but not an anonomyous person over the phone?


    This was post above. It's what I'm referring to.
    How a person when asked in person or on phone will give a politically correct answer but will vote the other way.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/11/opinion/campaign-stops/how-many-people-support-trump-but-dont-want-to-admit-it.html?_r=1

    It's no surprise to see Trump winning online polls. The debate poll had him winning by huge margin online but not in those face to face polling polls..


  • #3515
    B0jangles
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,950 ✭✭✭B0jangles


    FYI for most of those online polls you can vote as many times as you like if you clear out your cookies each time. You can also run scripts that automate and speed up the process of repeat voting.

    They are total junk.


  • #3516
    oik
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,186 ✭✭✭oik


    Trent Houseboat wrote: »
    You might be barking up the wrong tree there Robert. I think Trump has white Catholics sewn up. His problem is that most Catholics in the US are Hispanic. And he doesn't stand a chance of if winning them over, no matter how many stages taco eating photos he takes.

    Patently false.

    The majority of Catholics are white, mostly of Irish and Italian descent with Hispanics making up around 30%

    And Trump doesn't necessarily have them sewn up.

    I don't know the exact numbers but I do know that Irish immigrants were typically Democrats.


  • Advertisement
  • #3517
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,174 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    I've said this before and I'll say it again, if online polls were a reflection of reality we'd be reaching the end of 8 years of Ron Paul in the White House.


  • #3518
    Feline Grabber
    Closed Accounts Posts: 36 ✭Feline Grabber


    BorneTobyWilde wrote: »
    This was post above. It's what I'm referring to.
    How a person when asked in person or on phone will give a politically correct answer but will vote the other way.


    It's no surprise to see Trump winning online polls. The debate poll had him winning by huge margin online but not in those face to face polling polls..

    You do know that people were making scripts to keep voting in online polls for trump? There is proof of online pro trump communities brigading polls and voting multiple times. They weren't exactly quiet about it. Don't understand how people are dumb enough to brigade a poll and then claim victory but here we are. Why are people suddenly afraid to say they support Trump in an anonymous poll? They'll attend his rallies, put up yard signs vote in online polls but they become shy on the phone.


  • #3519
    oik
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,186 ✭✭✭oik


    Billy86 wrote: »
    Doesn't hold up and you know it from how often it has been pointed out, those same polls showed Trump winning the primaries easily.


    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationwide_opinion_polling_for_the_Republican_Party_2016_presidential_primaries

    Apples and oranges.

    There's nothing to be gleaned about the accuracy of primary polling that can be applied to the presidential race without controlling for a host of factors.

    So many factors are different. Different sets of people voting. The people tend to be more politically engaged. More confident in their beliefs.

    And most importantly, Trump was already strongly in the lead for most of the primary season and had won numerous primaries so there would be a strong social desirability bias in his favour rather than against. It was perfectly socially acceptable for Republicans to say they support Trump, not so much for independents and Democrats.

    It's a rather weak argument to keep leaning on tbh.


  • #3520
    oik
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,186 ✭✭✭oik


    MSNBC panelists admitting that their own company's poll was "cooked"

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XEx_zZhjLg


  • #3521
    TheDoctor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,980 ✭✭✭TheDoctor


    Trent Houseboat wrote: »
    Karl Rove rejecting reality was a good laugh alright.


    Vintage right wing behaviour.


  • Advertisement
  • #3522
    gosplan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,828 ✭✭✭gosplan


    oik wrote: »
    Apples and oranges.

    There's nothing to be gleaned about the accuracy of primary polling that can be applied to the presidential race without controlling for a host of factors.

    So many factors are different. Different sets of people voting. The people tend to be more politically engaged. More confident in their beliefs.

    And most importantly, Trump was already strongly in the lead for most of the primary season and had won numerous primaries so there would be a strong social desirability bias in his favour rather than against. It was perfectly socially acceptable for Republicans to say they support Trump, not so much for independents and Democrats.

    It's a rather weak argument to keep leaning on tbh.

    I don't get it.

    Some polls OK but polls now not OK?

    Closet Trump fans but no closet Hillary fans.

    Seems a little thin to be honest.


  • #3523
    oik
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,186 ✭✭✭oik


    gosplan wrote: »
    I don't get it.

    Some polls OK but polls now not OK?

    Closet Trump fans but no closet Hillary fans.

    Seems a little thin to be honest.

    You're right. You don't get it.

    Hillary is not cast as a racist, sexist sexual assaulter. She's just a bit corrupt and untrustworthy like a lot of politicians. There's no good reason to be a closet Hillary supporter unless you live in the deep south where your vote won't matter.


  • #3524
    gosplan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,828 ✭✭✭gosplan


    oik wrote: »
    MSNBC panelists admitting that their own company's poll was "cooked"

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XEx_zZhjLg

    Polls become news stories though.

    Taking one at a bad time for trump gives you the breaking story that he's slipping.

    Bad timing for trump, but y'know, he could just stop fcuking up.


  • #3525
    gosplan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,828 ✭✭✭gosplan


    oik wrote: »
    You're right. You don't get it.

    Hillary is not cast as a racist, sexist sexual assaulter. She's just a bit corrupt and untrustworthy like a lot of politicians. There's no good reason to be a closet Hillary supporter unless you live in the deep south where your vote won't matter.

    Ok so when the polls were closer everyone in the know was saying Trump was actually 4 points up?

    Do you think he's ahead?


  • #3526
    oik
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,186 ✭✭✭oik


    gosplan wrote: »
    Polls become news stories though.

    Taking one at a bad time for trump gives you the breaking story that he's slipping.

    Bad timing for trump, but y'know, he could just stop fcuking up.

    Exactly polls are useful as propaganda tools. Trump used them throughout the primary season. That's exactly why 4chan and r/The_Donald brigade those online polls to create the impression that Trump won. And it's exactly why NBC/WSJ took their first poll in weeks the day the scandal broke and ended right before the debate.

    They conducted the poll over 2 days and released it then conducted another one the day after and released it separately whereas the last NBC/WSJ was conducted over 3 days.

    NBC was also apparently responsible for the tape being released.

    They're running offensive for the Clinton campaign.


  • #3527
    oik
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,186 ✭✭✭oik


    gosplan wrote: »
    Do you think he's ahead?

    No. He's clearly behind, probably by about 6 or 7 points.

    Reagan was behind by 12 at this stage, I believe.


  • #3528
    gosplan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,828 ✭✭✭gosplan


    oik wrote: »
    Exactly polls are useful as propaganda tools. Trump used them throughout the primary season. That's exactly why 4chan and r/The_Donald brigade those online polls to create the impression that Trump won. And it's exactly why NBC/WSJ took their first poll in weeks the day the scandal broke and ended right before the debate.

    They conducted the poll over 2 days and released it then conducted another one the day after and released it separately whereas the last NBC/WSJ was conducted over 3 days.

    NBC was also apparently responsible for the tape being released.

    They're running offensive for the Clinton campaign.

    I think you need to appreciate the idea that a significant number of people maybe think Trump must not be president.


  • #3529
    Quin_Dub
    Moderators, Politics Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 17,047 Mod ✭✭✭✭Quin_Dub


    oik wrote: »
    No. He's clearly behind, probably by about 6 or 7 points.

    Reagan was behind by 12 at this stage, I believe.

    He was behind by 4 points..


  • #3530
    gosplan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,828 ✭✭✭gosplan


    Quin_Dub wrote: »
    He was behind by 4 points..

    Trumps problem is so far, he can't do what he needs to.

    He has to appeal to people beyond attack, attack, attack.

    People are now looking at him for something to change their minds and wiki leaks, or threatening to lock people up won't cut it.

    He needs to get to core republican policy, link HRC to failures and explain what he's going to do in the future.

    Attacking people has run it's course


  • #3531
    oik
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,186 ✭✭✭oik


    Quin_Dub wrote: »
    He was behind by 4 points..

    That was the difference between the final poll and the final result.

    He was polling at 39% at this time and won with 51%, so I was incorrect to say he was 12 behind but he gained 12 between this time 36 years ago and polling day.


  • Advertisement
  • #3532
    Christy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,107 ✭✭✭Christy42


    oik wrote: »
    Apples and oranges.

    There's nothing to be gleaned about the accuracy of primary polling that can be applied to the presidential race without controlling for a host of factors.

    So many factors are different. Different sets of people voting. The people tend to be more politically engaged. More confident in their beliefs.

    And most importantly, Trump was already strongly in the lead for most of the primary season and had won numerous primaries so there would be a strong social desirability bias in his favour rather than against. It was perfectly socially acceptable for Republicans to say they support Trump, not so much for independents and Democrats.

    It's a rather weak argument to keep leaning on tbh.

    It is by quite some distance more evidence than has been supplied for the shy Trump voter.

    I can think of reasons for there to be shy Hillary voters (she is also unpopular) or for Trump to under perform his polling (his weak ground game that is dependent on a hostile republican party and he tended to under perform his polling in the primaries slightly until near the end). However as I don't have evidence for.them.I don't keep bleating on about them being fact.


  • #3533
    RobertKK
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,775 ✭✭✭✭RobertKK


    Putin is unhappy that the US elections are being used to attack Russia and himself.
    He told CNBC that neither campaign can exploit Russia to win the US elections.


  • #3534
    oik
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,186 ✭✭✭oik


    Christy42 wrote: »
    It is by quite some distance more evidence than has been supplied for the shy Trump voter.

    I can think of reasons for there to be shy Hillary voters (she is also unpopular) or for Trump to under perform his polling (his weak ground game that is dependent on a hostile republican party and he tended to under perform his polling in the primaries slightly until near the end). However as I don't have evidence for.them.I don't keep bleating on about them being fact.

    The whole point of the shy voter phenomenon is you have to wait until after the election for the evidence. There's never any evidence pre-election but it has happened time and time again in various countries.

    No one is bleating on about it as fact but the absence of the phenomenon is not a fact either.

    We're still before the fact here, so no one should be talking about fact either way. It's all prediction.


  • #3535
    gosplan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,828 ✭✭✭gosplan


    oik wrote: »
    The whole point of the shy voter phenomenon is you have to wait until after the election for the evidence. There's never any evidence pre-election but it has happened time and time again in various countries.

    No one is bleating on about it as fact but the absence of the phenomenon is not a fact either.

    We're still before the fact here, so no one should be talking about fact either way. It's all prediction.

    Surely this would have existed with s black man running for president?


  • #3536
    20Cent
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,940 ✭✭✭20Cent


    oik wrote: »
    The whole point of the shy voter phenomenon is you have to wait until after the election for the evidence. There's never any evidence pre-election but it has happened time and time again in various countries.

    No one is bleating on about it as fact but the absence of the phenomenon is not a fact either.

    We're still before the fact here, so no one should be talking about fact either way. It's all prediction.

    Wouldn't polling companies take this into account? They must have ways of doing this. Same was said about the same sex marriage referendum here. The "silent majority" didn't show up on the day.


  • #3537
    B0jangles
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,950 ✭✭✭B0jangles


    RobertKK wrote: »
    Putin is unhappy that the US elections are being used to attack Russia and himself.
    He told CNBC that neither campaign can exploit Russia to win the US elections.

    And former KGB man Putin would never ever tell a fib :pac:


  • #3538
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    RobertKK wrote: »
    Putin is unhappy that the US elections are being used to attack Russia and himself.
    He told CNBC that neither campaign can exploit Russia to win the US elections.

    Thank kind of thing tends to happen when you hack the US government in order to tilt their elections in your favour. It failed.


  • #3539
    gosplan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,828 ✭✭✭gosplan


    Billy86 wrote: »
    Thank kind of thing tends to happen when you hack the US government in order to tilt their elections in your favour. It failed.

    There's still no smoking gun.

    It's not going to happen without one.

    Sure you can say 'Bill did this' and 'Hillary's advisers said this' but it is insignificant in comparison to a man who is publically losing the support of his own party due to bragging about sexually assaulting women.


  • #3540
    alastair
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Quin_Dub wrote: »
    He was behind by 4 points..

    And he (Reagan) had a good boost from the debates - universally accepted to have put to bed concerns regarding his age, capacity to compromise, and quick-wittedness.

    None of which you could claim for Trump.


  • Advertisement
  • #3541
    oik
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,186 ✭✭✭oik


    20Cent wrote: »
    Wouldn't polling companies take this into account? They must have ways of doing this. Same was said about the same sex marriage referendum here. The "silent majority" didn't show up on the day.

    If someone tells the pollster they're undecided or voting for Gary Johnson you pretty much have to believe them. They control for demographics to make sure the sample is representative but past that there's no way to get around people lying to pollsters.

    The SSM result was a win for Yes but Yes still underperformed the polls by 7-10%


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement