2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

Overheal · 17-10-2016 12:52AM

meepins wrote: »

I don't give clicks to mainstream media outlets when it can be avoided. They have demonstrated quite successfully that they're not trustworthy. A poll done recently by the American Press institute found only 6% of Americans had a 'great deal of confidence' in the press. It's a different story altogether on here though going by the constant stream of posts I read where people just mindlessly regurgitate their propaganda without question.

You see mindless regurgitation, and not intelligent filtering. That's your problem, which nobody else can really help you with.

If you want to play in this conversation with special goalposts though, I won't accommodate you for my own part. Sorry.

Trent Houseboat · 17-10-2016 01:02AM

Following 538 as I have been(site and podcast) I was excited hear that they were adding McMullen to their model for utah. I thought it would be a real kick in the arse for the GOP if he snuck in and ate Donald's lunch, but since his addition it doesn't seem to have effected their predictions. Trump is on pretty much the same numbers (40%ish) and its Clinton who's lost ground.
With him being LDS (and Trump's beef with Romney who is Mormon royalty) and much more of a traditional conservative he seemed the perfect fit for Utah.
At least theres still arizona for the arse kick. Trump will still probably win there but the mere the fact that it's a toss up is still a shock.

People in here calling the election for Clinton already are getting ahead of themselves. It's likely(6.5% on fte) and Trump needs a knock out in the last debate(too late for a points decision, and if she can stand there and take the onslaught like she did in the second one she'll run this out) or the greatest of October surprises but it's still to play for.

Trent Houseboat · 17-10-2016 01:09AM

Billy86 wrote: »

I can't see that gap doing anything but continue to widen in the next three weeks to be honest. Trump's only real hope, not of winning because that is completely out the window, but of even just saving some face, is for him to have the most unlikely excellent performance since Old School and FOX to do him favour after favour in the final debate.

I disagree, the gap will probably narrow a bit. I think we're at the floor of Donald's support, brace yourself for a narrative or his resurgence(the polls will instantly become accurate then).

Zubeneschamali · 17-10-2016 01:11AM

Trent Houseboat wrote: »

People in here calling the election for Clinton already are getting ahead of themselves.

Paddy Power will give you 5/1 right now on Trump, 1/6 on Clinton. In a 2 horse race, that means they think it's over. If we are all wrong, you could make quite a few bob.

But we aren't wrong- the only question is the margin: worst in 20 years? 40? 100?

alastair · 17-10-2016 01:15AM

Billy86 wrote: »

Where do you get your news then, out of interest?

It's the best source of opinion, believe me. It's a beautiful thing. Bigly.*

*no money back if facts don't tally with this source.

TheDoctor · 17-10-2016 01:15AM

I still don't see where Trump gets the 270 from to be honest.

aloyisious · 17-10-2016 01:16AM

Trent Houseboat wrote: »

Following 538 as I have been(site and podcast) I was excited hear that they were adding McMullen to their model for utah. I thought it would be a real kick in the arse for the GOP if he snuck in and ate Donald's lunch, but since his addition it doesn't seem to have effected their predictions. Trump is on pretty much the same numbers (40%ish) and its Clinton who's lost ground.
With him being LDS (and Trump's beef with Romney who is Mormon royalty) and much more of a traditional conservative he seemed the perfect fit for Utah.
At least theres still arizona for the arse kick. Trump will still probably win there but the mere the fact that it's a toss up is still a shock.

People in here calling the election for Clinton already are getting ahead of themselves. It's likely(6.5% on fte) and Trump needs a knock out in the last debate(too late for a points decision, and if she can stand there and take the onslaught like she did in the second one she'll run this out) or the greatest of October surprises but it's still to play for.

How do you evaluate the chances John McCain's difference of opinion with Don will affect any vote Don might expect to get in Arizona?

Billy86 · 17-10-2016 01:16AM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Paddy Power will give you 5/1 right now on Trump, 1/6 on Clinton. In a 2 horse race, that means they think it's over. If we are all wrong, you could make quite a few bob.

But we aren't wrong- the only question is the margin: worst in 20 years? 40? 100?

32 years is the upper limit there - 1984: Reagan 525, Mondale 13.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1984

Reagan was 0.18% in Minnesota off having all the votes, pretty sure it's never happened before and doubt it ever will.

alastair · 17-10-2016 01:18AM

TheDoctor wrote: »

I still don't see where Trump gets the 270 from to be honest.

He doesn't. It's been over the moment the live mic thing hit the media, and tbh, it didn't look like much of a shot before that point anyway. At his best, he was just a stronger loser, and he's not really got much in the line of wares to convince the floating voter at this stage.

Zubeneschamali · 17-10-2016 01:21AM

TheDoctor wrote: »

I still don't see where Trump gets the 270 from to be honest.

He won't even get to 200. Nor should he - he's not a joke like the monster raving loonies, he's an actual racist misogynist narcissist. If he beats 100, America should be ashamed.

Overheal · 17-10-2016 01:22AM

TheDoctor wrote: »

I still don't see where Trump gets the 270 from to be honest.

He doesn't, he could win most of the swing states and still not get there.

Black Swan · 17-10-2016 01:29AM

Trent Houseboat wrote: »

People in here calling the election for Clinton already are getting ahead of themselves. It's likely(6.5% on fte) and Trump needs a knock out in the last debate(too late for a points decision, and if she can stand there and take the onslaught like she did in the second one she'll run this out) or the greatest of October surprises but it's still to play for.

Yes, it's still premature for the election to be called for a Clinton presidency today 3 weeks or so before 8 November 2016 (On the humourous side, SNL did a skit with Baldwin/Trump and McKinnon/Clinton impersonators yesterday, and introduced Hillary as President). There still could be an October Surprise for Clinton, but the Wikileaks almost daily trickle will not do it. Emails, emails, emails have occurred so often in the past months that methinks the voter has undergone systematic desensitisation and no longer responds to them as months before. A Clinton Surprise would have to come in a different form.

There is also the possibility of a 2nd Trump p-grab boasting October Surprise video recording to be released before 8 November 2016, which would be GAME OVER for Trump. If I were in possession of such a 2nd Trump October Surprise, I would release it a day or two before the 3rd presidential debate, just like the 1st Trump October Surprise occurred 2 days before the 2nd presidential debate. "As a producer on seasons 1 & 2 of #theapprentice I assure you: when it comes to the #trumptapes there are far worse. #justthebegininng."

Overheal · 17-10-2016 01:31AM

That cold open was great and I could see why Trump tossed his pot over it

Trent Houseboat · 17-10-2016 01:33AM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Paddy Power will give you 5/1 right now on Trump, 1/6 on Clinton. In a 2 horse race, that means they think it's over. If we are all wrong, you could make quite a few bob.

But we aren't wrong- the only question is the margin: worst in 20 years? 40? 100?

Id say probably around 4% margin for Clinton.
No way she'll do Reagan numbers. The US is far too partisan at the moment*.

aloyisious wrote: »

How do you evaluate the chances John McCain's difference of opinion with Don will affect any vote Don might expect to get in Arizona?

I really haven't been following senate races, from what I know McCain is somewhat on an institution in AZ, and despite his hard right turn in 2008 is generally a moderate republican. I don't know if Trump can can poison him down-ballot. I remember before 2008 he was semi regular on The Daily Show where he showed himself to be an entirely reasonable person something lacking in the new wave of Tea Parties. Though I do know that AZ have that law whereby police can stop anyone they suspect iof being an illegal immigrant, which amounts to free reign on harassing Brown people, so the electorate might might see some merit in Trump's rhetoric.

*I have hope that it might get better.

Edit: sorry aloyisious, I read that as you asking me what ill effect Trump would have on McCain not the other way around. If, as I I think, McCain is well regarded in AZ then Trump's long running beef with him could only damage Trump's chances.

Black Swan · 17-10-2016 01:50AM

Overheal wrote: »

http://fivethirtyeight.com is worth placing your bets on. It's been frighteningly accurate the last few presidential elections.

FiveThirtyEight does have a grand record of predicting past US presidential elections. They do daily adjustments to their predictions, using 2 different models, both of which have predicted a Clinton win for several weeks now. Clinton has been in the 80 percentiles for some time, while Trump in the teens. They caution their readers, listeners, and viewers that it's still possible that Trump could win, but highly improbable this close to 8 November 2016.

Black Swan · 17-10-2016 07:13AM

KingBrian2 wrote: »

He is supported by the lovers of the US constitution

To what extent is Donald Trump "supported by" many who are not "lovers of the" 1st Amendment of the "US Constitution?" If elected president, Trump's plans to ban all Muslims from legally entering the United States, whether temporarily or permanently, violates today's "US Constitution" as amended.

The First Amendment guarantees freedoms concerning religion, expression, assembly, and the right to petition. It forbids Congress from both promoting one religion over others and also restricting an individual’s religious practices.

Brian? · 17-10-2016 08:14AM

KingBrian2 wrote: »

You also expect a President to not be Intune with the wishes of the electorate.

This might come as a shock, but being elected is a Democratic mandate from the electorate. That's far more important than some abstract notion of being "in tune with the wishes of the electorate". Although by winning the election it would be safe for Clinton to assume she is in tune with these wishes.

Anyway, you haven't really replied to my post. Shouldn't a candidate for POTUS be au fait with the nuances of Islam?

K-9 · 17-10-2016 11:32AM

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Doubt it will be humiliating now. I honestly hate every single candidate for different reasons, but it won't be an 11% victory for Clinton as a lot of democratic news outlet "polls" suggest. It may be somewhere between 2-5% which, for a candidate with absolutely no political background, isn't humiliating.

Polls are just snapshots of time, not predictions 3 weeks out!

I'd say it will be in or around 3 or 4% unless Trump has another meltdown in the week up to the election.

Depends if he's in the 1 step forward phase or the 2 step back one.

Quin_Dub · 17-10-2016 12:30PM

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Doubt it will be humiliating now. I honestly hate every single candidate for different reasons, but it won't be an 11% victory for Clinton as a lot of democratic news outlet "polls" suggest. It may be somewhere between 2-5% which, for a candidate with absolutely no political background, isn't humiliating.

K-9 wrote: »

Polls are just snapshots of time, not predictions 3 weeks out!

I'd say it will be in or around 3 or 4% unless Trump has another meltdown in the week up to the election.

Depends if he's in the 1 step forward phase or the 2 step back one.

US Politics has become heavily polarised in recent years , certainly the last 16-20 years..

Both Parties seem have have a near untouchable "Core" vote that they'll capture regardless of what name is on the ballot..

So a humiliating "blowout" in terms of the current US Election would be for Trump to significantly under perform vs that "core".

If you look at a rock Solid red state like Texas and look at where Trump is vs. Romney , McCain etc. , the GOP vote is way down.. In any previous election the GOP could run an inanimate carbon rod and still win Texas by healthy double digits..

The latest poll has Trump leading in Texas by only 4 points (The average sits at 6 , but the trend is downwards) which is a shocking indictment to how bad he is..

All the indicatations are the Trump is going to under-perform that core GOP vote across the board by quite some way , so whilst not a trouncing in the purest statistical sense , it is nonetheless heading for a pretty significant loss in the present climate..

K-9 · 17-10-2016 12:39PM

meepins wrote: »

I don't give clicks to mainstream media outlets when it can be avoided. They have demonstrated quite successfully that they're not trustworthy. A poll done recently by the American Press institute found only 6% of Americans had a 'great deal of confidence' in the press. It's a different story altogether on here though going by the constant stream of posts I read where people just mindlessly regurgitate their propaganda without question.

Mod:

Everybody on this thread is expected to refute links with opinion as to why they disagree and/or provide links to back it up. People on both sides have been warned about just dismissing media sources they don't like.

Overheal · 17-10-2016 03:51PM

Sources "very close" to Ron Swanson have unearthed what the most interesting man would say of this election

https://twitter.com/Nick_Offerman/status/787024754347610112

SterlingArcher · 17-10-2016 03:55PM

http://www.forbes.com/sites/dougbandow/2016/09/26/wannabe-global-dominatrix-hillary-clinton-never-met-a-war-she-didnt-want-other-americans-to-fight/#5abae2b16aa9

Igotadose · 17-10-2016 04:02PM

SterlingArcher wrote: »

http://www.forbes.com/sites/dougbandow/2016/09/26/wannabe-global-dominatrix-hillary-clinton-never-met-a-war-she-didnt-want-other-americans-to-fight/#5abae2b16aa9

Possibly one of the stupidest analyses ever published. "We know what HRC will do, and it's BAD." "We have no idea what Hair Furor will do, so it must be better"

This in a so-called finance magazine. Amazing garbage like that gets printed.

Howabout "Hair Furor is an unhinged horndog with a lifelong record of failing, who belittles the military, cheats veterans, ducked his war service and advocates attacking ISIS. He'd definitely be less of a threat to launch military strikes than HRC." If the article'd been written that way, the writer'd be laughed out of the room.

Amazing. The most public candidate vs. a secretive Russian tool (remember campaign manager #2?) with mysterious finances, and the latter'd be less likely to make war.

*facepalm*

Trent Houseboat · 17-10-2016 04:19PM

Trent Houseboat wrote:

Following 538 as I have been(site and podcast) I was excited hear that they were adding McMullen to their model for utah. I thought it would be a real kick in the arse for the GOP if he snuck in and ate Donald's lunch, but since his addition it doesn't seem to have effected their predictions. Trump is on pretty much the same numbers (40%ish) and its Clinton who's lost ground.
With him being LDS (and Trump's beef with Romney who is Mormon royalty) and much more of a traditional conservative he seemed the perfect fit for Utah.

Looks like I was getting ahead of myself.

http://heatst.com/world/exclusive-evan-mcmullin-utah-poll-independent-conservative-ties-trump/
Trump, McMullen and Clinton all within a point of each other in the most recent Rassumssen poll in Utah.

Overheal · 17-10-2016 04:21PM

I question whether 538 will call Utah. they probably won't have an accurate projection until early November.

edit: since the weekend their projection has narrowed further:

Clinton win chance (polls/polls+historical) 87.7%/84.8%
Trump 12.3%/15.2%

Even with the recent Rasmussen poll which they score fairly low, McMullin doesn't stand much of a shot yet. But hoping he gets good publicity from it.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/utah/#now

TheDoctor · 17-10-2016 04:41PM

McMullin for Utah 2016!

Trent Houseboat · 17-10-2016 04:52PM

It certainly would be two fingers to the system. A republican running as an independent because the party nominated an independent running as a republican.

ebbsy · 17-10-2016 05:22PM

Has today's outrage of the day from the Donald surfaced yet ?

TheDoctor · 17-10-2016 05:24PM

Not yet, he must be doing debate prep or something.

Overheal · 17-10-2016 05:34PM

The FBI/NSA watchlist keeps growing

http://www.mediaite.com/online/trump-supporter-tells-reporters-hillary-needs-to-be-taken-out/

“I feel like Hillary needs to be taken out,” said a rally-goer named Dan Bowman. “If she gets in the government, I’ll do everything in my power to take her out of power. If I have to be a patriot, I will.”

“What does that mean?” WSJ asked.

“Take it any way you want to take it,” Bowman responded enigmatically.

“That sounds like a threat,” they pointed out.

“I’m a patriot,” he responded.

“Is that a physical threat?” WSJ pressed.

“I don’t know. Is it?” he deflected.

The Boston Globe‘s Matt Viser also encountered Bowman, and reported on even more troubling comments.“If she’s in office, I hope we can start a coup. She should be in prison or shot. That’s how I feel about it…” he said. “We’re going to have a revolution and take them out of office if that’s what it takes. There’s going to be a lot of bloodshed.”

2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

Comments