|
I think a lot of first-time primary voters, or at least those who fell off the voter rolls due to apathy, are liking Trump's message. It's no surprise that him and Bernie are benefitting from same day registration. The big question is, and it gets bigger if that Opinion Savvy poll is even remotely accurate, is that would a strong ground game in a primary setting, as opposed to a caucus, would bring down Trump's numbers significantly?
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 18:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 06:58 |
|
|
I wouldn't put too much stock into "ground game" anyway. The rule of thumb is that it moves your final result a couple points at most. And in a primary situation, its value is even more dubious. If SC is very close, it might determine who wins. But in a race where it's more distant it makes little impact.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 18:03
|
|
|
a cop posted:Oh poo poo. Interesting points. Where do you get that Trump has been surviving off of same-day registrants, though? Surviving is overstating it, but quite a large portion of his voters in NH and Iowa showed up and registered to vote the same day of the election. All of the new voters heavily favored Trump and Bernie. Without the legions of new voters the margins would have been much, much closer. Iowa also showed off the effect a ground game could have by allowing Rubio and Cruz to over preform the expectation. It's a whole lot easier to get someone to go out and vote Trump when they don't have to have already been registered a month or so before the election even began. Another thing to keep in mind is that after SC Trump supporters are not only going to have to have registered to vote, they will have had to already register Republican. It's a lesser hurdle since Trump's supporters are likely to be Republican if they are registered, but it is yet another hurdle to a campaign designed around riling up people willy nilly and expecting them to figure out how to do the whole voting thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 18:06
|
|
|
Concerned Citizen posted:I wouldn't put too much stock into "ground game" anyway. The rule of thumb is that it moves your final result a couple points at most. And in a primary situation, its value is even more dubious. If SC is very close, it might determine who wins. But in a race where it's more distant it makes little impact. In this instance I'm talking less making sure your voters show up, and more making sure your voters can vote. Registration is often done by non-partisan groups, but I remember back in 07/08 it was also a focus of the Obama campaign because they recognized that a decent portion of their demographic was those eligible to vote who never had before. Which are also precisely the people the Trump and Bernie campaigns are also energizing, even if they may be a different cohort of the previously non-engaged. I could definitely be wrong, but Trump's campaign so far seems to have had little if any effort put into getting people into a position to let them vote. He seems to take for granted that the people he's talking to can vote.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 18:13
|
|
|
SCPrimary approaching 80 cents  Starting to get appealing...I bought in at 63c.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 18:49
|
|
|
Gyges posted:In this instance I'm talking less making sure your voters show up, and more making sure your voters can vote. Registration is often done by non-partisan groups, but I remember back in 07/08 it was also a focus of the Obama campaign because they recognized that a decent portion of their demographic was those eligible to vote who never had before. Which are also precisely the people the Trump and Bernie campaigns are also energizing, even if they may be a different cohort of the previously non-engaged. I'd make three points: First, same day registration is pretty big in NH but not that big. I'm not sure if the final tally of same day registrants is out, but the exit poll indicated that 5% of the GOP electorate were not previously registered at all when they came out to vote. That comes out to 12,424 votes. Even if we're enormously generous to Trump and give him 60% of those votes, it would still account for a relatively small portion of his win. Second, registration is an enormously difficult and manpower-intensive task. Even a big push (by primary standards) might yield 10-20k registrants in a primary context. And that would be a VERY high number for any GOP primary campaign! A study by Voter Participation Center shows that 65% of registrants from drives would have registered anyway without prompting. And a great number of those net registrants will decide not to vote anyway. VPC estimates that voter registration programs drive turnout up by a net of 1%. And that's not accounting for the vote share of those votes. Opinion is highly volatile in a primary, and many new registrants might decide to vote for other candidates. Third, I wouldn't attempt to "unskew" polls by trying to take into account voter registration. Many polls use samples of the official state voter file to conduct their surveys, so it would pay to check the methodology.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 19:02
|
|
|
FYI to anyone hanging around in the Dem Nevada market: http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/polls/targetpoint-washington-free-beacon-r-23746
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
That poll sucks, but it's better than nothing. My thoughts on NV: 1. Hillary will probably still win. The demographics favor her substantially in this race. 2. There isn't a lot of polling. More likely, there won't be a lot of polling because NV polls are not likely to be predictive and they're very expensive to carry out. I'm not aware of any polling happening right now, so there's a fair chance we will be completely blind going into the caucus. 3. Bernie will probably outperform expectations in this race, as they're currently pretty low. Hillary is furiously downplaying expectations here, and Bernie thinks he's behind by single digits. If there aren't any polls, you're basically betting on a coin flip with very little information if you go into the NV market. It'll be tough to try and flip if the only info you hear is Ralston desperately trying to prove NV is relevant this year prior to the actual results. And Bernie will still probably lose, so you're going to lose money on it. My strategy is playing Bernie.DNOM16.YES - if Bernie can do very well in NV and outperform expectations, there's not a lot of reason he can't also be competitive in states like Texas and California. NV is marginally less white than the US as a whole. So theoretically, Bernie.DOM16.YES should respond pretty positively and you can get 7-8 cent profit. I think it's fairly safe, since Bernie's price isn't likely to drop after Nevada so my losses should be limited if I'm wrong. I still think Bernie Yes is somewhat overpriced, so I'm also counting on the fact that it will stay like that until Super Tuesday. It's not a glamorous profit but I think the risk is managed pretty well. I continue to think Hillary in CO is currently the best value on the market. Bernie NO is priced at 35 cents! It shouldn't really be much easier than NV or IA for Bernie, even if it's one his best March 1 states. My target is at 50 cents. Concerned Citizen has issued a correction as of 19:46 on Feb 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
a cop posted:SCPrimary approaching 80 cents Never know if there'll be a last minute "Trump on camera says Ric Flair is a piece of poo poo and the Gamecocks are all bitches" moment!
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
NV Caucus likely will be a true coin flip -- Hillary NO is cheaper than Bernie YES right now. Hoping to flip a few shares for a little profit. Probably not going to stay in through the actual caucus though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 19:50
|
|
|
If Rubio comes in 4th and is pretty much out, I think I'm all in on Darth Cruz for the Republican Nomination. JEB! is already fatally wounded, and my guess is that the base left will choose Lawful Evil over Chaotic Neutral. Edit: My favorite part about Dem NV is that I got a few hundred NO MOM before he dropped out. Gyges has issued a correction as of 19:54 on Feb 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
Vox Nihili posted:FYI to anyone hanging around in the Dem Nevada market: http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/polls/targetpoint-washington-free-beacon-r-23746 I would take that poll with a grain of salt considering the source: http://freebeacon.com/politics/free-beacon-poll-clinton-and-sanders-tied-in-nevada/
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
Well, sorry about that bad tip everybody.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
runner up in sc might be where it's at. i have no idea how rubio or bush beats cruz. priced at $.65. not too shabby.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 20:28
|
|
|
pathetic little tramp posted:Never know if there'll be a last minute "Trump on camera says Ric Flair is a piece of poo poo and the Gamecocks are all bitches" moment! I think this is one of the things somewhat significantly factoring into my feeling that he's going to lose SC. He's been flying so close to that white hot ball of hate, so very close. Most of the party already isn't voting for him, and they had that panel of SC voters watching his profanity filled clip the other day. Which means nothing objectively, but it feels like he took the wrong thing away from calling Cruz a pussy. He's Trumping down on it until it bites him instead of gingerly feeling out the line where the base thinks it's too much. Once again this is all largely a gut feeling with only the flimsiest of factual support. It's quite possible my puny brain just can't wrap itself around Nominee Trump, but we'll see.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 20:44
|
|
|
Third in SC looks interesting too. Rubio should be a favorite, but not sure he should be a 47% favorite. Friend Ben looks like an interesting lottery ticket purchase at 2 cents.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
Necc0 posted:I would take that poll with a grain of salt considering the source: http://freebeacon.com/politics/free-beacon-poll-clinton-and-sanders-tied-in-nevada/ Thank you for this. I was starting to genuinely fear the democrats were gonna throw this and usher in President Trump.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
JosefStalinator posted:Thank you for this. I was starting to genuinely fear the democrats were gonna throw this and usher in President Trump. I think you meant hope instead of fear but Emperor Trump will prolly forgive your typo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
Necc0 posted:I would take that poll with a grain of salt considering the source: http://freebeacon.com/politics/free-beacon-poll-clinton-and-sanders-tied-in-nevada/ Well the pollster is what matters most, I think, as opposed to the entity paying for it. Either way it's the best and only data point at the time being.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
So, SC Winner is just completely nuts. At this rate you'll be able to buy shitloads for Cruz to win and Trump to lose at single digit prices. Which seems like way, way too good a deal to pass up. Assuming you've got shares of everyone else at NO, Cruz actually pulling off the win would make you Predictit rich as gently caress for very little risk.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
Gyges posted:So, SC Winner is just completely nuts. At this rate you'll be able to buy shitloads for Cruz to win and Trump to lose at single digit prices. Which seems like way, way too good a deal to pass up. Assuming you've got shares of everyone else at NO, Cruz actually pulling off the win would make you Predictit rich as gently caress for very little risk. I don't want to come off as rude, but why do you still think Cruz can win? That new poll had him down by a lot, as did almost all of them preceding it. I realize his ground game is good, but is it that good?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
Zeta Taskforce posted:Friend Ben looks like an interesting lottery ticket purchase at 2 cents. Oh good catch. Just bought my ticket
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 22:38
|
|
|
UnoriginalMind posted:I don't want to come off as rude, but why do you still think Cruz can win? That new poll had him down by a lot, as did almost all of them preceding it. I realize his ground game is good, but is it that good? I just think he can, Trump still is pretty likely. My point was actually that if you had the NOs on the other guys to cover a Trump Cruz flip you'd be ok. Certainly don't just buy hundreds of dollars of Cruz to win and Trump to lose with nothing covering it. I freely admit I could be completely nuts on Cruz winning SC. To me he fits better with the electorate, doesn't have people looking to strategically vote against him(yet at least), and can still pull votes from across the various groups. My guess is that he's got about a 55% chance to Trump's 45%. Ground game factors in, but more it's that SC is a place where Cruz has been preparing for a while. Also SC actually still likes W by a fairly decent percentage, and Trump has just been making GBS threads all over him(Justifiedly. And in the macro environment of the overall nation I certanly hope he's changing people's minds on W.). I feel like it'll be similar to Kaisich in NH in that he previous effort pays off. I think Rubio would have also had a decent enough chance if he hadn't hosed up NH. Please, by no means make your bets on my ramblings. Also I'm posting at work so I'm kind of writing posts in spurts so I'm probably poorly, poorly, making sense. Gyges has issued a correction as of 22:51 on Feb 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 22:49
|
|
|
Dem NV market is going nutty right now, too. These lovely polls are really shaking things up and not in my favor 
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 22:57
|
|
|
IM DAY DAY IRL posted:Dem NV market is going nutty right now, too. These lovely polls are really shaking things up and not in my favor  I'm not touching it right now though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 23:08
|
|
|
Yeah I'm getting out of the Cruz to win SC market now. I'll take a few $ loss....he definitely appears to be trending downward.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 23:21
|
|
|
I'm sticking with Trump to take SC. Not betting the farm- at this point I'm playing with the house's money unless it's a sure thing, but still enough that I'll be bummed if he loses.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 23:27
|
|
|
I sold off my Cruz YES because it's obvious from the initial SC polling that it's Trump and that's all there is to it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 00:15
|
|
|
yea there are two polls now with him nearly 20pts up. the only way he's losing sc is if sc disappears
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 00:18
|
|
|
IM DAY DAY IRL posted:Dem NV market is going nutty right now, too. These lovely polls are really shaking things up and not in my favor I'm a bit frustrated it hasn't moved the Bernie.DNOM16 market, since I really think a good showing in Nevada is an extremely positive indicator for Bernie. But I suspect there's still profit-taking going on.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
 NEW MARKETS - Will a CBS moderator or questioner bring up same-sex marriage? - Will a CBS moderator or questioner bring up push polls? - Will a CBS moderator or questioner bring up Kaesong? Apparently Kaesong is a city in North Korea. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 00:40
|
|
|
a cop posted:I'm sticking with Trump to take SC. Not betting the farm- at this point I'm playing with the house's money unless it's a sure thing, but still enough that I'll be bummed if he loses. I bought Trump RNOM YES instead; I got them at .44 and plan to sell at like .61or .62 if he wins SC which is a bigger return than just the SC market.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 02:03
|
|
|
I'd be surprised if Trump gets that much of a bump in RNOM from winning SC tho
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 02:06
|
|
|
It's a lofty goal, but I think if I have the sell order right now they'll go through, especially if he wins by ten points. If they don't sell they're still worth hanging on to.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 02:13
|
|
|
Gyges posted:If Rubio comes in 4th and is pretty much out, I think I'm all in on Darth Cruz for the Republican Nomination. JEB! is already fatally wounded, and my guess is that the base left will choose Lawful Evil over Chaotic Neutral. I’m from Trump in that scenario. I think if it comes down to Trump vs. Cruz, Trump will get the establishment’s backing, and not in a bad way.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 02:26
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:I’m from Trump in that scenario. I think if it comes down to Trump vs. Cruz, Trump will get the establishment’s backing, and not in a bad way. What would be a bad way to get the backing of the establishment? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 03:17
|
|
|
Flavahbeast posted:I'd be surprised if Trump gets that much of a bump in RNOM from winning SC tho There will be a bump as long as he doesn't underperform. It just won't be big.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 03:18
|
|
|
Fuschia tude posted:What would be a bad way to get the backing of the establishment? Backing isn’t bad, but being seen as part of the establishment can be a bad thing in this election cycle.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 03:19
|
|
|
The debate "will they mention this word" markets are becoming increasingly dumb, and whoever came up with these things should feel bad.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 03:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 06:58 |
|
|
Kaesong seems really random. Is there some news story that I somehow missed where this is a theme or controversy in any way?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 03:45
|
|