|
ReidRansom posted:He'll make another gaffe today or tomorrow and everyone will move on. They need a rapid response ad team for this stuff. Doesn't need to be televised or in paid ad space, just whip it up and stick on youtube and let the news media run clips talking about it. It's incredibly easy for that to backfire. It's better to wait and see if the controversy sticks on is own and if so hit it.
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 19:08 |
|
|
I guess this is why I work in rocks and mud instead of political consulting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:35
|
|
|
Junior G-man posted:We're gonna be seeing so many of these ads binding local candidates to the Trump Hindenburg Oh god, do Portman now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:36
|
|
|
ReidRansom posted:He'll make another gaffe today or tomorrow and everyone will move on. They need a rapid response ad team for this stuff. Doesn't need to be televised or in paid ad space, just whip it up and stick on youtube and let the news media run clips talking about it. No you don't you give him the rope to hang himself with. This poo poo is not getting resolved, just overtaken. Then it will all get brought back up and the wounds reopened. Going whole hog right now is what the GOP does, and that's why they have no ammo left for Hillary.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:36
|
|
|
I don't think he needs to make another gaffe. This story about his wife and her papers seems to have some traction.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:37
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:No you don't you give him the rope to hang himself with. This poo poo is not getting resolved, just overtaken. Then it will all get brought back up and the wounds reopened. Hillary Clinton is the political equivalent of antibiotic resistant strains. They overused the slander and attack for everything she's ever done, and it's inoculated her against them. Now the Republican Party gets to poo poo itself to death, helpless to stop it. This is the worst analogy I will make this month.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:38
|
|
|
Like Hillary is going to try and bait him into making statements in the debates that contradict or touch on some of these issues. Then they will take him going "I have always loved the vets! " and lay it over the recent stuff to remind everyone what he actually has said.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:38
|
|
|
ReidRansom posted:I guess this is why I work in rocks and mud instead of political consulting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:39
|
|
|
So the Atlah World MIssionary Church, they of the, uh is in massive debt and just got foreclosed on and is to be sold at public auction. and look who's trying to buy it quote:
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:39
|
|
|
On Terra Firma posted:I don't think he needs to make another gaffe. This story about his wife and her papers seems to have some traction. Going after family members is best left to the media. Using it in a campaign ad is going to backfire immediately, besides, the Clinton campaign does not want to open up the Bill can of worms on this by firing the first shot. The Dems were very quiet during the plagiarism thing and smartly so.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:39
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:No you don't you give him the rope to hang himself with. This poo poo is not getting resolved, just overtaken. Then it will all get brought back up and the wounds reopened. Besides it would be difficult to go whole hog with the Olympics about to suck some of the air out of the room. You've got to be careful which stories you try and keep smoldering. Unless Trump douses himself in gasoline(again) of course.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
Are there any good life insurance articles that I could do a short write-up on for class?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:Are there any good life insurance articles that I could do a short write-up on for class? nope you're out of luck
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:41
|
|
|
farraday posted:Besides it would be difficult to go whole hog with the Olympics about to suck some of the air out of the room. You've got to be careful which stories you try and keep smoldering. Unless Trump douses himself in gasoline(again) of course. Trump is not going to take the Olympics taking some of the attention off him very well at all, I suspect.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:41
|
|
|
zoux posted:So the Atlah World MIssionary Church, they of the, uh 
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:42
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:This might be a better question for Games, but isn't Trump just channeling Gandhi here? His words are backed with nuclear weapons. His candidacy was caused by overflow errors, I'll grant you that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:43
|
|
|
Mahoning posted:Oh god, do Portman now. Your wish, command etc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEqx-Ccr9UY
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:43
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:Trump is not going to take the Olympics taking some of the attention off him very well at all, I suspect. "He shoulda won gold. America needs to stop losing. I'm telling you once I'm president were gonna win all of the gold medals. Our Olympic team will win so much we'll get bored of the olympics. I'm that that athlete got sick if he had won he wouldn't have."
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:46
|
|
|
zoux posted:Tracking polls test the same sample over and over. For example, the LA Times tracking poll that gets so much attention because it consistently shows Trump with big leads, has a full sample of 3000 LVs and they call 400 of them randomly each day.  the LATimes hosed up and got a sample of 3000 money laundering "almond farmers" in Tulare and every day they get nothing but TRUMPCLICK
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:47
|
|
|
Is... Is Politico making a KC Green reference? Trump campaign spins a brutal week: This is fine
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:47
|
|
|
Junior G-man posted:Your wish, command etc I love how after the video ends there's links to eight identical spots for swing state Republican senators. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:48
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:
Actually he's behind in that poll now too lol 
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:48
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:Actually he's behind in that poll now too lol 
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:49
|
|
|
Rotten Red Rod posted:Is... Is Politico making a KC Green reference? The this is fine dog has been mainstream for a while, dude. Even though he's had an awakening.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:52
|
|
|
My only concern now is Hillary maintaining her support and momentum over the next three months. Trump has basically hit the rock bottom of his support at this point, and there's no sign he'll be digging his way out unless fate intervenes. Realistically, the only way this election becomes truly competitive is if something happens to chase voters away from Clinton, like some sort of "Dukakis Tank Ride" moment or something disastrous along those lines.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
zoux posted:Ever aggregator/modeler I've seen comment on that LA Times poll says it has a +5 T baked in advantage. I'm not sure what the stat's expert opinion on tracking polls in general is. It's fine. Basically you're taking one gigantic risk of coverage/sampling error at the start, rather than a bunch of independent polls that have their own independent risk of coverage/sampling error. You could actually argue it's a good way of doing something like this, because in addition to it being cheaper, you will have a fairly consistent bias. If it turns out you accidentally sampled +5 R vs. the true population, that's fine. It just means anyone looking at your poll knows to reduce accordingly. I'd much rather have a pollster with a consistent +5 R bias than one who oscilliated between -2 and +2, even if the absolute error is larger in the former case.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:55
|
|
|
haveblue posted:The this is fine dog has been mainstream for a while, dude. Even though he's had an awakening. This comic seems to be what's happening with the electorate at the moment, I hope.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
I think there's a number of arguments for 'what's wrong with the LA Times poll'. 1. Poor sample selection is possible, but I don't think is very likely. There's established ways of doing this stuff. 2. The way they ask the question is weird. They apparently ask as 'give a percentage of how likely you are to vote for X', which they naively sum up. Other sampling methodology just ask people who they would vote for, then a question about how likely they are to vote, or then use demographic data etc to potentially calculate a likelihood of voting. Their method might give differential precedence to people with low levels of education that overestimate their confidence. 3. The way they reweight the polls is bad. They take the numbers of people who say they voted for Obama or Romney, and match it to the 2012 figures. Those of us around in 2012 will remember this methodology as unskewing the polls. But this is nonsense - we know that false recall is a big issue. People say that they voted for the incumbent, when actually they didn't, or even didn't vote. It's much more sensible to use objective demographic data to weight than recalled vote. 4. There might be an instrinsic problem with re-asking the same people. The issue I see here is that asking people raises their level of political engagement, and also imposes a cognitive load - people don't like to admit they were wrong, after all. Gallup's 2012 tracking poll also swung to Romney. Anyway, I think there's a lot of reasons to think the LA/USC poll is junk. So if republicans carry on believing in it, AWESOME. Fangz fucked around with this message at 16:01 on Aug 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:58
|
|
|
I think it's been linked ITT before but now you can own your very own "this is fine" dog
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 15:59
|
|
|
UV_Catastrophe posted:My only concern now is Hillary maintaining her support and momentum over the next three months. Trump has basically hit the rock bottom of his support at this point, and there's no sign he'll be digging his way out unless fate intervenes. Dukakis was already behind when the tank thing happened. A lot of these things burn themselves into the imagination and become markers and inflection points, but it's a very hard sell that he would have come back and somehow beat Bush in the polls without the tank ride, of course, it probably didn't help. But looking back at the election, it's easy to point at a certain iconic moment (like, say, a Gold Star father pulling out the Constitution) and say "Yes, that was what sunk him." Even with Trump, the it wasn't even Khan, it wasn't even his response to the Khans - it was the result of a problem built into his very character, if he loses. Similarly, while the swiftboating Kerry took was outrageous and didn't help, it didn't determine the entire election. When I'm saying a fundamental change needs to happen in the race, it needs to be something significant that hits in terms of character or electability and most of all it needs to fit the perception lingering about that candidate in the first place. That's why some kind of corruption-related thing or a cover-up has the most potency. In other words, I think Clinton can make a gaffe or two or even lose a debate without it deciding the election.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 16:00
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/LPDonovan/status/761213398386352128
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 16:02
|
|
|
UV_Catastrophe posted:My only concern now is Hillary maintaining her support and momentum over the next three months. Trump has basically hit the rock bottom of his support at this point, and there's no sign he'll be digging his way out unless fate intervenes. I still think he can get down to 37%... He's at 40% now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 16:03
|
|
|
UV_Catastrophe posted:My only concern now is Hillary maintaining her support and momentum over the next three months. Trump has basically hit the rock bottom of his support at this point, and there's no sign he'll be digging his way out unless fate intervenes. Does Hillary have momentum? Her polls gut a bump after the convention, but they seem to be going down again.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 16:06
|
|
|
Reason posted:Does Hillary have momentum? Her polls gut a bump after the convention, but they seem to be going down again. According to whom? emdash posted:
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 16:07
|
|
|
Reason posted:Does Hillary have momentum? Her polls gut a bump after the convention, but they seem to be going down again. Link one.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 16:08
|
|
|
Antti posted:Going after family members is best left to the media. Using it in a campaign ad is going to backfire immediately, besides, the Clinton campaign does not want to open up the Bill can of worms on this by firing the first shot. The Dems were very quiet during the plagiarism thing and smartly so. What? I never mentioned her campaign. It's just what's circulating among a few sites right now. Her campaign doesn't need to do a thing at the moment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 16:08
|
|
|
FactsAreUseless posted:Probably since Rush Limbaugh came on-air. You can find a pretty clear divide between the pre-Limbaugh and post-Limbaugh American right. Obviously the attitudes were there, but Limbaugh gave them a voice they hadn't had before. Do you think people might moderate after he dies? He's old, and there's no real replacement anywhere near as good as him.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 16:09
|
|
|
UV_Catastrophe posted:Trump has basically hit the rock bottom of his support at this point Nope.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 16:09
|
|
|
Reason posted:Does Hillary have momentum? Her polls gut a bump after the convention, but they seem to be going down again. You know you probably shouldn't wander in to make up lies about polling numbers. If there is one thing the thread is on top of it is that. greatn posted:Do you think people might moderate after he dies? He's old, and there's no real replacement anywhere near as good as him. No, we're in the internet age. Limbaugh has been replaced by echo chambers on the internet that serve the same purpose.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 16:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 20, 2024 19:08 |
|
|
There was article I saw that read "Hillary's post-DNC bump might actually stick around. Here's why." on my Google news feed. I dismissed it outright, but maybe there's some truth to it now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2016 16:11
|
|
