|
Harrow posted:Apparently, yes. "If she was innocent, why is she on trial????"
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 17:36 |
|
|
ImpAtom posted:If this election has shown nothing else it has shown that Republicans no longer need to fear controversy, they have a reliable enough demographic that a friendly FBI head dropping a completely meaningless letter can influence things entirely in their favor. That seems unlikely. Why would black voters just completely abandon her suddenly?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:27
|
|
|
re: that poll: https://twitter.com/LPDonovan/status/793545335503282176
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:28
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Someone posted a twitter earlier that showed the big thing. Clinton's support among black voters tanked like a rock in that specific poll. That has to be an aberration, right?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:28
|
|
|
She doesn't need NC. Now if VA or PA show a near tie then begin to Arzy. Chill the gently caress out people.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:28
|
|
|
theblackw0lf posted:Don't weekend only polls, especially ones right near a holiday, tend to skew Republican, since younger voters will more likely be out or busy? Thats a good point. Now obviously they adjust for that demographically, but I would argue that young people who are actually at home and answer the phone on Halloween weekend are probably more Republican-leaning than young people who are out getting trashed. Northjayhawk fucked around with this message at 21:31 on Nov 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:28
|
|
|
Can't massive swings in voter preference be attributed to the formulas pollsters use to screen likely voters? My impression is that support for Trump is deep but narrow and support for Clinton is shallow but wide. These "scandals" tend to depress enthusiasm for Clinton, but as long as Clinton supporters go to the polls (begrudgingly), Clinton will win. Americans live in a country where one man equals one vote, thankfully.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
Josh Lyman posted:I can't believe our republic is at risk of chaos because the Clinton campaign couldn't find enough dirt on Donald loving Trump. They found a shitload of dirt, a truly campaign-ending barrage of it, and it just doesn't matter. As it turns out, most of the things a lot of us find horrifying about Trump, a huge amount of Americans just plain don't care about. And the things that did scare voters away, like the Access Hollywood video and Trump's poor debate performances, are so many news cycles ago that people predisposed to vote Republican can minimize them or easily rationalize them. In other words, Trump really is Teflon. Although maybe it's more like there's such a huge build-up of grease on him that nothing else can really stick for long. If there's nothing shocking in recent memory, it all just sort of fades into a general sludge and stops mattering as much, especially when his opponent is Hillary Clinton, who is the devil and must be stopped, or something. AriadneThread posted:"If she was innocent, why is she on trial????" Pretty much. Our justice system is supposed to abide by "innocent until proven guilty," but public opinion very rarely even tries.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
The poll apparently also showed Trump winning young voters. That's basically impossible, isn't it?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
FWIW, here's a SUSA poll that had McCain +20 in NC. In September, but still... http://abc11.com/archive/6380065/
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
Antti posted:LV screens are probably really messy in this election. We'll find out next week. This is what bothers me the most about the whole thing - LV screens have been all over the drat place for months up to and including using statistically insignificant numbers for the 18-35 bracket for a couple polls. Does conventional LV methodology include "I voted early" as a likely voter?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:30
|
|
|
Wow, I am a poo poo and somehow turned urban into black. Sorry for that. I'm running on an hour's sleep but that is no excuse.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:30
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:Someone posted a twitter earlier that showed the big thing. Clinton's support among black voters tanked like a rock in that specific poll. Okay, I get that HRC has never had and was never going to have the black support that Obama did, but this stat alone makes me incredibly dubious. I'd be stunned if AA voters stayed home or voted R when they knew it could mean The Police Union's President Trump. They're certainly not going to all of a sudden abandon her a week out because of Anthony Weiner's emails.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
i don't understand why that would happen
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:The poll apparently also showed Trump winning young voters. That's basically impossible, isn't it? If you only poll Reddit and 4chan, maybe possible.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:32
|
|
|
Crow Jane posted:If I may, I have a question for the Trump supporters here. What about him makes you think he'd be a good president, exactly? What qualities do you see in him? I'm genuinely curious, and since I don't know a single person irl who's voting for him, I figured I'd ask Since nobody answered this.. I'm not a Trump voter myself, but I work with/around an absolute ton of them. I've actually asked this a couple of times and found they fall into three categories: A) "My head has been embedded up Rush Limbaugh's/Glenn Beck's/Sean Hannity's rear end in a top hat for twenty years." B) "Everything is wrong because of The Blacks and The Gays. Also The Jews." C) "He's a successful businessman, so he'll fix the country's economic problems. Congress will prevent him from doing any of the frightening/illegal/stupid things he says he'll do, because they are Serious Republican Politicians who would never endanger the country's stability and prosperity." Camp A are the loudest, and most actually don't seem to give much of a drat about Trump - they're anti-Clinton, and would vote for a rutabaga as long as Hillary was on the other side of the ticket. Camp B are actually pretty quiet, at least where I am, unless they're sure they're in a group of people who they know hold their same opinions/online and can avoid most of the repercussions if they're called out. They're pro-Trump because, well, racism. They think that America is being destroyed by inherently evil groups of people that, in my last conversation with one, included but was not limited to The Muslims, The Blacks, The Gays, The Mexicans and The Jews. The Millennials are also on the list, but they're only there because they don't know any better and will become good Republicans once they make their first house payment and understand the real world. Camp C is your old Rockefeller/Eisenhower Republicans. Trump's only positive in their eyes is that he's a businessman (every single one I've spoke with ardently defends his business acumen). Few if any actually care about his policies, only that he has an R next to his name and he'll rubber stamp anything the Republican Congress puts on his desk. To a one, they've got complete faith that no wall will be built, no trade agreements will be destroyed, etc. Because Congress is responsible and will keep him in check. (Reasons on that vary a bit, from truly believing that Congress is made up of serious, intelligent, sensible people to merely believing that Congress won't dare to threaten the business operations of the financial giants.) In short? If it ain't racism, Trump doesn't seem to have any real support that any generic GOP candidate wouldn't and I've yet to hear someone (in person) articulate a positive for him beyond that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:32
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:The poll apparently also showed Trump winning young voters. That's basically impossible, isn't it? Is this a serious question? I guess I'll try answer, no it is not.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:32
|
|
|
This is gonna be a long rear end week. I look forward to everyone a week from now going "Hahaha, what the gently caress were we worried about?"
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:32
|
|
|
Harrow posted:Apparently, yes. In this case, isn't it really just the word "emails" that's causing all the crazying? Like isn't there literally zero evidence of anything sketchy happening?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
Harrow posted:They found a shitload of dirt, a truly campaign-ending barrage of it, and it just doesn't matter. As it turns out, most of the things a lot of us find horrifying about Trump, a huge amount of Americans just plain don't care about. I think that's the part that scares me the most. Who is okay with what he has done and how many of them are out there hiding? I don't believe the "silent majority" stuff, I just feel heartbroken.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
Northjayhawk posted:They won't even consider expanding the house unless the Dems achieve total, overwhelming control over government and can trample any and all GOP and moderate objections. The reason why is a larger house helps the Dems in the electoral college. Why was it restricted after the 20s though?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ppppolls/status/793549543497404416
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:
Carlton moved to NC?!
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:34
|
|
|
Padams posted:It's weird how "Clinton emails" dominating a news cycle or two causes her poll numbers to drop so quickly. Are there really people out there who were like "eh... I guess I'll vote for Clinton... wait what was that? Emails?! Guess I'll stay home/vote for Trump. This is surely news I havent heard before" Yes, this is how stupid most people in this country are.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:34
|
|
|
Yeah, this has gotta be the case.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:34
|
|
|
TheGreatGnocchi posted:She doesn't need NC. Now if VA or PA show a near tie then begin to Arzy. Chill the gently caress out people. You should be furious at what a missed opportunity this election is going to be even if she wins.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:34
|
|
|
Crowsbeak posted:Why was it restricted after the 20s though? It wasn't "restricted", congress can choose to expand the house any time they want. They have just chosen not to.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:35
|
|
|
I just thought you might all enjoy this article for a few moments, to look back on both candidates' fatal flaws: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/10/clinton_vs_trump_whose_crimes_are_worse.html
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:35
|
|
|
I just don't see how that kind of drop is even POSSIBLE http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/north-carolina/ of 538's collected polls in the last week, we've seen a Clinton +6 and a Clinton +7 (unadjusted). A Trump +7 just doesn't make any sense, we'd be seeing the effects of Comey's thing across the board if it were true.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:35
|
|
|
smug n stuff posted:In this case, isn't it really just the word "emails" that's causing all the crazying? Like isn't there literally zero evidence of anything sketchy happening? I'm not nearly as well-versed on the private email server case as I'd need to be to really make a statement there, but from what I do know: shouldn't have used the private email server, but nothing she did with it crossed into illegality, to the point that even James Comey, a dude who's had it out for the Clintons for well over a decade, couldn't recommend indictment. Dogwood Fleet posted:I think that's the part that scares me the most. Who is okay with what he has done and how many of them are out there hiding? I don't believe the "silent majority" stuff, I just feel heartbroken. They're not hiding anymore. Really, though, a lot of people rationalize it. A lot of people really buy into the "locker room talk" thing and categorically disbelieve the women who have accused him of sexual assault and harassment. Even when their accusations and Trump's own claims line up, like his claims about walking in on women while they were undressed before the Miss Universe pageant, it gets rationalized and minimized. There are plenty of people who would be okay with it even if he did every single thing he's accused of, but for a lot of people, they don't think he did.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
Dogwood Fleet posted:I think that's the part that scares me the most. Who is okay with what he has done and how many of them are out there hiding? I don't believe the "silent majority" stuff, I just feel heartbroken. It's not that they're necessarily okay with it, they just don't think any of it is true. That's the post-facts thing so many people talk about. You can now curate your private media bubble to such an extent that you only consume narratives that reinforce what you already "know," while believing that it's everyone else who's just fooling themselves. The pussy-tape thing hit hard because it was from Trump's mouth, about things Trump has already done, and Trump as usual did the bare minimum to deny or excuse it, so that self-curation briefly failed and the general public was, for one brief moment, forced to confront a Fact. But it's already faded and we're back to the status quo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
BiohazrD posted:Yes, this is how stupid most people in this country are. See also: the Ken Bone Bors cartoon in the OP
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:This is gonna be a long rear end week.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:You should be furious at what a missed opportunity this election is going to be even if she wins. How is it a missed opportunity if it seems like whenever there needs to be a real policy discussion we slide into "trump sniffs own farts" or "Well there is nothing wrong with what you are doing but we are going to make it sound like there is!" Because what can you do when your countries media is so obsessed with horse racing?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:37
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:You should be furious at what a missed opportunity this election is going to be even if she wins. I think you might have expressed this sentiment once or twice in the past
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
Also, when a pollster is brave enough not to bury what looks like an obvious outlier, thats a good thing, and they should be commended for it (unless they are partisan with intentionally lovely methodology). I don't want to be lied to, if Trump is pulling ahead, I want to know as soon as possible. We don't want pollsters to herd to the conventional wisdom, because thats where shocking election night results and madness lies.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:37
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:I just don't see how that kind of drop is even POSSIBLE Statistically if the pollsters are good every so often you are guaranteed some crazy rear end polls.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:37
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:I just don't see how that kind of drop is even POSSIBLE Even in the context of the three Leon Trotsky linked which were +2 C +2 T and a tie, +7 would be an absolutely large outlier.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
If Clinton somehow does lose due to loving Comey...
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 17:36 |
|
|
Harrow posted:I'm not nearly as well-versed on the private email server case as I'd need to be to really make a statement there, but from what I do know: shouldn't have used the private email server, but nothing she did with it crossed into illegality, to the point that even James Comey, a dude who's had it out for the Clintons for well over a decade, couldn't recommend indictment. I was referring to the most recent Weiner stuff. Is the whole, "the emails were neither to or from HRC" thing accurate, and if so, why are people caring?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2016 21:39
|
|