|
Remember: Reuters changed their entire methodology recently and it's been showing insane poo poo like Hillary down 14 in New Hampshire while up 7 in Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvannia, and showing her suddenly losing 12 points to be losing Michigan while gaining 18 to be winning Nebraska. Something is seriously wrong with their polls.
|
# ¿ Sep 1, 2016 13:15 |
|
|
# ¿ May 22, 2024 17:07 |
|
Eifert Posting posted:The biggest surprise for me is how small the sample size is for some of these polls. I thought a small poll was about 10k, not 100. It's because they're publishing the by-state results for their national election poll as if they were also an entire full poll.
|
# ¿ Sep 1, 2016 13:34 |
|
FactsAreUseless posted:Before Obamacare, insurers were allowed to reject you entirely for having an illness. Ask me about having arthritis at 25 and being rejected by every insurer for a short time before the pre-existing conditions thing was solidified! It loving sucked.
|
# ¿ Sep 1, 2016 13:53 |
|
zoux posted:Nate needs clicks! I think Nate's model also goes really heavily into 'trend lines' for their Polls Plus thing, so he's screaming about the PTA disbanding and flinging himself out a window if there's an appearance of large movement in any one direction.
|
# ¿ Sep 1, 2016 15:48 |
|
Also isn't Nate's stuff thrown off a lot by the utter madness of King Reuters?
|
# ¿ Sep 1, 2016 15:55 |
|
Nor down 14 in NH. It's me, I'm the unskewer.
|
# ¿ Sep 1, 2016 15:58 |
|
Pakled posted:I listen to NPR when it's not playing classical music or A Prairie Home Companion. Garrison Keiler is a goddamn treasure.
|
# ¿ Sep 1, 2016 19:41 |
|
Epic High Five posted:APHC exists to cater to people who have a compulsive desire to be soothed and it fills this niche masterfully. It doesn't do a whole lot else. Weirdly, I find it makes it a lot easier to concentrate on a commute.
|
# ¿ Sep 1, 2016 23:22 |
|
N00ba the Hutt posted:If you think this thread is bad now, just imagine what we'll be like next year at this time! Wait, they think the crazy hitler speech is an election winner? Why the hell did they do the last two weeks before it, then?
|
# ¿ Sep 2, 2016 03:28 |
|
Epic High Five posted:I don't like it though. The press has proven many times that they have no intention of being fair or not holding Clinton to ridiculous double standards. In fairness, they're kind of doing that anyway.
|
# ¿ Sep 2, 2016 04:39 |
|
As I've said before: The one consolation I will take, if the press somehow hands this to Trump (I know that is supremely unlikely) will be watching them be shocked, SHOCKED on their way to the camps.
|
# ¿ Sep 2, 2016 04:44 |
|
iospace posted:Crossposting from Trump Thread: His idiocy is the single most comforting thing about this election. Knowing he legitimately can't control himself just means it's always a matter of time before he throws the latest pivot away each time.
|
# ¿ Sep 2, 2016 05:04 |
|
Thank christ it isn't Wolf Blitzer or something.
|
# ¿ Sep 2, 2016 14:37 |
|
Iron Crowned posted:Why not just have a prairie home companion debate episode? Would be tremendously biased for Hillary. She's Methodist and it'd be her home turf.
|
# ¿ Sep 2, 2016 14:53 |
|
zoux posted:Like, why was birtherism dropped as a campaign issue? Why has the press allowed that to go completely unchallenged since he got in the race? I get why the Clinton campaign doesn't raise it, they might see some vulnerability there because it can be tied back to pro-Clinton supporters from 2008. But the press? They would really rather the race was a little closer. Why do you think we've seen a bajillion 'TRUMP IS MAKING A COMEBACK WE SWEAR PLEASE ARZY' articles lately?
|
# ¿ Sep 2, 2016 16:12 |
|
zoux posted:Honestly I find the idea of a vast and concerted media conspiracy to make the race as close as possible to be ridiculous. It's not vast and concerted. It's more like 'Oh no, Clinton is only up 6!' type clickbait. Also, for a better explanation, birtherism is something we've dealt with it for 8 years, so the media probably assumes people aren't being drawn by it anymore. Not that this explains them continuing 25 year old assaults on Clinton.
|
# ¿ Sep 2, 2016 16:20 |
|
zoux posted:FBI released its report: We already know basically everything that happened with the loving e-mail poo poo. Why doesn't the press get bored of this, like they get bored of Trump's latest rant within 3 hours?
|
# ¿ Sep 2, 2016 18:49 |
|
Reminder: Reuters changed their entire methodology to assume an 18-30 turnout of 13% and the highest white male turnout in history.
|
# ¿ Sep 2, 2016 23:36 |
|
Honestly, this investigation poo poo has made me trust Clinton more, because if they can't find anything substantive she either hasn't really done poo poo or she's so amazing at hiding it that gently caress, bring on super criminal genius Hillary.
|
# ¿ Sep 2, 2016 23:38 |
|
size1one posted:I'm trying to imagine a scenario where Trump wins the debate. He cannot go head to head with her on policy. His vague proposals will not stand up to scrutiny and so all she has to do is press for details. His only hope is to catch her off guard and break her concentration. He'd have to say something offensive enough to trip her up, but not so offensive that it actually costs him votes. You know she's prepping for emails, benghazi, and every other Clinton scandal. I've got nothing. The press decides he won because they're still pissy babies about ~access~.
|
# ¿ Sep 3, 2016 03:08 |
|
I admit I'm starting to worry some about Kellyanne Conway. She seems to be the smartest campaign staffer Trump has gotten so far and seems to be able to keep him on script so far, insane as the script is, at a time when expectations are so low that him not making GBS threads himself in any appearance is touted as brilliance.
|
# ¿ Sep 3, 2016 17:20 |
|
iospace posted:The thing about this is it'll raise his expectations for the debates, and the less likely he gets a free pass from the first debate, the better. My fear is that Trump's current team knows no-one is really paying attention to his rallies and so if they can keep these stunts in the media, he can still give his insane Nuremberg speeches and rallies as a nice treat so that he won't go off message during the 'outreach' events.
|
# ¿ Sep 3, 2016 17:36 |
|
My perceptions might be skewed some by having no cable and thus not being able to watch cable TV.
|
# ¿ Sep 3, 2016 17:39 |
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Where did they find a black church that would actually allow Trump to spout his hateful bullshit in? My sister's sect would've allowed it. Prosperity gospel heretics are awful everywhere, in every way.
|
# ¿ Sep 3, 2016 17:53 |
|
Eifert Posting posted:And, finally, as someone who has read the bible cover to cover, studied its interpretations and history and so on I have no earthly idea how anyone could read it Literally. For god's sake, The four most important books are different accounts of the life of Jesus. How the gently caress do you read them without realizing the way each writer's voice influences the story? It isn't just that each writer's voice influences the story, it's that each writer is also using the story of Jesus to try to reach out to a different audience, at a different time in history. I mean, christ, there are two completely different accounts of the Garden *back to back* in Genesis, because the two stories are intended to illustrate different theological truths, and the ancients had no problem with this. Biblical literal ism is a plague.
|
# ¿ Sep 3, 2016 23:01 |
|
Ice Phisherman posted:Well the bible is pretty long, and not only long but dense in religious context, historical context and just because it has a lot of old, difficult words in it. To really understand the bible you need years and years to understand the "true meaning". . I mean, even saying there is a single true meaning is kind of insane. There are, however, certainly intended meanings or historical interpretations that can be very instructive. I liked learning that in a lot of ways, the story of Jonah is a satire of the prophetic narratives by making them be about a totally self-absorbed jerk who happens to be selected as prophet and then instructed by God through his stubbornness. It makes the story way more entertaining.
|
# ¿ Sep 3, 2016 23:23 |
|
I will never understand why they went with the Revelation of John of Patamos as the Apocalypse.
|
# ¿ Sep 3, 2016 23:32 |
|
I honestly don't think 'He's not even a billionaire' would do anything to his support with his supporters. It's something HE cares about a hell of a lot, though, and if there's anything that would make him lose it completely it'd be proving that publicly.
|
# ¿ Sep 4, 2016 02:58 |
|
I think it's less stuff only they have access to and more that theoretically they can put focus on it. I say theoretically because that depends some on the press deciding to talk about it at all, and the total forgetting of the Reno speech shows that can't be depended on in the least.
|
# ¿ Sep 4, 2016 03:15 |
|
It's hilarious to see him rail against the media because they are basically the only thing keeping the bastard alive.
|
# ¿ Sep 4, 2016 04:04 |
|
Eifert Posting posted:Reminder that this is exactly, word for goddamned word, what happened to the actual Jesus. Jesus of Nazareth probably existed. It would not have been at all out of place for a Jewish apocalyptic preacher who caused a public disturbance during the Passover festival in Jerusalem (at the Temple no less) to be executed as a potential rebel and the fact that they acknowledge his crucifixion as an enemy of the state in the Gospels (and go to lengths to explain why it was a religious plot rather than a criminal death) and that Flavius Josephus mentions a preacher who might well be Jesus point to his probable existence. As a historical character he was probably real. There's no evidence historically of his religious claims, though.
|
# ¿ Sep 4, 2016 15:18 |
|
DICKS FOR DINNER posted:Isn't Reuters/Ipsos also predicting like the highest ever turnout on white 65-and-overs and a 13% turnout on under-35s, or was that another poll that seems to be somewhere out in space? Also extremely low minority turnout, yes.
|
# ¿ Sep 5, 2016 00:12 |
|
Also this pope is actually pretty popular with a wide swath of people, Catholic or not.
|
# ¿ Sep 5, 2016 15:42 |
|
canepazzo posted:
It's starting to look like Wisconsin and Michigan might actually need work done in 'em, though.
|
# ¿ Sep 6, 2016 13:04 |
|
We've lost ground, but it can be made back up and we're still ahead. It's bizarre to me that Conway and Bannon seem to be doing a legit better job than Manafort, though.
|
# ¿ Sep 6, 2016 13:08 |
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Eh -- Trump isn't really doing /better/ so much as Hillary has lost a little bit with the fringes. Two solid weeks of BUT BUT THE EMAILS bullshit from idiots like the NYT will do that. He isn't doing better, but it feels like he's giving the press more time to focus on Clinton instead of one continuous meltdown from his campaign now. Someone said the strength of his new people is that they're able to convince him to stick to a script sometimes because they can actually write in his voice a bit, unlike Manafort; I think some of the bigger explosions like 'Please hack the DNC' and 'gently caress that gold star family' were partly caused by a personality conflict with his old manager making the spiteful rear end in a top hat act out. Sooner or later one of his people will challenge him in a way that gets him to truly explode again, though. Or maybe Clinton starting to give pressers will get the media to back the hell off. Or another of Trump's hojillion scandals will catch again. There are a ton of ways Clinton can go back up in support, and I can't really see any ways for Trump to gain much more.
|
# ¿ Sep 6, 2016 13:19 |
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:That 50 State WaPo / Survey monkey poll is an online opt-in poll that has been very shaky. I really doubt Hillary is up by 1 in Texas. All the recent phone polls show her down in the high single digits. The E-Mails thing genuinely hurt Clinton when Comey did his thing and now the press has been screaming about the stupid scandal non-stop for 2 weeks. So she lost a little support, but it doesn't look like Trump actually gained any, himself.
|
# ¿ Sep 6, 2016 14:37 |
|
I mean, of course the GOP is going to hammer the E-Mail button with the force that shattered 13 blackberries, because so far it's been one of their most effective attacks. The AP starting the smear campaign against the Clinton Foundation didn't help, either. All because they were pissed they sued and got schedules that didn't actually show much of anything happening.
|
# ¿ Sep 6, 2016 14:45 |
|
The health bullshit is the birtherism of this election. It's 'Isn't she just so frail and weak seeming? Can you possibly vote for someone so female?' in coded language.
|
# ¿ Sep 6, 2016 14:59 |
|
|
# ¿ May 22, 2024 17:07 |
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:It would help if you actually had a critique that was accurate, it would help a lot. Look man, we just FEEL like Hillary has to be bad. Honestly, I'm at the point where if they can't get anything solid to nail her down with after 25 years she's either genuinely more trustworthy than most people think or she's such an incredible criminal mastermind that gently caress it, bring on Supervillain Hilldawg for pres, we can't stop her anyway.
|
# ¿ Sep 6, 2016 15:22 |