• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

US President 2016 - the Great Horse Race

 
 
 
RavenSky said:
I am listening to President Obama's speech for HRC in North Carolina a week or so ago... I am going to miss him so damned much as our President. Can't we please just keep him for a few more years?
Click to expand...

Canada's Parliament agrees with you, they want President Obama for another 4 years.


 
Meanwhile in Poll Land, depending on what you ask it is either nose to nose in Ohio or Clinton is leading just near the edge of margin of error.

Going through the poll data, I found one question interesting. Who will win? Clinton 53 - Trump 32 - Undecided 14. So in a state that polls even between the two, there is a 21 pt lead in the people of Ohio thinking Clinton will win.
 
Reuters Poll from Thursday with a really interesting stat.

Clinton leads by 4 pts, but the generic congress poll, Democrats lead 45 to 34.

This poll was taken between July 16 and 20, so it includes a chunk of the convention.
 
Trump is getting a convention bounce. Right now about 4 points since the 16th according to RealClearAboutBeingBiasedPolitics. The interesting, very interesting thing, Clinton hasn't dropped as part of the bounce.
 
If 2016 polling is as reliable as 2014, then it's Trump. President Trump. Commander and Chief Trump. I predict his State of the Union speeches will be highly entertaining.

L9FV38.png
 
I do think that there's cause for concern here, but I don't think this can't be fixed. What I'd like to know is whether or not this is a temporary bounce for Donald Trump, or if it's the beginning of a trend. If it's the beginning of a trend, then it's a serious worry.
 
Terrell said:
I do think that there's cause for concern here, but I don't think this can't be fixed. What I'd like to know is whether or not this is a temporary bounce for Donald Trump, or if it's the beginning of a trend. If it's the beginning of a trend, then it's a serious worry.
Click to expand...
We have felt this before people, with the Palin bounce. But that disappeared and Trump has yet to have maintained a consistent lead over Clinton. We have the DNC and then the debates. I have a hard time thinking Trump can handle a one on one debate. But Trump has failed to be a good candidate up to now, and he keeps on pushing forward and the Electoral College isn't looking like the blow out it should.

We've seen what the Trump campaign is shilling, we are all going to be killed by terrorists or blacks. That'll be a hard sell, unless there continues to be terror attacks in Europe or the US. For some reason the majority of Americans getting polled thinks that Trump will handle ISIS better than Clinton. Why I have no bloody clue!
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
Terrell said:
I do think that there's cause for concern here, but I don't think this can't be fixed. What I'd like to know is whether or not this is a temporary bounce for Donald Trump, or if it's the beginning of a trend. If it's the beginning of a trend, then it's a serious worry.
Click to expand...
We have felt this before people, with the Palin bounce. But that disappeared and Trump has yet to have maintained a consistent lead over Clinton. We have the DNC and then the debates. I have a hard time thinking Trump can handle a one on one debate. But Trump has failed to be a good candidate up to now, and he keeps on pushing forward and the Electoral College isn't looking like the blow out it should.
Click to expand...

I agree, that's why currently it's a cause for concern, but absent a larger trend I'm not too worried at this time. I do think we'll have to wait & see the numbers and trends after the convention. I think HRC will probably be in a better position after the convention.

If there's a trend favorable to Trump now, I think it's cause for worry, but it's fixable IMO. The serious concerns start after Labor Day.
 
ksen said:
Nate Silver's Now-Cast has the chance of winning the presidency: Trump 56.7%, Clinton 43.3%.

Thanks a lot Hillary and DNC.
Click to expand...

His longterm forecasts are still for Clinton. You could also forecast shop around and pick TheUpshot - The New York Times which has Clinton at 68% and includes the convention bounce.

We'll have a better idea next week.

Also see, Election Update: Clinton’s Lead Is As Safe As Kerry’s Was In 2004 | FiveThirtyEight

Polls become much more accurate after the conventions
[TABLE="class: viz full"]
[TR]
[TH="class: upper upper-text, colspan: 2"][/TH]
[TH="class: upper, colspan: 1"]POLLING AVERAGE
[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH="class: no-parent text, colspan: 1"]YEAR[/TH]
[TH="class: number, colspan: 1"]HEADING INTO CONVENTIONS[/TH]
[TH="class: number, colspan: 1"]30 DAYS AFTER CONVENTIONS[/TH]
[TH="class: no-parent number, colspan: 1"]ACTUAL RESULT[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: text"]1972[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Nixon +16.0[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Nixon +29.7[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Nixon +23.2[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: text"]1976[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Carter +13.0[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Carter +4.0[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Carter +2.0[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: text"]1980[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Reagan +6.0[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Reagan +2.6[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Reagan +9.7[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: text"]1984[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Reagan +14.3[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Reagan +16.8[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Reagan +18.2[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: text"]1988[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Dukakis +6.7[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Bush +3.0[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Bush +7.7[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: text"]1992[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Bush +1.0[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Clinton +11.7[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Clinton +5.6[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: text"]1996[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Clinton +16.8[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Clinton +16.0[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Clinton +8.5[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: text"]2000[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Bush +4.3[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Gore +2.0[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Gore +0.5[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: text"]2004[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Kerry +2.7[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Bush +1.8[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Bush +2.5[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: text"]2008[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Obama +3.8[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Obama +3.1[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Obama +7.3[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: text"]2012[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Obama +2.3[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Obama +1.9[/TD]
[TD="class: number"]Obama +3.9[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
 
Last edited:
Terrell said:
I agree, that's why currently it's a cause for concern....
Click to expand...

Since we are now having to rely on the same voters that re-elected W in 2004 I'd say its more than a concern. I knew we couldn't rely on the disgruntled Sanders supporters-they are even turning on him now. This is exactly what they would have done to him had he become president and couldn't have magically made all his promises come true in the first month in office.
 
I wrote this and never posted it. Feel free to ignore it.

angelo said:
Sarpedon said:
As I suspected, angelo hasn't even read the book he's claiming to cite. Also, if he actually knew anything about it, he would know that most scholars consider the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire to be mediocre history. Its influence is mostly from its style; it established the benchmark of English scholastic writing, the so-called 'official style.' As such, it is a much imitated book in its cadence, choice of words, and dignified exposition. As history, it makes a fine beginner book, detailed, easy to read, relatively non controversial, and not particularly insightful.

I suspect that if angelo had actually read it, he would be able to write better himself, as this is the primary value of the book.
Click to expand...

The Roman Empire was destroyed from within and without. Barbarians at the gates! Exactly what's happening today.
Click to expand...

The Romans always had barbarians at their gates throughout their history. Not in the least because the Latin barbarus most commonly referred to non-Romans.

The genius of the Romans was that they converted the people that they conquered into Romans who manned the border defenses under Roman officers, that they recycled, through taxation, the riches that they gained to pay for the defense of the borders, that the money from the border troops made the border regions prosperous and stable, that they had a large, moderately honest civil administration closely aligned with the military, that the military when not fighting built and maintained civil works, roads, bridges, waterworks, etc., that they had enough so that all of the citizens of Rome had enough, and others.

The empire failed because these things slowly unraveled, starting with the rich escaping paying their taxes. The quality of the military declined, the lack of money turned the military to looting the border areas instead of pouring money into them. The military was given land for payment instead of money, turning them into farmers instead of builders and maintainers of the infrastructure. The rich lost their dedication to the military, resulting in a less loyal officer corp of non-Romans. The distribution of income and wealth became more unequal, increasing poverty and unrest. The civil administration became underpaid and more corrupt. The bankers became more powerful, resulting in an explosion of private debt when the tradition of periodic debt jubilees, when all of the debts in Rome were forgiven, was abandoned.
 
Trump seems to be enjoying a convention bounce in the national polls, this bounce was also registered in a polls, Ohio. Clinton and Trump are tied in Ohio with Trump closing up a 4 pt gap, according to PPP

Meanwhile, in Georgia, it's all about turnout and a lack of a bump. The Georgia poll shows something unsettling and quite amazing, Trump leads by 2 pts (actually 1.3 / 45.5 to 44.2). Trump leads among white voters, greater than 3 to 1! Of course, among blacks, Clinton leads greater than 14 to 1. Other minorities, Clinton leads greater than 3 to 1, with minorities in majority for Clinton and split Johnson, Trump, and Mr. Undecided, who despite running a single ad, is still polling better than Jill Stein.

So when you look at the numbers, despite a large lead among whites for Trump in Georgia, it is nearly wiped out among his dismal showing with minorities, making the Michelle Obama speech so important. If blacks and minorities turn out, they can flip the purple state blue. Georgia is the second largest, and really only other Republican voting state that has an electoral vote count that matters. Losing Georgia isn't an option. It does get worse for Trump. Johnson is polling nearly 11 pts among the 18-39 group. If they sway back to the big parties in any direction favorable to Clinton, that may be it.
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
Meanwhile, PPP released a poll indicating Missouri residents are unqualified to vote.


  • 92% of voters in the state think women should receive equal pay for equal work,
  • 72% think that all on duty police officers should be required to wear body cameras
  • 68% think workers should have the right to collectively bargain for fair wages and benefits
  • 66% support expanding Medicaid in Missouri
  • 65% think state employees should get 10 days of paid leave upon the birth or adoption of a child
  • 62% say they would vote yes on a ballot issue that would legalize marijuana for medical purposes
  • 62% say they support the Missouri Nondiscrimination Act, which prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity in employment,

Yup... Trump 50 to Clinton 40. :beatdeadhorse:
Click to expand...

This points out what I consider to be the Democrats' main problem, their blind spot. What Bernie understands dimly but can't offer the correct solution for. What Clinton seems to be incapable of getting her head around. What Trump has blundered into and probably doesn't understand well enough to exploit fully yet, if he could.

The Democrats believe that they can cut up the population into small groups sharing common interests. Interests that are different from those of the whole country. That they can then gain the support of the group by offering them targeted policy solutions addressing the group's unique interests and concerns. That the voters and the population are a crazy quilt of these groups and that all the Democrats have to do to achieve Pax Democratium, an age of Democratic Party domination, is to sew enough of these groups together to get 271 electoral votes, 61 Senators and a majority in the House.

What the Democrats don't seem to understand is that we are all part of a single country too. That we are all part of the greatest civics experiment in history and that it is currently failing as a whole. And that the Democrats' crazy quilt* is a part of the problem because this tears at the fabric of our shared ethos as Americans.

A very large number of Americans are hurting and an even larger number are afraid that they too will be hurting. And even worse, they don't know why. The country as a whole is afraid that the experiment is failing and that society is coming apart.

The party that finally addresses this as well as their crazy quilt will win this election. And right now it seems to Trump and the Republicans who are closer to doing that.



* Yes, the Republicans have their own even crazier quilt because the groups are crazier and the policies are crazier too. But this is about the Democrats now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom