Now That Trump's President... (not any more!)

yeh it looks like Trumpman is recovering from the groping thing somehow:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

I don't get why/how but somehow he is.

  On 10/26/2016 at 1:48 PM, phling said:

yeh it looks like Trumpman is recovering from the groping thing somehow:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

 

I don't get why/how but somehow he is.

that poll with him ahead is the one I mentioned before containing the single black trump supporter distortion.

yeh it seems they haven't fixed that problem... but even if this one source is skewing the poll, pretty sure it's not sufficient to explain the Trumpman upswing rn..?

the LA Times thing is just 1 out of 9 polls in the meta poll on that site. It's also at +1 for Trumpman rn, and was +1 for Clintonwoman when the black trumpfan didn't vote.. so nah.

  On 10/26/2016 at 2:13 PM, phling said:

the LA Times thing is just 1 out of 9 polls in the meta poll on that site. It's also at +1 for Trumpman rn, and was +1 for Clintonwoman when the black trumpfan didn't vote.. so nah.

what? it's a tracking poll, i.e. it always includes the same respondents, so when it went to Clinton +1 in the previous poll it still included the skewed black demographic (it lists Trump's support among black voters as 18%, which is laughable). when you take into account this massive Trump skew (which a few weeks ago was giving him +5 and +6 in a couple of polls), having him hovering around +/- 1 isn't a sign of him gaining in the polls.

Clinton still has a healthy lead in the polls, greater than the margin of error, and when broken down by state it has her comfortably leading in EC votes. All of the data from early voting and voter registrations backs this up too, with registered Democrats either outperforming Republicans, or eating into their usual leads from previous elections. Florida in particular is looking increasingly worrying for him, and he basically needs to win all of the swing states, he might win 2 out of 7 if he's lucky.

  On 10/25/2016 at 11:23 PM, ignatius said:

 

  On 10/25/2016 at 11:13 PM, caze said:

The main reason polls get things wrong is because they fail to correctly predict the turnout, as long the democratic turnout is high, Trump basically has no chance at this point. There is a smaller chance their demographic models are wrong, which could also affect the numbers (e.g. that LA Times tracking poll which had a single black respondent, who was a Trump supporter, so the poll was massively skewed in Trump's favour because it over-weighted his support amongst black folks), but given the sheer number of polls being done that's far less likely to be a problem (they've almost all been very closely aligned, and it's unlikely all the polsters' models are wrong, but not impossible I guess).

 

 

what you talking about? lot's of blacks support trump.. like this lady.. 

 

 

http://i.imgur.com/4x5k4r6.jpg

*COME TO DADDY SCREAM* 

Hmm, I haven't got my ballot yet. Any other WA peeps get theirs yet?

It's gonna feel good to fill in those ovals and put 2016 to rest.

It'll be interesting to see if there's much change in the polls between now and then...plus a lot of people are early voting this year, should be nice to see who those people are, if it skews one way or in certain states....But anyone who thinks Trump might win please make a bet with me so you can lose and give me your money.

Can't embed but the exchange between Meeghyn Kally and Newt (Son of Satan, scum of the earth) Gingrich on polls and "reality" is... interesting.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/5185273692001

  On 10/26/2016 at 4:10 PM, Bob Dobalina said:

Can't embed but the exchange between Meeghyn Kally and Newt (Son of Satan, scum of the earth) Gingrich on polls and "reality" is... interesting.

 

http://video.foxnews.com/v/5185273692001

BBC had a short article on the exchange, and they posted two tweets which pretty much summed up how social media feels like during the election

yeah, here's another moron:

I predict that after the election, whenever her contract is next up for renewal, Fox has to scramble to offer her a massive bump to stop her moving to a bigger network.

fox straight up lies about shit and so do the trump surrogates on other networks. it's pretty fucked up tbh

  On 10/26/2016 at 1:03 AM, Deer said:

Trump will win because of the undecided voters, they'll go to the voting booth not knowing who to vote for and in the last second they'll think to themselves "fuck it lets vote trump and see what happens" 

A good analysis of the undecided voters: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-where-are-the-undecided-voters/

At this late stage, with about 15% undecided voters in play, it's not looking like a feasible out for Trump, he'd have to outscore Clinton with them by more than a 60/40 split to have any chance.

But when you look at it state by state it looks even less likely, seeing as there are only around 10% undecideds in Florida and North Carolina, and he needs both, so would probably need around 75% of them to break his way to win those states.

Turnout will be far more important on the day than undecideds. Clinton's extra cash and the fact the she has far more operatives on the ground helping with get out the vote work means she should have the advantage there as well (as well as the advantages she has in new registrations and early voting). There's no doubt that Trump's base is very enthusiastic, so he starts in a decent place in terms of turnout, Clinton's unfavorability with mainstream Republicans and even some Democrats will also help him, but I don't think it will be enough, as long as Clinton can get most of the people who have said they're going to vote for her to vote for her, she should win comfortably.

bill weld just threw in the towel. i guess that means gary johnson is out?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-IpWXAn9oUc

  Quote

Donald Trump’s star on the iconic Hollywood Walk of Fame was destroyed early Wednesday morning by a man dressed as a city construction worker wielding a sledgehammer and pick-ax. The man, who told Deadline his name was Jamie Otis, said he was trying to extract the star to auction it off and raise funds for the women who have come forward to accuse Trump of sexually assaulting them over the decades.

The embedded terrazzo and brass star, dedicated in 2007 in recognition of the now-GOP presidential candidate’s days as host of The Apprentice, was smashed to bits, with shrapnel flying everywhere in the early morning hours at the star’s sidewalk home at 6801 Hollywood Blvd. near the Dolby Theatre.

top kek

the way the 538 graph played it out hey pulled closer together periodically and it looks like that's happening now. if you scroll down to "how the forecast has changed"

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo

you see how it fluctuates on sort of a pattern. she's still up but it looks like the trend is to pull closer as the election approaches. 

ah fuck. trump by 2 in florida in latest poll.   

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/26/politics/bloomberg-florida-poll-trump-clinton/index.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_topstories+%28RSS%3A+CNN+-+Top+Stories%29

I don't see why people are so concerned about Florida, Ohio, Iowa, NC, etc. If Clinton maintains her lead in Pennsylvania, Colorado, Minnesota, Wisconsin (which appear to be pretty strong) then she will get her 270+ votes. Are people worried it might not be a landslide? If so, lol. America isn't losing much of their reputation by coming just short of electing Trump. Unless of course polls aren't reliable, then why sweat over them so much...?

  On 10/26/2016 at 9:03 PM, Vilwx said:

I don't see why people are so concerned about Florida, Ohio, Iowa, NC, etc. If Clinton maintains her lead in Pennsylvania, Colorado, Minnesota, Wisconsin (which appear to be pretty strong) then she will get her 270+ votes. Are people worried it might not be a landslide? If so, lol. America isn't losing much of their reputation by coming just short of electing Trump. Unless of course polls aren't reliable, then why sweat over them so much...?

true. i would like it to be at least in the direction of a landslide. something definitive. i should just not pay attention to any of it until the results are in. i'm sick of the distraction and angst of it. 

  On 10/26/2016 at 9:13 PM, ignatius said:

 

  On 10/26/2016 at 9:03 PM, Vilwx said:

I don't see why people are so concerned about Florida, Ohio, Iowa, NC, etc. If Clinton maintains her lead in Pennsylvania, Colorado, Minnesota, Wisconsin (which appear to be pretty strong) then she will get her 270+ votes. Are people worried it might not be a landslide? If so, lol. America isn't losing much of their reputation by coming just short of electing Trump. Unless of course polls aren't reliable, then why sweat over them so much...?

 

 

true. i would like it to be at least in the direction of a landslide. something definitive. i should just not pay attention to any of it until the results are in. i'm sick of the distraction and angst of it. 

 

Agreed - a landslide (or something close to it) would silence the ignorant Trumpians and further smear faeces in the faces of the Republicans who allowed this racist, warmongering asshat to even come close to becoming the most powerful leader on earth.

  On 10/26/2016 at 4:25 PM, WeAreOceans said:

 

  On 10/26/2016 at 4:10 PM, Bob Dobalina said:

Can't embed but the exchange between Meeghyn Kally and Newt (Son of Satan, scum of the earth) Gingrich on polls and "reality" is... interesting.

 

http://video.foxnews.com/v/5185273692001

 

BBC had a short article on the exchange, and they posted two tweets which pretty much summed up how social media feels like during the election

https://youtu.be/1RVqTfIKGbU

or watch the whole episode of 'the kelly file'

  On 10/26/2016 at 9:03 PM, Vilwx said:

Are people worried it might not be a landslide? If so, lol. 

clinton has been in politics for over 20 years and trump has been in politics less than 24 months and she can't beat him by a landslide? you don't think that looks bad? imo, there should be no doubts at this point who is going to win and instead, there is still uncertainty 

  On 10/26/2016 at 4:52 PM, caze said:

yeah, here's another moron:

 

https://twitter.com/DanScavino/status/791095922709200897?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

 

I predict that after the election, whenever her contract is next up for renewal, Fox has to scramble to offer her a massive bump to stop her moving to a bigger network.

I'm obviously not a fox consumer but from what I've observed during this election Kelly has her shit on lockdown. More so than pretty much any representative from the liberal side of the spectrum she seems to have a very controlled and dignified manner, typically seems to have no problem grappling with condescending male opponents, basically comes off as smart and on top of her game. Idk, my familiarity with her is fairly limited but as far as Fox News goes she seems pretty cool. I could be missing some super Fox behavior from her though so, ya knew, grain of salt.

nvrmndyolo

  On 10/26/2016 at 9:03 PM, Vilwx said:

I don't see why people are so concerned about Florida, Ohio, Iowa, NC, etc. If Clinton maintains her lead in Pennsylvania, Colorado, Minnesota, Wisconsin (which appear to be pretty strong) then she will get her 270+ votes. Are people worried it might not be a landslide? If so, lol. America isn't losing much of their reputation by coming just short of electing Trump. Unless of course polls aren't reliable, then why sweat over them so much...?

there's still two weeks. anything could happen between now and then, and americans are dumb as fuck.

plus the democrats need to take back the congress.