American Presidential candidates GoP/Dems

[turbobloke]

Northbloke said:

The total reliance on previously failed polls is insane. The News quotes them as if they are fact and the Dems are claiming victory already (Kinnock anyone? All right...)

As you pointed out, reminiscent of Brexit 2016 and Kinnock/Major 1992, but also of Miliband/Cameron 2015 and Thatcher's unexpected landslide in 1987.

What do the US pollsters do that makes them better?

[scherzkeks]

unrepentant said:

scherzkeks said:

OpulentBob said:

This thread has finally jumped the shark. A political thread where people are now accusing each other of peedling. Not commenting on whether it's right or wrong but come on guys.

I am using his own tactic for comic effect. Clearly some people are taking things a bit too seriously.

Only Unrep and 50 are allowed to do that.

No, no. You've clearly demonstrated that you can't tell the difference between a 49 year old woman and a 15 year old girl and like your hero Trump you are in fact a .

ETA

Edited by Big Al. on Monday 24th October 19:18

As I said, you and 50h are two sides of the same coin.

[Vaud]

mikal83 said:

AreOut said:

unrepentant said:

There's a difference between expressing admiration for the superbly displayed cleavage of a 49 year old woman and deliberately entering a changing room hoping that 15 year old girls will be naked.

If you can't see that then, like your little buddy Areout, you have no place in normal society and are a danger to women.

haha I bet I have more female friends than you, if you have any with such attitude

Guess your a good payer? Unlike your idol trump who goes for the freebies.

"haha I bet I have more female friends than you"

Seriously AreOut, are you a 13 year old boy swapping notes in the playground? I think you have issues, politics aside.

[frankenstein12]

AreOut said:

third project veritas video is up

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEQvsK5w-jY

evil empire is crumbling

Pointless. She is too well connected. She will never face charges for anything. As far as I am concerned she could kick the potus in the nuts on live TV being watched by millions and nothing other than criticism will happen to Hillary.

[Funkycoldribena]

Northbloke said:

Any links to the IBD polls AreOut? Past history and current standings?

If true I could be tempted to have a bet on Trump at 5/1. This is just so reminiscent of Brexit.

The total reliance on previously failed polls is insane. The News quotes them as if they are fact and the Dems are claiming victory already (Kinnock anyone? All right...).

The timing of the total onslaught on Trump is so transparent and flakey compared to the kid gloves treatment of Clinton. Neutrals can clearly see that and I bet as many are turned off by it as reject Trump because of it. Trump is after the anti-establishment vote and this behaviour just reinforces that.

Is anyone convinced by the (offensive) shrilleness of Unrep? ...Thought not.

Still everything to play for I reckon.

I'm so hoping you're right.
Brexit was lovely seeing adamant people flailing about.Not convinced by unrep one bit,so up himself and Hillary its sickly.

[scherzkeks]

Northbloke said:

Any links to the IBD polls AreOut? Past history and current standings?

If true I could be tempted to have a bet on Trump at 5/1. This is just so reminiscent of Brexit.

The total reliance on previously failed polls is insane. The News quotes them as if they are fact and the Dems are claiming victory already (Kinnock anyone? All right...).

The timing of the total onslaught on Trump is so transparent and flakey compared to the kid gloves treatment of Clinton. Neutrals can clearly see that and I bet as many are turned off by it as reject Trump because of it. Trump is after the anti-establishment vote and this behaviour just reinforces that.

Is anyone convinced by the (offensive) shrillness of Unrep? ...Thought not.

Still everything to play for I reckon.

Poli Sci professor Helmut Norpoth at SUNY Stonybrook has accurately predicted the popular vote for 5 elections in a row.

He currently claims Trump has an 87% chance of winning.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpeGihVfB3k

[frankenstein12]

Northbloke said:

Any links to the IBD polls AreOut? Past history and current standings?

If true I could be tempted to have a bet on Trump at 5/1. This is just so reminiscent of Brexit.

The total reliance on previously failed polls is insane. The News quotes them as if they are fact and the Dems are claiming victory already (Kinnock anyone? All right...).

The timing of the total onslaught on Trump is so transparent and flakey compared to the kid gloves treatment of Clinton. Neutrals can clearly see that and I bet as many are turned off by it as reject Trump because of it. Trump is after the anti-establishment vote and this behaviour just reinforces that.

Is anyone convinced by the (offensive) shrillness of Unrep? ...Thought not.

Still everything to play for I reckon.

I bet on brexit and won. I plan on betting on Trump to win. Don't go crazy of course nothing is certain but at 5-1 its worth ten or twenty quid.

If you really want to push the boat out bet on the markets instead. I am going to look into what can be done in that regard as if Trump wins markets will slide.

[Countdown]

AreOut said:

third project veritas video is up

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEQvsK5w-jY

evil empire is crumbling

Apologies as I got bored after a few minutes - would somebody mind summing up why that video means the evil empire is crumbling?

All I got was reepeated references to "ducks"... did she delete 33000 ducks?

[anonymous-user]

scherzkeks said:

Poli Sci professor Helmut Norpoth at SUNY Stonybrook has accurately predicted the popular vote for 5 elections in a row.

He currently claims Trump has an 87% chance of winning.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpeGihVfB3k

Let me guess. If Trump loses, it won't be because he lost and it won't be that Norpoth was wrong. It will be because the election must have been rigged. Because it didn't turn out the way Norpoth predicted.

[unrepentant]

turbobloke said:

As you pointed out, reminiscent of Brexit 2016 and Kinnock/Major 1992, but also of Miliband/Cameron 2015 and Thatcher's unexpected landslide in 1987.

What do the US pollsters do that makes them better?

I have little faith in the polls as I think they are overestimating Trump. I have a lot more confidence in the internal polling data of the Democratic campaign. They have a very formidable operation and their intelligence is excellent. In 2012 they weren't just confident that they would win in Ohio, they knew how districts would vote on a street by street basis. This campaign is the same and they already have the get out the vote operation underway. I was in a small field office yesterday and they have teams of volunteers scheduled all the way through Election Day.

Their ground game was light years ahead of Romney's in 2012 and Trump doesn't even have one. The fact that they (the Clinton / Kaine campaign) are moving resources into areas where they would not normally go in order to try and win down ballot races says that they have confidence that they are solid where they need to be. The fact that they feel able to divert funds to Arizona, Indiana, Texas, Missouri and Georgia tells you that Also. Michelle Obama, the most popular figure in American politics went to Arizona last week. Unheard of to send your most valuable surrogate into enemy territory this close to an election. They think they can win there. They've just added staff in Utah, a historically red state because they think they can win there. Meanwhile Trump has pulled out of Virginia, where he badly needs to win, to save money.

The campaign has about 1000 staff working directly plus tens of thousands of volunteers in field offices. They said Obama had close to 1 million people actively working in one capacity or another on polling day. I imagine it will be similar this time.

[anonymous-user]

turbobloke said:

As you pointed out, reminiscent of Brexit 2016 and Kinnock/Major 1992, but also of Miliband/Cameron 2015 and Thatcher's unexpected landslide in 1987.

What do the US pollsters do that makes them better?

Surely it will only be reminiscent if Trump wins.

Otherwise, it will be fair;y routine ... polls predict X will win, X wins.

[unrepentant]

Greg66 said:

scherzkeks said:

Poli Sci professor Helmut Norpoth at SUNY Stonybrook has accurately predicted the popular vote for 5 elections in a row.

He currently claims Trump has an 87% chance of winning.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpeGihVfB3k

Let me guess. If Trump loses, it won't be because he lost and it won't be that Norpoth was wrong. It will be because the election must have been rigged. Because it didn't turn out the way Norpoth predicted.

Norpoth is a pundit for Breitbart who admits he has placed a huge bet on Trump.

Nate Silver on the other hand suggests that Trump will lose so badly and depress republican turnout so much that it will spell down ballot "disaster" for the GOP.

But hey, if Norpoth isn't to be believed the gullible can still fall back on Dilbert or, failing that, Mystic Meg.

[amgmcqueen]

Nobody does, and nobody will know fk all about the result until the 8th. Polls are pointless as people do not want there vote to be judged upon.

The end.

[Northbloke]

As it happens, just watching a recording of Pointless and Emily Maitlis (of BBC Newsnight fame) is talking about interviewing Trump (many times).

She says "he's a charming chap" (the persona is all bluster) and despite being in his dressing room with him no mention of tongues or groping at all. She says he does spray his own hair though!

Not like a Beeboid to admit that. And she's a good looker so surely in the Danger zone if reports are to be believed!

[scherzkeks]

amgmcqueen said:

Nobody does, and nobody will know fk all about the result until the 8th. Polls are pointless as people do not want there vote to be judged upon.

The end.

It doesn't matter who wins anyways.

[scherzkeks]

unrepentant said:

Norpoth is a pundit for Breitbart who admits he has placed a huge bet on Trump.

Nate Silver on the other hand suggests that Trump will lose so badly and depress republican turnout so much that it will spell down ballot "disaster" for the GOP.

But hey, if Norpoth isn't to be believed the gullible can still fall back on Dilbert or, failing that, Mystic Meg.

Aw. Triggered again.

Nate Silver has been wrong on Trump throughout his entire rise to the top, BTW.

[Murph7355]

Greg66 said:

Let me guess. If Trump loses, it won't be because he lost and it won't be that Norpoth was wrong. It will be because the election must have been rigged. Because it didn't turn out the way Norpoth predicted.

This seems to be what happens in modern votes, eh Greg66. People not accepting the result of a vote and boo hooing about it

[mikebradford]

Regardless of which side you believe is right.
It does appear that Hilary is playing a dirty game, and at some point needs to be accountable
Latest Youtube release showing Hilary connection with underhand tactics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEQvsK5w-jY&fe...

Edit to note previously been posted

Edited by mikebradford on Monday 24th October 22:36

[anonymous-user]

mikebradford said:

Regardless of which side you believe is right.
It does appear that Hilary is playing a dirty game, and at some point needs to be accountable
Latest Youtube release showing Hilary connection with underhand tactics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEQvsK5w-jY&fe...

Edit to note previously been posted

Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 24th October 22:36

You might want to read a bit about the guy behind Project Veritas, especially if it involves videos.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_O%27Keefe

[rscott]

mikebradford said:

Regardless of which side you believe is right.
It does appear that Hilary is playing a dirty game, and at some point needs to be accountable
Latest Youtube release showing Hilary connection with underhand tactics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEQvsK5w-jY&fe...

Give Project Veritas past record, I wouldn't 100% trust those videos. They've been proven before to edit in rather a misleading fashion, to say the least. If they release the entire recordings for review that would help their credibility.