2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm starting having a problem if I'm going to support Trump, first my sister-in-law (a democrat) defends him and she would vote for him if he wins the GOP then on my second job I was talking with a Jewish guy who said the same shit (he's a democrat as well), both hate Hillary and they want a president that's not part of the system.
 
Chris Christie on Fox News....... Iran, Iran, Iran, Iran..................... blah.......... blah, blah............. Iran. Biggest threat to the world, Iran!................ Obama's biggest failing to this country is dealing with Iran.......They hang homosexuals Iran!!!!............... Yet I voted against them having equal rights.. .... Iran.... nobody who comes here illegally should be rewarded with the GREATEST POSESSION that anyone on the Globe can have.. an American Passport........... Iran......... Democrats brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.......... Iran.

What the feck is that guy smoking?

Unbelievable.
 
Polls may actually underestimate Trump's support, study finds

Donald Trump leads the GOP presidential field in polls of Republican voters nationally and in most early-voting states, but some surveys may actually be understating his support, a new study suggests.

The analysis, by Morning Consult, a polling and market research company, looked at an odd occurrence that has cropped up repeatedly this year: Trump generally has done better in online polls than in surveys done by phone.

The firm conducted an experiment aimed at understanding why that happens and which polls are more accurate -- online surveys that have tended to show Trump with support of nearly four-in-10 GOP voters or the telephone surveys that have typically shown him with the backing of one-third or fewer.

Their results suggest that the higher figure probably provides the more accurate measure. Some significant number of Trump supporters, especially those with college educations, are "less likely to say that they support him when they’re talking to a live human” than when they are in the “anonymous environment” of an online survey, said the firm's polling director, Kyle Dropp.

With Trump dominating political debates in both parties, gauging his level of support has become a crucial puzzle. The Morning Consult study provides one piece of the solution, although many other uncertainties remain.

Among the complicating factors is this: The gap between online and telephone surveys has narrowed significantly in surveys taken in the last few weeks. That could suggest that Republicans who were reluctant to admit to backing Trump in the past have become more willing to do so recently.

Another issue is that not only can polls change over time, but Trump's support in pre-election surveys might not fully translate into actual votes. He has not invested as heavily as some of his GOP rivals in building the kind of get-out-the-vote operation that candidates typically rely on, particularly in early voting states.


Some of the polls that show heavy support for Trump have also shown him doing better among self-identified independents who lean Republican than among regular GOP voters. At least some of those independents may not be in the habit of voting in primaries and caucuses, which could make a robust turnout operation even more necessary.

On the other hand, a candidate of Trump's level of celebrity may simply not need much of a get-out-the-vote operation. No one really knows.

Another complication is that most polls made public this year have been of people nationwide, not of voters in the states that actually hold the first primaries. In Iowa, which will kick off the election season with party caucuses on Feb. 1, Trump has slipped into second place, trailing Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas in the majority of recent polls.

In New Hampshire, which holds the first primary, on Feb. 9, Trump leads, but less dramatically than in national polls. In recent weeks, he has averaged a bit more than one-quarter of the vote there.

Still, the Morning Consult experiment sheds considerable light on an issue that has puzzled pollsters for months.

The firm polled 2,397 potential Republican voters earlier this month, randomly assigning them to one of three different methods -- a traditional telephone survey with live interviewers calling landlines and cellphones, an online survey and an interactive dialing technique that calls people by telephone and asks them to respond to recorded questions by hitting buttons on their phone.

By randomly assigning people to the three different approaches and running all at the same time, the researchers hoped to eliminate factors that might cause results to vary from one poll to another.

The experiment confirmed that "voters are about six points more likely to support Trump when they’re taking the poll online then when they’re talking to a live interviewer,” said Dropp.

The most telling part of the experiment, however, was that not all types of people responded the same way. Among blue-collar Republicans, who have formed the core of Trump's support, the polls were about the same regardless of method. But among college-educated Republicans, a significant difference appeared, with Trump scoring 9 points better in the online poll.

The most likely explanation for that education gap, Dropp and his colleagues believe, is a well-known problem known as social-desirability bias -- the tendency of people to not want to confess unpopular views to a pollster.

Blue-collar voters don't feel embarrassed about supporting Trump, who is very popular in their communities, the pollsters suggested. But many college-educated Republicans may hesitate to admit their attraction to Trump, the experiment indicates.

In a public setting such as the Iowa caucuses, where people identify their candidate preference in front of friends and neighbors, that same social-desirability bias may hold sway.

But in most primaries, where voters cast a secret ballot, the study's finding suggests that anonymous online surveys -- the ones that typically show Trump with a larger lead -- provide the more accurate measure of his backing.

"It’s our sense that a lot of polls are under-reporting Trump’s overall support," Dropp said.



http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-trump-polls-20151221-story.html
 
barros said:
I'm starting having a problem if I'm going to support Trump, first my sister-in-law (a democrat) defends him and she would vote for him if he wins the GOP then on my second job I was talking with a Jewish guy who said the same shit (he's a democrat as well), both hate Hillary and they want a president that's not part of the system.
Click to expand...

Hillary is completely bought out by big business and is as fake as they come. Nothing changes if she gets elected, granted she is marginally better than any GOP candidate, but not by much.

Bernie sanders is the only politician with integrity in the game at the moment.
 
The Law of Denis said:
Polls may actually underestimate Trump's support, study finds
Click to expand...

I could believe that just because of how the UK voted in our recent general election. America likes to pretend it's a modern, liberal, progressive country, but at the core it's no different to the UK. A strongly conservative country that secretly fears change and resents many changes they feel have been forced upon them. Right or wrong, that's how many feel and that's how the UK felt when it came to the election. The silent majority of America will determine this election, the same as the silent majority decided ours.

I just hope the American electorate is more liberal/progressive than the UK pretends to be at times. It will probably come down to how much they can actually believe Hillary and how much they fear Trump and his policies.
 
Last edited:
Trump has been very effective. Though I do not believe he means most of the nonsense he spouts, it is very dangerous to stir up such feelings in people. Such hatred will eventually lead to bloodshed.

I am beginning to think he can win. :nervous:
 
langster said:
I could believe that just because of how the UK voted in our recent general election. America likes to pretend it's a modern, liberal, progressive country, but at the core it's no different to the UK. A strongly conservative country that secretly fears change and resents many changes they feel have been forced upon them. Right or wrong, that's how many feel and that's how the UK felt when it came to the election. The silent majority of America will determine this election, the same as the silent majority decided ours.

I just hope the American electorate is more liberal/progressive than the UK pretends to be at times. It will probably come down to how much they can actually believe Hillary and how much they fear Trump and his policies.
Click to expand...

America is also more ideologically divided than the UK, and they have the Electoral College.

Trump may appeal to a lot of whites, but he's toast in the general with the way he's antagonizing just about everybody else. Barry won 2012 with just 34% of the white votes.

Edit: also seems to be losing it. The part about Merkel :lol:

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-debates-bathroom-217052
 
@langster You do realize the UK Conservative Party is economics aside...more to the left of the Democratic Party in the US?

I could easily imagine Obama as the head of the Tories (in terms of policy), yet you've all heard the accusations of extreme leftist and socialist thrown at him.

Western Europe is mostly a lot more progressive than we are in the US.
 
Neutral said:
@langster You do realize the UK Conservative Party is economics aside...more to the left of the Democratic Party in the US?

I could easily imagine Obama as the head of the Tories (in terms of policy), yet you've all heard the accusations of extreme leftist and socialist thrown at him.

Western Europe is mostly a lot more progressive than we are in the US.
Click to expand...

Yeah, sorry, I was a little drunk last night and talking bollocks. Luckily I didn't write the reply I had fallen asleep writing. That was pure shite!
 
There are metrics, after all, by which the post-2009 GOP appears to be a supremely successful political party. Recently, Rory Cooper, of the communications firm Purple Strategies, tallied a net gain to the Republicans of 69 seats in the House of Representatives, 13 seats in the Senate, 900-plus seats in state legislatures, and 12 governorships since Obama took office. With that kind of grip on state government, in particular, Republicans are well positioned to write election and voting rules that sustain their hold on the national legislature. The president may be able to grant formerly illegal immigrants the right to work, but he cannot grant them the right to vote. In this light, instead of revising Republican policies to stop future Barack Obamas and Hillary Clintons, maybe it’s necessary to revise only the party rules to stop future Donald Trumps from confronting party elites with their own unpopularity.

The inaugural issue ofThe Weekly Standard, the conservative magazine launched in 1995, depicted then–Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich swinging into action, a submachine gun blazing in his left hand, under the headline “Permanent Offense.” But that was then. Maybe the more natural condition of conservative parties is permanent defense—and where better to wage a long, grinding defensive campaign than in Congress and the statehouses? Maybe the presidency itself should be regarded as one of those things that is good to have but not a must-have, especially if obtaining it requires uncomfortable change.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...419118/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Click to expand...
 
The Law of Denis said:
Polls may actually underestimate Trump's support, study finds

Donald Trump leads the GOP presidential field in polls of Republican voters nationally and in most early-voting states, but some surveys may actually be understating his support, a new study suggests.

The analysis, by Morning Consult, a polling and market research company, looked at an odd occurrence that has cropped up repeatedly this year: Trump generally has done better in online polls than in surveys done by phone.

The firm conducted an experiment aimed at understanding why that happens and which polls are more accurate -- online surveys that have tended to show Trump with support of nearly four-in-10 GOP voters or the telephone surveys that have typically shown him with the backing of one-third or fewer.

Their results suggest that the higher figure probably provides the more accurate measure. Some significant number of Trump supporters, especially those with college educations, are "less likely to say that they support him when they’re talking to a live human” than when they are in the “anonymous environment” of an online survey, said the firm's polling director, Kyle Dropp.

With Trump dominating political debates in both parties, gauging his level of support has become a crucial puzzle. The Morning Consult study provides one piece of the solution, although many other uncertainties remain.

Among the complicating factors is this: The gap between online and telephone surveys has narrowed significantly in surveys taken in the last few weeks. That could suggest that Republicans who were reluctant to admit to backing Trump in the past have become more willing to do so recently.

Another issue is that not only can polls change over time, but Trump's support in pre-election surveys might not fully translate into actual votes. He has not invested as heavily as some of his GOP rivals in building the kind of get-out-the-vote operation that candidates typically rely on, particularly in early voting states.


Some of the polls that show heavy support for Trump have also shown him doing better among self-identified independents who lean Republican than among regular GOP voters. At least some of those independents may not be in the habit of voting in primaries and caucuses, which could make a robust turnout operation even more necessary.

On the other hand, a candidate of Trump's level of celebrity may simply not need much of a get-out-the-vote operation. No one really knows.

Another complication is that most polls made public this year have been of people nationwide, not of voters in the states that actually hold the first primaries. In Iowa, which will kick off the election season with party caucuses on Feb. 1, Trump has slipped into second place, trailing Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas in the majority of recent polls.

In New Hampshire, which holds the first primary, on Feb. 9, Trump leads, but less dramatically than in national polls. In recent weeks, he has averaged a bit more than one-quarter of the vote there.

Still, the Morning Consult experiment sheds considerable light on an issue that has puzzled pollsters for months.

The firm polled 2,397 potential Republican voters earlier this month, randomly assigning them to one of three different methods -- a traditional telephone survey with live interviewers calling landlines and cellphones, an online survey and an interactive dialing technique that calls people by telephone and asks them to respond to recorded questions by hitting buttons on their phone.

By randomly assigning people to the three different approaches and running all at the same time, the researchers hoped to eliminate factors that might cause results to vary from one poll to another.

The experiment confirmed that "voters are about six points more likely to support Trump when they’re taking the poll online then when they’re talking to a live interviewer,” said Dropp.

The most telling part of the experiment, however, was that not all types of people responded the same way. Among blue-collar Republicans, who have formed the core of Trump's support, the polls were about the same regardless of method. But among college-educated Republicans, a significant difference appeared, with Trump scoring 9 points better in the online poll.

The most likely explanation for that education gap, Dropp and his colleagues believe, is a well-known problem known as social-desirability bias -- the tendency of people to not want to confess unpopular views to a pollster.

Blue-collar voters don't feel embarrassed about supporting Trump, who is very popular in their communities, the pollsters suggested. But many college-educated Republicans may hesitate to admit their attraction to Trump, the experiment indicates.

In a public setting such as the Iowa caucuses, where people identify their candidate preference in front of friends and neighbors, that same social-desirability bias may hold sway.

But in most primaries, where voters cast a secret ballot, the study's finding suggests that anonymous online surveys -- the ones that typically show Trump with a larger lead -- provide the more accurate measure of his backing.

"It’s our sense that a lot of polls are under-reporting Trump’s overall support," Dropp said.



http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-trump-polls-20151221-story.html
Click to expand...

Shy Trumpies. Now there's a frightening thought. If it's true that a significant number of ostensibly reasonable American actually do support the ideas behind Trump's rhetoric - the hate, the bigotry, the Islamophobia, the thuggishness - then that's a serious problem whether or not he wins.

I still have faith in Silver, though. :wenger: Though, can't help but notice that the probability he assigns Trump of winning the party nomination has quietly inflated from like 2% at the start to something like 23% now.
 
naturalized said:
Shy Trumpies. Now there's a frightening thought. If it's true that a significant number of ostensibly reasonable American actually do support the ideas behind Trump's rhetoric - the hate, the bigotry, the Islamophobia, the thuggishness - then that's a serious problem whether or not he wins.

I still have faith in Silver, though. :wenger: Though, can't help but notice that the probability he assigns Trump of winning the party nomination has quietly inflated from like 2% at the start to something like 23% now.
Click to expand...
You missed his sexism.
Pretty disgusting words yesterday about Hilary doing disgusting things (going to the bathroom during a debate break) and being schlonged by Obama in 2008. Then there was his retweet: "If Hillary Clinton can't satisfy her husband what makes her think she can satisfy America?"
 
senorgregster said:
You missed his sexism.
Pretty disgusting words yesterday about Hilary doing disgusting things (going to the bathroom during a debate break) and being schlonged by Obama in 2008. Then there was his retweet: "If Hillary Clinton can't satisfy her husband what makes her think she can satisfy America?"
Click to expand...

Yeah, I saw that. He's really doubling down that the Idiocracy vote alone is going to be enough to see him through, doesn't even need moderately self-respecting women it seems.
 
Fair game or not?

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/pol...draising-plea-fight-cartoon-article-1.2474943

JPUY7TD.jpg



Cruz's doggies version...

qpRyxlR.jpg
 
If it wasn't fair game before, Cruz is definitely making it so by first using his daughters in a political ad to attack Hillary, then fundraising off the cartoon about his daughters as monkeys, then again going after Hillary with the attack dogs cartoon.
 
Raoul said:
If it wasn't fair game before, Cruz is definitely making it so by first using his daughters in a political ad to attack Hillary, then fundraising off the cartoon about his daughters as monkeys, then again going after Hillary with the attack dogs cartoon.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's fair game. The McCain-Bush episode was ugly, so is this. Never understand the practice of parading your family in front of the public in politics, especially American politics. Spouse, parents, sure, why not? But children should be spared the limelights.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
I don't think it's fair game. The McCain-Bush episode was ugly, so is this. Never understand the practice of parading your family in front of the public in politics, especially American politics. Spouse, parents, sure, why not? But children should be spared the limelights.
Click to expand...

They should, but it has to be said that Cruz preemptively and recklessly used his own kids in an ad to attack Hillary Clinton, which was basically a shameful use of his own young daughters to score cheap political points.

 
Not denying any of that. Still, the cartoonist could have criticised Cruz for it without dragging the girls into it. Imagine your children being drawn as monkeys on a national newspaper.
 
Raoul said:
They should, but it has to be said that Cruz preemptively and recklessly used his own kids in an ad to attack Hillary Clinton, which was basically a shameful use of his own young daughters to score cheap political points.

Click to expand...


Ted Cruz led the government shutdown in 2013 And it cost the USA over 20 billion in lost revenues. He led the shutdown for no reason other than to score political points. He is a very smart man (he went to Harvard and was a debating champion!) with zero moral compass.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
Not denying any of that. Still, the cartoonist could have criticised Cruz for it without dragging the girls into it. Imagine your children being drawn as monkeys on a national newspaper.
Click to expand...


Cruz likes this, it gives him plenty ammo to go back his supporters and complain about the lying liberal media and how unfair they are to Republicans.

I am sure he prioritizes his political career over the well being of his family.
 
ravi2 said:
Cruz likes this, it gives him plenty ammo to go back his supporters and complain about the lying liberal media and how unfair they are to Republicans.

I am sure he prioritizes his political career over the well being of his family.
Click to expand...

I know all of that. As a matter of fact, he's already fundraising off this incident. Still, the cartoonist is out of line here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.