But the polls bro...so scientific....
-
I love how HRC supporters crucified Nate Silver for saying Trump had a 30% chance
Looking at you huffpost
I love how HRC supporters crucified Nate Silver for saying Trump had a 30% chance
Looking at you huffpost
Not surprising....
Most interesting thing about the polls? That HRC under performed even Trump's internal polling... in other words his campaign went into the evening believing they were likely going to lose.
Most of the polling percentages were close. Where the polls went off rails were in their "likely voters" predictions. Where Trump came much closer to Romney than HRC did Obama in 2012.
Game set match...
-
Well GA was not a toss up. Trump won Ohio by a wide margin. NC too. We all knew TX wasn't a toss up.
-
Not sure what your definition of "toss up" is... or what your post was in response to for that matter.
NC was separated by 177,000 votes out of 4.5mm. Georgia 130,000 out of 4mm. Those are close, competitive results which is my definition of toss up.
Ohio was widely predicted for Trump albeit not by the margin he rolled up.
-
It doesn't matter Woody . Seems to me the consensus of every pore had Donald Trump losing by 4.The real America polls or the liberal cuck polls?
The last few days Democrats have been on MSNBC taking an early Victory lap.
WSS
It doesn't matter Woody . Seems to me the consensus of every pore had Donald Trump losing by 4.
The last few days Democrats have been on MSNBC taking an early Victory lap.
WSS
This seems like an anomaly. if anything, a chance to rework the formula
Though many will take it as validation of their anti science / anti academic beliefs.
"they say Clinton would win, why should I believe them about the climate?"
Ja.brill Peppers - Cleveland Brown OldBrownsFan, on 02 Jun 2017 - 5:09PM said: "No you are not the work of the devil but you are deceived by the devil." Who's got it better than us? Nooooobody! -
It doesn't matter Woody . Seems to me the consensus of every pore had Donald Trump losing by 4.
The last few days Democrats have been on MSNBC taking an early Victory lap.
WSS
This seems like an anomaly. if anything, a chance to rework the formula
Though many will take it as validation of their anti science / anti academic beliefs.
"they say Clinton would win, why should I believe them about the climate?"
This seems like an anomaly. if anything, a chance to rework the formula
Though many will take it as validation of their anti science / anti academic beliefs.
"they say Clinton would win, why should I believe them about the climate?"
As I was partly paying attention to the news coverage today on MSNBC I heard a black woman panelis bemoan the fact that and this is almost a direct quote, as journalists I feel we didn't do enough. As journalist? Please.
WSS
-
One last poll comment...
There was one in 538's, national poll, data base that "got it right". The final Marist poll, an "A" rated poll put HRC up by one in their raw data, but their adjusted number was Trump +1.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/national-polls/
A click on the embedded Marist link takes you to the article associated with the poll's release. It opens with:
A majority of voters believe Hillary Clinton has done something illegal, according to a new McClatchy-Marist Poll days before the presidential election.
A total of 83 percent of likely voters believe that Clinton did something wrong – 51 percent saying she did something illegal and 32 percent saying she something unethical but not illegal. Just 14 percent said she’s done nothing wrong.
By comparison, 79 percent think Donald Trump did something wrong, though not nearly as many think he did something illegal. Just 26 percent think he’s done something illegal, while 53 percent think he’s dome something unethical but not illegal. Just 17 percent think he’s done nothing wrong.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article112635048.html
I'm sure the election will be dissected 20 ways to Sunday over the coming weeks, but at a glance this could be as close to a rationale I've heard.
The late Comey letter impact? I'll leave that for others to parse... but if you dig into Marist's preceding Sept. poll (see page 14) "Soft Dems" were far more favorable towards HRC than Soft Repubs were toward Trump.
-
Plus gee whiz thanks for bringing up global warming again.
I think all it proves is that for all their bragging and puffery They Don't Know Jack Schitt about polling data.
WSS
-
538 predicted everything correctly last year. So clearly they know something.
-
By the way tour out of hundreds of prognosticators a few of them will get the NFL scores pretty close.
And they still call it gambling.
WSS
-
I know people that predicted 330 electoral votes for Hillary
Our musical works to date http://www.arielsatticmusic.com/ -
It doesn't matter Woody . Seems to me the consensus of every pore had Donald Trump losing by 4.
The last few days Democrats have been on MSNBC taking an early Victory lap.
WSS
This seems like an anomaly. if anything, a chance to rework the formula
Though many will take it as validation of their anti science / anti academic beliefs.
"they say Clinton would win, why should I believe them about the climate?"
This seems like an anomaly. if anything, a chance to rework the formula
Though many will take it as validation of their anti science / anti academic beliefs.
"they say Clinton would win, why should I believe them about the climate?"
Scary dark people......
-
I know people that predicted 330 electoral votes for Hillary
LA Times predicted 350+ yesterday morning, but they said Ohio might be close
-
The real America polls or the liberal cuck polls?
Ha- they didn't do enough polling in Hicksville USA, Farmer City, Illinois, or Mount Olive, North Carolina. & don't forget without that real America, you'd need your own victory garden out back, as well as a few chickens to survive.
I was jumping back and forth between Fox and the Communist News Network, and it was almost comical (at least if you were pulling for Trump). It was like- how can this be happening? As state after state went red. They had all but given HRC the presidency as a done deal last week. Waited for 30-60 minutes to call a state for Trump after every other news outlet had. Around what was it 2:30 or so? She's not giving up- there's still a chance. Then- oh, HRC just called Trump to concede- our bad.
-
LA Times predicted 350+ yesterday morning, but they said Ohio might be close
Well she won the popular vote, and there were a lot of very tight states. It doesn't take a ton of votes to swing a ton of electoral college votes, in the grand scheme of things.
-
Well she won the popular vote, and there were a lot of very tight states. It doesn't take a ton of votes to swing a ton of electoral college votes, in the grand scheme of things.
Granted- but it's not the first time someone has won the popular vote, and lost the election. I'm sure the crybabies are going to push for getting rid of the electoral college after this one.
I'd be in favor of breaking up California's 55 votes. Hillary won Cali and NY- those 2 states put you 31% on your way to 270.
-
Well she won the popular vote, and there were a lot of very tight states. It doesn't take a ton of votes to swing a ton of electoral college votes, in the grand scheme of things.
Granted- but it's not the first time someone has won the popular vote, and lost the election. I'm sure the crybabies are going to push for getting rid of the electoral college after this one.
I'd be in favor of breaking up California's 55 votes. Hillary won Cali and NY- those 2 states put you 31% on your way to 270.
Granted- but it's not the first time someone has won the popular vote, and lost the election. I'm sure the crybabies are going to push for getting rid of the electoral college after this one.
Even though they've been saying the Democrats have a ridiculous advantage with the electoral map due to shifting demographics.
Without the electoral college honestly California might as well be the only state that votes for the president - I'm up for reform but there has to be some kind of system to represent the rest of America too (like the electoral college)
Unlike 2000 though, Trump won the electoral college in a landslide.
-
Well she won the popular vote, and there were a lot of very tight states. It doesn't take a ton of votes to swing a ton of electoral college votes, in the grand scheme of things.
Granted- but it's not the first time someone has won the popular vote, and lost the election. I'm sure the crybabies are going to push for getting rid of the electoral college after this one.
I'd be in favor of breaking up California's 55 votes. Hillary won Cali and NY- those 2 states put you 31% on your way to 270.
Granted- but it's not the first time someone has won the popular vote, and lost the election. I'm sure the crybabies are going to push for getting rid of the electoral college after this one.
I'd be in favor of breaking up California's 55 votes. Hillary won Cali and NY- those 2 states put you 31% on your way to 270.
Well why should a vote in a big city essentially count for less?
It is also funny that the founding fathers created the electoral college to basically prevent this exact type of thing from happening.
-
wrong.
if it was by popular vote alone - the states with comparatively small populations
would be insignificant in every presidential election. Why should THEIR vote
be counted for nothing?
http://dailysignal.com/2016/11/07/why-the-founders-created-the-electoral-college/
-
wrong.
if it was by popular vote alone - the states with comparatively small populations
would be insignificant in every presidential election. Why should THEIR vote
be counted for nothing?
http://dailysignal.com/2016/11/07/why-the-founders-created-the-electoral-college/
wrong.
if it was by popular vote alone - the states with comparatively small populations would be insignificant in every presidential election. Why should THEIR vote
be counted for nothing?
http://dailysignal.com/2016/11/07/why-the-founders-created-the-electoral-college/
I know there's a new electoral college thread, but...
Wrong question, cal. The correct one is why should the smallest states' citizens' votes count disproportionately more than the largest's?
Your reference is very selective in its citations of Hamilton's intent and ignores his actions when he saw the Electoral College being bastardized, but one thing it does do is say your position is incorrect:
The system empowers states, especially smaller ones, because it incentivizes presidential candidates to appeal to places that may be far away from population centers.
But as much as I love it when your own references support the opposite of your posts, I'll get into that in the new thread... so there's no reason for you to tell me how I'm wrong here.
Even though they've been saying the Democrats have a ridiculous advantage with the electoral map due to shifting demographics.
Without the electoral college honestly California might as well be the only state that votes for the president - I'm up for reform but there has to be some kind of system to represent the rest of America too (like the electoral college)
Unlike 2000 though, Trump won the electoral college in a landslide.
Ditto on the "see you in the other thread", bb... including some information you apparently may lack for a change.
-
The polls in the states trump won were off by 7 points when compared to the actual results (on average)
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login