Total Posts:39|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Trump in free fall

TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2016 5:23:53 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
Now down nearly 6 points to Hillary in RCP average. While Hillary is only marginally better from her May performance against Trump (less than 1 percentage point), Trump has dropped from 43.4% to 38.3% in just the last month. (http://www.realclearpolitics.com...)
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2016 6:31:44 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/17/2016 5:23:53 PM, TN05 wrote:


Now down nearly 6 points to Hillary in RCP average. While Hillary is only marginally better from her May performance against Trump (less than 1 percentage point), Trump has dropped from 43.4% to 38.3% in just the last month. (http://www.realclearpolitics.com...)

In the interests of looking at the raw data; I wanted to take a look at a few things.

1.) These are actually national polls, and due to margin of error when applying to the country as a whole, they don't mean a massive amount sometimes, although for the sake of example and to gauge overall approval, it can be an indicator.

2.) New pollsters are coming in; it makes it very difficult to compare. For example, if a new pollster has a particular bias, one way or another, being included in the RCP average will undoubtedly skew the result. This may take a while to even out.

3.) Of the new polls; Bloomberg, SurveryUSA and Ipsos all have very few recent polls. Only bloomberg has a poll more than a month old and it shows trumps support about the same (36 v 37%), and also showed Hilary losing 5% (54-49) points, which doesn't mean too much as could well be a statistical blip or margin of error.

4.) Of the two pollsters in the current RCP average; only two have had significant previous polling to compare it to; Rasmussen and Fox news; ( 2 out of I believe 3 pollsters that have ever produced a poll showing trump ahead of Clinton)

Rasmussen shows trump with ~39% support, unchanged since may (where it went all the way up to a high of 42%), it is unclear whether that specific bump was because of the nomination (it showed trump with +2 prior to being the nominee), but either way, it's settling down at 39%.

Fox has kinda been all over the place; with trump polling (almost randomly) between 47% and 39%, with Hilary polling (again, almost randomly) between 40% and 49%

5.) In reality, we don't know how biased individual polls are; given the accuracy of the polls for the primaries (85% I believe accurately called the winners), but it's relatively fair to say that Hilary is likely ahead; but comparing the same pollsters results makes it easier to see any movement; what is fairly clear is that hillary was way ahead until the latter quarter of last year, and Donald trump gained ground, there may have been a minimal bump for trump, but it's difficult to ascertain given how few polls there are been.

6.) Using past accuracy, ABC news, Marist, Survey USA; followed by fox, NBC, quinnipiac and ipsos all get fairly good grades, Fox has the higher error, with 6.4% SAE and only 65% of races called correctly, whereas survey USA is pretty low at 4.6% SAE and 90% called correctly; though they do show a slight D bias. Rasmussen, fairs much worse.

Given these and waiting for other new polls, it's probably more likely that Hilary is about 5-6% up on Trump; and has been all this year without a significant movement. What you're seeing could be true, but could just be an artifact of polling, we won't know until we get a few more.
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,072
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2016 8:19:18 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
It's 6% now? That's great news.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2016 8:36:34 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/17/2016 5:23:53 PM, TN05 wrote:


Now down nearly 6 points to Hillary in RCP average. While Hillary is only marginally better from her May performance against Trump (less than 1 percentage point), Trump has dropped from 43.4% to 38.3% in just the last month. (http://www.realclearpolitics.com...)

Its too soon, or just right, I don't know.

Normal elections, this would be something to overcome, but in this one, it may be representative of sanity. The guy is going to loose big, my question is the margin. How many complete fools are willing to buy snake oil.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,269
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2016 8:42:53 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/17/2016 8:36:34 PM, TBR wrote:
At 6/17/2016 5:23:53 PM, TN05 wrote:


Now down nearly 6 points to Hillary in RCP average. While Hillary is only marginally better from her May performance against Trump (less than 1 percentage point), Trump has dropped from 43.4% to 38.3% in just the last month. (http://www.realclearpolitics.com...)

Its too soon, or just right, I don't know.

Normal elections, this would be something to overcome, but in this one, it may be representative of sanity. The guy is going to loose big, my question is the margin. How many complete fools are willing to buy snake oil.

But snake oil is tasty, like McDonalds.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2016 8:48:34 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/17/2016 8:42:53 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 6/17/2016 8:36:34 PM, TBR wrote:
At 6/17/2016 5:23:53 PM, TN05 wrote:


Now down nearly 6 points to Hillary in RCP average. While Hillary is only marginally better from her May performance against Trump (less than 1 percentage point), Trump has dropped from 43.4% to 38.3% in just the last month. (http://www.realclearpolitics.com...)

Its too soon, or just right, I don't know.

Normal elections, this would be something to overcome, but in this one, it may be representative of sanity. The guy is going to loose big, my question is the margin. How many complete fools are willing to buy snake oil.

But snake oil is tasty, like McDonalds.

I like neither.

Seriously - just who the hell eats McDonalds?
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,269
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2016 9:07:01 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/17/2016 8:48:34 PM, TBR wrote:
At 6/17/2016 8:42:53 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 6/17/2016 8:36:34 PM, TBR wrote:
At 6/17/2016 5:23:53 PM, TN05 wrote:


Now down nearly 6 points to Hillary in RCP average. While Hillary is only marginally better from her May performance against Trump (less than 1 percentage point), Trump has dropped from 43.4% to 38.3% in just the last month. (http://www.realclearpolitics.com...)

Its too soon, or just right, I don't know.

Normal elections, this would be something to overcome, but in this one, it may be representative of sanity. The guy is going to loose big, my question is the margin. How many complete fools are willing to buy snake oil.

But snake oil is tasty, like McDonalds.

I like neither.

Seriously - just who the hell eats McDonalds?

Millions...it's HUUUGE
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2016 9:50:35 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/17/2016 9:07:01 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 6/17/2016 8:48:34 PM, TBR wrote:
At 6/17/2016 8:42:53 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 6/17/2016 8:36:34 PM, TBR wrote:
At 6/17/2016 5:23:53 PM, TN05 wrote:


Now down nearly 6 points to Hillary in RCP average. While Hillary is only marginally better from her May performance against Trump (less than 1 percentage point), Trump has dropped from 43.4% to 38.3% in just the last month. (http://www.realclearpolitics.com...)

Its too soon, or just right, I don't know.

Normal elections, this would be something to overcome, but in this one, it may be representative of sanity. The guy is going to loose big, my question is the margin. How many complete fools are willing to buy snake oil.

But snake oil is tasty, like McDonalds.

I like neither.

Seriously - just who the hell eats McDonalds?

Millions...it's HUUUGE

Yea, I know. It just is always a surprise to me. It sucks so hard.

My son, celebrating his 6th birthday today, has never had McDonalds. I don't know how long that will last, but I hope a lifetime.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,269
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2016 9:51:15 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/17/2016 9:50:35 PM, TBR wrote:
At 6/17/2016 9:07:01 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 6/17/2016 8:48:34 PM, TBR wrote:
At 6/17/2016 8:42:53 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 6/17/2016 8:36:34 PM, TBR wrote:
At 6/17/2016 5:23:53 PM, TN05 wrote:


Now down nearly 6 points to Hillary in RCP average. While Hillary is only marginally better from her May performance against Trump (less than 1 percentage point), Trump has dropped from 43.4% to 38.3% in just the last month. (http://www.realclearpolitics.com...)

Its too soon, or just right, I don't know.

Normal elections, this would be something to overcome, but in this one, it may be representative of sanity. The guy is going to loose big, my question is the margin. How many complete fools are willing to buy snake oil.

But snake oil is tasty, like McDonalds.

I like neither.

Seriously - just who the hell eats McDonalds?

Millions...it's HUUUGE

Yea, I know. It just is always a surprise to me. It sucks so hard.

My son, celebrating his 6th birthday today, has never had McDonalds. I don't know how long that will last, but I hope a lifetime.

he will devour it like the Carlin list of banned words.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2016 9:54:11 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/17/2016 9:51:15 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 6/17/2016 9:50:35 PM, TBR wrote:
At 6/17/2016 9:07:01 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 6/17/2016 8:48:34 PM, TBR wrote:
At 6/17/2016 8:42:53 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 6/17/2016 8:36:34 PM, TBR wrote:
At 6/17/2016 5:23:53 PM, TN05 wrote:


Now down nearly 6 points to Hillary in RCP average. While Hillary is only marginally better from her May performance against Trump (less than 1 percentage point), Trump has dropped from 43.4% to 38.3% in just the last month. (http://www.realclearpolitics.com...)

Its too soon, or just right, I don't know.

Normal elections, this would be something to overcome, but in this one, it may be representative of sanity. The guy is going to loose big, my question is the margin. How many complete fools are willing to buy snake oil.

But snake oil is tasty, like McDonalds.

I like neither.

Seriously - just who the hell eats McDonalds?

Millions...it's HUUUGE

Yea, I know. It just is always a surprise to me. It sucks so hard.

My son, celebrating his 6th birthday today, has never had McDonalds. I don't know how long that will last, but I hope a lifetime.

he will devour it like the Carlin list of banned words.

Yea, I know it is possible or probable. Look. The ONLY fat people I know are people who eat this sh1t. My best friend growing up is now somewhere short of round. He has never been an attractive guy, but.... He eats crap every day for lunch, and dinner at least 2 days a week. It is a plague on Americans.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2016 9:57:55 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
My wife makes him Panko breaded "chicken nugetts". She, well, she is very selective. Our grocery bill has been ~ 1k/month for as long as I can recall (or care to look). Free range, organic, blah blah. But the truth is, eating "right" is very simple. I don't work at my diet at all. I eat butter. I EAT BUTTER - like hollandaise, like every place you can stuff butter, I eat it. I don't weigh a ton because I don't eat too much, and what I do eat is quality. Simple when it comes down to it.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,269
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2016 10:00:48 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/17/2016 9:57:55 PM, TBR wrote:
My wife makes him Panko breaded "chicken nugetts". She, well, she is very selective. Our grocery bill has been ~ 1k/month for as long as I can recall (or care to look). Free range, organic, blah blah. But the truth is, eating "right" is very simple. I don't work at my diet at all. I eat butter. I EAT BUTTER - like hollandaise, like every place you can stuff butter, I eat it. I don't weigh a ton because I don't eat too much, and what I do eat is quality. Simple when it comes down to it.

Butter is better for you than sugar or bread, but not as good as fake butter.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2016 10:08:04 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/17/2016 10:00:48 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 6/17/2016 9:57:55 PM, TBR wrote:
My wife makes him Panko breaded "chicken nugetts". She, well, she is very selective. Our grocery bill has been ~ 1k/month for as long as I can recall (or care to look). Free range, organic, blah blah. But the truth is, eating "right" is very simple. I don't work at my diet at all. I eat butter. I EAT BUTTER - like hollandaise, like every place you can stuff butter, I eat it. I don't weigh a ton because I don't eat too much, and what I do eat is quality. Simple when it comes down to it.

Butter is better for you than sugar or bread, but not as good as fake butter.

Fake butter is terrible. I couldn't care less if it gave me super-powers, I am not eating that sh1t.
PetersSmith
Posts: 5,840
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2016 10:19:44 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/17/2016 5:23:53 PM, TN05 wrote:
https://www.youtube.com...

I agree. Trump is on a free fall to the White House.
Empress of DDO (also Poll and Forum "Maintenance" Moderator)

"The two most important days in your life is the day you were born, and the day you find out why."
~Mark Twain

"Wow"
-Doge

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet just because there's a picture with a quote next to it."
~Abraham Lincoln

Guide to the Polls Section: http://www.debate.org...
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2016 10:39:29 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/17/2016 10:19:44 PM, PetersSmith wrote:
At 6/17/2016 5:23:53 PM, TN05 wrote:
https://www.youtube.com...

I agree. Trump is on a free fall to the White House.

Based on?

While I won't say every person on the left are bastions of rationality and data, it seems the majority of trump supporters basically pull prospects and idea's about how he's doing out of their a**. You know, much like their candidate does.

In reality, while much can indeed change between then and now; is things are not looking very good for Trump.

If you look at the key factors necessary in gauging there race, rather than speculative punditry that this or that will happen and magically save the day based on nothing more than simple emotional investment, trump is unlikely to win.
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/17/2016 11:47:52 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/17/2016 9:57:55 PM, TBR wrote:
My wife makes him Panko breaded "chicken nugetts". She, well, she is very selective. Our grocery bill has been ~ 1k/month for as long as I can recall (or care to look). Free range, organic, blah blah. But the truth is, eating "right" is very simple. I don't work at my diet at all. I eat butter. I EAT BUTTER - like hollandaise, like every place you can stuff butter, I eat it. I don't weigh a ton because I don't eat too much, and what I do eat is quality. Simple when it comes down to it.

Fats help to fill you up to prevent over eating.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
ofmega
Posts: 36
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/18/2016 1:12:52 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
I am not surprised Trump's numbers are down. Being opposed to being politically correct seems to have gotten a lot of people angry, particularly in the liberal controlled news business. The news readers seem to think Trump will be worse then G.W. Bush.
There is also this theory that Trump is a bigot, and a bigot can't be president. The case for Trump being a bigot is based on his theoretical hatred of Mexicans and Muslims.
The evidence for his being a bigot seems to be that he is in favor of enforcing the law that prohibits allowing a foreigner from living and working in the U.S. if he does not have a visa, and for asking for a temporary ban on letting Muslims from Muslim countries in. Can you people think of more evidence to prove he is a bigot?
I can see why the liberals hate him, but they wont be voting for him anyway. Among non-liberals bigotry is not such a big deal, and its fun to watch someone breaking the unwritten laws of political correctness.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/18/2016 2:19:03 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
The evidence for his being a bigot seems to be that he is in favor of enforcing the law that prohibits allowing a foreigner from living and working in the U.S. if he does not have a visa, and for asking for a temporary ban on letting Muslims from Muslim countries in. Can you people think of more evidence to prove he is a bigot?

No. Do you need more? Well, there is the "Mexicans are rapists" bit, but why pile on?

I can see why the liberals hate him, but they wont be voting for him anyway. Among non-liberals bigotry is not such a big deal, and its fun to watch someone breaking the unwritten laws of political correctness.

Right. That is why he is sporting 70% disapprove numbers. The guy will go down in an epic way, that is news worthy.
ofmega
Posts: 36
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/18/2016 2:27:53 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
Did Trump actually say "Mexican's are Rapists" ? I thought he was talking about a few Mexicans who committed rape after they swam the Rio Grande, not every Mexican.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/18/2016 2:39:10 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/18/2016 2:27:53 AM, ofmega wrote:
Did Trump actually say "Mexican's are Rapists" ? I thought he was talking about a few Mexicans who committed rape after they swam the Rio Grande, not every Mexican.

Lol, what is this, sanity and an attention to context? Get out of here, they aren't interested in that!
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
bsh1
Posts: 27,503
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/18/2016 2:42:07 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
Trump is definitely not having a good month.

http://www.debate.org...
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,269
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/18/2016 2:42:09 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/18/2016 2:27:53 AM, ofmega wrote:
Did Trump actually say "Mexican's are Rapists" ? I thought he was talking about a few Mexicans who committed rape after they swam the Rio Grande, not every Mexican.

It's they're rapists, not their rapists. get it right, or go home.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/18/2016 3:26:59 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/18/2016 2:27:53 AM, ofmega wrote:
Did Trump actually say "Mexican's are Rapists" ? I thought he was talking about a few Mexicans who committed rape after they swam the Rio Grande, not every Mexican.

Yea. Caveat expressed,

Look. Trump doesn't have a have a chance in hell in winning. You guys will be kicks and giggles for a few months till the election, but you have to know, you are backing a looser.
Lsumichiganfan
Posts: 267
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/18/2016 3:08:17 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/17/2016 6:31:44 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 6/17/2016 5:23:53 PM, TN05 wrote:


Now down nearly 6 points to Hillary in RCP average. While Hillary is only marginally better from her May performance against Trump (less than 1 percentage point), Trump has dropped from 43.4% to 38.3% in just the last month. (http://www.realclearpolitics.com...)

In the interests of looking at the raw data; I wanted to take a look at a few things.

1.) These are actually national polls, and due to margin of error when applying to the country as a whole, they don't mean a massive amount sometimes, although for the sake of example and to gauge overall approval, it can be an indicator.

2.) New pollsters are coming in; it makes it very difficult to compare. For example, if a new pollster has a particular bias, one way or another, being included in the RCP average will undoubtedly skew the result. This may take a while to even out.

3.) Of the new polls; Bloomberg, SurveryUSA and Ipsos all have very few recent polls. Only bloomberg has a poll more than a month old and it shows trumps support about the same (36 v 37%), and also showed Hilary losing 5% (54-49) points, which doesn't mean too much as could well be a statistical blip or margin of error.

4.) Of the two pollsters in the current RCP average; only two have had significant previous polling to compare it to; Rasmussen and Fox news; ( 2 out of I believe 3 pollsters that have ever produced a poll showing trump ahead of Clinton)

Rasmussen shows trump with ~39% support, unchanged since may (where it went all the way up to a high of 42%), it is unclear whether that specific bump was because of the nomination (it showed trump with +2 prior to being the nominee), but either way, it's settling down at 39%.

Fox has kinda been all over the place; with trump polling (almost randomly) between 47% and 39%, with Hilary polling (again, almost randomly) between 40% and 49%


5.) In reality, we don't know how biased individual polls are; given the accuracy of the polls for the primaries (85% I believe accurately called the winners), but it's relatively fair to say that Hilary is likely ahead; but comparing the same pollsters results makes it easier to see any movement; what is fairly clear is that hillary was way ahead until the latter quarter of last year, and Donald trump gained ground, there may have been a minimal bump for trump, but it's difficult to ascertain given how few polls there are been.

6.) Using past accuracy, ABC news, Marist, Survey USA; followed by fox, NBC, quinnipiac and ipsos all get fairly good grades, Fox has the higher error, with 6.4% SAE and only 65% of races called correctly, whereas survey USA is pretty low at 4.6% SAE and 90% called correctly; though they do show a slight D bias. Rasmussen, fairs much worse.

Given these and waiting for other new polls, it's probably more likely that Hilary is about 5-6% up on Trump; and has been all this year without a significant movement. What you're seeing could be true, but could just be an artifact of polling, we won't know until we get a few more.

Actually a new poll out has Hillary up by 15 percentage points.
Please vote on this debate: http://www.debate.org...
"You have displayed the political understanding of a tortoise thus far in this election" -Harder
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/18/2016 3:14:53 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/18/2016 2:39:10 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 6/18/2016 2:27:53 AM, ofmega wrote:
Did Trump actually say "Mexican's are Rapists" ? I thought he was talking about a few Mexicans who committed rape after they swam the Rio Grande, not every Mexican.

Lol, what is this, sanity and an attention to context? Get out of here, they aren't interested in that!

Some? Is that what he said? I don't think so. Should we check the quote? No.... We know what he said. The only part where "some" had anything to do with it when he conceded that "some might be good people".
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/18/2016 4:05:39 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/18/2016 3:08:17 PM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
At 6/17/2016 6:31:44 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 6/17/2016 5:23:53 PM, TN05 wrote:


Now down nearly 6 points to Hillary in RCP average. While Hillary is only marginally better from her May performance against Trump (less than 1 percentage point), Trump has dropped from 43.4% to 38.3% in just the last month. (http://www.realclearpolitics.com...)

In the interests of looking at the raw data; I wanted to take a look at a few things.

1.) These are actually national polls, and due to margin of error when applying to the country as a whole, they don't mean a massive amount sometimes, although for the sake of example and to gauge overall approval, it can be an indicator.

2.) New pollsters are coming in; it makes it very difficult to compare. For example, if a new pollster has a particular bias, one way or another, being included in the RCP average will undoubtedly skew the result. This may take a while to even out.

3.) Of the new polls; Bloomberg, SurveryUSA and Ipsos all have very few recent polls. Only bloomberg has a poll more than a month old and it shows trumps support about the same (36 v 37%), and also showed Hilary losing 5% (54-49) points, which doesn't mean too much as could well be a statistical blip or margin of error.

4.) Of the two pollsters in the current RCP average; only two have had significant previous polling to compare it to; Rasmussen and Fox news; ( 2 out of I believe 3 pollsters that have ever produced a poll showing trump ahead of Clinton)

Rasmussen shows trump with ~39% support, unchanged since may (where it went all the way up to a high of 42%), it is unclear whether that specific bump was because of the nomination (it showed trump with +2 prior to being the nominee), but either way, it's settling down at 39%.

Fox has kinda been all over the place; with trump polling (almost randomly) between 47% and 39%, with Hilary polling (again, almost randomly) between 40% and 49%


5.) In reality, we don't know how biased individual polls are; given the accuracy of the polls for the primaries (85% I believe accurately called the winners), but it's relatively fair to say that Hilary is likely ahead; but comparing the same pollsters results makes it easier to see any movement; what is fairly clear is that hillary was way ahead until the latter quarter of last year, and Donald trump gained ground, there may have been a minimal bump for trump, but it's difficult to ascertain given how few polls there are been.

6.) Using past accuracy, ABC news, Marist, Survey USA; followed by fox, NBC, quinnipiac and ipsos all get fairly good grades, Fox has the higher error, with 6.4% SAE and only 65% of races called correctly, whereas survey USA is pretty low at 4.6% SAE and 90% called correctly; though they do show a slight D bias. Rasmussen, fairs much worse.

Given these and waiting for other new polls, it's probably more likely that Hilary is about 5-6% up on Trump; and has been all this year without a significant movement. What you're seeing could be true, but could just be an artifact of polling, we won't know until we get a few more.

Actually a new poll out has Hillary up by 15 percentage points.

Did you even read what I wrote?
Lsumichiganfan
Posts: 267
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/18/2016 4:09:36 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/18/2016 4:05:39 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 6/18/2016 3:08:17 PM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
At 6/17/2016 6:31:44 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 6/17/2016 5:23:53 PM, TN05 wrote:


Now down nearly 6 points to Hillary in RCP average. While Hillary is only marginally better from her May performance against Trump (less than 1 percentage point), Trump has dropped from 43.4% to 38.3% in just the last month. (http://www.realclearpolitics.com...)

In the interests of looking at the raw data; I wanted to take a look at a few things.

1.) These are actually national polls, and due to margin of error when applying to the country as a whole, they don't mean a massive amount sometimes, although for the sake of example and to gauge overall approval, it can be an indicator.

2.) New pollsters are coming in; it makes it very difficult to compare. For example, if a new pollster has a particular bias, one way or another, being included in the RCP average will undoubtedly skew the result. This may take a while to even out.

3.) Of the new polls; Bloomberg, SurveryUSA and Ipsos all have very few recent polls. Only bloomberg has a poll more than a month old and it shows trumps support about the same (36 v 37%), and also showed Hilary losing 5% (54-49) points, which doesn't mean too much as could well be a statistical blip or margin of error.

4.) Of the two pollsters in the current RCP average; only two have had significant previous polling to compare it to; Rasmussen and Fox news; ( 2 out of I believe 3 pollsters that have ever produced a poll showing trump ahead of Clinton)

Rasmussen shows trump with ~39% support, unchanged since may (where it went all the way up to a high of 42%), it is unclear whether that specific bump was because of the nomination (it showed trump with +2 prior to being the nominee), but either way, it's settling down at 39%.

Fox has kinda been all over the place; with trump polling (almost randomly) between 47% and 39%, with Hilary polling (again, almost randomly) between 40% and 49%


5.) In reality, we don't know how biased individual polls are; given the accuracy of the polls for the primaries (85% I believe accurately called the winners), but it's relatively fair to say that Hilary is likely ahead; but comparing the same pollsters results makes it easier to see any movement; what is fairly clear is that hillary was way ahead until the latter quarter of last year, and Donald trump gained ground, there may have been a minimal bump for trump, but it's difficult to ascertain given how few polls there are been.

6.) Using past accuracy, ABC news, Marist, Survey USA; followed by fox, NBC, quinnipiac and ipsos all get fairly good grades, Fox has the higher error, with 6.4% SAE and only 65% of races called correctly, whereas survey USA is pretty low at 4.6% SAE and 90% called correctly; though they do show a slight D bias. Rasmussen, fairs much worse.

Given these and waiting for other new polls, it's probably more likely that Hilary is about 5-6% up on Trump; and has been all this year without a significant movement. What you're seeing could be true, but could just be an artifact of polling, we won't know until we get a few more.

Actually a new poll out has Hillary up by 15 percentage points.

Did you even read what I wrote?

I did.

But, at this rate do you believe Trump will win the presidency? I was just pointing out a poll that you did not include in your paragraph.
Please vote on this debate: http://www.debate.org...
"You have displayed the political understanding of a tortoise thus far in this election" -Harder
Ramshutu
Posts: 4,063
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/18/2016 7:09:47 PM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/18/2016 4:09:36 PM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
At 6/18/2016 4:05:39 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 6/18/2016 3:08:17 PM, Lsumichiganfan wrote:
At 6/17/2016 6:31:44 PM, Ramshutu wrote:
At 6/17/2016 5:23:53 PM, TN05 wrote:


Now down nearly 6 points to Hillary in RCP average. While Hillary is only marginally better from her May performance against Trump (less than 1 percentage point), Trump has dropped from 43.4% to 38.3% in just the last month. (http://www.realclearpolitics.com...)

In the interests of looking at the raw data; I wanted to take a look at a few things.

1.) These are actually national polls, and due to margin of error when applying to the country as a whole, they don't mean a massive amount sometimes, although for the sake of example and to gauge overall approval, it can be an indicator.

2.) New pollsters are coming in; it makes it very difficult to compare. For example, if a new pollster has a particular bias, one way or another, being included in the RCP average will undoubtedly skew the result. This may take a while to even out.

3.) Of the new polls; Bloomberg, SurveryUSA and Ipsos all have very few recent polls. Only bloomberg has a poll more than a month old and it shows trumps support about the same (36 v 37%), and also showed Hilary losing 5% (54-49) points, which doesn't mean too much as could well be a statistical blip or margin of error.

4.) Of the two pollsters in the current RCP average; only two have had significant previous polling to compare it to; Rasmussen and Fox news; ( 2 out of I believe 3 pollsters that have ever produced a poll showing trump ahead of Clinton)

Rasmussen shows trump with ~39% support, unchanged since may (where it went all the way up to a high of 42%), it is unclear whether that specific bump was because of the nomination (it showed trump with +2 prior to being the nominee), but either way, it's settling down at 39%.

Fox has kinda been all over the place; with trump polling (almost randomly) between 47% and 39%, with Hilary polling (again, almost randomly) between 40% and 49%


5.) In reality, we don't know how biased individual polls are; given the accuracy of the polls for the primaries (85% I believe accurately called the winners), but it's relatively fair to say that Hilary is likely ahead; but comparing the same pollsters results makes it easier to see any movement; what is fairly clear is that hillary was way ahead until the latter quarter of last year, and Donald trump gained ground, there may have been a minimal bump for trump, but it's difficult to ascertain given how few polls there are been.

6.) Using past accuracy, ABC news, Marist, Survey USA; followed by fox, NBC, quinnipiac and ipsos all get fairly good grades, Fox has the higher error, with 6.4% SAE and only 65% of races called correctly, whereas survey USA is pretty low at 4.6% SAE and 90% called correctly; though they do show a slight D bias. Rasmussen, fairs much worse.

Given these and waiting for other new polls, it's probably more likely that Hilary is about 5-6% up on Trump; and has been all this year without a significant movement. What you're seeing could be true, but could just be an artifact of polling, we won't know until we get a few more.

Actually a new poll out has Hillary up by 15 percentage points.

Did you even read what I wrote?

I did.

But, at this rate do you believe Trump will win the presidency? I was just pointing out a poll that you did not include in your paragraph.

As I said, the only polls that I looked at are ones that have been conducted repeatedly, so a good plain comparison can be made. Bloomberg (+12) is the highest clinton margin that I have seen in polls this week (and I double checked to see if I could find your +15 poll, but couldn't).

I'm just looking at the data, and what comparisons you can actually draw; and in reality it's too early to draw conclusions on poll numbers coming out from pollsters that haven't been regularly tracking to gauge a baseline.

If, for example, multiple pollsters come in now, all of which have a systematic pro-clinton bias; the poll averages will go up; they could be right, and the ones that show clinton with only a small lead could be wrong, but don't necessarily indicate a change in perception in their own right.

In reality, while much can change in the months before the election, I don't see trump doing very well at all; for a whole lot of statistical factors.

Importantly, many people on both sides, seem to be engaging in punditry based on their own emotional conviction in their candidate (or against them), rather than actually looking at what the data actually does show.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2016 2:54:29 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/18/2016 3:14:53 PM, TBR wrote:
At 6/18/2016 2:39:10 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 6/18/2016 2:27:53 AM, ofmega wrote:
Did Trump actually say "Mexican's are Rapists" ? I thought he was talking about a few Mexicans who committed rape after they swam the Rio Grande, not every Mexican.

Lol, what is this, sanity and an attention to context? Get out of here, they aren't interested in that!

Some? Is that what he said? I don't think so. Should we check the quote? No.... We know what he said. The only part where "some" had anything to do with it when he conceded that "some might be good people".

They're vs. their. Principle of charity. Context. Maybe I should just quote my response to this before:

M = R + D + C + G + A
I = XR + XD + XC +XG
N = R(1-X) + D(1-X) + C(1-X) + G(1-X) + A
N + I = M

M = Mexican population before immigration
I = Mexican immigrants to US
N = Mexican population after immigration to US
R = Rapists
D = Drug dealers
C = Criminals
G = Good People
A = Non-immigrant to US population of Mexico
0<X<1

Now, if the laws of mathematics don't break down around Trump, the implication is clear. Mexico is sending a certain amount of rapists, drug dealers, criminals, and good people to the US as part of its emigrant populations. No matter what you do to that set of equations, you cannot get M=R. If you disagree, please solve for 'M' and show your work =D
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2016 3:03:24 AM
Posted: 5 months ago
At 6/19/2016 2:54:29 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 6/18/2016 3:14:53 PM, TBR wrote:
At 6/18/2016 2:39:10 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 6/18/2016 2:27:53 AM, ofmega wrote:
Did Trump actually say "Mexican's are Rapists" ? I thought he was talking about a few Mexicans who committed rape after they swam the Rio Grande, not every Mexican.

Lol, what is this, sanity and an attention to context? Get out of here, they aren't interested in that!

Some? Is that what he said? I don't think so. Should we check the quote? No.... We know what he said. The only part where "some" had anything to do with it when he conceded that "some might be good people".

They're vs. their. Principle of charity. Context. Maybe I should just quote my response to this before:

M = R + D + C + G + A
I = XR + XD + XC +XG
N = R(1-X) + D(1-X) + C(1-X) + G(1-X) + A
N + I = M

M = Mexican population before immigration
I = Mexican immigrants to US
N = Mexican population after immigration to US
R = Rapists
D = Drug dealers
C = Criminals
G = Good People
A = Non-immigrant to US population of Mexico
0<X<1

Now, if the laws of mathematics don't break down around Trump, the implication is clear. Mexico is sending a certain amount of rapists, drug dealers, criminals, and good people to the US as part of its emigrant populations. No matter what you do to that set of equations, you cannot get M=R. If you disagree, please solve for 'M' and show your work =D

Nicely done. Lots of work to justify remarks Trump supporters are otherwise so proud of.

Look. YOU may bend over backwards to excuse his remarks if you like. Point remains, Hispanics are not going near his checkbox on election day. If this "candidacy" is more than just vanity then some effort to... you know... win - might be a priority. They, Hispanics, women, Blacks, Muslims and every other group of Americans this a$$ has gone out of his way to insult know well what a dog whistle sounds like just fine. They will insure that come November you guys will be pissed even more - if that is possible.