Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So your argument is not that Nate Silver was wrong in his predictions but that someone else was more right? How is that supposed to sway people when they both had the same prediction, and they are both currently predicting a Clinton win?
No try again.
My argument is that Nate Silver's analysis = rubbish and therefore liberals fawning over his brilliance are clueless.
Nate Silver analyzes polls with his special math formulas...yet his prediction success rates are BELOW a SIMPLE AVERAGE of recent polls on RCP.
Hence his analysis is rubbish if simple elementary math has a higher success rate than his "genius" to analyze the polls.
My comment has nothing to do with who will win in 2016 and everything to do with the JOKE that it is to think that thus far Silver is a proven brilliant poll analysis even though he has a worse success rate than a simple average.
I've been saying for months now that a lot of these uneducated redneck hicks filling up the Trump rallies aren't even registered voters. Most of them have never voted in their lives and wouldn't even know how to locate the registration office if they wanted to.
Uh; that can be said about some of Hillary's voter's, too. Like la raza, alt-left "libs" of any "race" and the BLM hood rats.
Too; "Redneck" ain't much of a slur in 2016, it's actually a good thing many times. lol
The "missing" White voters are not really missing, they are residing down at the local cemetery. We've reached the peak of the angry White man vote. This whole "myth" was cooked up the ultra-conservatives as a means of sticking their heads back into the sand and ignoring the 2013 "Autopsy report".
Many anti la raza "Hispanics" are now claiming "anglo white" in 2016. Us whities will be just fine.
According to exit polls, non-Hispanic whites accounted for 81% of all votes cast in 2000. In 2004 that percentage dropped to 77%. When Obama beat McCain in 2008, the percentage dropped to 74% and in 2012 it dropped to 72%. The point I'm trying to make is that the decline in the n/h white share of total votes cast was happening before Obama, it continued during Obama, and it will most likely continue after Obama, because it is driven not by a surge in black turnout, but in a decline in the percentage of registered voters that are n/h white that started 36 years ago and has continues unabated in every election with the exception of 1992 when it spiked upward by 2%.
.
Not talking total %. Notice the black vote spike under BHO. The white % down is more due to Latinos increasing, than long-term black turnout rising.
Inner city turnout will reset I'd bet to Pre BHO levels plus the typical +1 mill per cycle, which would mean .5 ill fewer votes from blacks today than in 2004.
Hillary holds no special demographic interest for inner city America. BHO did.
I've been saying for months now that a lot of these uneducated redneck hicks filling up the Trump rallies aren't even registered voters. Most of them have never voted in their lives and wouldn't even know how to locate the registration office if they wanted to.
Guess those redneck hicks located the registration office.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
