Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 11-28-2015, 06:08 AM
 
7,687 posts, read 5,122,942 times
Reputation: 5482

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by dechatelet View Post
RealClearPolitics has Trump leading in Iowa with 25%, followed by Cruz at 23%, Carson at 18%, and Rubio at 13%.

The RealClearPolitics poll is dated November 24 -- three days ago as of this writing.

Any poll that claims Trump only has 15% is -- quite simply -- a ridiculous fraud.
Exactly

 
Old 11-28-2015, 08:32 AM
 
Location: University City, Philadelphia
22,632 posts, read 14,945,990 times
Reputation: 15935
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaldoKitty View Post
Iowa is much smaller. By your logic, then, Iowa doesn't matter at all.
But Iowa is first ... and being first does matter in politics.
 
Old 11-28-2015, 12:09 PM
 
52,431 posts, read 26,636,151 times
Reputation: 21097
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clark Park View Post
But Iowa is first ... and being first does matter in politics.
How so?
 
Old 11-28-2015, 04:45 PM
 
Location: Old Mother Idaho
29,218 posts, read 22,371,062 times
Reputation: 23858
Iowa is a loose cannon. The New Hampshire primary is the one that makes and breaks the candidates, and always has.
 
Old 11-28-2015, 05:00 PM
 
52,431 posts, read 26,636,151 times
Reputation: 21097
Quote:
Originally Posted by banjomike View Post
Iowa is a loose cannon. The New Hampshire primary is the one that makes and breaks the candidates, and always has.
For GOP it's South Carolina.
 
Old 11-29-2015, 12:03 AM
 
10,829 posts, read 5,438,007 times
Reputation: 4710
Winning the early primaries is important because it makes you a "winner" in the eyes of the electorate.

People like to vote for winners, not losers. It's just human nature.

It also helps in terms of raising money.

On the other hand, not winning the early primaries doesn't automatically rule out your winning the nomination.

But it sure helps to win them.
 
Old 11-29-2015, 08:49 PM
 
2,334 posts, read 2,648,454 times
Reputation: 3933

Same link, updated just two hours ago:

Carson, Clinton lead in new poll from Iowa State University/WHO-HD | State | iowastatedaily.com

This puts Trump in third place.


Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC View Post
I saw this poll yesterday or earlier today but noticed it gives the margin of error for total sampled but does not give the margins of error for the two subsets (Democrats, Republicans). That's dishonest since the results are reported that way.
You said the Reuters poll that came out the other day was dishonest because T's numbers were down and they didn't break the percentages into D vs R.

That's like saying the AP is dishonest. I WISHED I could have worked for Reuters, which holds itself to the highest standards of journalism and has done so since its inception in 1851. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reuters

Quote:
Reuters employs several thousand journalists. Reuters journalists use the Reuters Handbook of Journalism as a guide for fair presentation and disclosure of relevant interests, to maintain the values of integrity and freedom upon which their reputation for reliability, accuracy, speed and exclusivity relies.
The (IA) Gazette is also dishonest, in your opinion, because they're reporting lower numbers for your preferred candidate and because the results don't fit your paradigm. It clearly states that
Quote:
The margin of error is approximately 3 percent.
Who determines which news agencies are dishonest?
 
Old 11-29-2015, 09:15 PM
 
13 posts, read 8,870 times
Reputation: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaldoKitty View Post
Haha. The TV Station that commissioned the Poll is a NBC affiliate.

IMO, NBC is holding an obvious war against Trump.

But no matter. It's South Carolina that matters.


It's New Hampshire that matters. They picked the last two republican nominees and will probably pick the next.
 
Old 11-30-2015, 04:17 AM
 
2,886 posts, read 5,825,184 times
Reputation: 1885
Quote:
Originally Posted by banjomike View Post
Iowa is a loose cannon. The New Hampshire primary is the one that makes and breaks the candidates, and always has.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaldoKitty View Post
For GOP it's South Carolina.
Originally I thought Rubio had a shot at winning the New Hampshire primary but Trump continues to gain a sizable lead. I also believe South Carolina will be the first important primary for the GOP and it looks like Trump will also win that one, same goes for Nevada.

At this point it would not surprise me if Trump won every GOP primary state with the exception of Iowa going to Cruz maybe Carson.

Carson continues to plummet leaving Tump with a commanding lead over Rubio, Cruz and himself.
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.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top