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.
The only time a liberal wants to have a serious discussion about polling is when Hillary is up by 10 points.
Another way of looking at that is that once again, the clown posse is deliberately trying to close down a serious discussion about polling in order to deflect from the fact that their master is getting his ass handed to him in the polls. You guys would rather get the thread closed down again than have to see all the bad news.
And still another way of looking at it is that most of us liberals have always been eager to have serious discussions about polls and other complex issue - it's just hard to do with people whose only contribution is "everybody I play poker with is voting for Trump, so all the polls must be rigged!"
And still a third way of looking at it is that I made a solid point about the likely trends of of undecided voters, and I still think it's an interesting aspect of the discussion. I'm curious if anyone who understands polling better than I do would comment on it. The observation I made is historically true in previous elections (generally so, anyway), and I'm really interested to see if that axiom is valid this year, given what a departure 2016 has been from the norm.
Does anyone who knows polling have an opinion on how they think undecideds will break this year? Does anyone think they'll start to break earlier than previous years? Or maybe later? Will everything we've come to know about undecideds still be valid this year?
Another observation - from watching the polls the last several weeks, one thing that seems increasingly apparent to me is that many of the undecideds are not really waiting to decide which of the two major candidates they're going to vote for. This year, it seems more that a solid block of the undecideds already know that they're definitely not going to vote for Trump, and another block already know they're definitely not voting for Hillary. I think that this year, an unusually high percentage of the undecideds are waiting to pick between the major candidate they don't hate, or one of the 3rd party candidates.
And if that's true, who does it help more? Hillary or Trump? I think most of the undecideds who hate Hillary are already going to vote for Trump no matter what - but that many of the undecideds who hate Trump are more likely to go 3rd party than to vote for Hillary. Anyone have any thoughts on that?
I have faith that the majority of Americans will vote for Hillary because they are not as susceptible to the Trump "fantasy mystery tour". They are too smart to fall victim to his lie machine. My worry is, how long until the Republican Party can be rebuilt enough to provide a viable 2nd Party in our 2 Party System? Our Democracy doesn't work very well without 2 functioning Party's.
I find it interesting that I started a thread just 2 days ago about a poll focused on Florida's Jewish community showing Hillary with a 43 point lead over Donald. It ran for about 5 pages with about 30 posts ... and then it just disappeared ... vanished.
The poll was not insignificant because Florida is an important "swing" or "battleground" state, and Florida has the third largest Jewish population in the US.
I find it interesting that I started a thread just 2 days ago about a poll focused on Florida's Jewish community showing Hillary with a 43 point lead over Donald. It ran for about 5 pages with about 30 posts ... and then it just disappeared ... vanished.
The poll was not insignificant because Florida is an important "swing" or "battleground" state, and Florida has the third largest Jewish population in the US.
Looking at your post history, it appears that said thread was merged into this one.
I have faith that the majority of Americans will vote for Hillary because they are not as susceptible to the Trump "fantasy mystery tour". They are too smart to fall victim to his lie machine. My worry is, how long until the Republican Party can be rebuilt enough to provide a viable 2nd Party in our 2 Party System? Our Democracy doesn't work very well without 2 functioning Party's.
The GOP is not a functioning party. Its just a vehicle for the billionaire class to further their agenda.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,926,708 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC
Hillary's problem is she's decided to play defense and coast on her lead. Trump goes to Louisiana. Hillary fundraises, naps and criticizes Trump. Trump goes to Mexico, Hillary criticizes but doesn't go. Even if she does now, it won't look good because she's REACTIVE not proactive. I'm sure she'll squawk about the immigration speech, too. She doesn't seem to think she has to talk about anything FIRST and the media lets her get away with it. Just let Trump come out with something and she goes in right after him and criticizes or appropriates what he says if it's received well. She followed the same defensive game plan with Sanders. She thinks she'll win because it's her turn to win. There are no super delegates or coin tosses in the general election.
She's making another mistake. Just because she has the backing of union leaders doesn't mean the rank and file is in her pocket
Whoever is advising her on this non-offense strategy did not take notes during the Republican primaries. There is a reason why 16 Republican candidates, many with long time political experience like hers, and with a lot of money to spend like she has, all fell to Trump. He's going all out and she's resting on the political couch.
By the way, for the Fox News national poll, you should be looking at the "Who are you going to vote for?" question that includes Johnson and Stein to see how much Clinton is ahead of Trump or vice versa.
What you are not considering is that Clinton has a local and regional ground game. Trump? Nada. He thinks he can run only on PR, and doesn't recognize the importance of GOTV, and the organization it takes to pull that off successfully. Oh, he has given it some lip service, but his campaign team is about 1.5 years behind, and that is too late.
What you are not considering is that Clinton has a local and regional ground game. Trump? Nada. He thinks he can run only on PR, and doesn't recognize the importance of GOTV, and the organization it takes to pull that off successfully. Oh, he has given it some lip service, but his campaign team is about 1.5 years behind, and that is too late.
Ground game.. I heard so much about that in the primaries. In fact, Cruz was supposed to beat Trump because he had good ground game. He was the master ground game guy! Ground game is so old and useless. Let Hillary keep opening offices all over swing states.. what do they do? robocall? fliers? Exactly what does these field offices do that change peoples minds to vote for a candidate?
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.
