Posted on 08/30/2016 7:26:10 AM PDT by Kozy
I can’t imagine her actually showing up for a debate...she has dodged the media for so long now, she has been handing Trump ammo for the debates.
I’m betting she weasels out with some kind of media-supported excuse.
Stop bringing up 2012, this is not 2012.
Not even the 24/7 support of the Dem-Propaganda Machine MSM can carry the increasing tonnage of one Hitlery scandal after another, her horrendous health, and inability to inspire (or even show up anywhere).
Meanwhile, Trump appears vital as support is increasing. The sickly, lying Hag appears to be on Life-Support. Team Hag can’t fake it for her.
To prevent duplication, please do not alter the published headline, thx.
She will get votes but don’t kid yourself into thinking people are enthusiastic about her candidacy. She has real problems with the Sanders supporters and minority voters.
(MSM, Uni-Party and Globalists setting up Voter Fraus Machination...NOW.)
I firmly believe the polls have always been in Trumps favor !
Did you get the headline right this time or is this thread going to disappear after I put in the effort to find graphics and related links to post on it?
I don't believe Congress will go after her fully; I think there's a lot of connections from them to the Clinton Foundation, enough to implicate a sizable portion.
B-b-b-but, she’s pulling ads out of Virginia and Colorado because she has too big a lead!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I still see her ads here in central Illinois.
Think they axed the first posting because I used the link to LATimes USC. Think there is copyright problem.
The moderator posted that you used the wrong title. A lot of people besides me contributed to that thread and all of our effort was wasted.
Yup
Nate rates and weights the polls. His ratings are public, and provided in handy "grade" format.
So, I must respectfully disagree that the RCP average is worthless. It correctly predicted Obama / Romney result, but not the margin. ABC News / WaPo were very close, for instance, though.
For people who really hate poll averaging I'd say then confine yourself to looking at the "A" rated polls
I don't get your point about the turnout. Turnout is always a factor in elections, which is why pollsters try hard to factor it into the polls. "Likely voters". Etc.
However if one hates poll averaging on principle I would then say at least use the better polls for thinking about the race, not the outliers or completely new ones, like the USC that all the pro-Trump people are glomming onto.
I have thoughtfully made a list of these on a post yesterday, which you can access here
With 70 days left Team Trump needs to be very focused on winning enough states to get past 270. What the hell is he doing in Washington today? Is there any chance that Trump can win Washington?
Trump behind in 10 closest states. This is by a polling operation that was extremely accurate in the 2012 race. If you discount all polling then you are merely "running blind", you are not going to win the POTUS race with that kind of operation. Instead you need to focus where your efforts can make a difference.
The MSM, including such outfits as ABC and WaPo may indeed be full of Hillary loving libtards, but we still should be smart enough to use their output for our own requirements.
same with PA
Trump knows what he is doing.
Trump isn't behind and the phony polls are made to panic 'experts' such as yourself.
And this isn’t 2012, so stop acting like it is!
They are tightening the race so they can show Hillary with a bounce from the debates.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.