Replies

F&M poll is laughable, If you buy that poll you are saying Hillary will outperform Obama in 12, and if you believe that, you are truly not paying attention. Polls are polls, they say what they say, that does not mean they are accurate, or depicting what is actually going on... Dewey defeats Truman and all that rot.

I can produce a poll to say whatever I want, its really not hard... oversampling, improper weighting, leading questions. Push Polls, gas lighting, etc... all exist and are real. Doesn’t mean the polls don’t exist, just means they are not accurate to what is going on.

The article I cited talked about dems going Trump, just about every single one of those people will not show up in a likely voter poll, because by their own admission they have not voted in the last 2 presidential races... so modern polling will filter them out as unlikely voters... Because their model says they aren’t likely to vote because they didn’t the last 2 times... but does that mean those people will not vote? I’d bet good money those people, and lots more like them will indeed be showing up on election day.

Secondly, if you thing Hillary is going to outperform Obama in 12, you are smoking some good good stuff. Hillary will not pull O’s numbers, anywhere. Polling showing her up 7 or 12 in PA is laughable on its face. Obama got the state by about 5.5 in 12, Hillary will not meet, let alone outperform Obama in PA... if you think that, I doubt you have been on the ground here at all.

OBama polling over 50%? So what. Hate to break this to you, but Clinton was over 50% in 2000, that didn’t mean he wasn’t toxic on the campaign trail. Obama is TOXIC in the rust belt, and he has the same interesting polling behavior that HIllary has.. being the less he’s seen the higher he polls.. the more he gets out in OCT and stumps, the lower he’ll and she will poll.

Finally you admit that this is not a typical cycle.. its just you can’t seem to recognize how untypical it is. You are applying typical viewpoint to the cycle... established politician against a neophyte... she she would... but that ignores the very foundation of why this cycle is atypical... its atypical because its a disruptive cycle... and Trump is the disruption, and he has been able to do everything traditional views have said he could not do for the past year.

You seem to think an endorsement matters, you are putting far too much weight on things that are not beneficial because you are approaching this as its just another election. When you are running a campaign claiming the system is stacked and corrupt, and you have a candidate that is clearly an embodiment of that corruption, endorsements of the status quo are not helpful, they just reinforce the corruption narrative. Every single crazy attack in the press, every single thing that in a traditional cycle would matter, doesn’t help.. it’s just reinforcing the disrupting narrative.

I do agree that if Trump is successful in his outreach to minorities, it could be a huge game changer, and his willingness to say the simple truth to these groups... look around, do you think the Dems have helped you? Are your neighborhoods better off? are your schools? are your children safer? If not, then why not give me a shot?

He will certainly do better with blacks than Romney or McCain did, if only for the fact that Hillary is not black... will he get more than 10%? We shall see, some polls have shone him far exceeding those numbers, and if he does, that’s another nail in Hillary’s coffin.

All those things you keep trying to argue are why Hillary will win, better ground game, more money, name recognition, party backing... all of those things were just points she was spotted at the start of the game... NONE of them have given her an increase to her functional max. Yes, she consolidated her base faster than Trump did, but she hasn’t had momentum once this entire cycle. The closest she’s had was when Trump let himself get off message with the kahn nonsense in early August, he quickly recovered and rebuilt his momentum... Hillary hasn’t had momentum once this cycle beyond Trump’s stumbling.

Trump has had momentum since last year, Hillary has none. Her original plan was to simply try to run out the clock, and it wasn’t going to work and won’t work, because Trump has the momentum and always has.

The dorslife tracking poll is about the only polls that’s showing the honest movement, Trump has been on a solid steady upward direction entire cycle, with the sole dip during the kahn nonsense where he got off message and got bogged down and allowed his momentum to be stalled, he adjusted and rebuilt... Hillary has never had momentum... she peaked right around the whole kahn nonsense... and her line has been on a fairly steady and predictable downward path since... while Trumps has been steadily and generally upward. This is the race, Hillary has a funcitonal max of 42/43% that’s it.

She is winning only those making under 35k, women, blacks, latinos, college grad and women. But the poll clearly shows, Trump is in the drivers seat in the race...

http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-presidential-poll-dashboard/

But when these same folks are asked who they think will win, not who they intend to vote for, HIllary is in the lead... Why is that? Because they are viewing the outcome like you are... falsely. If these folks vote the way they claim, Hillary will lose and lose solidly, but the majority of them think Hillary will win... You are making the I think Hillary will win, when the evidence is pretty solid she will not... Unless Trump self destructs between now and Nov 8.

Again, time will tell, a few more weeks and its over one way or another... either way I’ll get up and go to work the next day. So, we will see who’s view is correct. Given the “pundit” and “traditionalist” view has been WRONG for over a year, we will see which one winds up the winner in the end.

Taken in the aggregate, the polls have been fairly accurate. The RCP polling data show Clinton being ahead by 3.8% in a four way race.

The PA polling data show Clinton ahead by 4.6%. The two most recent polls show Clinton expanding her lead: F&M +12 and Quinnipiac +5. Believe them or not, Trump is trailing in every PA poll.

I am familiar with political polling having actually constructed one myself in a graduate statistics course. The key is a representative sample. The wording of the questions also has an impact depending upon what kind of poll you are constructing. The polling companies depend on revenue, which is based on the validity of their findings. As we approach election day, the polls get more accurate because their credibility and revenue are at stake.

This is the so-called monster vote. We will see if it exists. The registration data don't reflect a major increase in voters so these "unlikely" voters must be registered by now or they won't be able to vote in many states.

Will Trump outperform Romney? As I pointed out, the Dems win PA by manufacturing huge numbers in Philly and Allegheny County (Pittsburgh). They amassed (probably thru fraud) a 600,000 vote margin that offset the 300,000 margin Romney achieved in the rest of the state. Detroit performs the same function in MI.

FYI: Kerry amassed almost as many votes in 2004 in PA that Obama had in 2012. Obama received 300,000 less votes in 2012 than he did in 2008 and still won comfortably. MCCain and Romney received fewer votes in PA than Bush did in 2004. Can Hillary match Kerry in PA? Can Trump surpass Bush in 2004?

Clinton had the Monica problem. Big difference. Obama is interested in getting the black and Hispanic vote to the polls. It is called identity politics. He could care less about the non-Hispanic white vote.

Of course it is not typical. The Reps have a candidate who has never run for elective office in his life. He has no political experience. He has the lowest approval levels of any candidate to run matching Hillary in that regard. This is why the Dems are attacking Trump personally claiming he is unfit for the Presidency and dangerous because he has his finger on the nuclear button. Hillary loses on policy.

I didn't say Hillary would win. I said she has many advantages that will make it an uphill and close race for Trump to win despite Hillary's totally flawed record and outright lies. She is one of the worst candidates ever yet she is more than holding her own with Trump because of the Dem organization, money, and the partisan MSM. Right now, Hillary has the momentum after the first debate.

Trump is seen on the defensive talking about Miss Universe and his purloined tax returns. The MSM is playing all this up big time. This was all a setup. Hillary had already distributed the press packages about Machado to the MSM before the debate and told them she would be raising the issue. She also raised the tax issue at the debate, no doubt aware of what the NYT had beforehand. Hence Hillary's speculation on why Trump was hiding his tax returns. The MSM and Hillary are working hand in glove. It is all orchestrated.

There you go again making things up. Where did I say Hillary would win? My difference with you is that I don't consider Trump to have the election in the bag. Again, if Trump wins, it will be a close election not a landslide either in popular vote or in the electoral vote. Like her husband, Hillary will not win 50% of the vote or more. Bill won with 43% of the vote in 1992 and 49% in 1996.

If Hillary wins, the country is the loser. I will have a very tough time accepting her victory. It means the end of this country as we know it. The Constitution and the vision and values of our Founders will be cast into the dustbin of history. The only redeeming factor is that I will not have that many years to go and see the continuing decline of the country. Unfortunately, my daughter will.