Posted on 10/19/2016 5:59:27 AM PDT by BlueStateRightist
Dead even. With nearly one-in-10 voters still looking beyond the top four candidates or undecided and less than three weeks to go until Election Day.
(Excerpt) Read more at rasmussenreports.com ...
Aren’t some people already early voting?
9/10 Johnson/Weld voters will vote for Hillary on election day. Most Jill Stein voters will stick with her and Baracka.
Upon looking at your sign up date, I'd say you are one of Illary's paid concern trolls.
Witch Of Chappaqua at 42% - just where she’s been all year.
Now she has to hope Trump wears worse than her to have a chance in November.
And all those polls showing her with a commanding advantage?
Hokum. And we’ve got 19 days to the election.
What I am seeing here is a early week swing for the witch and then it swings back to Trump at the end of the week and the weekends. This is the trend I am seeing. Why is that?
I’d say you’re clueless
D plus 14!!!
I’m anything but a troll... I’ve posted over 10,000 times in the past, under NYC_Republican, and have interacted with you and others for years.
Conservatives are out doing things.
on the weekend.
How can it be? ABDNCFOXBS are saying Harpy is ahead by 15-20 and have already called the election?
Pray America wakes
I do not want to come across as arrogant; but based on 60+ years of fighting for traditional American values, including hours of using live TV to advantage, I want to share some experience driven suggestions, both for our candidate, and all of us who will be actively promoting a Trump victory in just 20 days.
While speaking in anger can sometimes help rally those who share your beliefs and priorities, it is not the most effective way to convert those who dissent from our purpose. When there is a real problem to be addressed, it is almost always better to speak in sorrow than in anger.
In the present ideological conflict, there is great reason for sorrow. We need to interject, in every possible exchange, those contemporary phenomena that are not only unfortunate from our stand point; but which are likely to be understood as sad by anyone listening to us.
Putting this understanding to work in a situation such as tonight's Presidential debate; Trump needs to intertwine his response to essential policy issues, by sadly lamenting the background social climate, which certainly impacts all aspects of contemporary American life, including the problem reflected in the issue. For example:
The decline in pride in heritage, openly encouraged by Obama's repeated apologies to others for America's traditions & achievement--leading to Americans kneeling through the Star Spangled Banner;--his & Mrs. Clinton's siding with Soros financed thugs against the Police--leading to the cold blooded assassination of American cops;--their refusal to protect the border, leading to job losses among rooted Americans, brutal crimes against American women, and the despicable riots in California, where aliens who do not share our values, or honor our heritage, intimidate local officials into not celebrating the achievements of the Founding Fathers and their posterity.
It was only last week, when anti-American culturalists advocated not celebrating Columbus Day! The Obama/Clinton cabal seem intent on denying that our values & achievements, under uniquely American cultural values, grew directly out of the experience driven values of particular European settlers. That is fact. It takes nothing away from the achievements or values of any other people; but it is our fact, and we are entitled to honor that fact and the rich cultural heritage it reflects.
To the extent that the Obama/Clinton cabal would deny us pride in our history, they are truly bigoted enemies. But we do best, again, when we lament the success of our enemies, as we explain, again quietly and sadly, how totally despicable is this ongoing attack, coming indeed from those who have benefited so much, while gaming our system.
Some may think that this approach is going soft. It is precisely the opposite. In place of venting our wrath at the Obama/Clinton betrayal, we begin to instill wrath in some of those who otherwise would simply go along with the enemy, "to get along."
There is nothing the least bit new in these tactics. Anyone familiar with Shakespeare's play "Julius Caesar," is quite familiar with the technique. It worked in the play because it reflects a true understanding of the psychological factors involved.
William Flax
[This may be reproduced, if in full context, with or without attribution.]
Reagan won by 18% in 1984. Bush 1 won his landslide by less than 8%. By how much is Hillary realistically predicted to win?
I look for at least half of Johnson’s 7% to break for Trump. Maybe more. No way Johnson gets more than 2%-3%. If that.
There’s a whole lotta polls showing her up in the range of 4-11% this morning. Heard from a conservative Texas radio talk show host thinking that yes, Trump will win Texas, but only by 4-5% as the Hispanic vote is going 44% to H.
For sure, Trump needs to hit this out of the park tonight. Rasmussen is actually looking like an outlier at this point.
How do you know it is the outlier and the others are not wrong like they were all through the primaries? These are not accurate polls in any way.
How can they get an accurate sample with cell phones and caller ID?
The oddity is that Rasmussen’s turnout model is not outrageous.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/about_us/methodology
The partisan rating I recall seeing for them was D+6, though from their text it’s clear they are more precise than that, weighting by each locale, not just nationally.
And this:
“After the surveys are completed, the raw data is processed through a weighting program to ensure that the sample reflects the overall population in terms of age, race, gender, political party, and other factors. The processing step is required because different segments of the population answer the phone in different ways. For example, women answer the phone more than men, older people are home more and answer more than younger people, and rural residents typically answer the phone more frequently than urban residents.”
If this is not weighted for, you can easily oversample women, which would be a Hillary plus.
ON RCP’s site this morning:
Reuters: Clinton+4
Bloomberg: Clinton +9
Rasmussen: Tie
LA Times: Tie
SurveyUSA: Clinton+2
Arizona Republic: Clinton+5
FOX News: Clinton+6
NBC: Clinton+6
I don’t know the methodologies of any of these, but calling one an ‘outlier’ simply means that they are outside the ‘norm’, which is clearly reflected in the list above. Only 2 even suggest Trump is even... and of course none show him ahead.
Obviously, I want Rasmussen to be correct. But these scare me.
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.