You guys are talking about two different things where Loki, I believe, is trying to take into consideration the possibility of things changing in the next ~100 days from how they look now (based on polls).
I'm not sure how much guidance we can get from previous elections. Has anyone compared polling in this election cycle to previous elections?
Going by polls, Clinton still has a small edge over Trump:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...r-than-trumps/
But not "in the bag" atm.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
All right, question for the fortune-tellers: will Trump attempt to mount a legal challenge calling the election results into question if he loses? If not, will he level any serious accusations of electoral fraud?
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
A bit late for the second question.
Hope is the denial of reality
The question was inspired by his remarks, I'm wondering if he will make a really big fuss if he ends up losing.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
He made a big fuss in 2012 and he wasn't even running.
Hope is the denial of reality
He's going to lose on a scale of Goldwater. He may make accusations but it won't even be close.
Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer
... you hope
Keep on keepin' the beat alive!
Stop jinxing it.
The light that once I thought compassion still casting shadows in your action
The words you shared were cold transactions that bring me to curse what you've done
When you're up there absorbed in greatness with such success you've grown complacent
I hope you scorch your many faces when you fly too close to the sun
Even Georgia is polling as a swing state now. If the GOP can't even rely upon Georgia then they have lost, plain and simple.
There is no line up of States that will realistically see Trump win. The question is how badly he loses.
Almost certainly. If it's close, he'll make a legal challenge. If it's a blow-out, to save face he'll claim the Republican establishment colluded with the Democratic establishment to defeat him. And it wouldn't at all surprise me if that turned out to be true - not because the system is 'rigged' (which it might be...), but because Trump is a complete disaster that no 'leader' with any integrity could seriously support for president.
The Rules
Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)
And Remain won by 5%.
Hope is the denial of reality
A better comparison would be with the latest British general election perhaps.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
But it's true the sentiment ("Fuck you, establishment!") among the similar demographic groups supporting both is more or less the same. Polls may not be reliable and complacency could put Trump in the oval office.
The Rules
Copper- behave toward others to elicit treatment you would like (the manipulative rule)
Gold- treat others how you would like them to treat you (the self regard rule)
Platinum - treat others the way they would like to be treated (the PC rule)
538 admitted in the primary that any predictions around trump were coming up useless after his first couple of upsets. What was that news headline that was popular a couple of days ago? Only 9% of the population voted for Clinton or Trump in the primary.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
So what you're saying is we can't put faith in polling?
He's saying you need to factor in the uncertainty and require a larger margin before believing Clinton has this in the bag.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
If the polling including state polling is even halfway reliable then she does.
That is a big if.
Unless it's systematically wrong in one direction, which we have reason to believe based on recent elections in Europe...
Also, Trump's not dangerous at all: http://www.mediaite.com/tv/report-tr...ust-use-nukes/
Hope is the denial of reality
Sorry, Rand, but it's really too early to tell. It's certainly trending that way now but things change between the summer and late autumn. Further, the GOP has had a very strong GOTV machine in the last stage of the race the last twenty years which frequently causes late surges.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
That's crap. The US is a far softer polling target than anywhere in Europe, including the UK. It's possible Trump is an exception to the rule but you certainly can't try and reason back from how effective polling has been recently in other countries.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
It's too early to be 100% certain but unless the polls are not worth anything (when Loki keeps insisting polls are the gospel truth) it is possible to tell within a reasonable degree.
Forget national percentages, which states will Trump realistically win to get the necessary electoral votes?
538 had Trump winning North Carolina, Ohio, New Hampshire, and Florida last week, which was enough to put him over the top.
Hope is the denial of reality
That's inconsistent. If it's "a big if" then it's misleading to say she has the election "in the bag" until she has a much larger margin.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
RCP has almost permanently given all of them to Clinton, currently has Clinton in the lead in all but Florida and by big margins in some.
Barring the totally unreliable period between the two primaries, New Hampshire consistently is polling Clinton.
Not really, Loki has been a cheerleader for "polls are reliable", if that is even halfway true as I said then it is in the bag.
If polls aren't reliable then indeed nothing is certain until the votes have been counted.
That's nonsensical. There's an infinite range between being perfect and not getting ANYTHING right. Nothing is EVER certain, not even the likely truth that poll-based forecasting may be better in the long run than your gut feelings. The question is, what level of uncertainty and unreliability are we dealing with? Polls may be reasonably good without being good enough to be reassuring until Clinton gets a 10% lead over Trump.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
If the election was held tomorrow its a stomp for Clinton. I don't see how you and Loki aren't getting that.
Now things could happen, wikileaks has something really big they are waiting for until October. Clinton screws up in the debates. Massive terror attack occurs. Since life can be unexpected it isn't a gurantee just because Clinton is winning now she will win in November. *If nothing substantial changes it* she has it in the bag.
No, it's not. Polls change. They change even without something big happening. If the election were held today then yes, I think Clinton would win. But it's not and there's no reason to think all things will remain exactly as they are now for the next 3+ months until the election.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
This may be news to you but the election isn't being held tomorrow. I do think that Clinton currently has better odds of winning, but that's not really the point.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Why 10%? Why not 5% or 15%? It's a nice round decimal figure but what's special about it?
Events, dear boy, events.
Of course something could happen in-between now and then. Your bit in bold is what I mean, if Clinton comes out and murders a small child during the debates then she probably wouldn't but as things stand she is going to win barring a change in circumstances.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote