Hillary Clinton is Done: part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
WildCat said:
Whereas you rely on Hillary's push polls? The Dems push polls?

And I'll point out that the polls have consistently overestimated Hillary's numbers and underestimated Trump's numbers.
Click to expand...

Right, I wouldn't be surprised if there was a hefty Bradley effect going on. I can imagine some people are probably reluctant to admit to supporting Trump. Admitting support of Clinton just makes you vomit in your mouth a little.
 
jhunter1163 said:
I posted this in the other thread, but it's applicable here, too. Hillary just needs to hold the base (the 19 states and DC that have gone blue the last SIX elections) and win in Florida (where she leads by double digits); that's 271 EV, and Hillary punches her ticket to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...lem-that-has-nothing-to-do-with-donald-trump/
Click to expand...

No she doesn't. The RCP Florida average has Clinton up by 4 and the latest poll has her up by 1. YouGov just released a poll with Clinton up by 1 in Florida.
 
jhunter1163 said:
I posted this in the other thread, but it's applicable here, too. Hillary just needs to hold the base (the 19 states and DC that have gone blue the last SIX elections) and win in Florida (where she leads by double digits); that's 271 EV, and Hillary punches her ticket to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...lem-that-has-nothing-to-do-with-donald-trump/
Click to expand...

That is some wishful thinking bordering on delusional. Double digit lead in Florida? The latest poll has her up by just 1%, and her recent rhetoric on guns is not going to help her in the Gunshine State. She had a double-digit lead in just one outlier poll by a Florida business group that has virtually no polling experience.
 
Fudbucker said:
No she doesn't. The RCP Florida average has Clinton up by 4 and the latest poll has her up by 1. YouGov just released a poll with Clinton up by 1 in Florida.
Click to expand...

Maybe you missed this in the WaPo article;

http://www.capitalnewyork.com/artic...poll-republican-brand-damage-bolsters-clinton

In a heavily Hispanic state such as Florida, Trump's overwhelming negatives among Hispanic voters will be fatal. And the fundamental issue for Republicans is that Clinton is starting from a very strong position in the EC; if she holds the base, that's 242 EV. She would only need 28 more to win; Florida is 29 all by itself, but there are plenty of other states where she can pick up the needed votes even if she doesn't win Florida.

ETA: 24 percent of Florida residents are Hispanic; Trump's unfavorable rating among Hispanics is 87 percent. You simply can't alienate that large a portion of the electorate and realistically expect to win.
 
Last edited:
jhunter1163 said:
Maybe you missed this in the WaPo article;

http://www.capitalnewyork.com/artic...poll-republican-brand-damage-bolsters-clinton

In a heavily Hispanic state such as Florida, Trump's overwhelming negatives among Hispanic voters will be fatal. And the fundamental issue for Republicans is that Clinton is starting from a very strong position in the EC; if she holds the base, that's 242 EV. She would only need 28 more to win; Florida is 29 all by itself, but there are plenty of other states where she can pick up the needed votes even if she doesn't win Florida.

ETA: 24 percent of Florida residents are Hispanic; Trump's unfavorable rating among Hispanics is 87 percent. You simply can't alienate that large a portion of the electorate and realistically expect to win.
Click to expand...
Florida's Hispanics are mostly Cuban, and conservative.
 
WildCat said:
Florida's Hispanics are mostly Cuban, and conservative.
Click to expand...

Oh really? From the linked article:

One of the most astounding — and depressing — results for Republicans like Tyson was the percentage of likely Hispanic Florida voters who have a negative impression of Trump: 87 percent. Only 10 percent viewed him favorably.

“No, that’s not a typo,” Tyson wrote in the memo.

Tyson said Trump’s trouble with Hispanics is a huge problem in a state where they could account for 14 percent of ballots. Cruz polls much better with Hispanics, with 33 percent favorable, and 34 percent unfavorable.

Clinton sits at 50 percent unfavorable with Hispanics, and 48 percent favorable.

The AIF poll is the second in two weeks that had Trump in alarmingly negative territory with Hispanic voters. A poll conducted by Dario Moreno, a Florida International University political scientist, found 84 percent of Hispanics viewed Trump negatively.
Click to expand...
 
jhunter1163 said:
Maybe you missed this in the WaPo article;

http://www.capitalnewyork.com/artic...poll-republican-brand-damage-bolsters-clinton

In a heavily Hispanic state such as Florida, Trump's overwhelming negatives among Hispanic voters will be fatal. And the fundamental issue for Republicans is that Clinton is starting from a very strong position in the EC; if she holds the base, that's 242 EV. She would only need 28 more to win; Florida is 29 all by itself, but there are plenty of other states where she can pick up the needed votes even if she doesn't win Florida.

ETA: 24 percent of Florida residents are Hispanic; Trump's unfavorable rating among Hispanics is 87 percent. You simply can't alienate that large a portion of the electorate and realistically expect to win.
Click to expand...

I didn't miss anything. it's dishonest (or just ignorant) to rely on older polling data to make a point where there is newer data from better established polling outfits available.

The poll you're talking about is an outlier from when Cruz was still in the race. The two most recent polls show it within the margin of error.

ETA: “Republicans’ weakness among minority voters is well known. But the reason this race is so
close overall is Clinton’s historic weakness among white men. In Florida, she is getting just 25
percent from white men,” Brown said.
https://www.qu.edu/images/polling/ps/ps05102016_Sw4b42d.pdf
 
Last edited:
jhunter1163 said:
Oh really? From the linked article:
Click to expand...

What you miss is that you can have an unfavorable opinion of someone and still support them. I don't have a favorable opinion of Trump, but I think he'll do far less harm to the country than Hillary will.

eta: getting tired of the spellchecker constantly "correcting" the word "Trump" to a lower-case "T"!
 
WildCat said:
That's what happens when your political career spanning decades is marked my lies and corruption and smearing women who have been sexually assaulted.
Click to expand...
This is a tired, bs meme. She believed and defended her spouse, to which I say BFD. And in regard to the purported assault(s), you're re-writing history by taking he said / she said allegations and declaring one side as fact.
 
varwoche said:
This is a tired, bs meme. She believed and defended her spouse, to which I say BFD. And in regard to the purported assault(s), you're re-writing history by taking he said / she said allegations and declaring one side as fact.
Click to expand...

Funny how her husband is such a magnet those allegations, isn't it? Must be one of those bizarre coincidences.

eta: and how unfortunate that Bill was a frequent flier on Jeffrey Epstein's sex plane for pedophiles. Just another weird coincidence for Bill!
http://gawker.com/flight-logs-put-clinton-dershowitz-on-pedophile-billio-1681039971
 
Last edited:
varwoche said:
This is a tired, bs meme. She believed and defended her spouse, to which I say BFD. And in regard to the purported assault(s), you're re-writing history by taking he said / she said allegations and declaring one side as fact.
Click to expand...

Wait, I thought Hillary said sexual assault victims deserve to be believed? I guess not when they accuse her husband?

Anyway, I remember Clinton looking in the camera and lying to the country, his semen showing up on Lewinsky's dress, and Bill getting disbarred in his home state. So yeah, I'm probably not going to believe much of what Bill says about anything.
 
varwoche said:
This is a tired, bs meme. She believed and defended her spouse, to which I say BFD. And in regard to the purported assault(s), you're re-writing history by taking he said / she said allegations and declaring one side as fact.
Click to expand...

Talk about bs. If you think Hillary, having known Bill for over 20 years, and being not only highly intelligent, but also an unparalleled liar in her own right, took Bill's word over his bimbos', then I urge you to stay far away from salesmen, especially of the used car or undeveloped land variety.
 
Slings and Arrows said:
Crooked Hillary has told us that, if elected, her husband Bill will be in charge of running the US economy; while she deals with the far more pressing and important issues of "paid leave" and "affordable child care".

But which one of the two Clinton's will tackle our immigration problems? Will it be 1996 Bill Clinton, or 2016 Crooked Hillary?

"We need comprehensive immigration reform with a path to full and equal citizenship. If Congress won't act, I'll defend executive actions—and I'll go even further to keep families together. I'll end family detention, close private immigrant detention centers, and help more eligible people become naturalized." -- Crooked Hillary Jan 6, 2016

"I'll defend executive actions," she said. And it's a safe bet she will.
Click to expand...
why do you think lying helps your case?
 
WildCat said:
Whereas you rely on Hillary's push polls? The Dems push polls?

And I'll point out that the polls have consistently overestimated Hillary's numbers and underestimated Trump's numbers.
Click to expand...

Me, a push poll? You got a particular quote in mind? I think you're mixing me up with someone else.
 
Fudbucker said:
Are you ever going to stop shilling for Clinton? No? Then people will continue to not take you seriously. Unlike you, I back up my claims with evidence. Here's some:

Polls in May, 2012 showed Obama with a 2 point lead. Obama ended up winning by 3 points.

In June, 2008, NBC had Obama up by 6, ABC had him up by 4, Fox had Obama ahead by 4, and Rasmussen had Obama up by 5. Obama won by 7.

So the same four polling outfits that in the last week have Trump winning/within the margin of error, were all accurate to within 3 points in June 2008, AND the RCP average in May 2012 was accurate to within 1 point. The RCP average this May has Trump ahead of Clinton.

And in 2008 and 2012, the GOP nominees weren't mentally ill women-hating bullies.

This is horrible news for Clinton.
Click to expand...

The stars were aligned in May and Obama won in Nov. Got it.

Harry’s Guide To 2016 Election Polls
Even within a week of a primary election, the polls are often inaccurate. The polls more than a month out are, at best, a guesstimate. General election polls are far more accurate on the eve of an election, and the candidate who leads after the major party conventions is likely to win....

The national polls don’t add to your understanding of the race — just look at surveys of the upcoming states....
Click to expand...

This is the biggest point you remain in denial about:
General election polls before and during the primary season have a very wide margin of error. That’s especially the case for candidates who aren’t even in the race and therefore haven’t been treated to the onslaught of skeptical media coverage usually associated with being the candidate.
Click to expand...

And in regards to the media:
There’s a reason we aggregate polls at FiveThirtyEight: The aggregate is usually better than any individual pollster. That’s especially the case in general elections. In primaries, the trend line can be more important, as a candidate with momentum heading into a contest often outperforms his or her average....

Consider the motives of the media reporting on polls. They want headlines. This one is self-explanatory. The media are interested in your readership. Moreover, partisan news outlets are more likely to give press to those polls that favor their preferred candidate.
Click to expand...
 
sunmaster14 said:
Talk about bs. If you think Hillary, having known Bill for over 20 years, and being not only highly intelligent, but also an unparalleled liar in her own right, took Bill's word over his bimbos', then I urge you to stay far away from salesmen, especially of the used car or undeveloped land variety.
Click to expand...
Despite your over the top hyperbole, point taken to this extent: It's arguably the case that she believed him.
 
varwoche said:
Despite your over the top hyperbole, point taken to this extent: It's arguably the case that she believed him.
Click to expand...

Is it "arguably the case" that every time there was a "bimbo eruption" Clinton's professional smearmongers would go full out denigrating any woman who dared accuse Bill of sexually assaulting them?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom