WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
It's more than 650,000 this year.
Hillary Clinton is Done: part 2
- Thread starter Travis
- Start date
- Status
It's more than 650,000 this year.
jhunter1163
beer-swilling semiliterate
As I'm sure you're aware, even though you didn't mention it, McCain lost Florida despite the GOP having significantly more primary voters. So, not really predictive.
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2003
- Messages
- 59,856
By just 200,000 votes, and McCain was a horrible candidate against a charismatic candidate.
Did you see the latest Florida polls? Do you think it's going to get better for Hillary after the Dem convention riots?
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader, TLA Dictator
There are a lot of conservatives in Florida? Who'd have thought it. But that wasn't the discussion. Wildcat seems to believe press reports from the 90s, that the dominant mood of Hispanics in Florida, because there's a huge Cuban (and anti-Castro, thus pro-Republican) segment, the GOP will lock them down. And that would be WRONG. The figures from the last three GEs show a continuing trend to vote Dem. Against Romney, Against McCain, Against Bush v. 2.2(2004).
And you might want to take a closer look at those polls. New polls are out in FL and OH. It's adjusting back to reality. My personal theory is that Trump is now largely relegated to the All Trump 24/7 Network(Fox) and because he's not out there figuratively slipping his dick into the cole slaw on all channels ten times a day, his fan boyz are already starting to forget him.
Obama beat Mccain by over two points in Florida in 2008. By 2012, his margin of victory was down to less than 1%. Incumbents with 8% unemployment have a rougher time of things, but then there's also the fact Palin wasn't around in 2012.
Yeah, the reality of a dead heat. Have you seen the new polls? Clinton is up by 2 in the RCP average.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/fl/florida_trump_vs_clinton-5635.html
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader, TLA Dictator
Telltale signs a partisan is losing an argument: Try to belittle the individual you are arguing with.
When was the last time YOU were in the US? Why would you think your computer screen has better information than mine? How many people in the US do you know well? How many are you in communication with on a daily basis? How much involvement do you have in the US political system? Provide made-up answers to all of those, and I'll provide my data. The absurdity of your implicit contention is, well, absurd.
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader, TLA Dictator
What part of "WE ARE DISCUSSING THE LATINO DEMOGRAPHIC" do you not understand? It was the topic of my cross-examination of Wildcat and I even reminded you in the post you're quoting.
The national popular vote doesn't matter. See "How the electoral college works". If you take RCP's generous electoral map, Hillary starts with 201 electoral votes, pretty much in the bank. She needs 69 more. More than half of those are going to come from 3 states that RCP generously calls toss-ups.. MI, PA, MN. The number everyone else has is that she has 247.
As anyone who followed the GE in the last 3 cycles knows, it's all down to the key states with red and blue stripes... VA, FL, OH, CO, NV. FL alone puts her over the top (when you correct for RCP's conservative exuberance). Or VA and OH put her over the top. Or OH+NV+CO. Trump needs to take FL, VA, OH... all of them. It doesn't matter if eleventy-seven more Texas voters move to Trump because Cruz is making nice-nice. It's getting an accurate count in those key states.
Say, here's an exercise.... you like that sort of a poll? What does it tell you about Clinton/Sanders. Has the Big Mo gone out for coffee and crullers? That same national polling has Clinton leading by 8, with the most recent poll showing her at +14. I doubt you'll offer the same blind support for those numbers that you do for your "Here's proof she can lose in the GE" argument.
Last edited:
Did you actually click on the link? It's not national polling. It's polling in Florida. Clinton is up by 2 in the RCP average.
ETA: And when it comes to polls of likely voters (which Skeptical Ginger says we should prefer), Clinton is up by 1. Not nationally. In Florida.
Last edited:
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2005
- Messages
- 96,955
Which I said you should prefer???? WTF?
I said some polls matter but at this point in time, national polls are too far out to be relevant.
Of course the one group said polls are relevant to are the idiot mainstream news organizations that like to report polls as news stories, poll significance matters not.
Yes, you posted this:
http://media.wnyc.org/media/resources/2016/Jan/22/OTM_Consumer_Handbook__ElectionPollsEditionPDF.pdf
Rule 4: Look for polls of likely voters, not just registered voters.
And do you somehow think it's sensationalism that CBS is reporting a CBS poll that CBS routinely conducts, and we shouldn't trust the results of the CBS poll?
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader, TLA Dictator
I think he's referring to the "likely voters" part, which is probably something you've pointed out (as more reliable than RV polls); I know I have.
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader, TLA Dictator
My bad. No, I didn't click the link.
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader, TLA Dictator
Fudbucker said:
You still have time to delete this, apologize, and move on with a little dignity in tact. This sort of sophistry is probably against several rules, here.
Last edited by a moderator:
It's not sophistry. Some of the Clinton supporters I've come across are dumb. There's no other word for it. They don't know pertinent information and their arguments are specious. If I get dinged for this observation, so be it. This forum is a shadow of its former JREF days.
Last edited:
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader, TLA Dictator
So be it. I won't take your posts seriously any longer.
If you took them seriously, you wouldn't make mistakes about the links I post.
And where was your outrage when I was accused of lying (post 1829):
So spare me the righteous indignation. If it's OK to call me a liar, which apparently it is, I'm going to call people out for their dumb arguments, reading fails, and dependence on irrelevant information.
And if I get called out on it, and people who call me names don't, the forum is even worse off than I thought.
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2005
- Messages
- 96,955
Oh cherry picking one thing from an entire source and pretending that's the end all and be all of what I said. Got it.
Yes, that matters in a poll. Is it the only variable? **** no.
Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader, TLA Dictator
Look, we all get caught up in the argument. I hate the word liar/lying so I never use it. So we concur on that. I've sometimes said "that's a lie" when I know someone is intentionally repeating something that they've been repeatedly corrected on. But "that's a lie", while negative, and "that post is wrong" or even "that's one of the stupidest things I've ever read", are not blanket accusations of a whole group.
More important is the sophistry (perhaps unintended, offering you an out here) that in a thread that's been going on for a year and a half and which has Hillary Clinton as the topic, the implication is that your fellow posters are stupid. (Many of us may be, but that has nought to do with the topic and is crossing the line to attacking the arguer.)
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 21,203
Hmmm, did someone notice where the Goalposts went in the middle of that Gish Gallop?
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 21,203
If you keep saying the same thing even after having had it pointed out multiple times why your claim is wrong, then the only thing left to assume is that you are deliberately lying about it. If the shoe fits and all.
- Status