Trump tanked like 13% in slight over 10 days before the rally. Its a roller coaster.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 4417
Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
Trump tanked like 13% in slight over 10 days before the rally. Its a roller coaster. | ||
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
I dunno though, I haven't looked at Kane much, but she would have been better off picking someone further to the right. As a Trump supporter right now, I'm grinning. | ||
GGTeMpLaR
United States7226 Posts
On July 23 2016 10:07 Plansix wrote: It is easy to go up and down on this map based on specific state polling, rather than national polls. Trump didn't go up, Clinton just lost votes to third parties over the last 10 days, which is not insane based on last times data. Also the convention has not happened yet. Trump tanked like 13% in slight over 10 days before the rally. Its a roller coaster. On what you linked he went up 20% too | ||
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
| ||
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
On July 23 2016 10:07 Plansix wrote: It is easy to go up and down on this map based on specific state polling, rather than national polls. Trump didn't go up, Clinton just lost votes to third parties over the last 10 days, which is not insane based on last times data. Also the convention has not happened yet. Trump tanked like 13% in slight over 10 days before the rally. Its a roller coaster. Very true, it is known that during conventions polling is less predictive of the results than polling done months before during the primaries. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
And he lost 13% right before that. He started at 33% and tanked to 21%. On July 23 2016 10:10 LegalLord wrote: That was a solid enough convention for Trump and I think it will give him a reasonably strong boost for the next week. The question is, how much of that support will stick, and the answer is that no one really knows. And the people who decide elections have historically made up their mind in the 4 weeks of the election. | ||
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
On July 23 2016 10:11 Plansix wrote: And he lost 13% right before that. He started at 33% and tanked to 21%. And the people who decide elections have historically made up their mind in the 4 weeks of the election. Yeah, right now our predictive power is very bad. In two weeks we will have a much better indication of how well the two conventions stuck. | ||
GGTeMpLaR
United States7226 Posts
On July 23 2016 10:11 Plansix wrote: And he lost 13% right before that. He started at 33% and tanked to 21%. And the people who decide elections have historically made up their mind in the 4 weeks of the election. 10 days ago he was at 20% with clinton at 80%, now he's at 40% with clinton at 60% It's obviously extremely volatile right now and so what you see today isn't really necessarily reflective at all what it will be in November That's the take away from this | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 23 2016 10:17 GGTeMpLaR wrote: 10 days ago he was at 20% with clinton at 80%, now he's at 40% with clinton at 60% It's obviously extremely volatile right now and so what you see today isn't really necessarily reflective at all what it will be in November That's the take away from this I am not teaching you how to use that really simple website. Just trust me. | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4338 Posts
Hillary was probably prodded by Goldman Sachs to choose him. | ||
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
| ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
The White House on Thursday announced an array of new initiatives aimed at clinching one key goal in a transition away from burning fossil fuels — switching the nation’s millions of drivers from gas guzzlers to electric vehicles. The key to this transition? Installing a widespread national network of electric vehicle charging stations that will allow potential drivers to get around a key psychological problem: “range anxiety.” At present, many people are justifiably afraid that they’ll run out of charge on their EV far from a station where they can repower its battery. We know it’s easy in most places to find a gas station, but we don’t know as much about charging stations. And without that assurance, EV sales will continue to be held back. To change this, the White House announced a new designation of up to $4.5 billion in Energy Department loan guarantees to support new types of EV charging infrastructure, plans to designate and develop key electric vehicle “charging corridors” across the country, plans for the government itself to procure large numbers of electric vehicles and research initiatives at the Department of Energy and its laboratories to improve EV charging technologies. The array of initiatives “serves the goal of providing consumers with more comfort that they will be able to move across regions and across the country in their electric vehicles,” said Brian Deese, a senior adviser to President Obama, on a call with reporters. At the same time, the White House announced that some of the country’s largest power companies and automakers — ranging from Duke Energy to the Southern Company, and from Ford to Tesla — had signed on to a joint statement pledging to “drive the market transformation to electric vehicles by making it easy for consumers to charge their vehicles.” The partnership signals that even as Tesla and other automakers build more electric cars, companies like Duke, the country’s largest electric utility, are taking steps to create more facilities to accommodate them. Duke recently announced a plan to offer cities in North Carolina $1 million to develop charging facilities, even though there are only about 4,700 EVs in the state right now, the company’s Randy Wheeless said in a recent interview with The Washington Post. Source | ||
Introvert
United States4825 Posts
Pluses: from Virginia, speaks Spanish. | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
Toadesstern
Germany16350 Posts
On July 23 2016 10:03 GGTeMpLaR wrote: Wow she tanked 20% in 10 days? according to another article from them it's very normal for candidates to get a boost during or right after the convention (duh). Trump would have to be quiet ahead of Clinton right now to get to 50% chance of winning the election in their book. In that sense, yes she went down as everyone thought would happen but not really sure if it's enough as Trump should be ahead right now. Clinton does have the advantage of her convention being after Trumps after all. But then again chances are hers won't really be as big in the media | ||
Introvert
United States4825 Posts
On July 23 2016 11:36 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: But does nothing to benefit the rust belt. They might be believers in the idea that VP choice doesn't matter much. Kaine can't hurt her, which is his best attribute. And he might help in Virginia. I mean who would she pick? Warren? Please. Though I kind of wanted that. All the things Warren has said about Clinton and then she agrees to be surrogate #1. lol. Edit: and don't forget "history." First female president. Don't take any of Clinton's glory. | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
| ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
| ||