|
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. |
On October 17 2016 09:34 Doodsmack wrote:
Nettles is gonna look really dumb on the evening of Nov 8. As is anyone still clinging to the Titanic.
Why can't you argue without calling other people names?
I see tons of people doing that here.
|
|
|
He wasn't saying Nettles is dumb, he's saying Nettles is going to look dumb.
Put down the victim card, please.
|
On October 17 2016 09:27 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2016 06:59 LemOn wrote:
So the odds now with bookies
Trump 5
Hillary 1/6
Obviously Hillary is a favourite but nowhere near the lock they are making it out to be... Are interest groups rigging the election through capital again?
It happened in the UK where large companies and City pumped out bets remain to influence the vote It really is a lock. Show me an electoral map where Trump wins, tyty. Use this tool, post a map where Trump has 270 and we'll look at what he needs to win for that map to be true. http://www.270towin.com/
seems like the path of least resistance is ohio, north carolina, florida, georgia, nevada, iowa, wisconsin? assuming he wins utah and arizona
unlikely if you are relying on 538's model
|
On October 17 2016 09:31 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2016 09:21 Dan HH wrote:On October 17 2016 09:06 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On October 17 2016 08:59 Dan HH wrote:On October 17 2016 08:54 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On October 17 2016 08:22 TheTenthDoc wrote:On October 17 2016 06:59 LemOn wrote:
So the odds now with bookies
Trump 5
Hillary 1/6
Obviously Hillary is a favourite but nowhere near the lock they are making it out to be... Are interest groups rigging the election through capital again?
It happened in the UK where large companies and City pumped out bets remain to influence the vote The most conservative statistical model out there that I'm aware of (538 polls-plus) gives Trump worse odds than 5-1. It's pretty unlikely the interest groups are rigging the odds through capital. And the final poll before the brexit vote had remain up by 10 points.It was also the largest sample size of all polls.Explain that? Keep trusting those phony polls, plenty here going to get a huge shock come election day. I've already explained it to you the last time you brought this shit up, Brexit doesn't void polling. It was a one off vote with no precedent and no proper baseline, an issue that is not present in cyclical elections. You can't explain away a 12 point discrepancy between polling and the final result.Nice sidestep there.Drudge through the UK politics thread i'm sure youll find dozens of claims that brexit will never win.Maybe some of those predictions were even made by you. Suggesting that all polling is now void and every election from Brexit forward is some complete mystery is fucking insane even for your standards. Whats insane is the WSJ polls showing Clinton up by 11 and the LA Times poll showing Trump up by one released on the same day.You don't see that? You wonder why so many don't trust the pollsters? Look at the discrepancies... LA Times were closest to predicting the result in 2012, don't be surprised if theyre right again.
And i believe it has been shown how that poll was massively Skewed by 1 black teenager representing a whole chunk of the population.
|
On October 17 2016 09:42 Shingi11 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2016 09:31 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On October 17 2016 09:21 Dan HH wrote:On October 17 2016 09:06 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On October 17 2016 08:59 Dan HH wrote:On October 17 2016 08:54 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On October 17 2016 08:22 TheTenthDoc wrote:On October 17 2016 06:59 LemOn wrote:
So the odds now with bookies
Trump 5
Hillary 1/6
Obviously Hillary is a favourite but nowhere near the lock they are making it out to be... Are interest groups rigging the election through capital again?
It happened in the UK where large companies and City pumped out bets remain to influence the vote The most conservative statistical model out there that I'm aware of (538 polls-plus) gives Trump worse odds than 5-1. It's pretty unlikely the interest groups are rigging the odds through capital. And the final poll before the brexit vote had remain up by 10 points.It was also the largest sample size of all polls.Explain that? Keep trusting those phony polls, plenty here going to get a huge shock come election day. I've already explained it to you the last time you brought this shit up, Brexit doesn't void polling. It was a one off vote with no precedent and no proper baseline, an issue that is not present in cyclical elections. You can't explain away a 12 point discrepancy between polling and the final result.Nice sidestep there.Drudge through the UK politics thread i'm sure youll find dozens of claims that brexit will never win.Maybe some of those predictions were even made by you. Suggesting that all polling is now void and every election from Brexit forward is some complete mystery is fucking insane even for your standards. Whats insane is the WSJ polls showing Clinton up by 11 and the LA Times poll showing Trump up by one released on the same day.You don't see that? You wonder why so many don't trust the pollsters? Look at the discrepancies... LA Times were closest to predicting the result in 2012, don't be surprised if theyre right again. And i believe it has been shown how that poll was massively Skewed by 1 black teenager representing a whole chunk of the population.
That is correct. And they use a tracking poll.
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20161012/14570935784/how-one-young-black-man-supporting-trump-massively-skews-la-times-presidential-poll.shtml
|
Sweden33723 Posts
On October 17 2016 08:06 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2016 07:08 Nakajin wrote:On October 17 2016 06:59 LemOn wrote:
So the odds now with bookies
Trump 5
Hillary 1/6
Obviously Hillary is a favourite but nowhere near the lock they are making it out to be... Are interest groups rigging the election through capital again?
It happened in the UK where large companies and City pumped out bets remain to influence the vote Am I the only one felling super disgusted at the idea of betting on an election? I don't want to be mean to anyone but I can't understand how someone can do it and still have an ounce of respect for democracy. (Ok that was a little mean, sorry) here's some reasons: gambling addiction. They think it provides more meaningful information than polling. They're only betting on other country's stuff. as a hedge against risk. they're otherwise horrible people who care about democracy (i.e. they'd have no problem betting on life/death matters)
.. I like how you basically pre-suppose betting on an election is morally questionable.
I would almost go as far as to say it is less questionable than f.e sports betting. In sports betting you end up with match fixing, but the election is so huge for both sides it basically dwarfs any incentive some group with money on it could produce.
Except maybe if Trump had money on Clinton I guess.
I am open to there being other reasons betting on the election is wrong, but I do not believe it to be so obvious you can assume it without having stated a single argument as to why.
|
On October 17 2016 09:31 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2016 09:21 Dan HH wrote:On October 17 2016 09:06 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On October 17 2016 08:59 Dan HH wrote:On October 17 2016 08:54 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On October 17 2016 08:22 TheTenthDoc wrote:On October 17 2016 06:59 LemOn wrote:
So the odds now with bookies
Trump 5
Hillary 1/6
Obviously Hillary is a favourite but nowhere near the lock they are making it out to be... Are interest groups rigging the election through capital again?
It happened in the UK where large companies and City pumped out bets remain to influence the vote The most conservative statistical model out there that I'm aware of (538 polls-plus) gives Trump worse odds than 5-1. It's pretty unlikely the interest groups are rigging the odds through capital. And the final poll before the brexit vote had remain up by 10 points.It was also the largest sample size of all polls.Explain that? Keep trusting those phony polls, plenty here going to get a huge shock come election day. I've already explained it to you the last time you brought this shit up, Brexit doesn't void polling. It was a one off vote with no precedent and no proper baseline, an issue that is not present in cyclical elections. You can't explain away a 12 point discrepancy between polling and the final result.Nice sidestep there.Drudge through the UK politics thread i'm sure youll find dozens of claims that brexit will never win.Maybe some of those predictions were even made by you. Suggesting that all polling is now void and every election from Brexit forward is some complete mystery is fucking insane even for your standards. Whats insane is the WSJ polls showing Clinton up by 11 and the LA Times poll showing Trump up by one released on the same day.You don't see that? You wonder why so many don't trust the pollsters? Look at the discrepancies... LA Times were closest to predicting the result in 2012, don't be surprised if theyre right again.
That's why we have aggregators like 538 who also include other factors and weigh polls. A few skewed pollsters is no reason to assume that math has stopped working.
|
On October 17 2016 09:47 Liquid`Jinro wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2016 08:06 zlefin wrote:On October 17 2016 07:08 Nakajin wrote:On October 17 2016 06:59 LemOn wrote:
So the odds now with bookies
Trump 5
Hillary 1/6
Obviously Hillary is a favourite but nowhere near the lock they are making it out to be... Are interest groups rigging the election through capital again?
It happened in the UK where large companies and City pumped out bets remain to influence the vote Am I the only one felling super disgusted at the idea of betting on an election? I don't want to be mean to anyone but I can't understand how someone can do it and still have an ounce of respect for democracy. (Ok that was a little mean, sorry) here's some reasons: gambling addiction. They think it provides more meaningful information than polling. They're only betting on other country's stuff. as a hedge against risk. they're otherwise horrible people who care about democracy (i.e. they'd have no problem betting on life/death matters) .. I like how you basically pre-suppose betting on an election is morally questionable. I would almost go as far as to say it is less questionable than f.e sports betting. In sports betting you end up with match fixing, but the election is so huge for both sides it basically dwarfs any incentive some group with money on it could produce. Except maybe if Trump had money on Clinton I guess.
Have you heard the conspiracy theory about trump being a stooge to get clinton elected?
its by far the most sensible of all the conspiracy theories that have been going around this year imo
|
Sweden33723 Posts
On October 17 2016 09:50 PassiveAce wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2016 09:47 Liquid`Jinro wrote:On October 17 2016 08:06 zlefin wrote:On October 17 2016 07:08 Nakajin wrote:On October 17 2016 06:59 LemOn wrote:
So the odds now with bookies
Trump 5
Hillary 1/6
Obviously Hillary is a favourite but nowhere near the lock they are making it out to be... Are interest groups rigging the election through capital again?
It happened in the UK where large companies and City pumped out bets remain to influence the vote Am I the only one felling super disgusted at the idea of betting on an election? I don't want to be mean to anyone but I can't understand how someone can do it and still have an ounce of respect for democracy. (Ok that was a little mean, sorry) here's some reasons: gambling addiction. They think it provides more meaningful information than polling. They're only betting on other country's stuff. as a hedge against risk. they're otherwise horrible people who care about democracy (i.e. they'd have no problem betting on life/death matters) .. I like how you basically pre-suppose betting on an election is morally questionable. I would almost go as far as to say it is less questionable than f.e sports betting. In sports betting you end up with match fixing, but the election is so huge for both sides it basically dwarfs any incentive some group with money on it could produce. Except maybe if Trump had money on Clinton I guess. Have you heard the conspiracy theory about trump being a stooge to get clinton elected? its by far the most sensible of all the conspiracy theories that have been going around this year imo
They seem to have underestimated the power of partisanship if so.
Also seems almost impossible to provide enough incentive to Trump to make this worth it when you look at how close he is to actually winning. It would have to have been a massive shock to him that he'd even have a chance to make such a proposition attractive but then that would defeat the purpose since why would you expect him to win the nomination if so?
Not to mention he's discussed running for president as far back as the 90s I think? Anyhow, seems like a hard sell motivation wise unless he's an ideological zealot.
|
On October 17 2016 09:47 Liquid`Jinro wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2016 08:06 zlefin wrote:On October 17 2016 07:08 Nakajin wrote:On October 17 2016 06:59 LemOn wrote:
So the odds now with bookies
Trump 5
Hillary 1/6
Obviously Hillary is a favourite but nowhere near the lock they are making it out to be... Are interest groups rigging the election through capital again?
It happened in the UK where large companies and City pumped out bets remain to influence the vote Am I the only one felling super disgusted at the idea of betting on an election? I don't want to be mean to anyone but I can't understand how someone can do it and still have an ounce of respect for democracy. (Ok that was a little mean, sorry) here's some reasons: gambling addiction. They think it provides more meaningful information than polling. They're only betting on other country's stuff. as a hedge against risk. they're otherwise horrible people who care about democracy (i.e. they'd have no problem betting on life/death matters) .. I like how you basically pre-suppose betting on an election is morally questionable. I would almost go as far as to say it is less questionable than f.e sports betting. In sports betting you end up with match fixing, but the election is so huge for both sides it basically dwarfs any incentive some group with money on it could produce. Except maybe if Trump had money on Clinton I guess. I am open to there being other reasons betting on the election is wrong, but I do not believe it to be so obvious you can assume it without having stated a single argument as to why.
gonna have to call you an idiot, cuz you are. I was RESPONDING to someone who found it questionable, hence my listing of reasons. Pay attention to what was said.
|
On October 17 2016 09:50 PassiveAce wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2016 09:47 Liquid`Jinro wrote:On October 17 2016 08:06 zlefin wrote:On October 17 2016 07:08 Nakajin wrote:On October 17 2016 06:59 LemOn wrote:
So the odds now with bookies
Trump 5
Hillary 1/6
Obviously Hillary is a favourite but nowhere near the lock they are making it out to be... Are interest groups rigging the election through capital again?
It happened in the UK where large companies and City pumped out bets remain to influence the vote Am I the only one felling super disgusted at the idea of betting on an election? I don't want to be mean to anyone but I can't understand how someone can do it and still have an ounce of respect for democracy. (Ok that was a little mean, sorry) here's some reasons: gambling addiction. They think it provides more meaningful information than polling. They're only betting on other country's stuff. as a hedge against risk. they're otherwise horrible people who care about democracy (i.e. they'd have no problem betting on life/death matters) .. I like how you basically pre-suppose betting on an election is morally questionable. I would almost go as far as to say it is less questionable than f.e sports betting. In sports betting you end up with match fixing, but the election is so huge for both sides it basically dwarfs any incentive some group with money on it could produce. Except maybe if Trump had money on Clinton I guess. Have you heard the conspiracy theory about trump being a stooge to get clinton elected? its by far the most sensible of all the conspiracy theories that have been going around this year imo
This is implausible because they already had Jeb.
|
On October 17 2016 09:58 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2016 09:47 Liquid`Jinro wrote:On October 17 2016 08:06 zlefin wrote:On October 17 2016 07:08 Nakajin wrote:On October 17 2016 06:59 LemOn wrote:
So the odds now with bookies
Trump 5
Hillary 1/6
Obviously Hillary is a favourite but nowhere near the lock they are making it out to be... Are interest groups rigging the election through capital again?
It happened in the UK where large companies and City pumped out bets remain to influence the vote Am I the only one felling super disgusted at the idea of betting on an election? I don't want to be mean to anyone but I can't understand how someone can do it and still have an ounce of respect for democracy. (Ok that was a little mean, sorry) here's some reasons: gambling addiction. They think it provides more meaningful information than polling. They're only betting on other country's stuff. as a hedge against risk. they're otherwise horrible people who care about democracy (i.e. they'd have no problem betting on life/death matters) .. I like how you basically pre-suppose betting on an election is morally questionable. I would almost go as far as to say it is less questionable than f.e sports betting. In sports betting you end up with match fixing, but the election is so huge for both sides it basically dwarfs any incentive some group with money on it could produce. Except maybe if Trump had money on Clinton I guess. I am open to there being other reasons betting on the election is wrong, but I do not believe it to be so obvious you can assume it without having stated a single argument as to why. gonna have to call you an idiot, cuz you are. I was RESPONDING to someone who found it questionable, hence my listing of reasons. Pay attention to what was said.
Bit quick to call names because someone didn't read every post in the thread religiously, aren't we? There are more diplomatic ways to correct someone
|
On October 17 2016 09:58 Liquid`Jinro wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2016 09:50 PassiveAce wrote:On October 17 2016 09:47 Liquid`Jinro wrote:On October 17 2016 08:06 zlefin wrote:On October 17 2016 07:08 Nakajin wrote:On October 17 2016 06:59 LemOn wrote:
So the odds now with bookies
Trump 5
Hillary 1/6
Obviously Hillary is a favourite but nowhere near the lock they are making it out to be... Are interest groups rigging the election through capital again?
It happened in the UK where large companies and City pumped out bets remain to influence the vote Am I the only one felling super disgusted at the idea of betting on an election? I don't want to be mean to anyone but I can't understand how someone can do it and still have an ounce of respect for democracy. (Ok that was a little mean, sorry) here's some reasons: gambling addiction. They think it provides more meaningful information than polling. They're only betting on other country's stuff. as a hedge against risk. they're otherwise horrible people who care about democracy (i.e. they'd have no problem betting on life/death matters) .. I like how you basically pre-suppose betting on an election is morally questionable. I would almost go as far as to say it is less questionable than f.e sports betting. In sports betting you end up with match fixing, but the election is so huge for both sides it basically dwarfs any incentive some group with money on it could produce. Except maybe if Trump had money on Clinton I guess. Have you heard the conspiracy theory about trump being a stooge to get clinton elected? its by far the most sensible of all the conspiracy theories that have been going around this year imo They seem to have underestimated the power of partisanship if so. Also seems almost impossible to provide enough incentive to Trump to make this worth it when you look at how close he is to actually winning. It would have to have been a massive shock to him that he'd even have a chance to make such a proposition attractive but then that would defeat the purpose since why would you expect him to win the nomination if so? Not to mention he's discussed running for president as far back as the 90s I think? Anyhow, seems like a hard sell motivation wise unless he's an ideological zealot.
Also IDK what Clinton could offer that would make Trump willing to sink time and money plus his reputation and business.
|
On October 17 2016 09:27 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2016 09:18 ChristianS wrote:On October 17 2016 09:15 oBlade wrote:On October 17 2016 09:06 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On October 17 2016 08:59 Dan HH wrote:On October 17 2016 08:54 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On October 17 2016 08:22 TheTenthDoc wrote:On October 17 2016 06:59 LemOn wrote:
So the odds now with bookies
Trump 5
Hillary 1/6
Obviously Hillary is a favourite but nowhere near the lock they are making it out to be... Are interest groups rigging the election through capital again?
It happened in the UK where large companies and City pumped out bets remain to influence the vote The most conservative statistical model out there that I'm aware of (538 polls-plus) gives Trump worse odds than 5-1. It's pretty unlikely the interest groups are rigging the odds through capital. And the final poll before the brexit vote had remain up by 10 points.It was also the largest sample size of all polls.Explain that? Keep trusting those phony polls, plenty here going to get a huge shock come election day. I've already explained it to you the last time you brought this shit up, Brexit doesn't void polling. It was a one off vote with no precedent and no proper baseline, an issue that is not present in cyclical elections. You can't explain away a 12 point discrepancy between polling and the final result.Nice sidestep there.Drudge through the UK politics thread i'm sure youll find dozens of claims that brexit will never win.Maybe some of those predictions were even made by you. Yes, polls are interesting, but people who can only think through polls are tiring. Do you have a better method for figuring out what the population thinks and predicting who will win? You don't need to predict the winner, it's not a big priority. People have explained this before in the thread, in an election you don't get extra points for choosing the right answer.
So you're not doubting the efficacy of polling, just complaining about horse race reporting? Surely the discussions of a) who should win, and b) who is going to win are both legitimate ones to have. Right now, for instance, it seems pretty meaningless to discuss policy implications of Trump's various plans when by all indications he won't have any chance to implement them.
|
|
|
On October 17 2016 09:58 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2016 09:47 Liquid`Jinro wrote:On October 17 2016 08:06 zlefin wrote:On October 17 2016 07:08 Nakajin wrote:On October 17 2016 06:59 LemOn wrote:
So the odds now with bookies
Trump 5
Hillary 1/6
Obviously Hillary is a favourite but nowhere near the lock they are making it out to be... Are interest groups rigging the election through capital again?
It happened in the UK where large companies and City pumped out bets remain to influence the vote Am I the only one felling super disgusted at the idea of betting on an election? I don't want to be mean to anyone but I can't understand how someone can do it and still have an ounce of respect for democracy. (Ok that was a little mean, sorry) here's some reasons: gambling addiction. They think it provides more meaningful information than polling. They're only betting on other country's stuff. as a hedge against risk. they're otherwise horrible people who care about democracy (i.e. they'd have no problem betting on life/death matters) .. I like how you basically pre-suppose betting on an election is morally questionable. I would almost go as far as to say it is less questionable than f.e sports betting. In sports betting you end up with match fixing, but the election is so huge for both sides it basically dwarfs any incentive some group with money on it could produce. Except maybe if Trump had money on Clinton I guess. I am open to there being other reasons betting on the election is wrong, but I do not believe it to be so obvious you can assume it without having stated a single argument as to why. gonna have to call you an idiot, cuz you are. I was RESPONDING to someone who found it questionable, hence my listing of reasons. Pay attention to what was said.
Okay I thought better of you.
Not even a warning?
What are mods doing?
I thought we are all about civility.
|
On October 17 2016 09:58 Liquid`Jinro wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2016 09:50 PassiveAce wrote:On October 17 2016 09:47 Liquid`Jinro wrote:On October 17 2016 08:06 zlefin wrote:On October 17 2016 07:08 Nakajin wrote:On October 17 2016 06:59 LemOn wrote:
So the odds now with bookies
Trump 5
Hillary 1/6
Obviously Hillary is a favourite but nowhere near the lock they are making it out to be... Are interest groups rigging the election through capital again?
It happened in the UK where large companies and City pumped out bets remain to influence the vote Am I the only one felling super disgusted at the idea of betting on an election? I don't want to be mean to anyone but I can't understand how someone can do it and still have an ounce of respect for democracy. (Ok that was a little mean, sorry) here's some reasons: gambling addiction. They think it provides more meaningful information than polling. They're only betting on other country's stuff. as a hedge against risk. they're otherwise horrible people who care about democracy (i.e. they'd have no problem betting on life/death matters) .. I like how you basically pre-suppose betting on an election is morally questionable. I would almost go as far as to say it is less questionable than f.e sports betting. In sports betting you end up with match fixing, but the election is so huge for both sides it basically dwarfs any incentive some group with money on it could produce. Except maybe if Trump had money on Clinton I guess. Have you heard the conspiracy theory about trump being a stooge to get clinton elected? its by far the most sensible of all the conspiracy theories that have been going around this year imo They seem to have underestimated the power of partisanship if so. Also seems almost impossible to provide enough incentive to Trump to make this worth it when you look at how close he is to actually winning. It would have to have been a massive shock to him that he'd even have a chance to make such a proposition attractive but then that would defeat the purpose since why would you expect him to win the nomination if so? Not to mention he's discussed running for president as far back as the 90s I think? Anyhow, seems like a hard sell motivation wise unless he's an ideological zealot.
yeah a conspiracy theory is a conspiracy theory. but man that would be smart.
i kind of doubt trump actually wants to be president. I get the feeling hes more interested in the prestige then the work
|
|
|
On October 17 2016 09:31 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2016 09:21 Dan HH wrote:On October 17 2016 09:06 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On October 17 2016 08:59 Dan HH wrote:On October 17 2016 08:54 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:On October 17 2016 08:22 TheTenthDoc wrote:On October 17 2016 06:59 LemOn wrote:
So the odds now with bookies
Trump 5
Hillary 1/6
Obviously Hillary is a favourite but nowhere near the lock they are making it out to be... Are interest groups rigging the election through capital again?
It happened in the UK where large companies and City pumped out bets remain to influence the vote The most conservative statistical model out there that I'm aware of (538 polls-plus) gives Trump worse odds than 5-1. It's pretty unlikely the interest groups are rigging the odds through capital. And the final poll before the brexit vote had remain up by 10 points.It was also the largest sample size of all polls.Explain that? Keep trusting those phony polls, plenty here going to get a huge shock come election day. I've already explained it to you the last time you brought this shit up, Brexit doesn't void polling. It was a one off vote with no precedent and no proper baseline, an issue that is not present in cyclical elections. You can't explain away a 12 point discrepancy between polling and the final result.Nice sidestep there.Drudge through the UK politics thread i'm sure youll find dozens of claims that brexit will never win.Maybe some of those predictions were even made by you. Suggesting that all polling is now void and every election from Brexit forward is some complete mystery is fucking insane even for your standards. Whats insane is the WSJ polls showing Clinton up by 11 and the LA Times poll showing Trump up by one released on the same day.You don't see that? You wonder why so many don't trust the pollsters? Look at the discrepancies... LA Times were closest to predicting the result in 2012, don't be surprised if theyre right again.
No, I don't wonder why so many people don't trust pollsters, when the candidate those people support says all the polls in which he isn't doing well are rigged and fake while proudly tweeting every poll in which he is climbing. I also don't wonder why so many people don't trust pollsters when every single alt-right forum and blog does the same thing as him and keeps yelling polls don't count because Brexit. And I have no doubt that one or both of the above are the reason why you are now trying to convince me that 'polls are phony'.
A 12 point difference between the most +Clinton and most +Trump is not of particular note given the massive amount of polls for the US election and the wildly different methodologies used. For Brexit this difference was over 20 points.
Both the WSJ and LA Times polls have apparent flaws as far as I'm concerned, of course either one of them could end up to be true, but it's not particularly wise to cherry pick and put all your hopes on the biggest outlier that fits your wish. Hell it's not particularly wise to cherry pick the biggest outlier among aggregators, let alone individual polls. Especially when you are not claiming one is better than all the others based on an analysis of their methodology but simply by looking at whether they have your candidate in the lead or not.
Plenty of polls that have pinpointed a previous election have gotten the next one wildly wrong, that's why clinging to a specific one isn't a great idea. The bottom line is, Trump's chances are somewhere between 1 in 10 and 1 in 5 according to current data, that's not a very low one if you think about it. But it would be a surprise, statistically an even bigger one than Brexit if polls were to stay like this until election day. And as I hope you are acknowledging by now, the statistical wiggle room for Brexit was much greater.
You are not wrong in the slightest to think that the race isn't over and Trump has a chance, but you are unequivocally wrong to think that polling is phony and the result is a complete mystery. Make no mistake, if the turnout among the main demographic groups does not vary more than expected between the last few elections and this one, he will lose. His chance is based on a significant change in turnout demographics, a change that has the best shot of happening if Clinton's supporters and the anti-Trump crowd are convinced that she is assured of victory. But Trump's supporters are doing a piss poor job of convincing them of that by acting like you are.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
