Election 2016: Trump vs Clinton

[HI54UNI]

Dedicated website noting Hilldog's last press conference

http://hillaryslastpressconfrence.com/

[CAA Flagship]

Did any of you catch Trumps speech yesterday? Pretty damn good.

No.

Post by CAA Flagship » Thu Aug 18, 2016 7:27 pm
Trump just gave his best speech yet.

[BDKJMU]

All the headlines are Donald Trump, Mike Pence meeting Louisiana flood victims, touring hard-hit Baton Rouge neighborhoods, helping to hand out supplies.

Meanwhile, former Donk LA Senator Mary Landrieu,
"‘I Want To Thank Mr. Trump for Coming to Louisiana,’ ‘I Hope’ Clinton and Obama Will Visit'"..
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/08/ ... ill-visit/

Must be driving JSO nuts..

[JohnStOnge]

I really doubt that a " highest level of state secrets" thing was involved with Clinton's use of a private server. In fact my guess is that if people could see the kinds of stuff she was e mailing about through that system most would ask, "What's the big deal?"

It's incredible how clueless you are. What is so difficult to understand, the SoS used her own email server to house government communications. That's a no-no (if you're anyone other than Clinton).

I know it's a no no. I'm just saying I doubt "highest level state secrets" were involved. At least in terms of practical reality.

[JohnStOnge]

All the headlines are Donald Trump, Mike Pence meeting Louisiana flood victims, touring hard-hit Baton Rouge neighborhoods, helping to hand out supplies.

Meanwhile, former Donk LA Senator Mary Landrieu,
"‘I Want To Thank Mr. Trump for Coming to Louisiana,’ ‘I Hope’ Clinton and Obama Will Visit'"..
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/08/ ... ill-visit/

Must be driving JSO nuts..

Not driving me nuts. I understand the political optics. I'm sure Trump made a HUGE difference by making an appearance and handing out supplies for a few seconds.

Louisiana's Governor asked Obama to wait a while to come. He said he'd welcome him if he came but would really rather that he not.

[JohnStOnge]

And BTW Louisiana's governor asked Trump not to come for a "photo op." What do you think was going on when Trump in his "Make America Great Again" hat was videoed standing line for a few seconds passing boxes of supplies on to the next person as though he was REALLY doing something to help? BTW they were very small boxes.

He was asked not to do a "photo op" thing and that's exactly what he did anyway.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6qYuUGK77o[/youtube]

Oh yeah. That REALLY helped the situation.

[JohnStOnge]

Trump just gave his best speech yet.

And lied when he said "I will always tell you the truth." Like after saying that he went out and kept saying he opposed the Iraq War before it started. And he said no reporters would be allowed during his trip to Louisiana but now we're seeing him handing out boxes for a few seconds. Oh and saying the trip to Louisiana wouldn't be political. THAT was a whopper. On and on.

I wanted to wait until he actually lied again AFTER saying "I will always tell you the truth" because it was a future tense statement. Obviously he had NOT always told the truth in the past. In fact he'd told the truth very little. But since it was future tense I wanted to see if maybe he would change.

Nope. He continues to lie all the time.

[kalm]

And BTW Louisiana's governor asked Trump not to come for a "photo op." What do you think was going on when Trump in his "Make America Great Again" hat was videoed standing line for a few seconds passing boxes of supplies on to the next person as though he was REALLY doing something to help? BTW they were very small boxes.

He was asked not to do a "photo op" thing and that's exactly what he did anyway.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6qYuUGK77o[/youtube]

Oh yeah. That REALLY helped the situation.

I think it's great how you're learning about the PR practices of all modern politicians.

[JohnStOnge]

I think Trump's team may have stepped in it with its first national ad. See leftist take on it at http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/t ... k-dacadapa. The Trump ad cites something called the "Center for Immigration Studies," which is tabbed as a right wing hate group by the leftist groups that label such things. You can see that on pages like http://www.pfaw.org/rww-in-focus/anti-i ... #thinktank and https://www.splcenter.org/20090201/nati ... ntolerance. The head of the Center for Immigration Studies has a history of being involved in the eugenics movement.

Not a good move. Now the Democrats are going to be able to say Trump's campaign ad cites a racist group run by a guy who promotes eugenics and "...who operates a racist publishing company and has written that to maintain American culture, 'a European-American majority' is required."

That sort of thing.

Of course I'm happy about it. Even while the news has been full of reports of Trump trying to tone it down it's clear that his campaign is still screwing up. Like kicking an ethnic minority teen who went to a Trump rally yesterday to support Trump out and who now is making the TV news circuit.

http://reason.com/blog/2016/08/19/trump ... kicked-out

Anantha says he stood outside the Convention Center watching a stream of white people enter.

"I thought (Trump) was for all people. I don't believe he is for all people anymore," he said. "Why are all these white people allowed to attend and I'm not?"

[JohnStOnge]

BTW I hadn't commented on the hiring of the Breitbart.com guy. Or if I did I don't recall it. But it's another example of how tone deaf Trump is. Here is some content from Breitbart.com:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... -heritage/

Now, I actually like the Confederate Flag and think it does reflect a proud heritage. But is associating himself with the Brietbart.com guy a smart move on the part of this supposed GREAT manager Trump? Think maybe the Democrats can make some hay out of that?

[CID1990]

It's incredible how clueless you are. What is so difficult to understand, the SoS used her own email server to house government communications. That's a no-no (if you're anyone other than Clinton).

I know it's a no no. I'm just saying I doubt "highest level state secrets" were involved. At least in terms of practical reality.

And again, at the risk of sounding like a broken record, you are incorrect, JSO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ivytalk]

BTW I hadn't commented on the hiring of the Breitbart.com guy. Or if I did I don't recall it. But it's another example of how tone deaf Trump is. Here is some content from Breitbart.com:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... -heritage/

Now, I actually like the Confederate Flag and think it does reflect a proud heritage. But is associating himself with the Brietbart.com guy a smart move on the part of this supposed GREAT manager Trump? Think maybe the Democrats can make some hay out of that?

I don't know. Why don't you tell us, Robby St. Mook?

[93henfan]

Trump back in the lead for first time since the Republican Convention in the USC/LA Times poll.

[BDKJMU]

Trump back in the lead for first time since the Republican Convention in the USC/LA Times poll.

That one is head to head. The 3 most recent 4 Way polls (Reuters, Rasmussen, Pew) with Johnson and Stein have Clinton up +4, +2, +4. But like I said before, the polls right now are like the pre season football polls- don't mean much for another month..

[BDKJMU]

Clowns at the Washington Post:

"With a comfortable lead, Clinton begins laying plans for her White House agenda

...In recent weeks, as her leads over GOP nominee Donald Trump have expanded...."
Actually in the last 2 weeks her lead has shrunk..

"....Trump, who also has a transition team at work, trails by double digits in some national polls. No candidate in more than 60 years has come back to win after being so far behind at this point in the general-election campaign...."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html

First off, these idiots at the WaPo are claiming Trump trails by double digits in some national pollS. 2-3 weeks ago, yeah. But now of the 14 polls currently listed on the RCP averages, 8 four way Polls, and 6 head to head, only 1 has Clinton up by double digits, the Monmouth 4 Way, taken 8/4-8/7, and that poll will probably drop off the list tomorrow.

Also whatever Hillary fans that wrote the article are wrong on the 60 year thing. In the RCP averages Clinton is basically up around 5 points. In Aug 88' Dukakis was up double digits on HW Bush. (end of July 88' Gallup Dukakis was +17).
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/07/26/us/du ... -poll.html

Just goes to show polls this far out don't matter that much..While us political junkie nerds on this board are paying attention, a significant portion (maybe a plurality) of the population aren't paying that much attention- got vacations & other things going on in Aug.

[CID1990]

National polls are meaningless.

The polls that have pretty well correctly shown what was going to happen in the general was the state polls. Currently, those show even more of a bloodbath than the national ones do. Hillary's campaign is correctly moving on to agenda and cabinet because this election is already over.

[SDHornet]

National polls are meaningless.

The polls that have pretty well correctly shown what was going to happen in the general was the state polls. Currently, those show even more of a bloodbath than the national ones do. Hillary's campaign is correctly moving on to agenda and cabinet because this election is already over.

[BDKJMU]

National polls are meaningless.

The polls that have pretty well correctly shown what was going to happen in the general was the state polls. Currently, those show even more of a bloodbath than the national ones do. Hillary's campaign is correctly moving on to agenda and cabinet because this election is already over.

Its not over. Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

[kalm]

National polls are meaningless.

The polls that have pretty well correctly shown what was going to happen in the general was the state polls. Currently, those show even more of a bloodbath than the national ones do. Hillary's campaign is correctly moving on to agenda and cabinet because this election is already over.

Its not over. Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

[Skjellyfetti]

National polls are meaningless.

The polls that have pretty well correctly shown what was going to happen in the general was the state polls. Currently, those show even more of a bloodbath than the national ones do. Hillary's campaign is correctly moving on to agenda and cabinet because this election is already over.

Yeah, looking at polls in swing states and the electoral map is the most telling.

And, looking at Senate elections - and Democrats should retake the Senate. And make gains in the House.

[kalm]

National polls are meaningless.

The polls that have pretty well correctly shown what was going to happen in the general was the state polls. Currently, those show even more of a bloodbath than the national ones do. Hillary's campaign is correctly moving on to agenda and cabinet because this election is already over.

Good point. But at least on RCP, the state polls tend to lag behind the national polls with updates. What are the recent swing state polls showing and how recent are they?

[JohnStOnge]

Trump back in the lead for first time since the Republican Convention in the USC/LA Times poll.

The LA Times/USC poll has always been relatively favorable for Trump. That doesn't necessarily mean it's wrong or anything. But even when Hillary's been ahead in it the margin has been very narrow.

Saw Nate Silver on TV talking about it today. He cued me in somewhat to the way it works but it's a weird poll. Here is a description of the methodology (from http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-preside ... ard/#about):

The USC Dornsife/L.A. Times Presidential Election "Daybreak" Poll asks more than 400 people each day about their voting intentions. The poll is part of the Understanding America Study (UAS) at the University of Southern California's Dornsife Center for Economic and Social Research.

Each day's poll respondents are a subset of the UAS election panel, roughly 3000 U.S. citizens who were randomly recruited from among all households in the United States. Respondents are asked three predictive questions: What is the percent chance that (1) you will vote in the presidential election? (2) you will vote for Clinton, Trump, or someone else? and (3) Clinton, Trump or someone else will win?

Results are weighted to match demographic characteristics, such as race and gender, from the U.S. Census Current Population Survey, and are aligned to the 2012 presidential election outcome using self-reported votes in that election.

All kinds of weird stuff there. They're dealing with the same 3,000 people the whole time. And the 3,000 weren't randomly selected. They were "randomly recruited."

A pure, unbiased poll would be something like a true random selection of voters. And there would be no weighting to match demographics and such.

We'll have to wait and see if what the LA Times is doing works. But it's not a "pure" statistical sampling survey or even a serious effort to achieve such a thing.

I'm not necessarily putting that down because it's pretty much impossible to achieve a "pure" statistical sampling survey. We'll just have to wait and see how they do.

[JohnStOnge]

BTW I hadn't commented on the hiring of the Breitbart.com guy. Or if I did I don't recall it. But it's another example of how tone deaf Trump is. Here is some content from Breitbart.com:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... -heritage/

Now, I actually like the Confederate Flag and think it does reflect a proud heritage. But is associating himself with the Brietbart.com guy a smart move on the part of this supposed GREAT manager Trump? Think maybe the Democrats can make some hay out of that?

I don't know. Why don't you tell us, Robby St. Mook?

You can figure it out.

[Ivytalk]

I don't know. Why don't you tell us, Robby St. Mook?

You can figure it out.

Well, I defer to you as the vice chair of the CS.com chapter of the Klinton Kampaign (chair: dbackjon).

[DSUrocks07]

"Everything that the Democrats chase after with Trump is 100% legit and will derail his campaign.

Everything that the GOP chase after with Clinton is a waste of time and will only make them look worse than they already are."

- JSO

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk