Trump/Clinton Debate #3 Thread

[JohnStOnge]

Notice how KY didn't give a link. I suspect this is a series of purported "scientific" polls from one of the lefty sites like CNN. Not much more scientific than the online polls most of whom showed Trump winning all 3 debates..

What people are talking about is on line polls where anybody can just go to a web site and click to say who they thought won as opposed to scientific polls where pollsters are making some kind of effort to make sure that there is some kind of "representative" sample of the population and contact people to construct the sample. It's a huge difference and you are kidding yourself if you don't accept that the "scientific" polls are far superior. The scientific polls aren't perfect by a long shot because it just flat isn't possible to get a true completely sound probability sample of the population. But they're a heck of a lot better than just having a web site where anybody can go click on responses and people self-select.

[89Hen]

To me that graphic provides even stronger evidence that Clinton won. Yes, you can see that people are pre-disposed based on partisanship. But Clinton was +77 among Democrats as compared to those who thought either Trump won or it was a draw while Trump was up +44 among Republicans in those terms. She clearly won. And people who think Trump did are in denial.

It also gets worse if you start looking at questions about who came off as looking more like they knew what the hell they were talking about.

Yeah, but you're a fucking idiot JSO, so....

[DSUrocks07]

To me that graphic provides even stronger evidence that Clinton won. Yes, you can see that people are pre-disposed based on partisanship. But Clinton was +77 among Democrats as compared to those who thought either Trump won or it was a draw while Trump was up +44 among Republicans in those terms. She clearly won. And people who think Trump did are in denial.

It also gets worse if you start looking at questions about who came off as looking more like they knew what the hell they were talking about.

But using your logic

more Independents didn't think that she won than those who thought she did.

Sent using Tapatalk because 89Hen hates this.

[houndawg]

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/12/us/wh ... .html?_r=0

So yeah, there you have it. They are nasty people. I hope Congress can get the impeachment done this time.

[JohnStOnge]

To me that graphic provides even stronger evidence that Clinton won. Yes, you can see that people are pre-disposed based on partisanship. But Clinton was +77 among Democrats as compared to those who thought either Trump won or it was a draw while Trump was up +44 among Republicans in those terms. She clearly won. And people who think Trump did are in denial.

It also gets worse if you start looking at questions about who came off as looking more like they knew what the hell they were talking about.

But using your logic

more Independents didn't think that she won than those who thought she did.

Sent using Tapatalk because 89Hen hates this.

Sure. But the same is true of Trump, by a slightly larger margin, among Independents. Clinton won that debate in terms of perception. Absolutely no doubt.

I think she probably beat him in terms of substance too. I didn't watch so I can't say that for sure. But the fact that a substantial majority said that they thought she had a better understanding of issues strongly suggests that.

And that wouldn't be a surprise because Trump really IS clueless. Trump and substance simply do not mix.