• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Hillary landslide debate victory

disneydude

disneydude

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Messages
25,528
Reaction score
8,470
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Several people, while admitting that Hillary won the debate, took issue with my claim that she won in a landslide. Turns out.......she did. According to this new ABC news poll as well as other polls that have come out in the last few days, the percentage of people who say that Hillary won the debate by near record numbers. Trump took a trouncing by the numbers....and yes.....it was a landslide.

Clinton Trounces Trump in Debate Reactions; Trump's Unfavorability Edges Up (POLL) - ABC News

Americans see Hillary Clinton as the winner of the first presidential debate by a near-record margin in ABC News/Washington Post post-debate polls, with nearly half saying Donald Trump got his facts wrong and one in three saying he outright lied.
 
OrphanSlug said:
While I agree that Trump did not do so well, it has not translated into massive gains in the polling overall.

Hillary is +2.5 or +3 where before the debate they were close to a statistical tie.

View attachment 67208037

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Trump vs. Clinton
Click to expand...

she got no boost from the debate at all. if there was a spike it was minimum. They are pretty much polling where they were before the debate.
at +2.5 it is basically a tie. nothing that can't be overcome if trump does better prep work in the next debate.
 
ludin said:
she got no boost from the debate at all. if there was a spike it was minimum. They are pretty much polling where they were before the debate.
at +2.5 it is basically a tie. nothing that can't be overcome if trump does better prep work in the next debate.
Click to expand...

That's not entirely true. The RCP average is still over half filled with pre-debate polls, and the ones that are new are showing Clinton gains. Rasmussen from T+5 to C+3 for instance. The national and statewide polling suggests a Clinton bounce of 2-4 points.

Not that this can't be overcome with better performances in the next two debates or anything, but there has been without a doubt at least a small bounce for Clinton.
 
disneydude said:
Several people, while admitting that Hillary won the debate, took issue with my claim that she won in a landslide. Turns out.......she did. According to this new ABC news poll as well as other polls that have come out in the last few days, the percentage of people who say that Hillary won the debate by near record numbers. Trump took a trouncing by the numbers....and yes.....it was a landslide.

Clinton Trounces Trump in Debate Reactions; Trump's Unfavorability Edges Up (POLL) - ABC News

Americans see Hillary Clinton as the winner of the first presidential debate by a near-record margin in ABC News/Washington Post post-debate polls, with nearly half saying Donald Trump got his facts wrong and one in three saying he outright lied.
Click to expand...

I find that hard to believe but if true it simply re-enforces my belief that the average voter is a moron and has no grasp of politics, Rights or American government
 
disneydude said:
Several people, while admitting that Hillary won the debate, took issue with my claim that she won in a landslide. Turns out.......she did. According to this new ABC news poll as well as other polls that have come out in the last few days, the percentage of people who say that Hillary won the debate by near record numbers. Trump took a trouncing by the numbers....and yes.....it was a landslide.

Clinton Trounces Trump in Debate Reactions; Trump's Unfavorability Edges Up (POLL) - ABC News

Americans see Hillary Clinton as the winner of the first presidential debate by a near-record margin in ABC News/Washington Post post-debate polls, with nearly half saying Donald Trump got his facts wrong and one in three saying he outright lied.
Click to expand...

It's interesting that they cite the Romney debate. I guess this election is Hillary's to lose.
 
disneydude said:
Different issue. Hillary won the debate by a landslide. This doesn't always translate into polling increases.
Click to expand...

Not really, if a debate "landslide" victory does not move the polling then something else is a miss. You would think that Hillary supporters are unmoved just as much as Trump supporters based on any debate performance. So it comes down to likely voters whom have no affiliation, or have not boiled their vote down to being for one is purely about being against the other.

The point is you would think that a strong debate performance would yield more than moving a statistical tie to a +2.5 or +3 (that another poster pointed out is still pretty damn close to also being a statistical tie.)

If the debate victory does not translate into general election polling increases then the Hillary camp needs to get busy finding out a way to capitalize on something else.
 
ludin said:
she got no boost from the debate at all. if there was a spike it was minimum. They are pretty much polling where they were before the debate.
at +2.5 it is basically a tie. nothing that can't be overcome if trump does better prep work in the next debate.
Click to expand...

Do you ever get tired of being wrong?
 
ludin said:
she got no boost from the debate at all. if there was a spike it was minimum. They are pretty much polling where they were before the debate.
at +2.5 it is basically a tie. nothing that can't be overcome if trump does better prep work in the next debate.
Click to expand...

I would not go that far. The movement is there, it is just not that amplified.

Going from roughly +1 to +2.5 after a "landslide" debate win really sucks.

At the end of the day Trump and Hillary both may be fighting a condition where gains are hard to come by because of that sentiment towards them both. Independents and non-affiliated voters not leaning far left or far right are really in trouble.

My concern is if Hillary wins all the debates in a "landslide" and nothing really changes in the general election polling then we have all but confirmed that overall voters are looking into a toilet bowl and picking between two pieces of ****.
 
Absentglare said:
It's interesting that they cite the Romney debate. I guess this election is Hillary's to lose.
Click to expand...

It always has been. The surprising thing has always been how badly she's performed as a campaigner. It was her election to lose in 2008, it was nearly her election lost during the primary 2016, and she's disturbingly close to losing one of the lowest performing candidates in American history in the 2016 generals.
 
FieldTheorist said:
It always has been. The surprising thing has always been how badly she's performed as a campaigner. It was her election to lose in 2008, it was nearly her election lost during the primary 2016, and she's disturbingly close to losing one of the lowest performing candidates in American history in the 2016 generals.
Click to expand...

The real question of this campaign is why isn't Hillary 20 points ahead of this guy?
 
OrphanSlug said:
Not really, if a debate "landslide" victory does not move the polling then something else is a miss. You would think that Hillary supporters are unmoved just as much as Trump supporters based on any debate performance. So it comes down to likely voters whom have no affiliation, or have not boiled their vote down to being for one is purely about being against the other.

The point is you would think that a strong debate performance would yield more than moving a statistical tie to a +2.5 or +3 (that another poster pointed out is still pretty damn close to also being a statistical tie.)

If the debate victory does not translate into general election polling increases then the Hillary camp needs to get busy finding out a way to capitalize on something else.
Click to expand...


There actually has been a movement in the polls. It generally takes about a week to see the effects of a debate and the numbers have begun moving upward. More importantly, however, is that it really stopped any momentum that Trump had. He needed a strong debate performance in the first debate to convince skeptical voters that he really is Presidential. He failed miserably to do that. What this means is that no matter how great his performance in debates 2 and 3...its unlike to make a difference for him.
 
Fletch said:
The real question of this campaign is why isn't Hillary 20 points ahead of this guy?
Click to expand...

You have to understand that 29% of voters still actually believe that GWB was a good President. So Hillary can write off those 29% off the bat. The bigger question is where Trump is getting his other 10%
 
Anagram said:
That's not entirely true. The RCP average is still over half filled with pre-debate polls, and the ones that are new are showing Clinton gains. Rasmussen from T+5 to C+3 for instance. The national and statewide polling suggests a Clinton bounce of 2-4 points.

Not that this can't be overcome with better performances in the next two debates or anything, but there has been without a doubt at least a small bounce for Clinton.
Click to expand...

some are some aren't.
The rcp average runs from the 9/19-10/2 so it has a about a week of pre-debate and a week of post debate.
 
Fletch said:
The real question of this campaign is why isn't Hillary 20 points ahead of this guy?
Click to expand...

Because we are an extremely divided nation in terms of politics and the parties have largely sorted themselves out ideologically over the last 30 years or so. Thus its near impossible for anyone to have a 20 point lead in the polls. Hell even in the 84 election, Reagan did not win by a full 20 points. The only times I can think of that has ever happened was 1964 and 1972.
 
ludin said:
some are some aren't.
The rcp average runs from the 9/19-10/2 so it has a about a week of pre-debate and a week of post debate.
Click to expand...

Right. And more than half are pre-debate. And the post debate ones show gains for Clinton compared to their previous polls. All like I said.
 
ludin said:
she got no boost from the debate at all. if there was a spike it was minimum. They are pretty much polling where they were before the debate.
at +2.5 it is basically a tie. nothing that can't be overcome if trump does better prep work in the next debate.
Click to expand...

It takes about a week before one can determine whether or not Hillary got a boost. Most polls take three days to conduct, then a day or two to process before they are released to the public. On 25 Sep before the debate RCP averages were Clinton 42.7, Trump 40.3, Clinton had a 2.4 point lead. There has been three polls listed on RCP started and finished after the first debate, Rasmussen, Fox and PPP. The others listed were started before the first debate took place.

Post debate averages shows Clinton with a 43.3%. She rose less than a point, 0.6 to be exact. Trump's average is 40.0%, he dropped less than a point, 0.3 exactly. I may add so far. There is no doubt Clinton trounced Trump in the first debate. But as debates go, you have those who are avid supporters of the two candidates tuning in and cheering their candidate. Most undecideds don't bother to watch the debates, those stating they are voting for Johnson or Stein weren't interested in them either, their candidate wasn't part of them. As a Johnson supporter, I detest both Clinton and Trump, I didn't watch it either. I watched my grandson play a soccer game instead and my mind is made up as to whom I will vote for and whom I am voting against.

Pundits have a field day with the debates, the avid supporters of the candidates involved do also. The media loves the debates as it gives them a few days of news and reporting. As of now it doesn't appear the first debate made much of a difference. Perhaps it stopped Trump momentum in closing the gap, but that seems to have stopped around the 19th, before the debate when Trump had narrowed the gap to just 0.7 of a point. 41 to 40.3. Foot in mouth disease will doom Trump. It shouldn't be this close, but the fact that it is shows how much outside of their avid supporters both Trump and Clinton is despised by the electorate as a whole.

RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein
 
Last edited:
Perotista said:
It takes about a week before one can determine whether or not Hillary got a boost. Most polls take three days to conduct, then a day or two to process before they are released to the public. On 25 Sep before the debate RCP averages were Clinton 42.7, Trump 40.3, Clinton had a 2.4 point lead. There has been three polls listed on RCP started and finished after the first debate, Rasmussen, Fox and PPP. The others listed were started before the first debate took place.

Post debate averages shows Clinton with a 43.3%. She rose less than a point, 0.6 to be exact. Trump's average is 40.0%, he dropped less than a point, 0.3 exactly. I may add so far. There is no doubt Clinton trounced Trump in the first debate. But as debates go, you have those who are avid supporters of the two candidates tuning in and cheering their candidate. Most undecideds don't bother to watch the debates, those stating they are voting for Johnson or Stein weren't interested in them either, their candidate wasn't part of them. As a Johnson supporter, I detest both Clinton and Trump, I didn't watch it either. I watched my grandson play a soccer game instead and my mind is made up as to whom I will vote for and whom I am voting against.

Pundits have a field day with the debates, the avid supporters of the candidates involved do also. The media loves the debates as it gives them a few days of news and reporting. As of now it doesn't appear the first debate made much of a difference. Perhaps it stopped Trump momentum in closing the gap, but that seems to have stopped around the 19th, before the debate when Trump had narrowed the gap to just 0.7 of a point. 41 to 40.3. Foot in mouth disease will doom Trump. It shouldn't be this close, but the fact that it is shows how much outside of their avid supporters both Trump and Clinton is despised by the electorate as a whole.
Click to expand...

I look at the rcp average as pretty accurate for the most part. It seems they run on a 2 week update aggregated average for all the polls.
it gives a better view than just citing 1 poll.

for example if you take a look at the NBC poll it would look like Clinton has a commanding lead.
then again if I posted the LAtime poll after debate it would look the exact opposite.
 
ludin said:
she got no boost from the debate at all. if there was a spike it was minimum. They are pretty much polling where they were before the debate.
at +2.5 it is basically a tie. nothing that can't be overcome if trump does better prep work in the next debate.
Click to expand...

They were at a tie before the debate, and she's suddenly 2.5 points ahead of Donald even before all the post-debate polls are in. If you want to argue the extent of a debate boost then that's one thing. But to argue "she got not boost from the debate at all" is just goofy.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Because we are an extremely divided nation in terms of politics and the parties have largely sorted themselves out ideologically over the last 30 years or so. Thus its near impossible for anyone to have a 20 point lead in the polls. Hell even in the 84 election, Reagan did not win by a full 20 points. The only times I can think of that has ever happened was 1964 and 1972.
Click to expand...

If this election was Biden v Trump or Obama v Trump, there would be a 20 point spread right now.
 
ludin said:
I look at the rcp average as pretty accurate for the most part. It seems they run on a 2 week update aggregated average for all the polls.
it gives a better view than just citing 1 poll.

for example if you take a look at the NBC poll it would look like Clinton has a commanding lead.
then again if I posted the LAtime poll after debate it would look the exact opposite.
Click to expand...

I agree, there are always going to be certain biases in the polls. Not intentional, but with the model they use. Most polling firms will start off with the 2012 model and then make adjustments from there to what they think the electorate will look like come November. Some polls who gave the GOP or the Democrats more than the final results in 2012 will compensate for this year based on what and how they polled in 2012 and how they are polling this year. So it is normal for a polling firm to be pro Dem one election and pro Rep the next as they tend to over compensate. Throw in the fact no one really knows the demographic breakdown of who actually will be voting in November, polling is far from an exact science.

But averaging as RCP does gets one the closes and averaging tends to reduce the margin of error. The LA Times and NBC are tracking polls, they do a week at a time and they poll the same people.
 
Fletch said:
If this election was Biden v Trump or Obama v Trump, there would be a 20 point spread right now.
Click to expand...

I really doubt it. The spread might be a couple of points more than it is. In this country there are two groups, Democrats and Republicans. Sure, there are independents, but polling consistently shows that if anything they are more partisan in their voting patterns than those that actually declare a party affiliation. There are some Democratic voters that will vote for moderate Republicans as well (in state and local elections I vote Republican considerably more than I vote Democrat), but few Republican voters will vote for a Democrat under any circumstances.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom