• 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!

Trump: I'm a 'very stable genius' (1 Viewer)

MateoMtnClimber said:
His name is Barack Obama. I won't bother with the extra crazy part about 800,000 supposed undocumented immigrants accounting for Hillary Clinton's 2.8+ million vote popular win.
Click to expand...

That 800,000 number of illegals is artificially low. And I will address Obama Bin Laden by his real name as soon as the left drops terms like "big orange", etc.
 
ObamacareFail said:
You are spinning all of that nonsense about Trump losing support of those who voted for him on media driven opinion polls. Those same pollsters blew it badly in the lead up to the election. They admitted as much. And Trump's approval rating at this point in his first term is within about a point of what Obama Bin Laden's rating was at the same point. As for Hillary getting the popular vote, it comes with an asterisk. Without the socialist republic of Califotnia, which gives drivers licenses to illegals, Trump gets the majority of votes.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

...ah, no. Only if you take a single outlier high poll for Trump and compare it to a single outlier low poll for Obama. If you were honest, you would realize that Obama was at 48% at the one year mark and Trump is at 40%

Presidential Approval Ratings -- Barack Obama | Gallup Historical Data & Trends
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html

One major difference, however, is that there was no poll during the Obama years that told us that 57% of America believed their president was unfit for office.

https://nypost.com/2018/01/20/rand-pauls-alleged-attacker-will-plead-guilty-to-assault-charge/
 
upsideguy said:
...ah, no. Only if you take a single outlier high poll for Trump and compare it to a single outlier low poll for Obama. If you were honest, you would realize that Obama was at 48% at the one year mark and Trump is at 40%

Presidential Approval Ratings -- Barack Obama | Gallup Historical Data & Trends
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html

One major difference, however, is that there was no poll during the Obama years that told us that 57% of America believed their president was unfit for office.

https://nypost.com/2018/01/20/rand-pauls-alleged-attacker-will-plead-guilty-to-assault-charge/
Click to expand...

If I were you, I would be very embarrassed to quote opinion polls in general, much less the laughable Realclearpolitics.com which famously gave Trump a 16% chance of winning the election.
 
ObamacareFail said:
If I were you, I would be very embarrassed to quote opinion polls in general
Click to expand...

I was only challenging your use of a poll. Which, BTW, you used incorrectly... trying to contort an argument out of it that simply was not there.

The fact is, if you understood polls, particularly the difference between an election poll and an opinion poll, you would find that polls are remarkably spot on. Why do you think campaigns spend a very large part of their campaign budget commissioning polls and focus groups?

ObamacareFail said:
much less the laughable Realclearpolitics.com which famously gave Trump a 16% chance of winning the election.
Click to expand...

I don't think RealClearPolitics engaged in such predictions or forecasts. It is an aggregator of political news with some commentary.

Per RCP "....The accuracy of the RCP Poll Average is unmatched and trusted for use in Bloomberg terminals and campaign communication documents, as well as being widely cited by hundreds of news organizations including The Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Financial Times, FOX News, CNN, USA Today, and MSNBC...."

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/about.html

If you will remember, the aggregate of polls had Clinton winning nationally by 3%...she won by 2%, which in the polling world means they were spot on.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/elections/2016/

This article, which appeared the day of the election, commented up the last minute swing in Trump polling, suggesting it could be consequential. If you saw this prediction there, it likely was from another source.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/a...inton_trump_stand_on_election_eve_132270.html

Fivethirtyeight had a Clinton win probability of 64%. If someone with a 36% win probability wins, its a minor upset, not an unforeseen event. If the weatherman says there is a 30% chance of rain and it rains, was he wrong? I don't think so.
 
Last edited:
upsideguy said:
I was only challenging your use of a poll. Which, BTW, you used incorrectly... trying to contort an argument out of it that simply was not there.

The fact is, if you understood polls, particularly the difference between an election poll and an opinion poll, you would find that polls are remarkably spot on. Why do you think campaigns spend a very large part of their campaign budget commissioning polls and focus groups?



I don't think RealClearPolitics engaged in such predictions or forecasts. It is an aggregator of political news with some commentary.

Per RCP "....The accuracy of the RCP Poll Average is unmatched and trusted for use in Bloomberg terminals and campaign communication documents, as well as being widely cited by hundreds of news organizations including The Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Financial Times, FOX News, CNN, USA Today, and MSNBC...."

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/about.html

If you will remember, the aggregate of polls had Clinton winning nationally by 3%...she won by 2%, which in the polling world means they were spot on.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/elections/2016/

This article, which appeared the day of the election, commented up the last minute swing in Trump polling, suggesting it could be consequential. If you saw this prediction there, it likely was from another source.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/a...inton_trump_stand_on_election_eve_132270.html

Fivethirtyeight had a Clinton win probability of 64%. If someone with a 36% win probability wins, its a minor upset, not an unforeseen event. If the weatherman says there is a 30% chance of rain and it rains, was he wrong? I don't think so.
Click to expand...

The major pollsters themselves admitted that they badly blew their predictions for the 2016 election and they even admitted why. That's good enough for me. And I know you are desperately clinging to popular vote percentages as a crutch, however they are meaningless as we elect presidents by way of the electoral college. If you happen to trust polls, it's the state to state polls that matter. Your candidate lost. Get over it.
 
ObamacareFail said:
The major pollsters themselves admitted that they badly blew their predictions for the 2016 election and they even admitted why. That's good enough for me. And I know you are desperately clinging to popular vote percentages as a crutch, however they are meaningless as we elect presidents by way of the electoral college. If you happen to trust polls, it's the state to state polls that matter. Your candidate lost. Get over it.
Click to expand...

We did get over it. And what upsideguy said is not incorrect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top Bottom