• 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!

Poll: Trump pops to lead over clinton...

ludin said:
he is a dead heat in 1 poll.

over all the polls Clinton has a 6.7% advantage.
while not great it is outside the margin of error.

this could slip then again if trump wins the nomination that could move hordes of liberals to vote.
also don't forget that some states have open primaries in which people voted for trump but won't
vote for him in the general.


these polls are to fluid.
Click to expand...

One poll that far out is an aberration. When the difference is approximately the same as the margin or error it called a statistical dead heat. I know you really want Trump to be so far ahead Hilary gives up, but that is not the case.
 
MickeyW said:
Trump 41%, Clinton 39%

Trump 41%, Clinton 39% - Rasmussen Reportsâ„¢


Makes perfect sense.
Click to expand...

No, no, no, but you need to vote for Hillary --NOT BERNIE, NOT BERNIE!!-- if you want to prevent a Trump presidency!


I hope not, but I strongly suspect that Democrats are going to hear a giant, big fat "I told you so" from the Sanders supporters. Golly-gee-whiz, it turns out that pissing off Millennials and Left-wing Independents --two groups that are absolutely vital and central to your successful bid for presidency-- hurts you significantly in the polls? Huh. Who could have predicted that? Hopefully polls like this will lead Hillary to pull her head out of her ass and starting attempting to build in-roads with Sanders supporters, but we'll see. It may take a few months of this to get it through her head --hopefully it won't be too late by then.


reinoe said:
While this provides a good morale boost, it's too early to call.
Click to expand...

Oh yes, this is a bit early, but it could be the beginning of these polls starting to roll in. Keep in mind, Hillary is a highly controversial figure on the left, and those missing other 20% voters are almost certainly on the Left. You should expect (until polls come out about the new white voters that Trump is bringing back into the fold) that about 62% of voters are left-wing/center-left/center/center-right. The best you all could hope for right now is that a majority of those 20% are disenfranchised voters who vote Green, which is possible but unlikely. I don't predict that many of those will vote for Trump. Trump's big hope is in pulling in 2004-levels of white voters, of course demographics are still hard on him.
 
Last edited:
FieldTheorist said:
No, no, no, but you need to vote for Hillary --NOT BERNIE, NOT BERNIE!!-- if you want to prevent a Trump presidency!


I hope not, but I strongly suspect that Democrats are going to hear a giant, big fat "I told you so" from the Sanders supporters. Golly-gee-whiz, it turns out that pissing off Millennials and Left-wing Independents --two groups that are absolutely vital and central to your successful bid for presidency-- hurts you significantly in the polls? Huh. Who could have predicted that? Hopefully polls like this will lead Hillary to pull her head out of her ass and starting attempting to build in-roads with Sanders supporters, but we'll see. It may take a few months of this to get it through her head --hopefully it won't be too late by then.
Click to expand...

For Bernie to win the democratic nomination, he would need to win the remaining states by 80 point margins. The proportional system of awarding delegates has been a deciding factor in this race.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
For Bernie to win the democratic nomination, he would need to win the remaining states by 80 point margins. The proportional system of awarding delegates has been a deciding factor in this race.
Click to expand...

Well, or Hillary needs to get indicted and he gets the super-delegates. But yes, I'm well aware of the mathematics of the democratic primary.

I'm more amused at how delusional the Clintonite bubble is, and how this particular "electability" mythology is nearly universally believed within their bubble despite the total absence of evidence for (and the mounting evidence against) the idea that Hillary is the best candidate to put forward in November.
 
FieldTheorist said:
Well, or Hillary needs to get indicted and he gets the super-delegates. But yes, I'm well aware of the mathematics of the democratic primary.

I'm more amused at how delusional the Clintonite bubble is, and how this particular "electability" mythology is nearly universally believed within their bubble despite the total absence of evidence for (and the mounting evidence against) the idea that Hillary is the best candidate to put forward in November.
Click to expand...

If Bernie can not win over the pledged delegates, what would make the super delegates decide to support him over Hilliary?

Bernie has performed well and has run a phenomenal campagin but look at how things stand right now.

In primary after primary, the voters were presented with a choice between Bernie sanders, and Hilliary Clinton. How does one claim Bernie is the stronger candidate if he is behind by 200 delegates?
 
Last edited:
Unitedwestand13 said:
If Bernie can not win over the pledged delegates, what would make the super delegates decide to support him over Hilliary?

Bernie has performed well and has run a phenomenal campagin but look at how things stand right now.

In primary after primary, the voters were presented with a choice between Bernie sanders, and Hilliary Clinton. How does one claim Bernie is the stronger candidate if he is behind by 200 delegates?
Click to expand...

Wow, you don't bother to read, do you?
 
FieldTheorist said:
Wow, you don't bother to read, do you?
Click to expand...

If Bernie was the the stronger candidate, he would be doing as well as Hilliary in attracting minority and woman voters, in addition to the voting demographics he does well in. So far Bernie has not managed to do that.
 
Polls are meaningless at this point, but people who think that Trump cannot win in November are deluding themselves.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
If Bernie can not win over the pledged delegates, what would make the super delegates decide to support him over Hilliary?

Bernie has performed well and has run a phenomenal campagin but look at how things stand right now.

In primary after primary, the voters were presented with a choice between Bernie sanders, and Hilliary Clinton. How does one claim Bernie is the stronger candidate if he is behind by 200 delegates?[/QUOTE
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
For a long time, I believed that Hillary would slaughter Trump if they ran head to head. However, the last 3 or so months have made me think otherwise. I believe that Hillary would likely still win, however, I believe that Trump may actually be the stronger challenger for a number of reasons. Namely Trumps strange appeal to blue collar workers. I know its about the jobs issue, however, blue collar workers by and large have been the backbone of the Democratic base. I don't think that anti-Trump Republican voters will say home despite the fear because they hate Hillary more than they hate Trump...which may be why Bernie might actually be the stronger candidate (although I'm still convinced that the Republicans would destroy him with the "socialism" fear tactic in the general election).

Cruz would get destroyed because he only appeals to the far right Republican fringe and no one really likes the guy. Kasich, on the otherhand, probably had the best shot in a head to head until his recent implosion. The guy looks angry, desperate and non-Presidential. He's looking more like a tired old man than Bernie Sanders.
 
disneydude said:
For a long time, I believed that Hillary would slaughter Trump if they ran head to head. However, the last 3 or so months have made me think otherwise. I believe that Hillary would likely still win, however, I believe that Trump may actually be the stronger challenger for a number of reasons. Namely Trumps strange appeal to blue collar workers. I know its about the jobs issue, however, blue collar workers by and large have been the backbone of the Democratic base. I don't think that anti-Trump Republican voters will say home despite the fear because they hate Hillary more than they hate Trump...which may be why Bernie might actually be the stronger candidate (although I'm still convinced that the Republicans would destroy him with the "socialism" fear tactic in the general election).

Cruz would get destroyed because he only appeals to the far right Republican fringe and no one really likes the guy. Kasich, on the otherhand, probably had the best shot in a head to head until his recent implosion. The guy looks angry, desperate and non-Presidential. He's looking more like a tired old man than Bernie Sanders.
Click to expand...

I must have fallen into an alternate universe, because I agree with every word of what you said(except about Kasich. he NEVER had a chance to beat hillary and I don't care what the polls say). It may be the one and only time I will say that.

At this point I don't think Cruz has a chance either, so why not go for the dark horse who may actually motivate people to get out and vote. and even if Trump loses(which I agree is the more likely scenario) at least you know Trump will go after Hillary with everything he's got. I would take putting up a bloody fight and losing than rolling over like McCain and Romney did. Trump will be on offense all day, every day. that alone gives him a fighter's chance.
 
disneydude said:
For a long time, I believed that Hillary would slaughter Trump if they ran head to head. However, the last 3 or so months have made me think otherwise. I believe that Hillary would likely still win, however, I believe that Trump may actually be the stronger challenger for a number of reasons. Namely Trumps strange appeal to blue collar workers. I know its about the jobs issue, however, blue collar workers by and large have been the backbone of the Democratic base. I don't think that anti-Trump Republican voters will say home despite the fear because they hate Hillary more than they hate Trump...which may be why Bernie might actually be the stronger candidate (although I'm still convinced that the Republicans would destroy him with the "socialism" fear tactic in the general election).

Cruz would get destroyed because he only appeals to the far right Republican fringe and no one really likes the guy. Kasich, on the otherhand, probably had the best shot in a head to head until his recent implosion. The guy looks angry, desperate and non-Presidential. He's looking more like a tired old man than Bernie Sanders.
Click to expand...

Trump's appeal to blue collar workers isn't strange at all, or at least it's no stranger than his appeal to anyone else. Blue collar workers are not the "backbone" of the Democratic Party base, and haven't been for decades. Socially, white blue collar workers always tended to be more conservative than liberal. What kept them with the Democrats were unions because of the party's union support in Congress. As unions fell away so too did worker affiliation with the Party. Obama's support among blue collar workers, for example, was under forty percent. Trump of course is wooing workers with his 'terrible trade deals' pitch. What his speeches leave out is his proposed remedy: a 35 percent tariff on imported goods. When blue collar workers and their wives go to Walmart and find all the stuff on the shelves jacked up in price to pay for the tariffs, how will that go over?
 
JackA said:
Good luck with your morale boost. Rasmussen is the only poll, out of seven, that puts Trump ahead of her, just as it was the only national poll that failed to call the 2012 election for Obama.
Click to expand...

ludin said:
Polls like this are useless at this point.
Click to expand...

shrubnose said:
Rasmussen Reports works for the GOP.

RealClearPolitics has a different story:RealClearPolitics - Election 2016 - General Election: Trump vs. Clinton

Rasmussen's BS won't help Trump in November.

Wait and see.

:lol:
Click to expand...

And Yet..................

Trump's 'unpredictability' alarms Dems...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...b5f05c-0e45-11e6-bfa1-4efa856caf2a_story.html

There is concern and Trump has even begun to pull out his big guns yet, and aim them at Clinton!
 
Fearandloathing said:
Those would be 'push' polls, where you introduce weighted comments to push the vote your way. I don't know whether you've ever been polled, but it's not a clear 'who you gonna vote for', there's a lot of validating questions.

Another way to get the "right" answer is top ask a series of question all leading to a 'yes' value [somewhat, a lot etc] and then slide one in about the candidate. It was once believed that a push poll could turn a vote, but there has never been conclusive proof
Click to expand...

Yes, it is a sort of a push poll.
But, the more voters that realize that the second choice describes Trump, the fewer will be willing to vote for him, even as the lesser of the evils.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Next question:

B. In your opinion, does A come before B?
A. Or does B come before A?
Click to expand...

In B., and it's not an opinion, it's an observable fact, A comes before B. Assuming the B you reference is the B in B. and not the B right next to the ?
But in A., B comes before A., provided the same assumptions can be made that were just made about B.

But both assume that B. and A. were meant to designate identifying headers of some kind.

Now do you see why precise questions are so important?
 
cpwill said:
Well, traditionally, a crook is someone who steals things. White House furniture aside, Hillary is merely a felon. :)

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

So, we really are down to a choice between a con man and a crook?
 
Dittohead not! said:
So, we really are down to a choice between a con man and a crook?
Click to expand...

Only to the extent that the con-artist is not also a crook, and the crook is not also a con-artist.
 
bubbabgone said:
In B., and it's not an opinion, it's an observable fact, A comes before B. Assuming the B you reference is the B in B. and not the B right next to the ?
But in A., B comes before A., provided the same assumptions can be made that were just made about B.

But both assume that B. and A. were meant to designate identifying headers of some kind.

Now do you see why precise questions are so important?
Click to expand...

I do.

So, which do you pick:

B. the candidate who had a private email server with classified information on it which was never shown to have been illegal and which was never shown to have hacked, or

A. The candidate who refers to his wife as a "nice piece of ass", who would date his daughter, believes women have to be pretty to be taken seriously, and wants to secure the border by building a wall reminiscent of the DMZ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom