- Joined
- Jan 16, 2019
- Messages
- 49,124
- Reaction score
- 38,395
- Location
- Flori-duh
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
Lol, well you do know it has to go through the cyber ninjas first to be cleared.Arizona. We’re slow getting trendy terms.
-
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 Has a Decision to Make Soon
- Thread starter Rexedgar
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2013
- Messages
- 30,807
- Reaction score
- 22,358
- Location
- Georgia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
I remember some pundits saying she was, but not the numbers. It was probably more the heart talking in those pundits than they are looking at or taking the number seriously. According to RCP averages, Clinton was supposed to win the popular vote by 3.2 points, she won it by 2.1.You're more measured than I, and that's fair.
Remember when HRC was a shoe-in?
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/e...s/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html
Considering there a margin of error of plus or minus 3 points. A lead of 3.2 is no shoe in. It’s just outside the margin of error. She was the favorite to win the popular vote, but by what percentage? Nate Silver of 538 gave her 70% chance. But that still left a 3 in 10 chance she could lose the popular vote.
The electoral college was also very ambiguous. Prediction, 203 for Clinton, 164 for Trump with 177 electoral votes in the tossup column. Now the pundits take those states in the tossup column and give them to who they think will win them. But with so many states and electoral votes in the toss up column, no shoe in. That’s an old wife’s tale.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_elections_electoral_college_map.html
I made the mistake in my forecast with Pennsylvania and Michigan, 2 of the tossup states, of going by history and giving them to Clinton. But Trafalgar on the day prior to the election had Trump ahead in Pennsylvania by 1 and tied in Michigan. Like so many pundits, I disregarded the late polls. I should have known better. Especially for someone who states he goes by the numbers.
The numbers said the race was close. I think most of us, including me, just didn’t want to believe it.