login
Polls (Page 6)
-
No new posts
|
 2016-09-26 12:55 PM in reply to: Left Brain |
Champion  10157    Alabama |  Subject: RE: PollsOriginally posted by Left Brain In my house the 16-19 year old vote is 2-1 Republican.......and I expect the lone Democrat to be living in a van outside of Yosemite,....climbing, base jumping, and living on granola and the bugs she picks out of her hair by the time she is of voting age.
The last Rogillio to vote democrat in 1935 sleeps with the fishes.....
I think that fact that Bernie (a socialist) and Trump (a non-politician) did so well is American are really unhappy about the direction of the country. People read that the US gives away $35 Billion dollars a year in foreign aid and yet we have run down school and infrastructure. We have allowed the US to largely lose the ability to manufacture things. We thought as long as we held the intellectual property, we would remain on top. But slowly but surely foreign countries are stealing out intellectual property. Anyway, the point is, people want change. That is how BO got elected. Evidently the change they got with BO was not the change Americans were looking for......
Remember the scene from the Deer Hunter where they are playing Russian roulette? There was still a bullet in the chamber when he pulled the trigger but they needed to take a chance and put one more empty chamber in the gun. Might have died putting that empty chamber in the gun but had to take the chance. That's how I see Trump. We might be shooting ourselves in the foot or head as a country but that's the chance I am willing to take.
|
| 2016-09-26 1:29 PM in reply to: Rogillio |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Polls Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by Left Brain In my house the 16-19 year old vote is 2-1 Republican.......and I expect the lone Democrat to be living in a van outside of Yosemite,....climbing, base jumping, and living on granola and the bugs she picks out of her hair by the time she is of voting age.
The last Rogillio to vote democrat in 1935 sleeps with the fishes.....
I think that fact that Bernie (a socialist) and Trump (a non-politician) did so well is American are really unhappy about the direction of the country. People read that the US gives away $35 Billion dollars a year in foreign aid and yet we have run down school and infrastructure. We have allowed the US to largely lose the ability to manufacture things. We thought as long as we held the intellectual property, we would remain on top. But slowly but surely foreign countries are stealing out intellectual property. Anyway, the point is, people want change. That is how BO got elected. Evidently the change they got with BO was not the change Americans were looking for......
Remember the scene from the Deer Hunter where they are playing Russian roulette? There was still a bullet in the chamber when he pulled the trigger but they needed to take a chance and put one more empty chamber in the gun. Might have died putting that empty chamber in the gun but had to take the chance. That's how I see Trump. We might be shooting ourselves in the foot or head as a country but that's the chance I am willing to take.
You'll be the next one eating bugs out of your hair.....you'll just feel better about it because you fried them first. |
| 2016-09-26 1:51 PM in reply to: Left Brain |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Polls Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by Left Brain In my house the 16-19 year old vote is 2-1 Republican.......and I expect the lone Democrat to be living in a van outside of Yosemite,....climbing, base jumping, and living on granola and the bugs she picks out of her hair by the time she is of voting age.
The last Rogillio to vote democrat in 1935 sleeps with the fishes.....
I think that fact that Bernie (a socialist) and Trump (a non-politician) did so well is American are really unhappy about the direction of the country. People read that the US gives away $35 Billion dollars a year in foreign aid and yet we have run down school and infrastructure. We have allowed the US to largely lose the ability to manufacture things. We thought as long as we held the intellectual property, we would remain on top. But slowly but surely foreign countries are stealing out intellectual property. Anyway, the point is, people want change. That is how BO got elected. Evidently the change they got with BO was not the change Americans were looking for......
Remember the scene from the Deer Hunter where they are playing Russian roulette? There was still a bullet in the chamber when he pulled the trigger but they needed to take a chance and put one more empty chamber in the gun. Might have died putting that empty chamber in the gun but had to take the chance. That's how I see Trump. We might be shooting ourselves in the foot or head as a country but that's the chance I am willing to take.
You'll be the next one eating bugs out of your hair.....you'll just feel better about it because you fried them first.
Only kind of bug I eat is a mud bug....crayfish. I can skin a buck, I can run a trot line....a country boy can survive. Everything goes to pot I will load up my Raptor, hitch up the boat and go fishing....leave all the chaos to the next generation with apologies for screwing this up for them. I think I own some land on a bayou in Louisiana. I say "think" as I've never seen it....might be a swamp for all I know. My granddaddy was always buying tracts of land thinking somebody will find gas or oil.....a few years ago I sold the bottom of a lake that I inherited. So it you head to Nebraska, look in on my MIL there. She farms several hundred acres of wheat out there.....you send me down some wheat and pheasants and I'll send you up some deer and crappie.
|
| 2016-09-26 2:03 PM in reply to: Rogillio |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Polls Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by Left Brain In my house the 16-19 year old vote is 2-1 Republican.......and I expect the lone Democrat to be living in a van outside of Yosemite,....climbing, base jumping, and living on granola and the bugs she picks out of her hair by the time she is of voting age.
The last Rogillio to vote democrat in 1935 sleeps with the fishes.....
I think that fact that Bernie (a socialist) and Trump (a non-politician) did so well is American are really unhappy about the direction of the country. People read that the US gives away $35 Billion dollars a year in foreign aid and yet we have run down school and infrastructure. We have allowed the US to largely lose the ability to manufacture things. We thought as long as we held the intellectual property, we would remain on top. But slowly but surely foreign countries are stealing out intellectual property. Anyway, the point is, people want change. That is how BO got elected. Evidently the change they got with BO was not the change Americans were looking for......
Remember the scene from the Deer Hunter where they are playing Russian roulette? There was still a bullet in the chamber when he pulled the trigger but they needed to take a chance and put one more empty chamber in the gun. Might have died putting that empty chamber in the gun but had to take the chance. That's how I see Trump. We might be shooting ourselves in the foot or head as a country but that's the chance I am willing to take.
You'll be the next one eating bugs out of your hair.....you'll just feel better about it because you fried them first.
Only kind of bug I eat is a mud bug....crayfish. I can skin a buck, I can run a trot line....a country boy can survive. Everything goes to pot I will load up my Raptor, hitch up the boat and go fishing....leave all the chaos to the next generation with apologies for screwing this up for them. I think I own some land on a bayou in Louisiana. I say "think" as I've never seen it....might be a swamp for all I know. My granddaddy was always buying tracts of land thinking somebody will find gas or oil.....a few years ago I sold the bottom of a lake that I inherited. So it you head to Nebraska, look in on my MIL there. She farms several hundred acres of wheat out there.....you send me down some wheat and pheasants and I'll send you up some deer and crappie.
You mean I can keep all the walleye and you'll still send up some sac-a-lait? Hell, I'm gonna like trading with you. LOL |
| 2016-09-26 2:39 PM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Polls Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by Rogillio
Why do they poll just Trump vs Clinton? Are Johnson/Stein not on the ballot in every state? Is there a chance they will drop out? Seems like they hurt Clinton. I'm pretty sure Johnson is on the ballot in every state, but Stein is lagging quite a bit. Honestly the national polls are a bit of an indicator overall, but obviously mean nothing. Hillary could win CA and NY by 40 points and win the popular vote by 10%+ and still lose the election in a landslide as an example. What I find more interesting is how the polls seem to be holding onto the turnout models from 2012 to justify their Hillary numbers. There's no possible way Hillary gets Obama numbers this year so any polling based on those turnout models are severely flawed.
There is only one thing that can save Hillary now.....and that is Trump. As long as he doesn't show crazy Trump, he will win. Polls show him up in CO and only down by 1 in PA. If he flips PA, and keep FL and OH and NC, it's over.
I realize there is 6 weeks to go before the election, and I realize that Trump hasn't won anything yet........but the fact that this campaign is so close says volumes about how screwed up the Dems are. LMAO The country really is a conservative country and the Obama/Clinton type of politicians are severely out of touch. You can see it with the congressional races and governors races. Liberals are getting waxed left and right. I saw an article a few weeks ago that was interesting. If we used electoral votes based on congressional districts versus per state Romney would have won in 2012. Meaning nationally, even in 2012 with Obama the country wasn't as on board as everyone likes to think. The part that is most encouraging to me overall is how the younger generations are reacting to the ridiculous levels of political correctness and snowflakes that have come out of the progressive millennial generation. It's driving the kids to be much more conservative than previous generations because they see how stupid the alternative is. I think that statement is out of touch, have you met us? lol, you're just on the leading edge of the change. The Millennials overall are more conservative than the Gen X and Baby Boomers and and the younger generations are even more conservative.
|
| 2016-09-26 2:47 PM in reply to: 0 |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Polls Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by Left Brain In my house the 16-19 year old vote is 2-1 Republican.......and I expect the lone Democrat to be living in a van outside of Yosemite,....climbing, base jumping, and living on granola and the bugs she picks out of her hair by the time she is of voting age.
The last Rogillio to vote democrat in 1935 sleeps with the fishes.....
I think that fact that Bernie (a socialist) and Trump (a non-politician) did so well is American are really unhappy about the direction of the country. People read that the US gives away $35 Billion dollars a year in foreign aid and yet we have run down school and infrastructure. We have allowed the US to largely lose the ability to manufacture things. We thought as long as we held the intellectual property, we would remain on top. But slowly but surely foreign countries are stealing out intellectual property. Anyway, the point is, people want change. That is how BO got elected. Evidently the change they got with BO was not the change Americans were looking for......
Remember the scene from the Deer Hunter where they are playing Russian roulette? There was still a bullet in the chamber when he pulled the trigger but they needed to take a chance and put one more empty chamber in the gun. Might have died putting that empty chamber in the gun but had to take the chance. That's how I see Trump. We might be shooting ourselves in the foot or head as a country but that's the chance I am willing to take.
You'll be the next one eating bugs out of your hair.....you'll just feel better about it because you fried them first.
Only kind of bug I eat is a mud bug....crayfish. I can skin a buck, I can run a trot line....a country boy can survive. Everything goes to pot I will load up my Raptor, hitch up the boat and go fishing....leave all the chaos to the next generation with apologies for screwing this up for them. I think I own some land on a bayou in Louisiana. I say "think" as I've never seen it....might be a swamp for all I know. My granddaddy was always buying tracts of land thinking somebody will find gas or oil.....a few years ago I sold the bottom of a lake that I inherited. So it you head to Nebraska, look in on my MIL there. She farms several hundred acres of wheat out there.....you send me down some wheat and pheasants and I'll send you up some deer and crappie.
You mean I can keep all the walleye and you'll still send up some sac-a-lait? Hell, I'm gonna like trading with you. LOL
I am impressed that a city boy like you would know what sac-a-lait means. I had a fish camp on Bayou Louise in Louisiana and it was named Camp Sac-a-Lait. In the early 1990s I got a scroll saw and made a bunch of Christmas gifts......note the name Sac-a-lait below. So for those who don't know, sac-a-lait is French phrase that mean something like bag of milk....it is a reference to the white meat on white perch. A slightly different breed than crappie but very closely related. Some people use the white perch and crappie interchangeable.
Edited by Rogillio 2016-09-26 2:50 PM (Skroll saw work.jpg) Attachments ---------------- Skroll saw work.jpg (40KB - 6 downloads) |
| 2016-09-26 2:54 PM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Polls Originally posted by dmiller5 Millenials are born from 81-97 but some say from 80-2000 for easier math. Originally posted by Left Brain In my house the 16-19 year old vote is 2-1 Republican.......and I expect the lone Democrat to be living in a van outside of Yosemite,....climbing, base jumping, and living on granola and the bugs she picks out of her hair by the time she is of voting age. I'm not sure your kids are actually millenials, we go up to about age 35 |
| 2016-09-26 2:59 PM in reply to: tuwood |
Extreme Veteran 3025 Maryland | Subject: RE: Polls Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by dmiller5 Millenials are born from 81-97 but some say from 80-2000 for easier math. Originally posted by Left Brain In my house the 16-19 year old vote is 2-1 Republican.......and I expect the lone Democrat to be living in a van outside of Yosemite,....climbing, base jumping, and living on granola and the bugs she picks out of her hair by the time she is of voting age. I'm not sure your kids are actually millenials, we go up to about age 35 81-97 makes sense to me. the kids born around 2000 had a different childhood... I didn't have a smartphone until after college. Life is different that way. |
| 2016-09-26 3:24 PM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Polls Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by dmiller5 Millenials are born from 81-97 but some say from 80-2000 for easier math. Originally posted by Left Brain In my house the 16-19 year old vote is 2-1 Republican.......and I expect the lone Democrat to be living in a van outside of Yosemite,....climbing, base jumping, and living on granola and the bugs she picks out of her hair by the time she is of voting age. I'm not sure your kids are actually millenials, we go up to about age 35 81-97 makes sense to me. the kids born around 2000 had a different childhood... I didn't have a smartphone until after college. Life is different that way.
Good point RE the smartphone.....and how technology changes the world......when I was in college we use keypunch cards to program computers.....now my iPhone has 10x more computing power than my first PC. I think the world fundamentally changed in 2001 on 9/11. You probably don't remember being able to go to the gate of an arriving flight to greet the passengers as they walked off the plane. Reminds me of a story....(I think I'm getting old, I'm starting to sound like my granddaddy who had a story about everything)
So our kids were like 5 and 8 and my wife was flying back from visiting her folks in NE. As a joke, I bought those party glasses with the big plastic nose and bushy eyebrows for me and the kids. The 3 of us stood there at the gate for my wife. I told them we would surprise Mama. My son, the 5 year old, say, "Don't talk or she will recognize our voices!" Good thinking son!! LOL |
| 2016-09-26 3:38 PM in reply to: Rogillio |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Polls Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by dmiller5 Millenials are born from 81-97 but some say from 80-2000 for easier math. Originally posted by Left Brain In my house the 16-19 year old vote is 2-1 Republican.......and I expect the lone Democrat to be living in a van outside of Yosemite,....climbing, base jumping, and living on granola and the bugs she picks out of her hair by the time she is of voting age. I'm not sure your kids are actually millenials, we go up to about age 35 81-97 makes sense to me. the kids born around 2000 had a different childhood... I didn't have a smartphone until after college. Life is different that way.
Good point RE the smartphone.....and how technology changes the world......when I was in college we use keypunch cards to program computers.....now my iPhone has 10x more computing power than my first PC. I think the world fundamentally changed in 2001 on 9/11. You probably don't remember being able to go to the gate of an arriving flight to greet the passengers as they walked off the plane. Reminds me of a story....(I think I'm getting old, I'm starting to sound like my granddaddy who had a story about everything)
So our kids were like 5 and 8 and my wife was flying back from visiting her folks in NE. As a joke, I bought those party glasses with the big plastic nose and bushy eyebrows for me and the kids. The 3 of us stood there at the gate for my wife. I told them we would surprise Mama. My son, the 5 year old, say, "Don't talk or she will recognize our voices!" Good thinking son!! LOL I personally feel the biggest fundamental shift for kids has been social media and the ability to see things unfiltered by schools or the media and forming their own opinions. The Progressive movement has spent decades pushing their agendas into schools and news organizations and had a tremendous amount of success in shaping public opinion as a result. Now, with the advent of social media it's almost all wasted because it takes two seconds to blow a gaping hole in some globalist progressive garbage that's being shoved down your throat by a teacher or a politician. |
| 2016-09-26 3:51 PM in reply to: tuwood |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Polls Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by dmiller5 Millenials are born from 81-97 but some say from 80-2000 for easier math. Originally posted by Left Brain In my house the 16-19 year old vote is 2-1 Republican.......and I expect the lone Democrat to be living in a van outside of Yosemite,....climbing, base jumping, and living on granola and the bugs she picks out of her hair by the time she is of voting age. I'm not sure your kids are actually millenials, we go up to about age 35 81-97 makes sense to me. the kids born around 2000 had a different childhood... I didn't have a smartphone until after college. Life is different that way.
Good point RE the smartphone.....and how technology changes the world......when I was in college we use keypunch cards to program computers.....now my iPhone has 10x more computing power than my first PC. I think the world fundamentally changed in 2001 on 9/11. You probably don't remember being able to go to the gate of an arriving flight to greet the passengers as they walked off the plane. Reminds me of a story....(I think I'm getting old, I'm starting to sound like my granddaddy who had a story about everything)
So our kids were like 5 and 8 and my wife was flying back from visiting her folks in NE. As a joke, I bought those party glasses with the big plastic nose and bushy eyebrows for me and the kids. The 3 of us stood there at the gate for my wife. I told them we would surprise Mama. My son, the 5 year old, say, "Don't talk or she will recognize our voices!" Good thinking son!! LOL I personally feel the biggest fundamental shift for kids has been social media and the ability to see things unfiltered by schools or the media and forming their own opinions. The Progressive movement has spent decades pushing their agendas into schools and news organizations and had a tremendous amount of success in shaping public opinion as a result. Now, with the advent of social media it's almost all wasted because it takes two seconds to blow a gaping hole in some globalist progressive garbage that's being shoved down your throat by a teacher or a politician.
Good point! A few years ago my senior class had our 29 year class reunion....the first we'd had since our 10th. So cool too see people and how they had changed over the last 19 years. I was telling this to a millennial and she was like, I don't know if we will ever had a reunion......we all on FB and know what we all are doing, who got married, divorced, had children, etc. Not sure if that is better or worse than having reunions....but it certainly is different. |
| 2016-09-26 4:14 PM in reply to: tuwood |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Polls Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by dmiller5 Millenials are born from 81-97 but some say from 80-2000 for easier math. Originally posted by Left Brain In my house the 16-19 year old vote is 2-1 Republican.......and I expect the lone Democrat to be living in a van outside of Yosemite,....climbing, base jumping, and living on granola and the bugs she picks out of her hair by the time she is of voting age. I'm not sure your kids are actually millenials, we go up to about age 35 Well if it's 80-2000 then I've got 3 of those suckers........I'll trade one straight up for a 2005 model. |
| 2016-09-26 4:17 PM in reply to: 0 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Polls Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by dmiller5 Millenials are born from 81-97 but some say from 80-2000 for easier math. Originally posted by Left Brain In my house the 16-19 year old vote is 2-1 Republican.......and I expect the lone Democrat to be living in a van outside of Yosemite,....climbing, base jumping, and living on granola and the bugs she picks out of her hair by the time she is of voting age. I'm not sure your kids are actually millenials, we go up to about age 35 81-97 makes sense to me. the kids born around 2000 had a different childhood... I didn't have a smartphone until after college. Life is different that way.
Good point RE the smartphone.....and how technology changes the world......when I was in college we use keypunch cards to program computers.....now my iPhone has 10x more computing power than my first PC. I think the world fundamentally changed in 2001 on 9/11. You probably don't remember being able to go to the gate of an arriving flight to greet the passengers as they walked off the plane. Reminds me of a story....(I think I'm getting old, I'm starting to sound like my granddaddy who had a story about everything)
So our kids were like 5 and 8 and my wife was flying back from visiting her folks in NE. As a joke, I bought those party glasses with the big plastic nose and bushy eyebrows for me and the kids. The 3 of us stood there at the gate for my wife. I told them we would surprise Mama. My son, the 5 year old, say, "Don't talk or she will recognize our voices!" Good thinking son!! LOL I personally feel the biggest fundamental shift for kids has been social media and the ability to see things unfiltered by schools or the media and forming their own opinions. The Progressive movement has spent decades pushing their agendas into schools and news organizations and had a tremendous amount of success in shaping public opinion as a result. Now, with the advent of social media it's almost all wasted because it takes two seconds to blow a gaping hole in some globalist progressive garbage that's being shoved down your throat by a teacher or a politician. Or a parent. LMAO MY kids are ruthless.......no matter what I tell them about my childhood or "how things were" those little crushers are on their phones looking to verify or refute. I can't have nothing. But you're right too, Dave......they've had smart phones since they were 8-10 years old......and they ain't playing. Edited by Left Brain 2016-09-26 4:21 PM |
| 2016-09-26 4:32 PM in reply to: Left Brain |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Polls Originally posted by Left Brain I've got a 94, 96, and 99 so all three on the trailing edge.Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by dmiller5 Millenials are born from 81-97 but some say from 80-2000 for easier math. Originally posted by Left Brain In my house the 16-19 year old vote is 2-1 Republican.......and I expect the lone Democrat to be living in a van outside of Yosemite,....climbing, base jumping, and living on granola and the bugs she picks out of her hair by the time she is of voting age. I'm not sure your kids are actually millenials, we go up to about age 35 Well if it's 80-2000 then I've got 3 of those suckers........I'll trade one straight up for a 2005 model. |
| 2016-09-26 4:35 PM in reply to: tuwood |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Polls Speaking of the fragile little snowflake enablers. http://www.mrctv.org/blog/hofstra-university-provides-trigger-warni... |
| 2016-09-26 7:37 PM in reply to: tuwood |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Polls Uh oh...
|
| 2016-09-26 10:38 PM in reply to: tuwood |
Elite 4547 | Subject: RE: Polls Originally posted by tuwood Uh oh...
Um, I don't think that's how it works. I am pretty sure the projection provided nearest the election is the one that is counted/remembered. We haven't even hit October yet... ...and, just because Hillary just one Round One of the debate series doesn't mean she'll win...it just means her odds improved a small fraction.  |
| 2016-09-26 10:48 PM in reply to: ChineseDemocracy |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Polls Originally posted by ChineseDemocracy Originally posted by tuwood Um, I don't think that's how it works. I am pretty sure the projection provided nearest the election is the one that is counted/remembered. We haven't even hit October yet... ...and, just because Hillary just one Round One of the debate series doesn't mean she'll win...it just means her odds improved a small fraction. Uh oh...
I was mostly poking at the folks pushing Nate as the gold standard when he had Hillary at 90%+ as a done deal. Now that it's not such a done deal I'm poking them. On the debate I don't think Hillary did as well as you think she did. I do tend to agree that she won on points, but the way she's shaped Trump as a dolt he didn't come across that way at all. He went toe to toe with Hillary for 90 minutes and made some great points. I say at best Hillary slows down the hemorrhage in the polls, but didn't see anything that would make people change from Trump to Hillary. I could of course be wrong, but I think we'll both be curious on watching the trends in the polls the next few days. |
I agree with you.| 2016-09-26 11:06 PM in reply to: tuwood |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Polls Hillary's lack of online support just cracks me up. Obviously an internet poll isn't scientific at all, but 90 minutes after the debate with all the fierce supporters on both sides trolling the internet this is all she's got? ABCNews isn't exactly a conservative site. http://abcnewsgo.co/2016/09/abc-live-poll-who-are-you-voting-for/
|
| 2016-09-27 9:37 AM in reply to: tuwood |
| Chicago, IL | Subject: RE: Polls Trump seemed increasingly flustered as the debate wore on. Once it became undeniably evident he was losing, his body language and facial expressions completely changed. He must be just terrible at poker, maybe that's why his casinos keep folding. In the final minutes it was apparent that he was desperate. He was like a heavyweight fighter on the ropes; swinging with everything he has, just hoping to make contact. Unfortunately for him, he just came off as belligerent, completely ignoring the posed question, and incoherently spluttering any headlines he'd hoped, but failed, to cover during the previous 90 minutes. Even during some of the Trumps more articulate moments, he was thin on substance. It was clear that he'd memorized certain headlines, but equally clear he couldn't recall the rhetoric to back it up. Hillary had similar moments, but Trumps were more frequent and far more obvious. Who won the debate is completely irrelevant, since empirical evidence proves that almost nobody is swayed by the outcome of a debate.
|
| 2016-09-27 9:48 AM in reply to: Brit Abroad |
Master 2802 Minnetonka, Minnesota Bronze member | Subject: RE: Polls The betting markets think Hillary won the debate hands-down. "Prediction Markets Score the Debate a Rout: Clinton Over Trump" "Clinton gains in online betting markets after U.S. presidential debate" http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-bets-idUSKCN11X09O "Who Won the Debate? Betting Markets Say Clinton" http://heavy.com/news/2016/09/who-won-the-debate-betting-markets-sa... |
| 2016-09-27 10:02 AM in reply to: Brit Abroad |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Polls Originally posted by Brit Abroad Trump seemed increasingly flustered as the debate wore on. Once it became undeniably evident he was losing, his body language and facial expressions completely changed. He must be just terrible at poker, maybe that's why his casinos keep folding. In the final minutes it was apparent that he was desperate. He was like a heavyweight fighter on the ropes; swinging with everything he has, just hoping to make contact. Unfortunately for him, he just came off as belligerent, completely ignoring the posed question, and incoherently spluttering any headlines he'd hoped, but failed, to cover during the previous 90 minutes. Even during some of the Trumps more articulate moments, he was thin on substance. It was clear that he'd memorized certain headlines, but equally clear he couldn't recall the rhetoric to back it up. Hillary had similar moments, but Trumps were more frequent and far more obvious. Who won the debate is completely irrelevant, since empirical evidence proves that almost nobody is swayed by the outcome of a debate.
I'd take that bet in a heartbeat. She did do well in the debate and I do tend to agree that people aren't swayed a lot by it, but this season is a little bit unique in the way the candidates supporters are positioning themselves. You've got the die hard Trump and Hillary supporters that aren't going anywhere no matter what, and then you've got the people on both sides who really don't like their candidate at all and are searching. So it seems to be a contest of who can convince enough of their disenfranchised peeps to come home to roost. As for Trumps performance in the debate it was actually one of his better performances compared to most of the primary debates and you'd have to understand his appeal in order to see how people could like it. It's hard to explain, but he was ultimately the winner last night and not Clinton and it had nothing to do with "who won the debate". Micheal Moore saw it a little more accurately and had Trump winning.
|
| 2016-09-27 10:56 AM in reply to: 0 |
| Master 5557 , California | Subject: RE: Polls It's hard to explain, but he was ultimately the winner last night and not Clinton http://www.debatedrinking.com/ certainly he was the winner there... Edited by spudone 2016-09-27 10:57 AM |
| 2016-09-27 11:05 AM in reply to: spudone |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Polls Originally posted by spudone It's hard to explain, but he was ultimately the winner last night and not Clinton http://www.debatedrinking.com/ certainly he was the winner there... haha, good site and I like their word choices. |
| 2016-09-28 7:56 AM in reply to: 0 |
Elite 4547 | Subject: RE: Polls Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by Brit Abroad Trump seemed increasingly flustered as the debate wore on. Once it became undeniably evident he was losing, his body language and facial expressions completely changed. He must be just terrible at poker, maybe that's why his casinos keep folding. In the final minutes it was apparent that he was desperate. He was like a heavyweight fighter on the ropes; swinging with everything he has, just hoping to make contact. Unfortunately for him, he just came off as belligerent, completely ignoring the posed question, and incoherently spluttering any headlines he'd hoped, but failed, to cover during the previous 90 minutes. Even during some of the Trumps more articulate moments, he was thin on substance. It was clear that he'd memorized certain headlines, but equally clear he couldn't recall the rhetoric to back it up. Hillary had similar moments, but Trumps were more frequent and far more obvious. Who won the debate is completely irrelevant, since empirical evidence proves that almost nobody is swayed by the outcome of a debate.
I'd take that bet in a heartbeat. She did do well in the debate and I do tend to agree that people aren't swayed a lot by it, but this season is a little bit unique in the way the candidates supporters are positioning themselves. You've got the die hard Trump and Hillary supporters that aren't going anywhere no matter what, and then you've got the people on both sides who really don't like their candidate at all and are searching. So it seems to be a contest of who can convince enough of their disenfranchised peeps to come home to roost. As for Trumps performance in the debate it was actually one of his better performances compared to most of the primary debates and you'd have to understand his appeal in order to see how people could like it. It's hard to explain, but he was ultimately the winner last night and not Clinton and it had nothing to do with "who won the debate". Micheal Moore saw it a little more accurately and had Trump winning.
[/QUOTE Hillary won the debate, period. Now, where to start. Over at 538.com they have a great article on what happens when candidates win debates soundly. For instance, when one is objective, one will discount where the candidates stand on issues and focus more on the debate performance. Think back to 2012. Romney kicked Obama's butt in the first debate. Trust me, I wasn't happy about it. Did I agree with any of Romney's trickle-down, pad the pockets of the rich argument? Of course not. But did he articulate his message better? Absolutely. What was the result? Romney gained a net of about 4.4% in the polls. After Bill Clinton's masterful townhall performance in '92, he gained 4.1%. So, to conclude Hillary won't gain in the polls after crushing the chronically unprepared Trump the other night, is silly. We should know the result in 5 to 7 days. (Sat. through Mon.). Edited by ChineseDemocracy 2016-09-28 8:04 AM |
|
|
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK