|
|
Post by sdsuball on Jul 26, 2024 19:40:14 GMT -8
My posts may seem to be vindication for Trump, but I'm only trying to bring reality, and fairness to a situation. Nothing more, nothing less. I sincerely do not care if you believe me, or not, when it comes to Trump and how I feel about him, and my stance on him. No big deal. When I hear from you consistently in just about EVERY poll, for example, "This poll having Trump in the lead is misleading, and it will change when it gets closer to the election" opposed to, "Hey, check out this poll with Biden or Kamala gaining ground, or in the lead here", seems very disingenuous. Bottom line is, any poll that has come out in favor of Trump you've downplayed. Any poll on favor of Biden, or Harris, you applaud and basically say, "Hey, looky there." It's VERY blatant, and disingenuous, but I get that you have an agenda. Just expect someone to highlight what you're doing. Okay, but Trump +1 is the same thing as Harris +1 when a standard poll has a MOE of 2.5-3%. It means nothing. These are the possible distributions (give or take, with everything in between such as 3.5, 2.5, etc.) with Trump +1: Trump +4, Trump +3, Trump +2, Trump +1, Even, Harris +1, Harris +2 |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jul 26, 2024 19:43:55 GMT -8
Okay, but Trump +1 is the same thing as Harris +1 when a standard poll has a MOE of 2.5-3%. It means nothing. These are the possible distributions (give or take, with everything in between such as 3.5, 2.5, etc.) with Trump +1: Trump +4, Trump +3, Trump +2, Trump +1, Even, Harris +1, Harris +2 You're correct, I should have clarified that further. What I should have said is "Within the margin of error, we can't really annoint a winner." That was lazy and a generalization by me. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jul 26, 2024 19:45:31 GMT -8
My posts may seem to be vindication for Trump, but I'm only trying to bring reality, and fairness to a situation. Nothing more, nothing less. I sincerely do not care if you believe me, or not, when it comes to Trump and how I feel about him, and my stance on him. No big deal. When I hear from you consistently in just about EVERY poll, for example, "This poll having Trump in the lead is misleading, and it will change when it gets closer to the election" opposed to, "Hey, check out this poll with Biden or Kamala gaining ground, or in the lead here", seems very disingenuous. Bottom line is, any poll that has come out in favor of Trump you've downplayed. Any poll on favor of Biden, or Harris, you applaud and basically say, "Hey, looky there." It's VERY blatant, and disingenuous, but I get that you have an agenda. Just expect someone to highlight what you're doing. You don't need to bring fairness when it isn't warranted. Not everything needs it, believe it or not. Bigotry is bad. Hate is bad. Division is bad. Racism is bad. Dictatorships are bad. Felonies are bad. Stealing national security information is bad. Those don't need a "Welllll, but....." attached to them. You're not achieving much here, this isn't about fairness, it's about politics. It's not disingenuous at all. I am not here to suck up, patronize or feed the trolls. 0.0% of the time. This goes back to my original point: I'm going to clarify obvious trolling with reality, since I understand basic stats. Classic point: A certain poster says "All swing states are pointing towards Trump." Okay, but Trump +1 is the same thing as Harris +1 when a standard poll has a MOE of 2.5-3%. It means nothing. If you don't expect the race to get tighter once Kamala is formally nominated, I don't know what to tell you. As I said before, there is no planet where Trump wins 60% of the time. His ceiling is almost maxed out right now, barring something changing the perception of voters in a major way. I'll say this again: Topics like this require nuance and critical thinking. Minnesota isn't going to operate the same as Georgia. North Carolina is not going to operate the same as Arizona. Nevada and Texas? Same thing. Different things will move the needle in different states at different times. Some things in a major way, other things in a minor way. The specifics matter, here, now. I don't know what you want from me, but I'll tell you like it is from my point of view. I'm not here to bull$#!+ you, or anyone else. We are on different sides of the spectrum and that's the reality of the situation. If you were to have a question about a SPECIFIC poll, I could probably elaborate and tell you why, but I'm guessing you'll accuse me of spin, lying or being deceitful. Correction: NOT the same thing between Trump +1 and Harris +1 with MOE. That was a lazy simplification by me. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Jul 26, 2024 19:46:47 GMT -8
My posts may seem to be vindication for Trump, but I'm only trying to bring reality, and fairness to a situation. Nothing more, nothing less. I sincerely do not care if you believe me, or not, when it comes to Trump and how I feel about him, and my stance on him. No big deal. When I hear from you consistently in just about EVERY poll, for example, "This poll having Trump in the lead is misleading, and it will change when it gets closer to the election" opposed to, "Hey, check out this poll with Biden or Kamala gaining ground, or in the lead here", seems very disingenuous. Bottom line is, any poll that has come out in favor of Trump you've downplayed. Any poll on favor of Biden, or Harris, you applaud and basically say, "Hey, looky there." It's VERY blatant, and disingenuous, but I get that you have an agenda. Just expect someone to highlight what you're doing. You don't need to bring fairness when it isn't warranted. Not everything needs it, believe it or not. Bigotry is bad. Hate is bad. Division is bad. Racism is bad. Dictatorships are bad. Felonies are bad. Stealing national security information is bad. Those don't need a "Welllll, but....." attached to them. You're not achieving much here, this isn't about fairness, it's about politics. It's not disingenuous at all. I am not here to suck up, patronize or feed the trolls. 0.0% of the time. This goes back to my original point: I'm going to clarify obvious trolling with reality, since I understand basic stats. Classic point: A certain poster says "All swing states are pointing towards Trump." Okay, but Trump +1 is the same thing as Harris +1 when a standard poll has a MOE of 2.5-3%. It means nothing. If you don't expect the race to get tighter once Kamala is formally nominated, I don't know what to tell you. As I said before, there is no planet where Trump wins 60% of the time. His ceiling is almost maxed out right now, barring something changing the perception of voters in a major way. I'll say this again: Topics like this require nuance and critical thinking. Minnesota isn't going to operate the same as Georgia. North Carolina is not going to operate the same as Arizona. Nevada and Texas? Same thing. Different things will move the needle in different states at different times. Some things in a major way, other things in a minor way. The specifics matter, here, now. I don't know what you want from me, but I'll tell you like it is from my point of view. I'm not here to bull$#!+ you, or anyone else. We are on different sides of the spectrum and that's the reality of the situation. If you were to have a question about a SPECIFIC poll, I could probably elaborate and tell you why, but I'm guessing you'll accuse me of spin, lying or being deceitful. So, every single poll that was in favor of Trump had its flaws, but any poll favorable pertaining to Biden, or Kamala are right on, and probably won't change? That's what I'm getting at. Your blatant bias. It's really obvious. When you do that, it's hard to take you serious. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jul 26, 2024 19:47:55 GMT -8
Okay, but Trump +1 is the same thing as Harris +1 when a standard poll has a MOE of 2.5-3%. It means nothing. These are the possible distributions (give or take, with everything in between such as 3.5, 2.5, etc.) with Trump +1: Trump +4, Trump +3, Trump +2, Trump +1, Even, Harris +1, Harris +2 Worded more succinctly: With most polls inside the margin of error, it's better to view things more comprehensively at this point with how things can change daily. |
|
|
|
Post by sdsuball on Jul 26, 2024 19:50:50 GMT -8
It's not the same thing. Trump +1 with a +/- of 3% means that it is more likely that Trump is in the lead then Harris is.These are the possible distributions (give or take, with everything in between such as 3.5, 2.5, etc.) with Trump +1: Trump +4, Trump +3, Trump +2, Trump +1, Even, Harris +1, Harris +2 Worded more succinctly: With most polls inside the margin of error, it's better to view things more comprehensively at this point with how things can change daily. Well, and it just doesn't matter that much right now. The popular vote doesn't always win the Electoral College, and +1 is a really small margin if that actually is the hypothetical margin. The margins in the swing states matter more as long as the popular vote is close. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jul 26, 2024 19:51:00 GMT -8
You don't need to bring fairness when it isn't warranted. Not everything needs it, believe it or not. Bigotry is bad. Hate is bad. Division is bad. Racism is bad. Dictatorships are bad. Felonies are bad. Stealing national security information is bad. Those don't need a "Welllll, but....." attached to them. You're not achieving much here, this isn't about fairness, it's about politics. It's not disingenuous at all. I am not here to suck up, patronize or feed the trolls. 0.0% of the time. This goes back to my original point: I'm going to clarify obvious trolling with reality, since I understand basic stats. Classic point: A certain poster says "All swing states are pointing towards Trump." Okay, but Trump +1 is the same thing as Harris +1 when a standard poll has a MOE of 2.5-3%. It means nothing. If you don't expect the race to get tighter once Kamala is formally nominated, I don't know what to tell you. As I said before, there is no planet where Trump wins 60% of the time. His ceiling is almost maxed out right now, barring something changing the perception of voters in a major way. I'll say this again: Topics like this require nuance and critical thinking. Minnesota isn't going to operate the same as Georgia. North Carolina is not going to operate the same as Arizona. Nevada and Texas? Same thing. Different things will move the needle in different states at different times. Some things in a major way, other things in a minor way. The specifics matter, here, now. I don't know what you want from me, but I'll tell you like it is from my point of view. I'm not here to bull$#!+ you, or anyone else. We are on different sides of the spectrum and that's the reality of the situation. If you were to have a question about a SPECIFIC poll, I could probably elaborate and tell you why, but I'm guessing you'll accuse me of spin, lying or being deceitful. So, every single poll that was in favor of Trump had its flaws, but any poll favorable pertaining to Biden, or Kamala are right on, and probably won't change? That's what I'm getting at. Your blatant bias. It's really obvious. Not what was said. Like I said, if you want to point to a specific poll, I'll do my best to explain it, even though I botched the previous example. Long story short: Looking INSIDE the data to who was polled matters. Rasmussen, for example was Trump +7, with D+2 surveyed. Depending on where you're at, that could be an overpolling on either side. Bottom line: The race is going to be close. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jul 26, 2024 19:52:12 GMT -8
Worded more succinctly: With most polls inside the margin of error, it's better to view things more comprehensively at this point with how things can change daily. Well, and it just doesn't matter that much right now. The popular vote doesn't always win the Electoral College, and +1 is a really small margin if that actually is the hypothetical margin. The margins in the swing states matter more as long as the popular vote is close. Correct. I've maintained that Pennsylvania I think is the linchpin for Harris. She has to win that state, in my opinion, to get to 270. I don't see enough inroads in Georgia or North Carolina to flip. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Jul 27, 2024 13:41:00 GMT -8
Ryan wrote the following. Can we please...stop...repeating easily researched nonsense? Paul Manafort went to PRISON for selling internal polling data to a Russian operative. A BIPARTISAN Senate committee, chaired by a GOP member, found that Russia, did, in fact interfere in the election and tied the Trump campaign to Russian involvement. You would have to be a complete idiot (generally speaking) to believe that there's no connection between events. There's literal video of the Kremlin cheering Trump's victory.
A question. Is it your opinion that it was Russian interference that caused Trump to win the 2016 election?
AzWmThat and the timing of the Comey letter, yes.
I would also mention that many voters were pretty unhappy that so many manufacturing jobs have gone to China. This is a touchy issue with me, since I believe in free trade. I am a lot older than you (a lot older!). I can remember when it was possible for someone to graduate from high school, get a union job, and pretty soon buy a house. No longer.
The changes in our economy I refer to are the result of actions taken by both parties. Trump gave the promise of turning the economy around. I don't say that he could really do that, only that millions of blue-collar workers believed that he could.
One result of Trump's takeover is that the GOP is now populist rather than conservative.
AzWm
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jul 27, 2024 13:55:42 GMT -8
That and the timing of the Comey letter, yes.
I would also mention that many voters were pretty unhappy that so many manufacturing jobs have gone to China. This is a touchy issue with me, since I believe in free trade. I am a lot older than you (a lot older!). I can remember when it was possible for someone to graduate from high school, get a union job, and pretty soon buy a house. No longer.
The changes in our economy I refer to are the result of actions taken by both parties. Trump gave the promise of turning the economy around. I don't say that he could really do that, only that millions of blue-collar workers believed that he could.
One result of Trump's takeover is that the GOP is now populist rather than conservative.
AzWm
I've heard this explanation before, but it doesn't jive with the timing of *when* Hilary's lead eroded. She had a double digit lead in October, the Comey letter was reintroduced less than two weeks before ED - And then her lead evaporated. |
|
|
|
Post by 84aztec96 on Jul 27, 2024 14:05:09 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Jul 28, 2024 11:44:55 GMT -8
Ryan, you seem to ignore one important point I made regarding Trump's win in 2016. I would like to know what you think of said point.
I would also mention that many voters were pretty unhappy that so many manufacturing jobs have gone to China. This is a touchy issue with me, since I believe in free trade. I am a lot older than you (a lot older!). I can remember when it was possible for someone to graduate from high school, get a union job, and pretty soon buy a house. No longer.
The changes in our economy I refer to are the result of actions taken by both parties. Trump gave the promise of turning the economy around. I don't say that he could really do that, only that millions of blue-collar workers believed that he could.
One result of Trump's takeover is that the GOP is now populist rather than conservative.
AzWm
|
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jul 28, 2024 12:00:22 GMT -8
Ryan, you seem to ignore one important point I made regarding Trump's win in 2016. I would like to know what you think of said point.
I would also mention that many voters were pretty unhappy that so many manufacturing jobs have gone to China. This is a touchy issue with me, since I believe in free trade. I am a lot older than you (a lot older!). I can remember when it was possible for someone to graduate from high school, get a union job, and pretty soon buy a house. No longer.
The changes in our economy I refer to are the result of actions taken by both parties. Trump gave the promise of turning the economy around. I don't say that he could really do that, only that millions of blue-collar workers believed that he could.
One result of Trump's takeover is that the GOP is now populist rather than conservative.
AzWm
I didn't ignore it, that's your specialty. |
|
|
|
Post by bnastyaztecs on Jul 28, 2024 13:07:42 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Jul 28, 2024 13:16:15 GMT -8
She got roasted. Too bad that many people vote according to the color of their skin. Shameful, and irresponsible. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jul 28, 2024 13:19:25 GMT -8
She got roasted. Too bad that many people vote according to the color of their skin. Shameful, and irresponsible. Who'd you vote for in 2016? |
|
|
|
Post by bnastyaztecs on Jul 28, 2024 14:00:54 GMT -8
She got roasted. Too bad that many people vote according to the color of their skin. Shameful, and irresponsible. Except conservative white people.... |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Jul 28, 2024 14:24:01 GMT -8
She got roasted. Too bad that many people vote according to the color of their skin. Shameful, and irresponsible. Who'd you vote for in 2016? What does that have to do with it? It wasn't about skin color for me. |
|
|
|
Post by johneaztec on Jul 28, 2024 14:26:21 GMT -8
She got roasted. Too bad that many people vote according to the color of their skin. Shameful, and irresponsible. Except conservative white people.... Absolutely there are SOME Conservative white people who vote according to skin color, just as there are Democrats, Liberals Moderates that do the same. You sure are the king of generalizing issues. Work on that. It will serve you well. |
|
|
|
Post by aztecryan on Jul 28, 2024 14:29:18 GMT -8
Who'd you vote for in 2016? What does that have to do with it? It wasn't about skin color for me. Of course not, you went with the candidate that aligned with your beliefs. Culture is part of that. Empowerment is part of that. Asking people to vote opposite of their cultural beliefs is strange. |
|
