Church of Trump

[Splits]

Nate Silver needs to retire and let TSA, rmt and ducks take over as poll statisticians. Squirrel-head is acting mentally unstable and driving away longtime Republicans, and you people think it's the pollsters' and media's fault?

They and Karl Rove have the "real math".

[boutons_deux]

Donald Trump's Campaign Website Won't Let Some Cancel Recurring Donations

As the screenshots below demonstrate, there is no clear option on Trump's website to cancel monthly contributions or remove your credit card information: The site layout makes it appear that once you've set up a donation, you may only switch from one valid credit card to another.

There is, actually, a way to cancel — but only if you register your account by setting a password and navigate through a labyrinthine process.

This design flaw first came to light Wednesday, when CNN reporterJeremy Diamond tweeted a screenshot of an email from a disenchanted Trumpdonor who alleged that the campaign has not returned voice message requests to cancel contributions.

https://mic.com/articles/150640/dona...rds#.scJmQHCcX

Totally superfluous evidence that Trash is a classic Repug grifter.

[TheSanityAnnex]

Nate Silver needs to retire and let TSA, rmt and ducks take over as poll statisticians. Squirrel-head is acting mentally unstable and driving away longtime Republicans, and you people think it's the pollsters' and media's fault?

Some of us are aware that polls are intentionally skewed to show Clinton favorably. At least Reuters is admitting it

[boutons_deux]

Republicans hope that triaging Trump will save them downballot.

In the world of Republican “super PACs,” strategists are going even farther: discussing advertisements that would

treat Mr. Trump’s defeat as a given

and urge voters to send Republicans to Congress as a check on a Hillary Clinton White House.

The discussions were described by officials familiar with the deliberations, several of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity about confidential planning.

Republicans might tell themselves this approach will save them, but hard-nosed operatives know it won’t, because

few voters today split their tickets. That’s why the GOP is considering abandoning Trump entirely—their nuclear option.

But all weapons of mass destruction are tremendously dangerous, and one Republican politico lays out exactly why kicking Trump to the curb might be as risky as bear-hugging him:

“Do we run the risk of depressing our base by repudiating the guy, or do we run the risk of being tarred and feathered by independents for not repudiating him?” asked Glen Bolger, a Republican pollster working on many of this year’s races.

“We’re damned if we do and damned if we don’t.”

Exactly.

And the fears are so acute that Republicans aren’t merely worrying about the Senate, where they hold just a four-seat majority,

but even the House, where Democrats would need to win 30 seats to retake control.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/0...28Daily+Kos%29

[Splits]

“They not only changed their formula, to put Hillary ahead. They went back and changed the results, for a week of results where Trump was ahead, and then they turned those into Hillary leads,” said Caddell. “They also erased all the former polling off the site. They didn’t tweak their procedure – they cooked it.”

“Never in my life have I seen a news organization, and a supposedly reputable poll, do something so dishonest,” Caddell continued. “What they have done is, they decided the people who said, ‘oh, I’m never for someone’ – oh, those must be Hillary votes. They used to be Trump voters.”


Why Reuters is changing it poll
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN10910T

Linking to the Reuters article, pretending the "Caddell analysis" is from that link when, in fact, it is from ing breitbart and you didn't post the link

ing dishonest piece of .

[TheSanityAnnex]

Linking to the Reuters article, pretending the "Caddell analysis" is from that link when, in fact, it is from ing breitbart and you didn't post the link

ing dishonest piece of .

Why would I "pretend" his analysis trashing their tweaks is from from Reuters, and then bold and provide the actual Reuters article?

You try too hard sometimes. Put that some of that effort into discussing whether or not their tweaks to the polls are ethical, which you failed to do the first time. What you are doing now is no different than trying to shift focus from the contents of the hacked DNC emails to who hacked them.

[TheSanityAnnex]

rmt was correct in you having both a math and reading comprehension problem.

[Dirk Oneanddoneski]

Nate Silver needs to retire

You're right

[DMX7]

Mr. Trump doesn't need this. He gives and he gives and he gives. And all he asks in return is to be made President of the United States.

[ducks]

http://offtrade.info/cnmnews/tag/polls-rigged-by-media/

[Reck]

Citing 2015 Gallup is cherrypicking useless information. The chart above is "poll of polls" the past 8 years. The smallest spread was +5D in May 2011.

Last 2 Presidential election cycles were +6D and +7D. So +10D in a single poll after Trump has had the worst two weeks in his entire campaign and the party is split on a drastic fault line, is completely reasonable and/or within the margin of error. It isn't some grand conspiracy.

Yes, I dont get where the 2015 poll came from.

That other re TSA is even worse though.

He passes links from breitbart and those far right sites as legit on here.

I read into the reuters supposed skewed results and to a point, he's right. They lean democrat pretty good but they got to 8 points because they made the voters pick either Trump or Hillary. No other third party, no undecided, no sitting this one out.

Imo they did their job. Unlike Rasmussen who goes to great lenght to not push leaners.

But either way, you take Reuters poll away and even this new ABC/Washington Post poll and she still holds a 5-7 point lead.



You cannot spin this. It's inescapable fact.

Leave it to dumb s like TSA and ducks to come up with wierd conspiracy theories that explains why Hillary is winning.

[TheSanityAnnex]

Yes, I dont get where the 2015 poll came from.

That other re TSA is even worse though.

He passes links from breitbart and those far right sites as legit on here.

I read into the reuters supposed skewed results and to a point, he's right. They lean democrat pretty good but they got to 8 points because they made the voters pick either Trump or Hillary. No other third party, no undecided, no sitting this one out.

Imo they did their job. Unlike Rasmussen who goes to great lenght to not push leaners.

But either way, you take Reuters poll away and even this new ABC/Washington Post poll and she still holds a 5-7 point lead.



You cannot spin this. It's inescapable fact.

Leave it to dumb s like TSA and ducks to come up with wierd conspiracy theories that explains why Hillary is winning.

"Reuters supposed skewed results"

for s sake Reuters clearly admitted to skewing results, they even showed the changes and scraped previous polls

[TheSanityAnnex]

Reck who figured out rmt's math was right first Splits or you?

[Reck]

"Reuters supposed skewed results"

for s sake Reuters clearly admitted to skewing results, they even showed the changes and scraped previous polls

Like I said, I will throw away not only the Reuters poll but the Washington Post as well.

Explain the others. More specially, explain why Fox has her up 10. ing Fox.

[boutons_deux]

SALMA HAYEK OFFERS TO LEND DONALD TRUMP HER COPY OF 'U.S. HISTORY FOR DUMMIES'




http://www.latina.com/entertainment/...istory-dummies



Trash and Trash supporters are ing ridiculous fools.

[Splits]

Why would I "pretend" his analysis trashing their tweaks is from from Reuters, and then bold and provide the actual Reuters article?

The better question is: why didn't you link the breitbrt "analysis" that you copypasted?

Maybe you could post some WND, NewsMax, and DC "articles" to backup this brilliant "analysis".

[Reck]

Because you are a scared worthless sucker that has no original thoughts of your own. You realize that you're a piece of , and lie like the pieces of that think for you

re is the stupidest person alive, and a disgusting racist but is at least just a piece of , ing mongoloid stupid, but not a dishonest piece of

You got your pushed in yet again. Now go call your thinkers so they can tell you how to weasel out of this with some bull semantic argument....actually just kill yourself.

You may be on to something.

After my last post where I gave him a couple of caveats and challenged him to explain why Hillary is still ahead by 10 points on a Fox News poll and he still hasn't responded.

cuck

[Splits]

rmt was correct in you having both a math and reading comprehension problem.

Other than the fact that I responded to her they're over-sampling Dems by 43.4% simpleton take with a comprehensive, numbers-based smackdown, to which neither you nor her chose to respond.

[Splits]

Some of us are aware that polls are intentionally skewed to show Clinton favorably. At least Reuters is admitting it

based on what evidence?

so much red +R last cycle the media must be compensating this cycle



CONSPIRACY!

[ducks]

George P. Bush, a Trump Holdout, Urges Support For Nominee
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/08...s-support-him/

[Splits]

George P. Bush, a Trump Holdout, Urges Support For Nominee
https://www.texastribune.org/2016/08...s-support-him/

Oh noes, an endorsement from the establishment!

[rmt]

Other than the fact that I responded to her they're over-sampling Dems by 43.4% simpleton take with a comprehensive, numbers-based smackdown, to which neither you nor her chose to respond.

The WP/ABC poll didn't over-sample Dems by 43.4%. They over-sampled Dems by 43.4% - 11.5% (from the 2015 Gallup I picked up) = 31.9%. I used a January 11, 2016 Gallup poll with over 12k adults with "This elevated percentage of political independents leaves Democratic (29%) and Republican (26%) identification at or near recent low points, with the modest Democratic advantage roughly where it has been over the past five years." Meaning the difference between 29 and 26 is 3 (3 divided by 26 is 11.5) so for approximately the past 5 years there are about 11.5% more people identifying as Democrats than as Republicans. So for this WP/ABC, they over-sampled Dems by 31.9% which is quite significant.

Using your poll of polls and latest numbers, 35.8 - 28.7 = 7.1 7.1/28.7 = 24.7 43.4 - 24.7 = 18.7% Democrats over-sampled (which is still significant).

I was only clearing up the math for ducks and Reck. You chose to ignore my comment about it being too early to be obsessing about polls, insult my homeschooling (math) and bring my kids into this.

[Splits]

Yes, I dont get where the 2015 poll came from.

That other re TSA is even worse though.

He passes links from breitbart and those far right sites as legit on here.

I read into the reuters supposed skewed results and to a point, he's right. They lean democrat pretty good but they got to 8 points because they made the voters pick either Trump or Hillary. No other third party, no undecided, no sitting this one out.

Imo they did their job. Unlike Rasmussen who goes to great lenght to not push leaners.

But either way, you take Reuters poll away and even this new ABC/Washington Post poll and she still holds a 5-7 point lead.



You cannot spin this. It's inescapable fact.

Leave it to dumb s like TSA and ducks to come up with wierd conspiracy theories that explains why Hillary is winning.

Facts:

1) Any poll which poses Trump v. Clinton without the 3rd party candidates is not as credible as those which provide Lib and Green alternatives since Lib/Green will be on the ballot in all 50 states

2) The polls which have both h2h and all 4 parties on the ballot trend towards Trump losing by 1-2 points less when all 4 are on the ballot. The 3rd party voters take away from both R&D, but slightly a bit more from D.

3) No single poll before Labor day is meaningful in and of itself. The trends are somewhat meaningful, but you can't conclude anything this far out

4) Given 1-3, Shillary is clearly ahead right now, has a clear path to the presidency through the electoral college, and it isn't really disputable considering Republican leaders are scrambling to find ways to salvage their asses from the writing on the wall that they see for themselves

If I had to predict RIGHT NOW, I'd say

1) Trump's ceiling is 39% and will get beat by 11 points with 3rd parties taking up another 11 points.
2) Dems take 8 senate seats
3) Repubs hold the house by 8-12 seats

[Reck]

Oh noes, an endorsement from the establishment!

Jeb's son.

Jeb is such a failure as a man he cant even get sympathy from his own son. I mean, think about it. The son is voting for Trump after Trump took Jeb's manhood from him. How the does that happen?

Beta family.

[Splits]

The WP/ABC poll didn't over-sample Dems by 43.4%. They over-sampled Dems by 43.4% - 11.5% (from the 2015 Gallup I picked up) = 31.9%. I used a January 11, 2016 Gallup poll with over 12k adults with "This elevated percentage of political independents leaves Democratic (29%) and Republican (26%) identification at or near recent low points, with the modest Democratic advantage roughly where it has been over the past five years." Meaning the difference between 29 and 26 is 3 (3 divided by 26 is 11.5) so for approximately the past 5 years there are about 11.5% more people identifying as Democrats than as Republicans. So for this WP/ABC, they over-sampled Dems by 31.9% which is quite significant.

Using your poll of polls and latest numbers, 35.8 - 28.7 = 7.1 7.1/28.7 = 24.7 43.4 - 24.7 = 18.7% Democrats over-sampled (which is still significant).

I was only clearing up the math for ducks and Reck. You chose to ignore my comment about it being too early to be obsessing about polls, insult my homeschooling (math) and bring my kids into this.

Ok, genius. I'll insult your homeschooling because you think it's inappropriate for teachers to mention the term "climate change" in chemistry class.

Now, on to your numbers...

First of all, the Gallup numbers you keep quoting are absolutely meaningless, I don't know why you keep inserting them into this conversation. Especially when Gallup was +R7 in 2012. The numbers from the 8-year chart I posted are not "my" numbers, they are "the" numbers. It isn't an individual pollster or someone sticking their finger in the air and measuring the partisan temperature on any given day. Those are the aggregate numbers from all pollsters and actual elections over an 8 year time period. They have vacillated from +D10.5 to +D5 over the last 8 years. They currently stand at +D7.1.

Furthermore, let's pretend that the +D2.9 (10-7.1) is "bias" in this particular poll, which I would normally object to since there is demonstrable evidence that Trump attacking the Khans and his own party leadership will have a negative staying power, but let's just pretend for your little mind game that the accurate party affiliation is +D7.1.

So we have a difference of +D2.9 but with only 56% (33-23) of voters identifying with R or D and the other 44% identifying as independent/other. The poll you have such great consternation with is +D10 and shows Shill 50 Trump 42.

Using your incredible mathematical deduction skills, tell me what the poll results should be.