bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Sun 24 Jul, 2016 11:28 am
@giujohn,
It hurts the working poor, too.

I want a graduated tax.
0 Replies
 
revelette2
 
  1  
Sun 24 Jul, 2016 11:33 am
Election Update: Is Trump Getting A Convention Bump?

Nate Silver

Polls taken during and after the Republican National Convention, which concluded on Thursday in Cleveland, generally show Donald Trump continuing to gain ground on Hillary Clinton, making for a close national race. But it’s customary for candidates to receive a “bounce” in the polls after their convention. There’s not yet enough evidence to come to firm conclusions about the size of Trump’s convention bounce, but the initial data suggests that a small-to-medium bounce is more likely than a large one.

Before we run through the polls, a note of caution: The convention bounce is going to be harder than usual to study this year. That’s because in contrast to 2012, when the polls were extremely steady for weeks before the conventions, they were on the move heading into the RNC this year. In particular, they were on the move toward Trump — or away from Clinton — with Trump whittling down what had been a 6- or 7-percentage point lead for Clinton in late June into something more like a 3-point lead by mid-July.



So when you see a new poll suggesting that Trump has received a bounce, or failed to receive one, you’ll want to be mindful of when the previous edition of the poll was conducted. If the pollster had last surveyed the race in June, odds are that Trump has made some fairly big gains. Some of those were probably realized before the convention and not because of it, however. But if the previous edition of the poll was in July,1 his gains are likely to be smaller.

Keeping that in mind, here’s the data we have so far. First, there are three post-convention national polls, meaning that all of their interviews were conducted after Trump’s acceptance speech on Thursday night.
◾A RABA Research poll, conducted on Friday, shows Clinton 5 percentage points ahead of Trump, 39-34, with a large undecided and third-party vote. That sounds bad for Trump, but the trend line in the poll is favorable for him: The previous edition of the poll, conducted two weeks ago, had him down 12 points.
◾A Gravis Marketing poll, conducted Thursday and Friday, has Trump 2 points ahead of Clinton. Their previous national poll, in late June, had Clinton up 2 points instead.2 Note, however, that Gravis has generally shown better results for Trump than most other pollsters.
◾Finally, an Echelon Insights poll, conducted on Thursday and Friday, shows Clinton up by 1 percentage point, although Clinton’s lead grows to 4 points if Libertarian Gary Johnson and the Green Party’s Jill Stein aren’t included. Echelon Insights had not previously polled the election.

You see what I mean? Measuring the convention bounce isn’t so straightforward. At first glance, it appears that the RABA Research poll is good for Clinton and the Gravis Marketing poll is good for Trump. But the RABA Research poll shows Trump making big gains and, furthermore, doing so in comparison to a July poll. By contrast, a 2-point lead in a Gravis Marketing poll is a pretty “meh” result for Trump, given that it has generally shown Trump-friendly results and that Trump didn’t improve all that much from its previous poll in June.

Meanwhile, Echelon Insights hadn’t conducted a pre-convention poll, so putting its numbers into context is hard. It’s interesting, however, that its poll shows a relatively large difference based on whether or not Johnson and Stein were included. It’s plausible that some of Trump’s post-convention gains will come from wayward conservatives who were thinking about voting for Johnson, so polls showing third-party candidates may show a larger bounce for him than those that don’t. Likewise, liberal voters who were contemplating a Johnson or Stein vote may move to Clinton after next week’s Democratic convention.

There are also a couple of polls that contain a mix of post-convention, pre-convention and during-convention data:

◾The USC Dornsife/LA Times tracking poll, conducted from last Saturday through Friday, has Trump up by 2 percentage points. That suggests very little bounce, given that Trump had been up by 1 percentage point in the poll before the convention.

◾However, the Reuters/Ipsos tracking poll, conducted from Monday through Friday, shows Trump making major gains, trailing Clinton by less than 1 percentage point. Clinton had generally been up by around 10 percentage points in that poll before the convention began. Clinton’s lead is slightly larger, 3 percentage points, in the version of the poll without Johnson and Stein.

◾Finally, a Rasmussen Reports poll, conducted during the convention on Monday and Tuesday, shows Trump ahead by 1 percentage point. That’s actually down from a 7-point lead for Trump in Rasmussen’s poll last week, although that poll had been a big outlier.

This data is also pretty confusing. The massive gains Trump made in the Reuters/Ipsos are unabashedly good news for him. But their polling earlier in July had been something of a pro-Clinton outlier, so some gains for Trump were probably inevitable. Likewise, even though Rasmussen Reports has a long history of polls that show a statistical bias toward Republicans, a 7-point lead for Trump was a bit rich, even by Rasmussen standards, and the poll was likely to regress to the mean somewhat regardless of how effective Trump’s convention was. The trend lines in the USC poll aren’t great for Trump. But it only started publishing data a week or so ago, and the poll doesn’t include third-party candidates.

The FiveThirtyEight forecast models are helpful at times like this, but even they’re going to have trouble sorting everything out. Earlier this week, I wrote that “it would be a bad sign for Trump if he can’t at least tie Clinton in polls conducted in between the RNC and the DNC.” Our now-cast, which is very aggressive and addresses the question of what would happen in a hypothetical election held today, shows Clinton up by about 1 percentage point, so Trump has almost brought the race to a tie, but not quite. If Trump still trails in the now-cast after we get the next couple of polls in, the convention might qualify as disappointing for him, but it’s too soon to come to that conclusion. Meanwhile, Trump has continued to gain in our polls-only model, which is less aggressive than the now-cast but takes the polls at face value, whereas the trend in our polls-plus model, which builds in a convention bounce adjustment (it assumes that an average convention bounce is 3 to 4 percentage points) has been flat over the past few days.

I wish I had more definitive answers for you. But the data we’ve gotten so far is inconsistent and comes from a weird group of pollsters, several of which had shown outlier-ish results in one direction or the other before the convention began. I think we can probably rule out Trump getting a huge, 8-point bounce or something like that, and I think we can probably rule out his getting no bounce at all, but beyond that, we’re just going to have to be patient.

In another sense, however, the story isn’t so complicated. Whereas June’s polls suggested a potential blowout for Clinton, July’s polls have shown a highly competitive race. We’ll see what August’s polls bring, after the Democrats have held their convention and the bounces have died down.


0 Replies
 
snood
 
  5  
Sun 24 Jul, 2016 01:48 pm
I just thought this was something worth sharing...

https://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13227047_10209700646932415_3440376532796022325_n.jpg?oh=6c8ad37770eba708755cbf20f5c39d76&oe=582BCF73

-Dr. Jonathan Giftos
Chief Resident for the Primary Care/Social Internal Medicine residency training program
Montefiore Medical Center
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Sun 24 Jul, 2016 02:04 pm
@snood,
People who haven't realized that the narcissist, racial bigot, Trump is a loud mouth who happens to just be rich are the older, white, uneducated folks who think wealth is an indication of intelligence.
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  -1  
Sun 24 Jul, 2016 02:15 pm
This just in Debbie Wasserman Schultz resigns as DNC chair Democratic party in disarray... Donna Brazile takes over as interim chair in an effort to shore up black vote for Billery has Democrats worried about Sanders voters going over to Trump.
snood
 
  3  
Sun 24 Jul, 2016 02:28 pm
@giujohn,
giujohn wrote:

This just in Debbie Wasserman Schultz resigns as DNC chair Democratic party in disarray... Donna Brazile takes over as interim chair in an effort to shore up black vote for Billery has Democrats worried about Sanders voters going over to Trump.


Donna Brazile didn't take over anything, interim or otherwise. Wasserman Schultz turned over her duties to Brandon Davis, National Political Coordinator for the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).

http://observer.com/2016/06/dnc-chair-debbie-wasserman-schultz-is-finally-kicked-to-the-curb/
giujohn
 
  0  
Sun 24 Jul, 2016 02:33 pm
@snood,
snood wrote:

giujohn wrote:

This just in Debbie Wasserman Schultz resigns as DNC chair Democratic party in disarray... Donna Brazile takes over as interim chair in an effort to shore up black vote for Billery has Democrats worried about Sanders voters going over to Trump.


Donna Brazile didn't take over anything, interim or otherwise. Wasserman Schultz turned over her duties to Brandon Davis, National Political Coordinator for the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).



http://observer.com/2016/06/dnc-chair-debbie-wasserman-schultz-is-finally-kicked-to-the-curb/



Wrong again ... Donna brazile took over as interim chair it's been reported by MSNBC 12 minutes ago
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  -1  
Sun 24 Jul, 2016 02:38 pm
The Sanders people, now that they've got wind of the 20,000 emails leak from the DNC, we'll see just how devious and duplicitous the Democrats are and how the system was rigged against them and a good number of them will probably vote for Trump just to stick it to Billary.
0 Replies
 
revelette2
 
  2  
Sun 24 Jul, 2016 02:46 pm
@snood,
I never liked her much anyway, so to me, it is no big loss and it makes the right decision as she does need to be held accountable for those emails of talking about Bernie's lack of faith being used against him. From what I have read, Hillary really isn't involved in that whole mess, so this cleans it up before the convention.
giujohn
 
  -1  
Sun 24 Jul, 2016 02:49 pm
@revelette2,
revelette2 wrote:

I never liked her much anyway, so to me, it is no big loss and it makes the right decision as she does need to be held accountable for those emails of talking about Bernie's lack of faith being used against him. From what I have read, Hillary really isn't involved in that whole mess, so this cleans it up before the convention.


What matters is the Sanders supporters who will feel disaffected betrayed and outraged and if they ever considered going to Billary I'm sure they're going to reevaluate that decision... Either they'll sit it out or go over to Trump either way this is a big win for Trump
It will certainly cast a Pall over their convention.
giujohn
 
  -1  
Sun 24 Jul, 2016 02:54 pm
One step closer to you not being able to post here under the name Bob...huh Bob?
0 Replies
 
revelette2
 
  2  
Sun 24 Jul, 2016 02:56 pm
@giujohn,
I doubt it, the only ones who are going to go to Trump over this would have anyway. Most are either going to that Jill woman or sit out this election and were going to before this debacle. I agree, it is a scandal but it is not Hillary's fault from what I can see and it made no difference in the end because Sander's didn't have the black or the Hispanic vote and he needed one or both to win the primary regardless of the established democrats and they're doings.
giujohn
 
  -2  
Sun 24 Jul, 2016 03:16 pm
@revelette2,
Well as far as it not being Hillary's fault I don't think these things happen in a vacuum... The chances of DeLand or Hillary not being involved are slim to none.
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  -2  
Sun 24 Jul, 2016 03:18 pm
@revelette2,
Well as far as it not being Hillary's fault I don't think these things happen in a vacuum... The chances Bill and or Hillary not being involved are slim to none.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Sun 24 Jul, 2016 03:28 pm
@revelette2,
I think a flat tax would have both taxed at the same percentage of income, not the same dollar amount.

I'm still visualizing tax on income, not how much someone has. That is, taxing income as opposed to taxing wealth.
giujohn
 
  -1  
Sun 24 Jul, 2016 03:30 pm
@roger,
The only tax flat or otherwise that is fair should be based on consumption there should be a 5% state sales tax and a 10% federal sales tax... And be done with an income tax.
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  -1  
Sun 24 Jul, 2016 03:37 pm
What I find interesting is that the city of Philadelphia's is gearing up for protesters about 50,000 a day who apparently are already starting to gather... But these are not Republican protesters these are Sanders supporters.

The second interesting fact is the Slate of speakers at the Democratic Convention will include the mothers of people like Michael Brown and others apparently in an effort to pander to black lives matter... but not one mother of a slain police officer... and if Hillary even slightly mentions that she's for Law and Order it will ring Hollow and highlight just how big of phony she is. And So It Goes.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Sun 24 Jul, 2016 03:41 pm
@roger,
True, because we also have property tax, sales tax, and state income tax.
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  -2  
Sun 24 Jul, 2016 04:01 pm
@snood,
snood wrote:

I just thought this was something worth sharing...

https://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13227047_10209700646932415_3440376532796022325_n.jpg?oh=6c8ad37770eba708755cbf20f5c39d76&oe=582BCF73

-Dr. Jonathan Giftos
Chief Resident for the Primary Care/Social Internal Medicine residency training program
Montefiore Medical Center



Only problem is Obama was never a law professor or professor at all...what he is is a liar.
blatham
 
  4  
Sun 24 Jul, 2016 04:12 pm
@giujohn,
http://www.factcheck.org/2008/03/obama-a-constitutional-law-professor/
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 05/11/2024 at 04:31:37