Support NeoGAF

[titiklabingapat]

I said this last week, but these are all noise until the debates. The debates are about the only thing left that can change the dynamics of this race. It has been incredibly stable otherwise.

 

[Corto]

Just the normal ebb and flow of quasi real time polling. Historically Hillary should win and the debates won't do much difference. But maybe this election could be an abnormality. As everyone is expecting Trump to be aggressive, rude, unprepared for the debates, if he shows restraint, a "presidencial" demeanor, and a small hint of preparation his side will make that a huge victory, and media will follow along. If on the other side the moderation for the debates is more proactive, confronting the candidates with their opinions/statements and fact checking in real time then, that will unbalance Trump strategy. I personally can't wait for the first debate.

 

[EatinOlives]

Untrue.

538 had him leading their forecast from July 30th-31st.

Literally one day.

By 0.2%.

But you already knew that.

 

[Staccat0]

Really hoping the first debate is just full of time stamps and direct quotes. We need to hold everybody accountable for their claims at this point. The truth will shake this shit out.

If they treat this election like a "normal" presidential debate I can see Trump getting a huge boost.

 

[Lord Frieza]

Really hoping the first debate is just full of time stamps and direct quotes. We need to hold everybody accountable for their claims at this point. The truth will shake this shit out.

If they treat this election like a "normal" presidential debate I can see Trump getting a huge boost.

Uh, I'm not sure you understand what constitutes a "normal" debate. A "normal" debate is disadvantageous to Trump. That's why Trump wants a debate with no moderator at all.

 

[Darkgran]

My predicted map for election night aligns pretty closely with 538's current projection. Only difference is NH.

Let me ask you a question.

What the hell is Trump going to do to improve your life if he were to win?

 

[Aaron Strife]

What are you talking about?

This man could throw a tantrum, claim bias and unfairness from the moderators and walk out and his supporters would love him even more for it.

Trump's base of support probably bottoms out at 42% and frankly I don't see him doing much better than that in the general when all is said and done.

"The base" is overrated, the dude's approval rating is like 30%. His supporters don't count for double just because they're excited.

 

[Wolfgunblood Garopa]

There's zero percent chance Trump wins unless something drastically changes. He literally has no electoral path.

Worry when Vegas gives Trump over 40%. It hasn't happened yet, even after Comey and pneumonia.

https://electionbettingodds.com/

 

[Euphoria14]

I don't think his supporters will be enough.

I worry more about the number of people I know at work who moved into the "I'm not even going to vote this time" boat.

I hope that feeling isn't wide spread.

 

[Torokil]

So why is the gap tightening every time I look at fivethirtyeight?

because surveymonkey is a shit poll

 

[gabbo]

I said this last week, but these are all noise until the debates. The debates are about the only thing left that can change the dynamics of this race. It has been incredibly stable otherwise.

Am I being overly pessimistic if I don't believe it will change much for Trump? It may sway some undecideds, but his people and his base will take a win or a loss and spin it endlessly in his favour or negatively for Clinton.

 

[Team Alucard]

Let me ask you a question.

What the hell is Trump going to do to improve your life if he were to win?

He'll repeal the ACA, protect 2nd amendment rights, and possibly improve the economy, assuming that markets don't automatically tank simply in reaction to him being elected.

 

[A Human Becoming]

He'll repeal the ACA, protect 2nd amendment rights, and possibly improve the economy, assuming that markets don't automatically tank simply in reaction to him being elected.

Improve the economy how? I've mostly heard him talking about bad trade deals and currency manipulation.

 

[Wolfgunblood Garopa]

He'll repeal the ACA, protect 2nd amendment rights, and possibly improve the economy, assuming that markets don't automatically tank simply in reaction to him being elected.

A lot of people would lose their insurance, 2nd Amendment rights aren't going to change, and you can bet that the markets would nosedive.

 

[Lord Frieza]

He'll repeal the ACA, protect 2nd amendment rights, and possibly improve the economy, assuming that markets don't automatically tank simply in reaction to him being elected.

So, jack shit basically?

 

[Darkgran]

He'll repeal the ACA, protect 2nd amendment rights, and possibly improve the economy, assuming that markets don't automatically tank simply in reaction to him being elected.

You are so out of touch buddy...

 

[Thaedolus]

He'll repeal the ACA, protect 2nd amendment rights, and possibly improve the economy, assuming that markets don't automatically tank simply in reaction to him being elected.

And what, given his history of bilking people owed money, bankrupting businessss, blatantly lying and exaggerating about his accomplishments, and total lack of experience in public service gives you the impression he is capable of any of that?

 

[Not]

This is getting silly.

Exactly what kind of people can't make up their mind in this scenario?

 

[Toxi]

He'll repeal the ACA, protect 2nd amendment rights, and possibly improve the economy, assuming that markets don't automatically tank simply in reaction to him being elected.

That's a pretty large assumption.

 

[Darkgran]

He'll repeal the ACA, protect 2nd amendment rights, and possibly improve the economy, assuming that markets don't automatically tank simply in reaction to him being elected.

How the hell is repealing the ACA going to improve your life?

Edit: I also love how you say possibly...LMAO

 

[thepotatoman]

Thanks to the fact that people hate both candidates, there's probably going to be a lot of hard swings in both directions up to election day.

Trump seems to have a ceiling that is basically tied with Clinton, but if the swings are timed perfectly for him, he'd be going into election day with a chance to win. On the other hand, if the swings don't line up perfectly for him, he has no chance at all.

 

[InaSnowBoundLand]

Hopefully, Hillary sustains her lead over the neo-nazi who hates our country, its people, and its values. He is a putrid failure. Imagine him having his baby carrot stubs on the nukes button. Our world can change in an instant if Americans of sound mind and character don't defend it.

She leads the anti-nazi coalition and it must win to protect our families from the brainless conman's dangerous mix of stupidity and malevolence. The creature with the buffalo wings face is a looming disaster that must be averted; that is the only reasonable and patriotic position this election.

 

[Lord Frieza]

Eh, at this point I'm just ready to designate that Team Alucard is just a full-on troll. I've had some suspicions about it for awhile, but with that kind of shit, there's no way I buy they're serious. Revealing the fucking ACA.

 

[zelas]

because fivethirtyeight has the "let's include everything" approach in a year where almost everything is shit

aggregate of aggregates still has literally everyone else above 65% Clinton and the biggest substantive difference between them is only 538's including shit like those weird Ipsos polls where Vermont goes for Trump

This falsely assumes they treat polls equally.

Yeah, 538 is quoted a lot here, but it worth mentioning that they have been a pretty big outliner to actual percentage of a Trump win more or less since the general election starter. I don't say that to discredit 538, but I mean, it's kind of hard to ignore that they've consistently given Trump a higher chance than basically everyone else since generals officially started.

They were probably an outliers when they called each state the way they did in 2012. The constant outlier bashing of 538 reeks of twisted rationalization in an attempt to reassure. Just like when people here attacked the first poll from a couple of weeks ago showing Trump pulling in very close. What you guys are doing is just a more informed version of over reacting.

 

[smurfx]

If Trump wins the debates it galvanizes his base.
If Trump loses the debates it galvanizes his base.

Soundbites from the debates and interviews regarding the debates will serve as free advertising from now until election day.

will trump be able to keep these lunatics long enough to get 2020 candidates to grovel before him for his endorsement? imagine kasich having to kiss his ass.

 

[Version 3.0]

Hmm, ok... wasn't fivethirtyeight 100% accurate for the last election? I thought their track record spoke for itself. They're suddenly not reliable anymore?

Electoral-vote.com wrote a piece about that:

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2016/Feature_stories/538.html

 

[TheGreatMightyPoo]

How the hell is repealing the ACA going to improve your life?

Edit: I also love how you say possibly...LMAO

Even he has no faith in his boy.

 

[Mr. Giggles]

He'll repeal the ACA, protect 2nd amendment rights, and possibly improve the economy, assuming that markets don't automatically tank simply in reaction to him being elected.

Don't forget banning those pesky brown people

 

[Heaven Shard]

Aren't these polls too close to know for sure? Actual voter turnout my vastly vary.

I think if Drumpf loses, he will be forgotten as if he were never there (which is a shame. He should be grilled for what he did/ is doing. If Drumpf wins, I don't think anyone would give a shit and we will only be aware of how much more deplorable the public actually is. We've been regressing in civility for a while now- longer than the joke that is the muffin-man would run for president of a developed country.

 

[Slayven]

He'll repeal the ACA, protect 2nd amendment rights, and possibly improve the economy, assuming that markets don't automatically tank simply in reaction to him being elected.

So fuck over a bunch of poor people, do nothing because the 2nd amendment isn't threaten?

 

[Lord Frieza]

They were probably an outliers when they called each state the way they did in 2012. The constant outlier bashing of 538 reeks of twisted rationalization in an attempt to reassure. Just like when people here attacked the first poll from a couple of weeks ago showing Trump pulling in very close. What you guys are doing is just a more informed version of over reacting.

There probably were, but so what? Does they mean they weren't outliners? Also, who is bashing 538/Silver? Several times people who are commenting on this has given Silver credit, but how does one completely ignore the fact that he's an outliner in this situation (and a somewhat radical one when compared to the others, really)? No one is trying to discredit Silver. Are you trying to discredit the other aggregators? I have asked this question twice in this thread in response to this sentiment, and neither time got a straight answer. Do you find Silver more accurate than the others? Do you find them less creditable?

I don't see how pointing out a simple fact is overreacting or bashing in any way or form. I do think quoting a single source and screaming, "The end is near!" without acknowledging other sources might be, though.

 

[ZeroCDR]

So fuck over a bunch of poor people, do nothing because the 2nd amendment isn't threaten?

I'd really like to know what Hillary could realistically even do to the 2nd amendment to make responsible gun owners concerned in the first place.

 

[Insane Metal]

I'm actually baffled that Trump is (supposedly)getting all these votes... wtf.

 

[Darkgran]

I'd really like to know what Hillary could realistically do to the 2nd amendment to make responsible gun owners concerned in the first place.

You just wait. She will take guns away. Just like Obama did..Oh wait.

 

[Slayven]

I'd really like to know what Hillary could realistically even do to the 2nd amendment to make responsible gun owners concerned in the first place.

I mean Obama been trying to take guns for the last 8 years, what is the ace she got Obama doesn;t?

 

[Hoo-doo]

I mean Obama been trying to take guns for the last 8 years, what is the ace she got Obama doesn;t?

A democratic supreme court? Does that affect anything?

 

[Version 3.0]

He has a situation where the debates can only help him.

Anyone who would be scared away by his gaffes are already long gone. (Is there anything he could say at this point to drive away people who aren't already gone?)

The worst thing the media could probably do to him is embrace him.

Not true. I read an article just today that estimated there will be 40 million viewers for whom the 1st debate will be the first time they've paid attention to the election. Polls show there's as much as 12% of the electorate still undecided. That seems crazy to me, but the truth is, many people have no real opinion yet - even though there's little chance they've missed the many "Trump says dumb thing" headlines.

The debates could very well determine this election. Or, more accurately (and cynically), some stupid little insignificant event during the debates, like Hillary sneezing or Trump's hair being messed up. I have little faith that the content, which will all come from Hillary, will mean much at all.

 

[smokeandmirrors]

another trump supporter shows they only give a fuck about their goddamned toys over the actual needs of the people.

fuck the second amendment. fuck trump supporters. fuck republicans. fuck trump

if hillary doesn't win the future of my country for the vast majority of my living life is fucked.

 

[FiggyCal]

Nice to have a polling thread that doesn't read like the world is ending. If the debates go well (and they should) I can't see her falling back again.

I thought the same thing with the republican debates though. I thought for sure, he would sink after people saw him fail.

 

[Team Alucard]

SCOTUS was one justice away from nullifying the 2nd amendment in 2008. If Hill gets to replace Scalia, all its going to take is California passing a total ban (something that is coming down the pipe regardless within the next 5 years) and a subsequent lawsuit that is sure to follow and boom, for all practical purposes the 2nd amendment is gone.

 

[whyamihere]

SCOTUS was one justice away from nullifying the 2nd amendment in 2008. If Hill gets to replace Scalia, all its going to take is California passing a total ban (something that is coming down the pipe regardless within the next 5 years) and a subsequent lawsuit and boom, for all practical purposes the 2nd amendment is gone.

Cool!

 

[120v]

i think hillary's chances were always around 60%. summer has a tendency to inflate the winning side's chances, at least in recent elections. it's at about where it should be (per polling aggregates) and i don't see it budging much til election day unless something serious happens

 

[Version 3.0]

Thanks to the fact that people hate both candidates, there's probably going to be a lot of hard swings in both directions up to election day.

Trump seems to have a ceiling that is basically tied with Clinton, but if the swings are timed perfectly for him, he'd be going into election day with a chance to win. On the other hand, if the swings don't line up perfectly for him, he has no chance at all.

That's a good way to put it. Given that he hovers under a 20% chance of winning, I've likened it to having a revolver pointed at your head with one bullet in it. That's how it feels to me. I know the odds are good, but I'm still terrified.

 

[Darkgran]

SCOTUS was one justice away from nullifying the 2nd amendment in 2008. If Hill gets to replace Scalia, all its going to take is California passing a total ban (something that is coming down the pipe regardless within the next 5 years) and a subsequent lawsuit that is sure to follow and boom, for all practical purposes the 2nd amendment is gone.

You have no idea what you're talking about...

 

[Hoo-doo]

SCOTUS was one justice away from nullifying the 2nd amendment in 2008. If Hill gets to replace Scalia, all its going to take is California passing a total ban (something that is coming down the pipe regardless within the next 5 years) and a subsequent lawsuit that is sure to follow and boom, for all practical purposes the 2nd amendment is gone.

Fuck yes, progress.

 

[Not]

The 2nd Amendment is already gone. In its current NRA-defined iteration it retains very, very little of its original purpose.

 

[SDCowboy]

SCOTUS was one justice away from nullifying the 2nd amendment in 2008. If Hill gets to replace Scalia, all its going to take is California passing a total ban (something that is coming down the pipe regardless within the next 5 years) and a subsequent lawsuit that is sure to follow and boom, for all practical purposes the 2nd amendment is gone.

What in the blue hell are you talking about. lol

 

[smokeandmirrors]

You have no idea what you're talking about...

I mean they are a trump supporter so that should be painfully obvious

 

[titiklabingapat]

Guise, there is no point in convincing Team Alucard anymore. He is voting for Trump. Accept it and move on.

 

[User1608]

another trump supporter shows they only give a fuck about their goddamned toys over the actual needs of the people.

fuck the second amendment. fuck trump supporters. fuck republicans. fuck trump

if hillary doesn't win the future of my country for the vast majority of my living life is fucked.

Indeed. Alucard, your priorities are something. You're supporting a white supremacist and homophobe (Pence) on the ticket at the end of the day. Having read your posts elsewhere, I feel pity for you honestly.