-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2016 |OT5| Archdemon Hillary Clinton vs. Lice Traffic Jam
- Thread starter Spoiled Milk
- Start date
- Status
Hillary casts ultima On Bernie
Bernie uses a potion
Hillary summons bahamut zero
hammysaurusrex
Member
Sincere question: It seems while I'm already seeing some tone changes among personal friends, the reddit / social media faction is digging in heels. The narrative currently is: 'Sanders is more electable so when Hillary inevitably loses to Trump it'll be the Democrats fault for not seeing the way and the light'. My question is - what is the actual predictive value of pre-convention national polls - are they something to take seriously? Are certain types more valuable than others? Or are they just total campaign fodder and don't reflect much of anything.
It seems weird to me at first thought since the SFP people ignored the polling in New York, but are absolutely confident national polling is incredibly significant - is it?
It seems weird to me at first thought since the SFP people ignored the polling in New York, but are absolutely confident national polling is incredibly significant - is it?
Box of Kittens
Banned
Chat was something else. A few of us were trying to remind people of the track record of unadjusted exit polls, but otherwise it was non-strop diablosing.
metalslimer
Member
Republicans have already said they are going soft on Bernie because they would love for him to be the nominee. Months and billions spent saying Bernie will raise your taxes combined with Bernie saying "yes but" will lower those numbers. At least with Hilary the negatives are already in
That being said I'm not saying the polls are wrong. If there were some hypothetical national election today Bernie might do better
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
Someone posted a pretty detailed historical chart recently that I only partially understood ha ha, but I believe general election polls have only been about 50% predictive at this point in the calendar.
That said, even if they are predictive right now.. she's leading Trump by double digits. Sanders is leading by slightly higher double digits. "Electability" doesn't come into play with numbers like those.
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/a...republicans-see-sanders-as-an-easier-opponent
Bernie is a much easier target for Republicans. He's relatively untouched by Karl Rove and his ilk.
Hillary, on the other hand, has been dealing with them for decades, all in the public spotlight. Just look at Benghazi. What a sham.
Orbis Tabula
Member
Man, what a good night. And a great OT as well! So next set of primaries is next Tuesday, correct?
They're not terribly predictive at all, most of the time unless the candidate is extremely well known (a vice-president who's actually done something etc) then it's just generic D against generic R. Electorates tend to be very optimistic about candidates they don't have a lot of information about and in all cases the more they find out the less they like.
President Santorum was polling above Obama and Clinton at one point in the 2008 primary cycle.
QuiteWhittle
Member
It's interesting how Sanders's numbers in these early GE polls will stay consistent throughout the entire election but Clinton's performance against Trump in these same polls will inevitably worsen because of reasons.
eBay Huckster
Member
incidentally, we've got two extremely well-known frontrunners and the lead's still enormous
(which is a big part of why the GOP is trying so damn hard to block Trump from hitting 1,237)
RustyNails
Member
One million phonebank calls and bernie lost by even more than predicted 
balladofwindfishes
Member
After yesterday, it becomes even harder for the GOP to "steal" the nomination from Trump without it being a huge disaster. With both of his rivals eliminated mathematically from the first vote, he has an easy talking point to use going right up to the convention.
If he keeps that pace going, they're going to eventually have to just suck it up and accept him as their candidate.
If he keeps that pace going, they're going to eventually have to just suck it up and accept him as their candidate.
No. The conventional wisdom is that most of America doesn't really tune in until after Labor Day. That is probably a little extreme, especially in today's over-advertised political climate, but the general concept holds true that nothing really matters until we see the political landscape heading into the fall, when opinions will truly be formed.
Spring polling has been accurate in the past, but then most primaries don't last much beyond the real Super Tuesday as a front runner emerges and everyone gets in line for party unity and to maximize the value of their endorsement. As such you typically see the two parties already feeling out attacks on each other by this time of year in those cycles and so early polling begins to have some relevance. This cycle however we aren't going to have a clear 1 v. 1 match-up until the convention.
This is only compounded by who is actually running. Clinton is the obvious front runner on the D side and has been for a long time. The GOP has been gunning for her going on thirty years now. Citizen's United exists specifically because one group wanted to go above and beyond in '08 to attack her even prior to her even winning the nomination she lost to Obama. She has likely been the target of more negative messaging spread on her than any other candidate ever, which directly coincides with a stated conservative agenda since the mid-90's to seek out or manufacture any scandal they can associate with the Clintons. As such there is substantial negative messaging pre-build into all of Clinton's polling numbers and as we've seen this election cycle that needle isn't moving with further exposure.
Sanders on the other hand is the GOP dream opponent as the "socialist who loves Fidel Castro" attacks were basically written for them by Sanders twenty years ago. They've been entirely hands of with him because they want to do as little damage to him as possible until he's the guy.
Meanwhile the GOP is slinging mud at each other, but the Dems aren't aggressively pursuing a national attack narrative yet because no one knows exactly how their convention will play out and no SuperPAC wants to explain why they sunk millions attacking Trump or Cruz if the other or a third option ends up getting the nom.
This is an atypical cycle in the middle of an already tumultuous time in American politics. Previous methods of prediction are dubious at best.
Spoiled Milk
Banned
Congrats to dramatis for working the polls and serving the country!
fraud detected!
Orbis Tabula
Member
I'm wondering how much help Trump will get from the media at this point. If they repeat the "mathematically eliminated" points about Cruz and Kasich enough, it could help him out. He has to hope that the media bites on that.
teruterubozu
Member
Cruz bashing New York values has to be one of the dumbest moves in recent campaign politics.
Wolfgunblood Garopa
Member
Cruz getting bodied in NY is glorious. What kind of asshole other than a Republican would say some shit about a particular state's 'values' as a pejorative while running for a national office. And then for those unnecessary, divisive comments to come back and basically napalm all of the work he's put into getting to this point... it's pretty great. This has to be my favorite moment so far.
So on Monday there was a GOTV benefit concert for Bernie. It was Kung fu, a jam band, with the drummer from Phish and a few other guests. I know people hate phish here, and first I'm going to tell you you're wrong. But anyway, they did mostly covers. And they played Revolution by the Beatles, which to me seems incredibly ironic given Bernie's more rabid supporters and the criticisms of his campaign.
RustyNails
Member
He was even talking about New York values in upstate.
Macho Madness
Member
Fuck off, Ted.
Black Republican
Member
so apparently business friendly Delaware could be a problem for Bernie?
Outdoor Miner
Member
What a fantastic night! The second that CNN exit poll came out the missus and I laughed our asses off. Such a transparent attempt at 'reeling' viewers in. SHAME.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
That NY values thing pissed me off so much and not even because I'm in NY. You're running for president of the WHOLE COUNTRY, you don't just throw an entire state under the bus no matter how blue or red it is, you jackass.
That was my first assumption too.
eBay Huckster
Member
you don't even throw wyoming under the bus
because throwing that state anywhere might set off yellowstone
Yeah, I was in the kitchen when the polls first came out, and when I returned to the chat window I saw a lot of people freaking.. made me smile. Just like old times.
I'm sitting there saying to myself, "ehhh.. I'm skeptical.."
balladofwindfishes
Member
You know, for the last few weeks I've been kind of worried Bernie was doing serious harm to a Democrat winning the presidency, but after yesterday, I sort of calmed down on that. It feels pretty peaceful now, and it seems like Clinton supporters were just waiting for the smoke to clear away from Bernie before swooping in an making an attempt to return to sanity.
/r/Politics for example, I was pleasantly surprised to see comments like "SHILL" and "HILLARY IS JUST A REPUBLICAN" be downvoted and ignored, while just a few days ago such posts would get tons of support and anyone being critical of them would get downvoted to the point of absurdity.
/r/Politics for example, I was pleasantly surprised to see comments like "SHILL" and "HILLARY IS JUST A REPUBLICAN" be downvoted and ignored, while just a few days ago such posts would get tons of support and anyone being critical of them would get downvoted to the point of absurdity.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Spoiled Milk
Banned
reptilian suspect no. 1The Atlantic said:
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
My completely pulled-out-of-my-ass rule of thumb is the election is a lock if there is a 20-point difference in September, a 10-point difference in October, or a 5-point difference in November. I'd say any other poll average before then could tighten or flip by the election.
Outdoor Miner
Member
Do we know if Adam was perma'd?
Wolfgunblood Garopa
Member
It's starting to dawn on me just how wonderful this was. Conservatives have to maintain constant self-monitoring on such a consistent basis to work with a national audience, sometimes a little AM radio bubble rhetoric slips out.
Joe Shlabotnik
Banned
A short break
Oh god, I love this image. It's like one of those "story battles" you're in no way supposed to be able to lose with some over zealous village elder thinking he's protecting his quaint little bumpkin town from usurpers when, SURPRISE!!! It's actually the party working to save the world!!
eBay Huckster
Member
nah it's 2 weeks
teruterubozu
Member
Thing is, Cruz is the personification of right wing radio.
Spoiled Milk
Banned
Feel the Math
iZombie is a documentary.
plagiarize
Banned
I love that she carries hot sauce around with her. I've taken bottles of my favorites into many a restaurant.
As for the head to head polls...
Republicans aren't bothering to attack Sanders because there's no point. He's never looked capable of winning, so why spend money attacking him? And when his staying in the race appears to be hurting Clinton... why do something that could push votes her way in the primary?
It's just not a political sound strategy if you are a Republican super PAC to spend any money going after him. That's why basically none of them are.
Clinton's dirty laundry (or laundry that people think might be hers, or her laundry that has a bit of a pattern on it that if you look at it the right way could look like it was dirt instead of a pattern) has been getting aired all over the media (the same media who Sanders supporters think is biased against their candidate no less) during news coverage and commercial breaks.
If we want to weight how representative of November the head to head polls are right now, you do it by looking at how well the candidates in them are known to the public.
Trump vs Hillary would be the one you'd weight with the most confidence because everyone has a fairly good understanding of these candidates already. I struggle to think of many previous match ups where the candidates are as well established at this point as these two.
If you do, say Bernie vs Kasich... well you can't weight that one with any certainty at all. Of the five remaining 'plausible' candidates, that's the match up that you'd weight with the least confidence in your polling because that's the matchup where people know the least about the two candidates.
Cruz is probably better known than Sanders and Kasich, so Clinton vs Cruz I'd weight as the next most reliable after Clinton vs Trump.
It doesn't really matter where Sanders is polling compared to the clear leader and highly probable winner, when the clear leader and highly probable winner is set to demolish the front runners in the Republican race. The only reason you'd start looking to over turn what the voters wanted, is if the candidate they've selected doesn't have a clear path to the Presidency... and Clinton looks set to win in November easily.
And since she's done more for the down ticket races... well. Again, the party are going to pick the candidate who can easily win who will help them the most down ticket, rather than the candidate who can easily win who will help them less down the ticket.
It's been wishes and rainbows for months now. It's always been simple. If your candidate can win, they deserve it. If your favored candidate can't win the primary... then you just need to let it go. That was true of Clinton supports who wouldn't give up eight years ago and Sanders supporters now. I laughed long and hard at http://Hillaryis44.org eight years ago, and I'm laughing long at hard at the hardcore minority of Sanders voters who refuse to see reality now.
He was never ahead for even a moment in this race. He has never been on pace to close the gap. Yet every new set of elections where that didn't happen, this hardcore subset of his supporters would claim that the turnaround was going to start with the next set.
Well it didn't. It hasn't. It won't.
Your guy fought hard, and even if he hasn't officially lost yet... he's going to. He did better than most of us ever thought he could...
But he was never in a position where a win looked realistic.
As for the head to head polls...
Republicans aren't bothering to attack Sanders because there's no point. He's never looked capable of winning, so why spend money attacking him? And when his staying in the race appears to be hurting Clinton... why do something that could push votes her way in the primary?
It's just not a political sound strategy if you are a Republican super PAC to spend any money going after him. That's why basically none of them are.
Clinton's dirty laundry (or laundry that people think might be hers, or her laundry that has a bit of a pattern on it that if you look at it the right way could look like it was dirt instead of a pattern) has been getting aired all over the media (the same media who Sanders supporters think is biased against their candidate no less) during news coverage and commercial breaks.
If we want to weight how representative of November the head to head polls are right now, you do it by looking at how well the candidates in them are known to the public.
Trump vs Hillary would be the one you'd weight with the most confidence because everyone has a fairly good understanding of these candidates already. I struggle to think of many previous match ups where the candidates are as well established at this point as these two.
If you do, say Bernie vs Kasich... well you can't weight that one with any certainty at all. Of the five remaining 'plausible' candidates, that's the match up that you'd weight with the least confidence in your polling because that's the matchup where people know the least about the two candidates.
Cruz is probably better known than Sanders and Kasich, so Clinton vs Cruz I'd weight as the next most reliable after Clinton vs Trump.
It doesn't really matter where Sanders is polling compared to the clear leader and highly probable winner, when the clear leader and highly probable winner is set to demolish the front runners in the Republican race. The only reason you'd start looking to over turn what the voters wanted, is if the candidate they've selected doesn't have a clear path to the Presidency... and Clinton looks set to win in November easily.
And since she's done more for the down ticket races... well. Again, the party are going to pick the candidate who can easily win who will help them the most down ticket, rather than the candidate who can easily win who will help them less down the ticket.
It's been wishes and rainbows for months now. It's always been simple. If your candidate can win, they deserve it. If your favored candidate can't win the primary... then you just need to let it go. That was true of Clinton supports who wouldn't give up eight years ago and Sanders supporters now. I laughed long and hard at http://Hillaryis44.org eight years ago, and I'm laughing long at hard at the hardcore minority of Sanders voters who refuse to see reality now.
He was never ahead for even a moment in this race. He has never been on pace to close the gap. Yet every new set of elections where that didn't happen, this hardcore subset of his supporters would claim that the turnaround was going to start with the next set.
Well it didn't. It hasn't. It won't.
Your guy fought hard, and even if he hasn't officially lost yet... he's going to. He did better than most of us ever thought he could...
But he was never in a position where a win looked realistic.
Not trolling, genuinely want to know.
What is true about Benghazi and the email stuff regarding Hillary? Any good journalistic links that explain all of the facts, not the wild suspicions?
I saw clips where Hillary was confronted by Univision in a debate where they told the public one thing and then Hillary told her family another thing related to Benghazi. That's a bit troubling. Any good dissections of these events?
What about the email scandal? Can she actually be prosecuted for using personal email servers for state affairs? What kinds of dangers come from that?
If any of these are valid concerns, why do I rarely see anyone here take issue with it? If they're not valid concerns then it makes sense.
No one on my Facebook, no one I have asked on GAF, and nothing I have read so far on the Internet has been able to give me decent answers for this. Figured this was the thread to ask.
I realize none of us are privileged critics. We're all making judgments with limited information, but I would like to know what information is out there about this.
What is true about Benghazi and the email stuff regarding Hillary? Any good journalistic links that explain all of the facts, not the wild suspicions?
I saw clips where Hillary was confronted by Univision in a debate where they told the public one thing and then Hillary told her family another thing related to Benghazi. That's a bit troubling. Any good dissections of these events?
What about the email scandal? Can she actually be prosecuted for using personal email servers for state affairs? What kinds of dangers come from that?
If any of these are valid concerns, why do I rarely see anyone here take issue with it? If they're not valid concerns then it makes sense.
No one on my Facebook, no one I have asked on GAF, and nothing I have read so far on the Internet has been able to give me decent answers for this. Figured this was the thread to ask.
I realize none of us are privileged critics. We're all making judgments with limited information, but I would like to know what information is out there about this.
Spoiled Milk
Banned
pidgeon-Senpai, did you like my OP?
plagiarize
Banned
On Benghazi, the Republicans put together a committee to investigate it. Their own committee found no wrong doing on the part of Clinton and Obama, and the Republicans attacked their own committee as a result.
Personally I didn't need to see anything more than that.
http://nypost.com/2014/11/23/gop-looking-to-discredit-benghazi-report-that-cleared-obama/
Spoiled Milk
Banned
Yeah, this answer makes a lot of people angry, but "fog of war". On a plane, Hillary had just gotten news of something going on in Benghazi and told Chelsea it was probably a terrorist attack. But before she got to a press conference, the current intelligence was that it was a protest about that anti-muslim video circulating. So that's what she told the media. And then the next day, or maybe two days later, it became abundantly clear that it was a terrorist attack and should be treated as such. On the ground intelligence can be bad in situations like this.
Orbis Tabula
Member
So SCOTUS upholds the Arizona Redistricting Commission. Unanimous decision, written by Breyer.
blackaroni
Member
Oh no. Would a rally with both Clinton and Sanders help her out?
Macho Madness
Member
It's all over but the crying
And nobody's crying but me
Friends all over know I'm trying
To forget about how much I care for you
It's all over but the dreaming
Poor little dreams that keep trying to come true
It's all over but the crying
And I can't get over crying over you
And nobody's crying but me
Friends all over know I'm trying
To forget about how much I care for you
It's all over but the dreaming
Poor little dreams that keep trying to come true
It's all over but the crying
And I can't get over crying over you
- Status