What are YOU voting on in the fall?

[Creighton Duke]

 

 

He may or may not think they are staying home. But if he says it enough times, perhaps it will become true.

 

For example, warring nations will attempt to blast demoralizing propaganda at their foes... "Your allied armies are taking heavy losses", etc, whether or not it's true. Make sense?

 

On the topic itself, I'm far more willing to say "Trump is an awful candidate" because __, ___, and ____ than I am willing to have confidence in the political strength of his opposition. There the best I can do is that the August polls seem good, and hopefully they'll stay that way and the actual vote will reflect the projections. It's not at all a sure thing, especially if people start assuming it'll happen and then modifying their voting behavior accordingly.

 

(That was at least part of the deal with Brexit, right? Voters who either didn't vote or voted leave said, "I was sure Leave would lose, so I didn't think my actual preference of Stay needed my vote.")

I think they will. Between primary numbers and rally turnouts, some people are going to be pretty overwhelmed at the disparity on election day.

 

It has been consistently shown that primary numbers and rally turnouts are not at all indicative of election day turnout.

 

You have your models and I have mine. We'll see what happens in a few months.

 

In the meantime, can we also add "stopping someone who seems mean!" and "electing someone who doesn't hurt my feels" to the list (in addition to my suggestion of "I'm not voting")? This can cover people who are only casually following the race. I know it seems like a joke, but...ya know!

[Lil' Red]

 

 

 

He may or may not think they are staying home. But if he says it enough times, perhaps it will become true.

 

For example, warring nations will attempt to blast demoralizing propaganda at their foes... "Your allied armies are taking heavy losses", etc, whether or not it's true. Make sense?

 

On the topic itself, I'm far more willing to say "Trump is an awful candidate" because __, ___, and ____ than I am willing to have confidence in the political strength of his opposition. There the best I can do is that the August polls seem good, and hopefully they'll stay that way and the actual vote will reflect the projections. It's not at all a sure thing, especially if people start assuming it'll happen and then modifying their voting behavior accordingly.

 

(That was at least part of the deal with Brexit, right? Voters who either didn't vote or voted leave said, "I was sure Leave would lose, so I didn't think my actual preference of Stay needed my vote.")

I think they will. Between primary numbers and rally turnouts, some people are going to be pretty overwhelmed at the disparity on election day.

 

It has been consistently shown that primary numbers and rally turnouts are not at all indicative of election day turnout.

 

You have your models and I have mine. We'll see what happens in a few months.

What are you basing your models on? Here's some info on primary numbers and rally turnouts.

[Creighton Duke]

 

 

 

 

He may or may not think they are staying home. But if he says it enough times, perhaps it will become true.

 

For example, warring nations will attempt to blast demoralizing propaganda at their foes... "Your allied armies are taking heavy losses", etc, whether or not it's true. Make sense?

 

On the topic itself, I'm far more willing to say "Trump is an awful candidate" because __, ___, and ____ than I am willing to have confidence in the political strength of his opposition. There the best I can do is that the August polls seem good, and hopefully they'll stay that way and the actual vote will reflect the projections. It's not at all a sure thing, especially if people start assuming it'll happen and then modifying their voting behavior accordingly.

 

(That was at least part of the deal with Brexit, right? Voters who either didn't vote or voted leave said, "I was sure Leave would lose, so I didn't think my actual preference of Stay needed my vote.")

I think they will. Between primary numbers and rally turnouts, some people are going to be pretty overwhelmed at the disparity on election day.

 

It has been consistently shown that primary numbers and rally turnouts are not at all indicative of election day turnout.

 

You have your models and I have mine. We'll see what happens in a few months.

What are you basing your models on? Here's some info on primary numbers and rally turnouts.

 

I don't base them on Nate Silver or...Bernie supporters.

[zoogs]

Youtube geniuses, presumably -- or similar. Welcome to the world of the alt-right.

[Lil' Red]

 

 

 

 

 

He may or may not think they are staying home. But if he says it enough times, perhaps it will become true.

 

For example, warring nations will attempt to blast demoralizing propaganda at their foes... "Your allied armies are taking heavy losses", etc, whether or not it's true. Make sense?

 

On the topic itself, I'm far more willing to say "Trump is an awful candidate" because __, ___, and ____ than I am willing to have confidence in the political strength of his opposition. There the best I can do is that the August polls seem good, and hopefully they'll stay that way and the actual vote will reflect the projections. It's not at all a sure thing, especially if people start assuming it'll happen and then modifying their voting behavior accordingly.

 

(That was at least part of the deal with Brexit, right? Voters who either didn't vote or voted leave said, "I was sure Leave would lose, so I didn't think my actual preference of Stay needed my vote.")

I think they will. Between primary numbers and rally turnouts, some people are going to be pretty overwhelmed at the disparity on election day.

 

It has been consistently shown that primary numbers and rally turnouts are not at all indicative of election day turnout.

 

You have your models and I have mine. We'll see what happens in a few months.

What are you basing your models on? Here's some info on primary numbers and rally turnouts.

 

I don't base them on Nate Silver or...Bernie supporters.

Unless you believe the numbers are wrong in the 538 article, I'm don't think there is much to dispute regardless of your feelings about Nate Silver. The other article also brings up Ron Paul and Howard Dean, but Mitt Romney and Walter Mondale also discovered that rally turnout is meaningless.

[Moiraine]

 

 

 

 

 

 

He may or may not think they are staying home. But if he says it enough times, perhaps it will become true.

 

For example, warring nations will attempt to blast demoralizing propaganda at their foes... "Your allied armies are taking heavy losses", etc, whether or not it's true. Make sense?

 

On the topic itself, I'm far more willing to say "Trump is an awful candidate" because __, ___, and ____ than I am willing to have confidence in the political strength of his opposition. There the best I can do is that the August polls seem good, and hopefully they'll stay that way and the actual vote will reflect the projections. It's not at all a sure thing, especially if people start assuming it'll happen and then modifying their voting behavior accordingly.

 

(That was at least part of the deal with Brexit, right? Voters who either didn't vote or voted leave said, "I was sure Leave would lose, so I didn't think my actual preference of Stay needed my vote.")

I think they will. Between primary numbers and rally turnouts, some people are going to be pretty overwhelmed at the disparity on election day.

It has been consistently shown that primary numbers and rally turnouts are not at all indicative of election day turnout.

You have your models and I have mine. We'll see what happens in a few months.

 

In the meantime, can we also add "stopping someone who seems mean!" and "electing someone who doesn't hurt my feels" to the list (in addition to my suggestion of "I'm not voting")? This can cover people who are only casually following the race. I know it seems like a joke, but...ya know!

What are your models?

[Creighton Duke]

Youtube geniuses, presumably -- or similar. Welcome to the world of the alt-right.

"alt-right"? Please explain, if you don't mind.

 

Also, what do you think of my new signature??!!

[Danny Bateman]

 

Youtube geniuses, presumably -- or similar. Welcome to the world of the alt-right.

"alt-right"? Please explain, if you don't mind.

 

Also, what do you think of my new signature??!!

 

 

Lame. Particularly considering your candidate just brough on a campaign manager specifically due to bigwig donors.

 

The alt-right are a ragtag bunch that consist mainly of white supremacists, neo-Nazis, red pill idiots, the "anti-PC means I can say whatever I want" crowd, conspiracy theorists and just a$$hole$ in general.

 

You know. Breitbart's target audience.

[NM11046]

 

 

 

 

He may or may not think they are staying home. But if he says it enough times, perhaps it will become true.

 

For example, warring nations will attempt to blast demoralizing propaganda at their foes... "Your allied armies are taking heavy losses", etc, whether or not it's true. Make sense?

 

On the topic itself, I'm far more willing to say "Trump is an awful candidate" because __, ___, and ____ than I am willing to have confidence in the political strength of his opposition. There the best I can do is that the August polls seem good, and hopefully they'll stay that way and the actual vote will reflect the projections. It's not at all a sure thing, especially if people start assuming it'll happen and then modifying their voting behavior accordingly.

 

(That was at least part of the deal with Brexit, right? Voters who either didn't vote or voted leave said, "I was sure Leave would lose, so I didn't think my actual preference of Stay needed my vote.")

I think they will. Between primary numbers and rally turnouts, some people are going to be pretty overwhelmed at the disparity on election day.

It has been consistently shown that primary numbers and rally turnouts are not at all indicative of election day turnout.

You have your models and I have mine. We'll see what happens in a few months.

 

In the meantime, can we also add "stopping someone who seems mean!" and "electing someone who doesn't hurt my feels" to the list (in addition to my suggestion of "I'm not voting")? This can cover people who are only casually following the race. I know it seems like a joke, but...ya know!

What are your models?

 

Listening to Trump, Fox and Breitbart and then reciting whatever catchphrases they tell him to.

[Danny Bateman]

 

 

 

 

 

He may or may not think they are staying home. But if he says it enough times, perhaps it will become true.

 

For example, warring nations will attempt to blast demoralizing propaganda at their foes... "Your allied armies are taking heavy losses", etc, whether or not it's true. Make sense?

 

On the topic itself, I'm far more willing to say "Trump is an awful candidate" because __, ___, and ____ than I am willing to have confidence in the political strength of his opposition. There the best I can do is that the August polls seem good, and hopefully they'll stay that way and the actual vote will reflect the projections. It's not at all a sure thing, especially if people start assuming it'll happen and then modifying their voting behavior accordingly.

 

(That was at least part of the deal with Brexit, right? Voters who either didn't vote or voted leave said, "I was sure Leave would lose, so I didn't think my actual preference of Stay needed my vote.")

I think they will. Between primary numbers and rally turnouts, some people are going to be pretty overwhelmed at the disparity on election day.

 

It has been consistently shown that primary numbers and rally turnouts are not at all indicative of election day turnout.

 

You have your models and I have mine. We'll see what happens in a few months.

What are you basing your models on? Here's some info on primary numbers and rally turnouts.

 

I don't base them on Nate Silver or...Bernie supporters.

 

 

[zoogs]

There's no need to engage. CD's on a mission. And part of that is playing coy as he tries to legitimize crank.

[Creighton Duke]

There's no need to engage. CD's on a mission. And part of that is playing coy as he tries to legitimize crank.

The reason why I ask is not because I don't know what it means, but more so to get an idea of the broad brush that is used to paint so many people and so many Trump supporters. If you look at some of my posts on previous voting decisions, I am anything but consistent and I find it interesting that those with differing or dissenting opinions who draw conclusions from a myriad of different sources (although not Vox...never Vox) to be lumped into one particular category.

 

It would be like my saying that since you cite certain media outlets that you are trying to legitimize Palpatine (Soros).

[NM11046]

 

 

He may or may not think they are staying home. But if he says it enough times, perhaps it will become true.

 

For example, warring nations will attempt to blast demoralizing propaganda at their foes... "Your allied armies are taking heavy losses", etc, whether or not it's true. Make sense?

 

On the topic itself, I'm far more willing to say "Trump is an awful candidate" because __, ___, and ____ than I am willing to have confidence in the political strength of his opposition. There the best I can do is that the August polls seem good, and hopefully they'll stay that way and the actual vote will reflect the projections. It's not at all a sure thing, especially if people start assuming it'll happen and then modifying their voting behavior accordingly.

 

(That was at least part of the deal with Brexit, right? Voters who either didn't vote or voted leave said, "I was sure Leave would lose, so I didn't think my actual preference of Stay needed my vote.")

I think they will. Between primary numbers and rally turnouts, some people are going to be pretty overwhelmed at the disparity on election day.

 

It has been consistently shown that primary numbers and rally turnouts are not at all indicative of election day turnout.

 

http://www.npr.org/2016/04/26/475681237/campaign-mystery-why-dont-bernie-sanders-big-rallies-lead-to-big-wins

 

Unbiased source looking at the lack of connection between rally attendance crowds and votes.