Granted, this is likely voters, and her lead shrinks to 11 among all registered voters. But what you find in these polls is that Hillary's lead balloons if you take away people who don't say it's likely they'll vote, and even more if you strip away the third party candidates, which I'm inclined to do because as it gets closer to November and it's obvious those guys don't have a chance they bleed support and it becomes a two person race. I'd be shocked if Trump comes within 5 on election day. In fact, I think it's more likely he loses by double digits.
Then there is the latest edition of Reuter's Polling Explorer from June 14, supposedly showing Clinton up by 8.5% over Trump, 39.1% to 30.6%. But of the 1,481 respondents, 642 (43.3%) are Democrats, 493 (33.3%) are Republicans, and 206 (13.9%) are Independents, with 138 (9.3%) "members of another party." A 10% bias of Democrats over Republicans is 9% above the past two-month average of actual party affiliations. Remove that liberal bias, and now the race is a statistical tie.
-- americanthinker
Then there is the latest edition of Reuter's Polling Explorer from June 14, supposedly showing Clinton up by 8.5% over Trump, 39.1% to 30.6%. But of the 1,481 respondents, 642 (43.3%) are Democrats, 493 (33.3%) are Republicans, and 206 (13.9%) are Independents, with 138 (9.3%) "members of another party." A 10% bias of Democrats over Republicans is 9% above the past two-month average of actual party affiliations. Remove that liberal bias, and now the race is a statistical tie.
-- americanthinker
Granted, this is likely voters, and her lead shrinks to 11 among all registered voters. But what you find in these polls is that Hillary's lead balloons if you take away people who don't say it's likely they'll vote, and even more if you strip away the third party candidates, which I'm inclined to do because as it gets closer to November and it's obvious those guys don't have a chance they bleed support and it becomes a two person race. I'd be shocked if Trump comes within 5 on election day. In fact, I think it's more likely he loses by double digits.
Its really hard to win by more than 10. If its an obvious blowout, some people will tend to vote against HRC as a way of 'protesting that they don't like her'.
The race almost always tightens right before the election.
Then there is the latest edition of Reuter's Polling Explorer from June 14, supposedly showing Clinton up by 8.5% over Trump, 39.1% to 30.6%. But of the 1,481 respondents, 642 (43.3%) are Democrats, 493 (33.3%) are Republicans, and 206 (13.9%) are Independents, with 138 (9.3%) "members of another party." A 10% bias of Democrats over Republicans is 9% above the past two-month average of actual party affiliations. Remove that liberal bias, and now the race is a statistical tie.
-- americanthinker
BULLSH_T
You are whistling past the graveyard.
that's the last bastion....the convention to nov 2
all the arguments have been defined.....is only fill time now
now the flaming gloves are off....
that's all the masses beneath the tundra understand.....
#sheep
(This post was last modified: 06-25-2016 11:40 AM by stinkfist.)
Then there is the latest edition of Reuter's Polling Explorer from June 14, supposedly showing Clinton up by 8.5% over Trump, 39.1% to 30.6%. But of the 1,481 respondents, 642 (43.3%) are Democrats, 493 (33.3%) are Republicans, and 206 (13.9%) are Independents, with 138 (9.3%) "members of another party." A 10% bias of Democrats over Republicans is 9% above the past two-month average of actual party affiliations. Remove that liberal bias, and now the race is a statistical tie.
-- americanthinker
Then there is the latest edition of Reuter's Polling Explorer from June 14, supposedly showing Clinton up by 8.5% over Trump, 39.1% to 30.6%. But of the 1,481 respondents, 642 (43.3%) are Democrats, 493 (33.3%) are Republicans, and 206 (13.9%) are Independents, with 138 (9.3%) "members of another party." A 10% bias of Democrats over Republicans is 9% above the past two-month average of actual party affiliations. Remove that liberal bias, and now the race is a statistical tie.
-- americanthinker
BULLSH_T
You are whistling past the graveyard.
LULLED INTO COMPLACENCY
If you become complacent you run the risk of losing. It you dismiss polling because you don't think they are accurate and you are actually in the lead or much closer that would be complacency, would it not? Trump better get some money in the treasure chest and start running some ads and ramp up his ground game X10. That is what HRC is doing. They are in their second round of battleground states TV and have feet on the ground. If Trump doesn't get the ball rolling he is going to get steamrolled. He could take several of the battleground states and make this an electoral horse race but not if he doesn't get up and running, and fast!
Then there is the latest edition of Reuter's Polling Explorer from June 14, supposedly showing Clinton up by 8.5% over Trump, 39.1% to 30.6%. But of the 1,481 respondents, 642 (43.3%) are Democrats, 493 (33.3%) are Republicans, and 206 (13.9%) are Independents, with 138 (9.3%) "members of another party." A 10% bias of Democrats over Republicans is 9% above the past two-month average of actual party affiliations. Remove that liberal bias, and now the race is a statistical tie.
-- americanthinker
BULLSH_T
You are whistling past the graveyard.
LULLED INTO COMPLACENCY
If you become complacent you run the risk of losing. It you dismiss polling because you don't think they are accurate and you are actually in the lead or much closer that would be complacency, would it not? Trump better get some money in the treasure chest and start running some ads and ramp up his ground game X10. That is what HRC is doing. They are in their second round of battleground states TV and have feet on the ground. If Trump doesn't get the ball rolling he is going to get steamrolled. He could take several of the battleground states and make this an electoral horse race but not if he doesn't get up and running, and fast!
I know this poll is complete bullcrap because racist Max started it. You in typical "non-partisan" fashion bought the poll wholesale.
RE: Clinton leads Trump by 13 in Reuters/Ipsos Poll
(06-25-2016 11:54 AM)dawgitall Wrote: Trump better get some money in the treasure chest and start running some ads and ramp up his ground game X10. That is what HRC is doing. They are in their second round of battleground states TV and have feet on the ground. If Trump doesn't get the ball rolling he is going to get steamrolled.
$2 Billion Worth of Free Media for Donald Trump
-- nyt
this novice pol ...
spent the less ...
yet won the most votes in republican history ...
no offense ...
but you know what to do with your unsolicited advice ...
Then there is the latest edition of Reuter's Polling Explorer from June 14, supposedly showing Clinton up by 8.5% over Trump, 39.1% to 30.6%. But of the 1,481 respondents, 642 (43.3%) are Democrats, 493 (33.3%) are Republicans, and 206 (13.9%) are Independents, with 138 (9.3%) "members of another party." A 10% bias of Democrats over Republicans is 9% above the past two-month average of actual party affiliations. Remove that liberal bias, and now the race is a statistical tie.
-- americanthinker
BULLSH_T
You are whistling past the graveyard.
LULLED INTO COMPLACENCY
If you become complacent you run the risk of losing. It you dismiss polling because you don't think they are accurate and you are actually in the lead or much closer that would be complacency, would it not? Trump better get some money in the treasure chest and start running some ads and ramp up his ground game X10. That is what HRC is doing. They are in their second round of battleground states TV and have feet on the ground. If Trump doesn't get the ball rolling he is going to get steamrolled. He could take several of the battleground states and make this an electoral horse race but not if he doesn't get up and running, and fast!
I know this poll is complete bullcrap because racist Max started it. You in typical "non-partisan" fashion bought the poll wholesale.
Where did you get the notion that I was non-partisan? Nothing could be further from the truth. I've been a Democrat all my life, and actively worked at the county and district level for many years. I'm definitely a partisan. But I also think it is important to look at the campaign objectively. Polls are just snapshots in time and dismissing them because of some unsubstantiated perception of intentional bias is just poor strategy. That isn't to say that all polls are equally reliable, but pollsters that use industry standard practices shouldn't be dismissed.
RE: Clinton leads Trump by 13 in Reuters/Ipsos Poll
(06-25-2016 12:05 PM)green Wrote:
(06-25-2016 11:54 AM)dawgitall Wrote: Trump better get some money in the treasure chest and start running some ads and ramp up his ground game X10. That is what HRC is doing. They are in their second round of battleground states TV and have feet on the ground. If Trump doesn't get the ball rolling he is going to get steamrolled.
$2 Billion Worth of Free Media for Donald Trump
-- nyt
this novice pol ...
spent the less ...
yet won the most votes in republican history ...
no offense ...
but you know what to do with your unsolicited advice ...
STICK IT WHERE THE SUN DON'T SHINE
And how has that been working in the general election so far?
The media isn't as deferential to Trump and HRC has been running circles around DJT in just about every news cycle.
----
In the primaries, the other candidates didn't focus on Trump, thinking that he would eventually falter. And the other candidates were terrified of making Trump's supporters angry so they didn't go after him till it was too late. The media needed Trump for ratings, so they were more deferential. Also the subjects and storylines of the debates focused on issues popular with GOP primary voters.
That won't happen in the general. Trump now needs the media more than they need him. And HRC isn't holding anything back. And she's defining him while Trump wastes time with organizational chaos, messaging foulups, gaffes, and a broke campaign. HRC is also focusing on general election themes and messaging.
To be sure, DJT will win some news cycles, but he's done a really bad job of it recently.
And its not some plot either. This is a known transition when the candidates go from the primary to the general. DJT hasn't figured it out yet. Will he ever?
(This post was last modified: 06-25-2016 12:46 PM by Tom in Lazybrook.)
RE: Clinton leads Trump by 13 in Reuters/Ipsos Poll
(06-25-2016 12:05 PM)green Wrote:
(06-25-2016 11:54 AM)dawgitall Wrote: Trump better get some money in the treasure chest and start running some ads and ramp up his ground game X10. That is what HRC is doing. They are in their second round of battleground states TV and have feet on the ground. If Trump doesn't get the ball rolling he is going to get steamrolled.
$2 Billion Worth of Free Media for Donald Trump
-- nyt
this novice pol ...
spent the less ...
yet won the most votes in republican history ...
no offense ...
but you know what to do with your unsolicited advice ...
STICK IT WHERE THE SUN DON'T SHINE
That article is from March, during the primaries. If he continues to try and run in the general like he did in the primaries he is toast. It is a whole new ballgame. I'll stand by my views on the race. It isn't unsolicited advice, just my observations. I'm sure we can just discuss it without shouting or making inappropriate anatomical suggestions.
RE: Clinton leads Trump by 13 in Reuters/Ipsos Poll
(06-25-2016 12:38 PM)dawgitall Wrote: I've been a Democrat all my life, and actively worked at the county and district level for many years. I'm definitely a partisan. But I also think it is important to look at the campaign objectively. Polls are just snapshots in time and dismissing them because of some unsubstantiated perception of intentional bias is just poor strategy.
RE: Clinton leads Trump by 13 in Reuters/Ipsos Poll
(06-25-2016 12:47 PM)green Wrote:
(06-25-2016 12:38 PM)dawgitall Wrote: I've been a Democrat all my life, and actively worked at the county and district level for many years. I'm definitely a partisan. But I also think it is important to look at the campaign objectively. Polls are just snapshots in time and dismissing them because of some unsubstantiated perception of intentional bias is just poor strategy.
RE: Clinton leads Trump by 13 in Reuters/Ipsos Poll
(06-25-2016 12:47 PM)green Wrote:
(06-25-2016 12:38 PM)dawgitall Wrote: I've been a Democrat all my life, and actively worked at the county and district level for many years. I'm definitely a partisan. But I also think it is important to look at the campaign objectively. Polls are just snapshots in time and dismissing them because of some unsubstantiated perception of intentional bias is just poor strategy.
RE: Clinton leads Trump by 13 in Reuters/Ipsos Poll
(06-25-2016 12:53 PM)dawgitall Wrote:
(06-25-2016 12:47 PM)green Wrote:
(06-25-2016 12:38 PM)dawgitall Wrote: I've been a Democrat all my life, and actively worked at the county and district level for many years. I'm definitely a partisan. But I also think it is important to look at the campaign objectively. Polls are just snapshots in time and dismissing them because of some unsubstantiated perception of intentional bias is just poor strategy.
/
Clinton leads Trump by 13 in Reuters/Ipsos Poll
![[Image: IRpoll624a.PNG?1466814985]](http://images.dailykos.com/images/267054/large/IRpoll624a.PNG?1466814985)
