(08-05-2016 10:36 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  

(08-05-2016 10:31 AM)Max Power Wrote:  I set up for a couple Bernie speeches in Iowa, helped attendees find their caucus sites. I stood behind Bernie for a speech. Our speeches were YUGE! Our crowds blew Hillary's out of the water! Thousands packed in, enthusiastically cheering. Meanwhile, Hillary was giving intimate talks in coffee shops.

But we lost.

And you are so naive, you don't even realize when you've been fu**ed and gladly support the candidate that did the fu**en.

Team over country. Guys like Max are freaking pathetic. I hope Trump is elected and the GOP is fundamentally changed forever.

I am talking about the primaries Max...

Thats why libturds are so easily manipulated. They will get swindled, and then will fall back in line and support the person who swindled them with so much glee that they pee everywhere like an over-excited cocker spaniel.

(08-04-2016 05:20 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  Equating huge crowds or the lack of them to votes is a very misguided approach to handicapping this race.

Reminds me of Ron Paul's campaign.

Look, DJT is going to continue to draw huge crowds of people whose votes he already has. It is obvious that those crowds don't equate to more support, but just the level of support amongst those who already support him.

The enthusiasm gap is real, but really only helps turnout of your supporters. However, DJT's lack of organization and ground troops on the ground in swing states will ensure that HRC will probably out turnout DJT, even with the enthusiasm gap.

I fully expect DJT to draw lots of non-college educated white people to his rallies. But if its largely the same crowd, does it really mean much?

(08-04-2016 06:50 PM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  I don't put much stock in August polls, but I put even less stock in rally crowd size. Could be a case of there being more Hillary voters, but less enthusiastic.

Bernie packed stadiums and lost. Even Ron Paul was a crowd magnet wherever he went.

Totally agree Motown..

A) Bernie PACKED stadiums.. went down
B) Paul LOADED stadiums.. no votes
C) McCain and Palin were forced to turn people away for sizes.. still lost.

That's why I look at all the "look at how full/empty these crowds" are.. as just something to keep the pundits saying "Yay! Trump!" or "Yay! Hillary!"

(08-05-2016 10:38 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-04-2016 05:20 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  Equating huge crowds or the lack of them to votes is a very misguided approach to handicapping this race.

Reminds me of Ron Paul's campaign.

Look, DJT is going to continue to draw huge crowds of people whose votes he already has. It is obvious that those crowds don't equate to more support, but just the level of support amongst those who already support him.

The enthusiasm gap is real, but really only helps turnout of your supporters. However, DJT's lack of organization and ground troops on the ground in swing states will ensure that HRC will probably out turnout DJT, even with the enthusiasm gap.

I fully expect DJT to draw lots of non-college educated white people to his rallies. But if its largely the same crowd, does it really mean much?

Next expect signs in yards to be the key indicator. Haha