Oscirus wrote:also to the myth of trump secret voters. Polls had hillary at +3 percent, she won the vote by about 2.7 percent.
1) Not at this point, nope.
2) National polls are meaningless you have to win the Electoral College.
Moderators: Deeeez Knicks, dakomish23, mpharris36, j4remi, NoLayupRule, GONYK, Jeff Van Gully, HerSports85
Oscirus wrote:also to the myth of trump secret voters. Polls had hillary at +3 percent, she won the vote by about 2.7 percent.
BallSacBounce wrote:HarthorneWingo wrote:BallSacBounce wrote:This far out I don't even look at the polls. And when I do start looking at them I'll be paying attention for weighting and bias. That's what I did the last time and that was the fatal mistake for the doubters. They believed their own propaganda.
It should be no surprise at this point but sometimes others see things differently than you. Others see a vibrant economy, prosperous times which helped everyone before the virus and don't hold Trump accountable for the aftermath.
Others appreciate the wall and the sticking up for the American Worker he repeatedly does with the trade deals. Others prefer the law and order he stands for and have no stomach for the disorder and chaos allowed to run roughshod over their lives, believe it or not.
He'll lose New Yorkers? How exactly will that affect his electoral chances?
He will get re-elected. It's not just me saying these things.
Here's what swing voters are saying about Trump:
https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/29/opinions/swing-voters-midwest-trump-support-thau/index.html
So there it is. Life outside your bubble.
1. I live smack dab in the middle of Trumpland so trust me when I tell you I live in no bubble.
2. Long Island was the only place where suburban voters got killed by the mortgage interest deduction in the Trump tax bill. It’s happened all over the country to middle income home-owning voters.
3. Trump has routinely and consistently hovered at 40% approval rating. It’s probably under that now.
4. The economy is going well? Is that really what you wrote? Where are you getting this information from?
5. To whatever extent that the economy was “doing well” it was more a function of Obama’s stimulus package. Job growth numbers continued on the same trajectory for Trump that it was for Obama. But you’re going to give Trump the credit for that? LOL
6. Listening to the rationales from a handpicked group of Trump supporters to say why they like him so much offers little support for why he’ll be re-elected. Yet you’ll reference them while refusing to accept any polling numbers at all. Sounds like you just have your head buried in the sand.
7. The stupid ass border wall makes Americans feel safe? It does? Where? In El Paso? LOL. Maybe if we didn’t sell so much weaponry to the Cartel, maybe they would t be trying to cross the border so much. Moreover, at least prior to the pandemic, more Mexicans were leaving the US that immigrating here. Finally, there were less costly more effective ways (high tech surveillance) that could’ve been implemented instead without all of this nonsense. Oh, and by the way, when exactly is Mexico paying for the wall?
Trump has always had a low approval rating, didn't stop him from getting elected and it won't stop him from being re-elected.
I didn't say I refuse to accept poll numbers. You're putting words in my mouth. I said I don't look at them this far out. IMO it's a waste of time right now. But you go ahead and believe them Wingo. President Dukakis was up by 15 points at this point...oh wait!!!
So the fantastic economic numbers in Trump's tenure were all Obama's doing? Let's see how that works out for ya.
You really have your head in the sand, sorry buddy.
robillionaire wrote:antifa is only a problem for fascists and BLM is only a problem for racists
HarthorneWingo wrote:BallSacBounce wrote:HarthorneWingo wrote:
1. I live smack dab in the middle of Trumpland so trust me when I tell you I live in no bubble.
2. Long Island was the only place where suburban voters got killed by the mortgage interest deduction in the Trump tax bill. It’s happened all over the country to middle income home-owning voters.
3. Trump has routinely and consistently hovered at 40% approval rating. It’s probably under that now.
4. The economy is going well? Is that really what you wrote? Where are you getting this information from?
5. To whatever extent that the economy was “doing well” it was more a function of Obama’s stimulus package. Job growth numbers continued on the same trajectory for Trump that it was for Obama. But you’re going to give Trump the credit for that? LOL
6. Listening to the rationales from a handpicked group of Trump supporters to say why they like him so much offers little support for why he’ll be re-elected. Yet you’ll reference them while refusing to accept any polling numbers at all. Sounds like you just have your head buried in the sand.
7. The stupid ass border wall makes Americans feel safe? It does? Where? In El Paso? LOL. Maybe if we didn’t sell so much weaponry to the Cartel, maybe they would t be trying to cross the border so much. Moreover, at least prior to the pandemic, more Mexicans were leaving the US that immigrating here. Finally, there were less costly more effective ways (high tech surveillance) that could’ve been implemented instead without all of this nonsense. Oh, and by the way, when exactly is Mexico paying for the wall?
Trump has always had a low approval rating, didn't stop him from getting elected and it won't stop him from being re-elected.
I didn't say I refuse to accept poll numbers. You're putting words in my mouth. I said I don't look at them this far out. IMO it's a waste of time right now. But you go ahead and believe them Wingo. President Dukakis was up by 15 points at this point...oh wait!!!
So the fantastic economic numbers in Trump's tenure were all Obama's doing? Let's see how that works out for ya.
You really have your head in the sand, sorry buddy.
Okay, that's your right not to believe the polls and I get it. They are problematic, no doubt.
So, I guess you're conceding all of the other great points I made. Wingo Wins Again!
BallSacBounce wrote:robillionaire wrote:antifa is only a problem for fascists and BLM is only a problem for racists
Antifa ARE the fascists and self-admitted BLM Marxists are a problem for anyone who believes in our general system. They both want to tear the whole thing down and are using fascist force to get their way instead of democratic action.
HarthorneWingo wrote:BallSacBounce wrote:robillionaire wrote:antifa is only a problem for fascists and BLM is only a problem for racists
Antifa ARE the fascists and self-admitted BLM Marxists are a problem for anyone who believes in our general system. They both want to tear the whole thing down and are using fascist force to get their way instead of democratic action.
ANTIFA stands for "anti-fascist" you ninny.
Pointgod wrote:BallSacBounce wrote:Your first paragraph nah, not a chance.
Second paragraph I think your suburban mom is way more interested in personal protection for their family than you think.
Third one, really? You think Antifa is nothing more than a right wing slogan? Who's burning down the buildings and destroying things then? There's like, photo evidence, indictments and stuff.
The fourth paragraph is pure projection. It was Trump that was attacked by security state fascists trying to consolidate their power in place of a duly elected president. I mean really now. You can agree with them if you want but how can you not see they did exactly what you accuse others of. That's hilarious.
Fifth paragraph, whatever.
Okay let’s see those indictments of Antifa members from a DOJ source. I bet you can’t produce them because like everything Trump and his administration say it’s complete bull. Why isn’t Trump and Barr talking about the white supremacists and far right presence that are causing violence in the protests and killing police? You can’t claim to be law and order but completely ignore domestic terrorists because they’re just as racist as you. Here’s a link, I know you won’t read it so I pulled out the important parts for you.
https://theintercept.com/2020/07/15/george-floyd-protests-police-far-right-antifa/Among the steady stream of threats from the far-right were repeated encounters between law enforcement and heavily armed adherents of the so-called boogaloo movement, which welcomes armed confrontation with cops as means to trigger civil war. With much of the U.S. policing apparatus on the hunt for antifa instigators, those violent aspirations appear to have materialized in a string of targeted attacks in California that left a federal protective services officer and a sheriff’s deputy dead and several other law enforcement officials wounded.German argued that the impulse to paint both sides of the political spectrum with the same brush, despite the fact that only the far right is actively killing people, is among the most dangerous features of modern American law enforcement. In his review of the documents produced in response to the recent protests, German said purported “threats” from antifa were routinely overblown, often framed vandalism as terrorism and were typically absent of concrete evidence of serious criminal activity.In a separate document disseminated the following day, DHS warned its workforce that the nation’s “period of darkness” would soon worsen, as “violent protest movements” grew. Domestic extremists would capitalize on the unrest to “take over government facilities and attack law enforcement,” DHS predicted, with protests following police killings of civilians “posing a high risk of escalating to both premeditated and random attacks targeting law enforcement officers nationwide.” The document went on to describe how “users of a white supremacist extremist Telegram channel attempted to incite followers to engage in violence and start the ‘boogaloo’ — a term used by some violent extremists to refer to the start of a second Civil War — by shooting in a crowd.”
Among the developments cited in the bulletin was the May 29 assassination of a federal court security guard in Oakland. The alleged perpetrator would later be identified as Steven Carrillo, a 32-year-old sergeant in an elite Air Force security unit. According to authorities, Carrillo would go on to ambush and kill a sheriff’s deputy and wound several others in a second targeted attack days later. In court filings last month, the FBI reported that the airman had a ballistics vest bearing a boogaloo patch. Following a shootout with police, Carrillo reportedly used his own blood to scrawl phrases associated with the movement on the hood of a vehicle he had carjacked.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-race-protests-antifa/us-prosecutors-do-not-charge-portland-protesters-with-antifa-ties-idUSKCN2502NQU.S. federal prosecutors have produced no evidence linking dozens of people arrested in anti-racism protests in Portland, Oregon, to the antifa or anarchist movements, despite President Donald Trump's assertions they are fueling the unrest.
A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's office in Portland confirmed this in an email to Reuters on Tuesday.
Just because Trump repeats the same lies over and over again doesn’t make it true. Only really stupid people believe anything from him and his administration. You’re being conned by a conman and you’re only happy to be conned. What happened to the migrant hoards at the border right before the 2018 midterms or the threats from MS13? Don’t you find it the tiniest bit convenient that all these threats disappeared once the midterms were over? I suspect that you’re a troll so I’ve just wasted my time but stop spreading this stupid bull because it makes you look like a delusional idiot.
BallSacBounce wrote: So it's a vast right-wing conspiracy of far right agitators causing all the violence, destruction and chaos. Okey doke.
CHAZ..right wing? The kid that got shot in Atlanta by a Black BLM member, right wing? That's just freaking hilarious.
BallSacBounce wrote: I'm not sure at this point if the DOJ would or should be saying it's an Antifa thing. I think they just arrest and charge them for what they suspect them of doing and any criminal conspiracy comes later.
EDIT: And here it is, straight from your Reuters article.“We have not alleged defendant affiliation with any specific groups or ideologies in our cases stemming from recent Portland protests,” said Kevin Sonoff, the spokesman. “Our cases focus purely on the criminal conduct alleged.”
KEY BACKGROUND:
Of the 51 cases, spread across 18 states, brought by the Justice Department thus far, 20 involve allegations related to arson; 16 involve the illegal possession of a firearm, more often than not by a felon; another eight people face charges related to inciting a riot or civil disorder. Former federal prosecutors told NPR that “if the government had indications that an individual had ties to or documented interest in a particular extremist movement, they would likely include it in charging documents to cite it during a bail hearing.” On Monday, AG Barr told Fox News host Bret Baier that the lack of cases against Antifa activists is not conclusive evidence that they were not participating in the violence. “We have some investigations underway, very focused investigations on certain individuals that relate to Antifa,” Barr said. “But in the initial phase of identifying people and arresting them, they were arrested for crimes that don’t require us to identify a particular group or don’t necessitate that.”
TANGENT:
Among all the cases brought so far, the only extremist group mentioned in court documents is the right-wing “Boogaloo movement.” On June 3rd, the Justice Department indicted three members of this group for conspiracy to cause destruction during protests in Las Vegas, and possession of an unregistered destructive device (specifically, an improvised incendiary device commonly known as a Molotov cocktail). “Boogaloo” is a term used by extremists to signify a coming civil war and/or collapse of society. Although federal charges haven’t been brought, a self-identified leader in the Ku Klux Klan was arrested Monday after driving through peaceful protesters in Richmond late Sunday afternoon. Rogers reportedly admitted to being a KKK leader and “propagandist for Confederate ideology.”
BallSacBounce wrote: Anyway, here ya go...
https://www.ksat.com/news/local/2020/06/06/3-members-of-anti-government-group-antifa-arrested-after-looting-a-target-in-austin-fbi-says/.AUSTIN – Three people have been arrested for looting, burglarizing and damaging property at an Austin Target store, according to the FBI.
The three individuals are known members of the anti-government group ANTIFA, FBI officials said
However, I have no doubt a "boogaloo' or two are out there as well. I know "Umbrella Man" was one. But I think that's more a deflection from Democrats about the real problem here, Antifa and BLM Marxists.
Second paragraph I think your suburban mom is way more interested in personal protection for their family than you think.
Third one, really? You think Antifa is nothing more than a right wing slogan? Who's burning down the buildings and destroying things then? There's like, photo evidence, indictments and stuff.
BallSacBounce wrote:HarthorneWingo wrote:BallSacBounce wrote:
Antifa ARE the fascists and self-admitted BLM Marxists are a problem for anyone who believes in our general system. They both want to tear the whole thing down and are using fascist force to get their way instead of democratic action.
ANTIFA stands for "anti-fascist" you ninny.
They are the fascists they speak of.
I can call an elephant an anteater it doesn't make it one.

Pointgod wrote:BallSacBounce wrote:HarthorneWingo wrote:
ANTIFA stands for "anti-fascist" you ninny.
They are the fascists they speak of.
I can call an elephant an anteater it doesn't make it one.
Do you actually understand what a fascist is? You’re making yourself look foolish snowflake. Stop mainlining right wing propaganda, you’re woefully out of your depth.
Oscirus wrote:
And lest someone whines about the message being taken out of context, here's the full thing and while it is out of context, not by much

HarthorneWingo wrote:BallSacBounce wrote:robillionaire wrote:antifa is only a problem for fascists and BLM is only a problem for racists
Antifa ARE the fascists and self-admitted BLM Marxists are a problem for anyone who believes in our general system. They both want to tear the whole thing down and are using fascist force to get their way instead of democratic action.
ANTIFA stands for "anti-fascist" you ninny.
Pointgod wrote:
Just because Trump repeats the same lies over and over again doesn’t make it true. Only really stupid people believe anything from him and his administration. You’re being conned by a conman and you’re only happy to be conned. What happened to the migrant hoards at the border right before the 2018 midterms or the threats from MS13? Don’t you find it the tiniest bit convenient that all these threats disappeared once the midterms were over? I suspect that you’re a troll so I’ve just wasted my time but stop spreading this stupid bull because it makes you look like a delusional idiot.
HarthorneWingo wrote:Kamala Harris wears less makeup than Trump.
CharlesOakley wrote:Trump supporters prove over and over again that winning is everything. Actual policy change or a coherent president or coherent presidency have no impact on their point of view.
GONYK wrote:There are way less undecided voters now than in 2016. That is where the volatility came from.
Hillary, even with her polling lead, never broke 50% nationally. That is not the case with Biden.
Obviously, that doesn't mean its in the bag, but it's not apples to apples. I agree that Dems should absolutely treat it like we are down.
Also, the polling in 2016 was accurate. Hillary won the popular vote by 3%. Trump is president because of like 80k votes in 3 states. It just re-emphasizes that state polls are more meaningful than national ones.
Pointgod wrote:robillionaire wrote:HarthorneWingo wrote:
1. I live smack dab in the middle of Trumpland so trust me when I tell you I live in no bubble.
2. Long Island was the only place where suburban voters got killed by the mortgage interest deduction in the Trump tax bill. It’s happened all over the country to middle income home-owning voters.
3. Trump has routinely and consistently hovered at 40% approval rating. It’s probably under that now.
4. The economy is going well? Is that really what you wrote? Where are you getting this information from?
5. To whatever extent that the economy was “doing well” it was more a function of Obama’s stimulus package. Job growth numbers continued on the same trajectory for Trump that it was for Obama. But you’re going to give Trump the credit for that? LOL
6. Listening to the rationales from a handpicked group of Trump supporters to say why they like him so much offers little support for why he’ll be re-elected. Yet you’ll reference them while refusing to accept any polling numbers at all. Sounds like you just have your head buried in the sand.
7. The stupid ass border wall makes Americans feel safe? It does? Where? In El Paso? LOL. Maybe if we didn’t sell so much weaponry to the Cartel, maybe they would t be trying to cross the border so much. Moreover, at least prior to the pandemic, more Mexicans were leaving the US that immigrating here. Finally, there were less costly more effective ways (high tech surveillance) that could’ve been implemented instead without all of this nonsense. Oh, and by the way, when exactly is Mexico paying for the wall?
Why should anybody accept polling numbers? If you accepted them in 2016 it led you to a completely false reality and conclusion where Hillary had absolutely no chance to lose. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me...... you can't get fooled again!
This has "2016 all over again" written all over it
People who say this don’t actually understand how polling works. You do understand that the most accurate models had Trump at a 30% chance of winning right? And they correctly predicted the popular vote results. The mistake was not conducting more accurate state polls. Still polling only tells you a extrapolated trend at a point in time. Trump winning was a massive fluke that took the combined forces of James Comey, a sophisticated Russian attack, massive voter suppression, historical third party share of the vote, literally millions of people who voted in 2012 choosing to stay home. Despite all of that he only won because of 80000 votes in 3 states.
If you don’t trust the polls ask yourself a simple question. Do you think state polls have gotten better, worse or stayed the same over the last 4 years? Polls don’t predict the future but they point to a direction. If your point is that Democrats still need to show up in record numbers and vote for Biden/Harris to embarrass Donald the **** then I agree with you.
j4remi wrote:HarthorneWingo wrote:robillionaire wrote:Why should anybody accept polling numbers? If you accepted them in 2016 it led you to a completely false reality and conclusion where Hillary had absolutely no chance to lose. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me...... you can't get fooled again!
This has "2016 all over again" written all over it
I guess because (1) I can’t wrap my mind around another another 4 years of Trump, and (2) I would hope that these pollsters aren’t making the same damn mistakes again.
The problem imo isn't the polling numbers themselves, it's how people treat them. We oversimplify them when the value of a good poll is drilling down to contextualize the results you see. Like GONYK pointing out that this time around the voters are a lot more decided on who they're picking at this point; that makes the numbers seem more reliable at a minimum. Not that I'm saying the polls are flawless or to be complacent but the context of these polls is very different from when Hillary had her lead and poll diving can be fun but I'd compare it to playing fantasy sports or something. You're always speculating and it's just the methods to your educated guessing.
j4remi wrote:GONYK wrote:
I feel like this isn't the first time he's said it but maybe in the past he was just alluding to it rather than flat out stating as much. This is why I wish the Dems had more mail-in focus during the early portion of the primaries; just to have even more blatant evidence that the process is effective.
On another Trump gaffe note, I know Trump heads find rationalizations for this stuff but man...how do we get a charitable reading of this one? Because the woman tweeting the clip seems to think it's a valid defense of Trump.
At the very minimum, this sounds a lot like threatening suburbia with poor people invading to me and that's if we're being as kind as possible about him bringing up the percentage of minorities in the suburbs (which would also mean he's pitting minorities against the poor and affordable housing).