So in December he is losing to a generic candidate by 14 points...
In March that is down to 7 points... yeah, thats not exactly a good thing
I'm not sure what you achieve by constantly pointing out he is unpopular... he's been unpopular since he rode the escalator down... i sure hope the hubris we saw in 2016 doesn't come back, that shit killed us... i heard every day how far ahead Hillary was in the polls and that Trump had slim chances of winning... the last nbc/wsj poll has him at 47% with registered voters... that is after Cohen... so pardon me if i'm not on cruise control thinking this is in the bag
And the messenger was not mistaken, did you read the article? His numbers ticked up.... Also the only polls i'm concerned with are registered voters and likely voters, not concerned with generic polls
Hubris is the enemy
Okay. First of all, please don't take offense to what I am about to say. And please don't run to the moderator like the last time we disagreed. People can have discussion and disagree and still remain civil and not have to feel the need to run to a moderator and risk having a thread shut down just because they were proven wrong.
So--what the hell are you talking about? You're not sure "what I want to achieve" by continuing to point out how unpopular he is? Dude, I was replying to your post about his approval ratings. A presidential approval rating is a measure of how popular, or unpopular a president is. That is literally the whole point of those things.
You saw one poll and you thought it meant something so you posted it. In response I pointed out that in the grand scheme of things it didn't mean exactly what you thought it did. And, by the way, you're wrong about it showing him at 47%. It was 46%.
The NBC/WSJ poll you're referencing was taking during the time frame of 2/24-2/27. This is NOT after the Cohen testimonies last week as you have suggested. Cohen's public testimony occurred ON the 27th--the last day this survey took place. So when you say the Cohen stuff is totally factored in and this is proof that these things don't matter, you're simply wrong. I pointed out that his approval numbers (or popularity as you put it) have ranged form all time lowest to almost all time lowest. They go down during shit like the shut down and Charlottesville, and then they come back up when those things are over. But the point is they come back to all time or almost all time lowest numbers ever. Look at the chart on 538. This is normal. He at no point ever has even come close to any other president's ceiling. This is hugely important when looking at his chances in 2020. Any other president who inherited an economy like this would have approvals close to 60% would be blowing out all 2020 challengers. Instead he loses to all of them.
Also--I've pointed out numerous times to Trump supporters who always want to cherry pick polls that it's best to look at the average of such things to get the best overall picture. As 538 shows, shortly after the NBC (46%) poll, a few other polls have come out:
Gallup has him at 43% more recently. IDB/TIPP has him at 41% more recently Morning Consult has him at 41% more recently. Ispos has him at 39% more recently. Quinippiac has him at 38% more recently.
^These are all, generally, highly rated polls on 538 and a better reflection on where things stand after the Cohen stuff. Hell, he even lost a point or two on Rasmussen recently.
Add it all up and you have his overall number dropping by about 1% in just the last week......SINCE the Cohen public hearing happened.
I'm not sure why we are arguing about polls. If there is anything we have learned about polls from 2016 is that they do not seem to be reliable indication in regards to Trump specifically.
I personally don't care if it's 46, 47, 37, 38, wth ever. I especially don't care about the polls in March 2019. So keep arguing over "data" that has a 50% chance (my own data polling) to be shit.
hippiemom = goodness
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,516
I'm not sure why we are arguing about polls. If there is anything we have learned about polls from 2016 is that they do not seem to be reliable indication in regards to Trump specifically.
I personally don't care if it's 46, 47, 37, 38, wth ever. I especially don't care about the polls in March 2019. So keep arguing over "data" that has a 50% chance (my own data polling) to be shit.
Not arguing. I was correcting his interpretation of the data. Also national polling in 2016 was pretty darn accurate considering the pop vote totals.
Am I reading correctly that individual tax returns are really low? The middle class has been hit hard to compensate for the generous corporate tax breaks fatso gave him and his friends?
I'm not sure why we are arguing about polls. If there is anything we have learned about polls from 2016 is that they do not seem to be reliable indication in regards to Trump specifically.
I personally don't care if it's 46, 47, 37, 38, wth ever. I especially don't care about the polls in March 2019. So keep arguing over "data" that has a 50% chance (my own data polling) to be shit.
To me, the bolded line cincy is extremely critical.
First, I can only think of one purpose of paying attention to polls at this point in time: to try to influence people to vote one way or another. How about looking at the state of affairs in the country and the beliefs and opinions of politicians to establish that way to vote?
Next, the political situations in the States are evolving practically weekly. It seems insane to me to assume there won't be plenty of sets of results-altering events between now and the next election, making these results a moot point (unless, as I mentioned, an individual wants to be influenced by groupthink and/or cherry-picked poll results from <your favourite fake news poll> to confirm their right-ness).
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
I'm not sure why we are arguing about polls. If there is anything we have learned about polls from 2016 is that they do not seem to be reliable indication in regards to Trump specifically.
I personally don't care if it's 46, 47, 37, 38, wth ever. I especially don't care about the polls in March 2019. So keep arguing over "data" that has a 50% chance (my own data polling) to be shit.
Not arguing. I was correcting his interpretation of the data. Also national polling in 2016 was pretty darn accurate considering the pop vote totals.
I keep seeing that written and no it wasn't. The election is not based on popular vote. The polls know that. If they are using popular vote to say who is going to win the election and their polls do not account for the electoral college...well then their polls are even worse than I thought. There were election polls...they were very wrong. I don't understand why people feel the need to keep saying the polls were actually right, they weren't, they didn't meet their objectives. Anyhow - not meaning to 'attack' you personally on this point. I've just seen it over and over and over.
hippiemom = goodness
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,516
I'm not sure why we are arguing about polls. If there is anything we have learned about polls from 2016 is that they do not seem to be reliable indication in regards to Trump specifically.
I personally don't care if it's 46, 47, 37, 38, wth ever. I especially don't care about the polls in March 2019. So keep arguing over "data" that has a 50% chance (my own data polling) to be shit.
Not arguing. I was correcting his interpretation of the data. Also national polling in 2016 was pretty darn accurate considering the pop vote totals.
I keep seeing that written and no it wasn't. The election is not based on popular vote. The polls know that. If they are using popular vote to say who is going to win the election and their polls do not account for the electoral college...well then their polls are even worse than I thought. There were election polls...they were very wrong. I don't understand why people feel the need to keep saying the polls were actually right, they weren't, they didn't meet their objectives. Anyhow - not meaning to 'attack' you personally on this point. I've just seen it over and over and over.
I'm sorry but this is wildly inaccurate (much like the election projections in '16)
They're not using popular vote to say who was going to win the election and there were not election polls, there were election projections based on statewide polling. And as we've seen there were a few swing states where polling was curiously off by quite a bit. All of those projections that had HRC with 70%, 80% chances of winning? They were based off of state wide polling to then get a feel for how the electoral college would turn out. They were not based on national polling.
Point of national polling and approval rating is to get the feel for how the country as a whole feels about a candidate or their president. Totally different than projecting the outcome of the electoral college.
Nobody feels a need to just say national polling was right. People feel the need to correct those who say they were just wrong. Usually those who say they were wrong are confusing them with all the electoral college projections like you've done here. Two different things.
I'm not sure why we are arguing about polls. If there is anything we have learned about polls from 2016 is that they do not seem to be reliable indication in regards to Trump specifically.
I personally don't care if it's 46, 47, 37, 38, wth ever. I especially don't care about the polls in March 2019. So keep arguing over "data" that has a 50% chance (my own data polling) to be shit.
Not arguing. I was correcting his interpretation of the data. Also national polling in 2016 was pretty darn accurate considering the pop vote totals.
I keep seeing that written and no it wasn't. The election is not based on popular vote. The polls know that. If they are using popular vote to say who is going to win the election and their polls do not account for the electoral college...well then their polls are even worse than I thought. There were election polls...they were very wrong. I don't understand why people feel the need to keep saying the polls were actually right, they weren't, they didn't meet their objectives. Anyhow - not meaning to 'attack' you personally on this point. I've just seen it over and over and over.
I'm sorry but this is wildly inaccurate (much like the election projections in '16)
They're not using popular vote to say who was going to win the election and there were not election polls, there were election projections based on statewide polling. And as we've seen there were a few swing states where polling was curiously off by quite a bit. All of those projections that had HRC with 70%, 80% chances of winning? They were based off of state wide polling to then get a feel for how the electoral college would turn out. They were not based on national polling.
Point of national polling and approval rating is to get the feel for how the country as a whole feels about a candidate or their president. Totally different than projecting the outcome of the electoral college.
Nobody feels a need to just say national polling was right. People feel the need to correct those who say they were just wrong. Usually those who say they were wrong are confusing them with all the electoral college projections like you've done here. Two different things.
We will just have to disagree. I'm probably not articulating what I mean as well as I should.
When talking about the polls that were wrong I was referring to them projecting a winner in the election. But anyhow, you are right in that there are many different levels of polling, etc and it's detail oriented and I guess I don't feel like going back into the details on it since it doesn't matter.
You're all missing what's going on here. While you occupy yourself with petty stories of toilet paper on the bottom of shoes, massive waistlines, and Big Macs in the WH that are all designed to distract you, the real story is taking place. And if you don't figure out what the real story is soon, it will be too gawddamn late you dummies.
You're all missing what's going on here. While you occupy yourself with petty stories of toilet paper on the bottom of shoes, massive waistlines, and Big Macs in the WH that are all designed to distract you, the real story is taking place. And if you don't figure out what the real story is soon, it will be too gawddamn late you dummies.
You're all missing what's going on here. While you occupy yourself with petty stories of toilet paper on the bottom of shoes, massive waistlines, and Big Macs in the WH that are all designed to distract you, the real story is taking place. And if you don't figure out what the real story is soon, it will be too gawddamn late you dummies.
So in December he is losing to a generic candidate by 14 points...
In March that is down to 7 points... yeah, thats not exactly a good thing
I'm not sure what you achieve by constantly pointing out he is unpopular... he's been unpopular since he rode the escalator down... i sure hope the hubris we saw in 2016 doesn't come back, that shit killed us... i heard every day how far ahead Hillary was in the polls and that Trump had slim chances of winning... the last nbc/wsj poll has him at 47% with registered voters... that is after Cohen... so pardon me if i'm not on cruise control thinking this is in the bag
And the messenger was not mistaken, did you read the article? His numbers ticked up.... Also the only polls i'm concerned with are registered voters and likely voters, not concerned with generic polls
Hubris is the enemy
That NBC poll had Trump at 46%. But, even in your poll it ain't looking to good:
The bigger reveal in that poll:
"The NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll found that 41 percent of registered voters plan to vote for Trump while 48 percent said they plan to vote for whoever ends up becoming the Democratic candidate.
By contrast, at about this point in former President Barack Obama's presidency, 45 percent of voters said they planned to vote for Obama while 40 percent preferred a generic Republican candidate. "
That Obama +5 turned out to be a very accurate predictor.
Trump -7 against any democrat aint too good for this era of very low unemployment.
So in December he is losing to a generic candidate by 14 points...
In March that is down to 7 points... yeah, thats not exactly a good thing
I'm not sure what you achieve by constantly pointing out he is unpopular... he's been unpopular since he rode the escalator down... i sure hope the hubris we saw in 2016 doesn't come back, that shit killed us... i heard every day how far ahead Hillary was in the polls and that Trump had slim chances of winning... the last nbc/wsj poll has him at 47% with registered voters... that is after Cohen... so pardon me if i'm not on cruise control thinking this is in the bag
And the messenger was not mistaken, did you read the article? His numbers ticked up.... Also the only polls i'm concerned with are registered voters and likely voters, not concerned with generic polls
Hubris is the enemy
That NBC poll had Trump at 46%. But, even in your poll it ain't looking to good:
The bigger reveal in that poll:
"The NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll found that 41 percent of registered voters plan to vote for Trump while 48 percent said they plan to vote for whoever ends up becoming the Democratic candidate.
By contrast, at about this point in former President Barack Obama's presidency, 45 percent of voters said they planned to vote for Obama while 40 percent preferred a generic Republican candidate. "
That Obama +5 turned out to be a very accurate predictor.
Trump -7 against any democrat aint too good for this era of very low unemployment.
We're in an "anybody but Trump" era.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
I agree that splitting hairs on polls in March of an odd-numbered year is kinda silly. That said, I think most of M2H's point is spot-on. I don't care what the exact number is, but Trump's not as unpopular as many think...so when it comes to 2020, it seems crazy to sit around and say "no way this moron gets re-elected" after we spent 2016 saying "no way this moron gets elected." I thought the complacency (when he was running against the most hated candidate ever) was bad enough...but this time we have history to learn from and it's starting to look like we haven't learned. A legitimately good candidate is needed. A pragmatist to bring in the moderates? A liberal to bring in the harder left? Doesn't matter; it needs to be someone that will bring people to the polls. Obama did that. Hillary did not (at least not for her).
Even if M2H's and my tone that he's not as unpopular as you think (Trumpies don't respond to polls) is off-base, that might not really matter when it comes to 2020. It's about who votes. And that 37-46%? They're all voting. Every single one of them. The rest? Well, maybe roughly the same proportion hates him enough that they'll be voting against him for sure, which with the Electoral College is not enough. Who gets the rest of the people out...those people that don't think Trump's doing a good job but don't necessary see the importance in getting him out? That's what matters. And that's what I hope Democrats figure out. But right now, they kinda seem to think "not Trump" is enough. And it's not.
Remember, whatever his popularity, a huge chunk of the rest of the people (54% to 63%) don't hate him like most of us do.
Post edited by OnWis97 on
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
I agree that splitting hairs on polls in March of an odd-numbered year is kinda silly. That said, I think most of M2H's point is spot-on. I don't care what the exact number is, but Trump's not as unpopular as many think...so when it comes to 2020, it seems crazy to sit around and say "no way this moron gets re-elected" after we spent 2016 saying "no way this moron gets elected." I thought the complacency (when he was running against the most hated candidate ever) was bad enough...but this time we have history to learn from and it's starting to look like we haven't learned. A legitimately good candidate is needed. A pragmatist to bring in the moderates? A liberal to bring in the harder left? Doesn't matter; it needs to be someone that will bring people to the polls. Obama did that. Hillary did not (at least not for her).
Even if M2H's and my tone that he's not as unpopular as you think (Trumpies don't respond to polls) is off-base, that might not really matter when it comes to 2020. It's about who votes. And that 37-46%? They're all voting. Every single one of them. The rest? Well, maybe roughly the same proportion hates him enough that they'll be voting against him for sure, which with the Electoral College is not enough. Who gets the rest of the people out...those people that don't think Trump's doing a good job but don't necessary see the importance in getting him out? That's what matters. And that's what I hope Democrats figure out. But right now, they kinda seem to think "not Trump" is enough. And it's not.
Remember, whatever his popularity, a huge chunk of the rest of the people (54% to 63%) don't hate him like most of us do.
This is the most sensible post I've read in this thread.
I agree that splitting hairs on polls in March of an odd-numbered year is kinda silly. That said, I think most of M2H's point is spot-on. I don't care what the exact number is, but Trump's not as unpopular as many think...so when it comes to 2020, it seems crazy to sit around and say "no way this moron gets re-elected" after we spent 2016 saying "no way this moron gets elected." I thought the complacency (when he was running against the most hated candidate ever) was bad enough...but this time we have history to learn from and it's starting to look like we haven't learned. A legitimately good candidate is needed. A pragmatist to bring in the moderates? A liberal to bring in the harder left? Doesn't matter; it needs to be someone that will bring people to the polls. Obama did that. Hillary did not (at least not for her).
Even if M2H's and my tone that he's not as unpopular as you think (Trumpies don't respond to polls) is off-base, that might not really matter when it comes to 2020. It's about who votes. And that 37-46%? They're all voting. Every single one of them. The rest? Well, maybe roughly the same proportion hates him enough that they'll be voting against him for sure, which with the Electoral College is not enough. Who gets the rest of the people out...those people that don't think Trump's doing a good job but don't necessary see the importance in getting him out? That's what matters. And that's what I hope Democrats figure out. But right now, they kinda seem to think "not Trump" is enough. And it's not.
Remember, whatever his popularity, a huge chunk of the rest of the people (54% to 63%) don't hate him like most of us do.
I know several college educated co-workers and friends who think Trump is doing a wonderful job. As long as Trump runs as a pro-life, pro-gun, pro-wall candidate, I can see him getting re-elected.
Comments
So--what the hell are you talking about? You're not sure "what I want to achieve" by continuing to point out how unpopular he is? Dude, I was replying to your post about his approval ratings. A presidential approval rating is a measure of how popular, or unpopular a president is. That is literally the whole point of those things.
You saw one poll and you thought it meant something so you posted it. In response I pointed out that in the grand scheme of things it didn't mean exactly what you thought it did. And, by the way, you're wrong about it showing him at 47%. It was 46%.
The NBC/WSJ poll you're referencing was taking during the time frame of 2/24-2/27. This is NOT after the Cohen testimonies last week as you have suggested. Cohen's public testimony occurred ON the 27th--the last day this survey took place. So when you say the Cohen stuff is totally factored in and this is proof that these things don't matter, you're simply wrong. I pointed out that his approval numbers (or popularity as you put it) have ranged form all time lowest to almost all time lowest. They go down during shit like the shut down and Charlottesville, and then they come back up when those things are over. But the point is they come back to all time or almost all time lowest numbers ever. Look at the chart on 538. This is normal. He at no point ever has even come close to any other president's ceiling. This is hugely important when looking at his chances in 2020. Any other president who inherited an economy like this would have approvals close to 60% would be blowing out all 2020 challengers. Instead he loses to all of them.
Also--I've pointed out numerous times to Trump supporters who always want to cherry pick polls that it's best to look at the average of such things to get the best overall picture. As 538 shows, shortly after the NBC (46%) poll, a few other polls have come out:
Gallup has him at 43% more recently.
IDB/TIPP has him at 41% more recently
Morning Consult has him at 41% more recently.
Ispos has him at 39% more recently.
Quinippiac has him at 38% more recently.
^These are all, generally, highly rated polls on 538 and a better reflection on where things stand after the Cohen stuff. Hell, he even lost a point or two on Rasmussen recently.
Add it all up and you have his overall number dropping by about 1% in just the last week......SINCE the Cohen public hearing happened.
See fo yo self: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/?ex_cid=rrpromo
You can talk about hubris all you want....but coming with correct facts would better support your argument.
I personally don't care if it's 46, 47, 37, 38, wth ever. I especially don't care about the polls in March 2019. So keep arguing over "data" that has a 50% chance (my own data polling) to be shit.
First, I can only think of one purpose of paying attention to polls at this point in time: to try to influence people to vote one way or another. How about looking at the state of affairs in the country and the beliefs and opinions of politicians to establish that way to vote?
Next, the political situations in the States are evolving practically weekly. It seems insane to me to assume there won't be plenty of sets of results-altering events between now and the next election, making these results a moot point (unless, as I mentioned, an individual wants to be influenced by groupthink and/or cherry-picked poll results from <your favourite fake news poll> to confirm their right-ness).
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
They're not using popular vote to say who was going to win the election and there were not election polls, there were election projections based on statewide polling. And as we've seen there were a few swing states where polling was curiously off by quite a bit. All of those projections that had HRC with 70%, 80% chances of winning? They were based off of state wide polling to then get a feel for how the electoral college would turn out. They were not based on national polling.
Point of national polling and approval rating is to get the feel for how the country as a whole feels about a candidate or their president. Totally different than projecting the outcome of the electoral college.
Nobody feels a need to just say national polling was right. People feel the need to correct those who say they were just wrong. Usually those who say they were wrong are confusing them with all the electoral college projections like you've done here. Two different things.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
When talking about the polls that were wrong I was referring to them projecting a winner in the election. But anyhow, you are right in that there are many different levels of polling, etc and it's detail oriented and I guess I don't feel like going back into the details on it since it doesn't matter.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
So what the hell do you mean?
You're all missing what's going on here. While you occupy yourself with petty stories of toilet paper on the bottom of shoes, massive waistlines, and Big Macs in the WH that are all designed to distract you, the real story is taking place. And if you don't figure out what the real story is soon, it will be too gawddamn late you dummies.
Trump's Ties:
https://twitter.com/trumpsties?lang=en
www.headstonesband.com
Did I save anyone any time with this?
lol
That NBC poll had Trump at 46%. But, even in your poll it ain't looking to good:
The bigger reveal in that poll:
"The NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll found that 41 percent of registered voters plan to vote for Trump while 48 percent said they plan to vote for whoever ends up becoming the Democratic candidate.
By contrast, at about this point in former President Barack Obama's presidency, 45 percent of voters said they planned to vote for Obama while 40 percent preferred a generic Republican candidate. "
That Obama +5 turned out to be a very accurate predictor.
Trump -7 against any democrat aint too good for this era of very low unemployment.
We're in an "anybody but Trump" era.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/06/politics/trade-deficit-record-trump/index.html
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Even if M2H's and my tone that he's not as unpopular as you think (Trumpies don't respond to polls) is off-base, that might not really matter when it comes to 2020. It's about who votes. And that 37-46%? They're all voting. Every single one of them. The rest? Well, maybe roughly the same proportion hates him enough that they'll be voting against him for sure, which with the Electoral College is not enough. Who gets the rest of the people out...those people that don't think Trump's doing a good job but don't necessary see the importance in getting him out? That's what matters. And that's what I hope Democrats figure out. But right now, they kinda seem to think "not Trump" is enough. And it's not.
Remember, whatever his popularity, a huge chunk of the rest of the people (54% to 63%) don't hate him like most of us do.
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com