- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Axelrod on Clinton: "It takes a lot of work to lose to Donald Trump"
Posted on 5/3/17 at 2:35 pm to The Boat
Posted on 5/3/17 at 2:35 pm to The Boat
quote:funny the same thing happened with Bernie sanders, and yet the republican primary polls didn't seem to be too far off the money.
That's because the polls were made up bullshite designed to discourage and suppress Trump support
so strange. Hillary is a candidate and the polling is all of a sudden super unreliable at the state level. hmmmmmmmmmm
0
Posted on 5/3/17 at 2:35 pm to Rakim
quote:
Stole votes
Nope.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 2:38 pm to DelU249
quote:
Fox Mulder
BUT BUT BUT it wasn't a complete loss, Hillary did get 3 million more votes than her competitor
I laughed my balls off when she said that shite.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 2:38 pm to Zach
quote:
If the polls were right how did he win? The polls said he would lose?
National polls damn near nailed it.
State polls showed tightening in the states he surprised in right before the election.
And polls don't predict turnout.
Come on Zach. You are better than this. You are smart enough to know that the "polls were rigged" narrative is nonsense.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 2:39 pm to Haughton99
quote:
And polls don't predict turnout.
How convenient.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 2:39 pm to Sentrius
quote:
laughing
Call it whatever you want.
quote:
Are you?
Nope, but you asked the stupid question, not me. Stay focused.
quote:
Even I
Yep, even you.
Best thing I've read today, including BamaAtl's faceplant. Let that sink in.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 2:42 pm to Haughton99
yeah the polling was just run of the mill that's why everyone was so stunned that trump won and a lot of people thought he'd go over 300 EVs and who didn't see him winning Michigan...and Pennsylvania...and Wisconsin?
john Kasich had a speech planned for the next day because he just assumed trump would win or at least be competitive and wanted to congratulate him.
give me a break. why does something like shitty polling need to be a political divide? the polls were wrong. an average of the national polls happened to be right. every state that mattered the polling was way way way off and an average of the polling in some states happened to be close but look at the individual polls and you can see why everyone was shocked he won.
my prob/stat teacher said it best "averages are stupid"
john Kasich had a speech planned for the next day because he just assumed trump would win or at least be competitive and wanted to congratulate him.
give me a break. why does something like shitty polling need to be a political divide? the polls were wrong. an average of the national polls happened to be right. every state that mattered the polling was way way way off and an average of the polling in some states happened to be close but look at the individual polls and you can see why everyone was shocked he won.
my prob/stat teacher said it best "averages are stupid"
Posted on 5/3/17 at 2:50 pm to Haughton99
You can say the polls weren't rigged. Fine. The more likely explanation is that they were just fricked even though I absolutely think they were cooked
But you're defending the quality of the polling which was awful both nationally and in the states that mattered
An average of the all the super wrong national polls ended up being right. That's what you're hanging your hat on?
But you're defending the quality of the polling which was awful both nationally and in the states that mattered
An average of the all the super wrong national polls ended up being right. That's what you're hanging your hat on?
Posted on 5/3/17 at 2:55 pm to DelU249
quote:Well this is a pretty nonsensical statement.
An average of the all the super wrong national polls ended up being right. That's what you're hanging your hat on?
Posted on 5/3/17 at 3:03 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
BUT BUT BUT it wasn't a complete loss, Hillary did get 3 million more votes than her competitor
She's like a somehow less likable Al Gore.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 3:04 pm to Iosh
quote:ridiculous. Trump for better or worse earned his nomination.
Same collective action problem that got Donald Trump nominated, just inverted. If everyone put the knife in at once she could've been brought down but nobody wanted to be Casca.
Clinton had it virtually sewn up from day one with the superdelegates and having no one run against her. They thought it would be a cake walk going against that Maryland guy and a socialist.
Democrats still won't admit that people by and large do not like Hillary Clinton. It's not sexist or misogyny or any other bad word you want to come up with. She is extremely unlikable. She is a female Ted Cruz.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 3:04 pm to Haughton99
quote:
National polls damn near nailed it.
Which is a useless exercise in as much as the President isn't selected in this manner.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 3:04 pm to therick711
quote:
She's like a somehow less likable Al Gore.
Minus the estrogen of course.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 3:19 pm to Haughton99
quote:
Polls had him up outside of the margin of error in all of those states. Not sure what you are talking about.
MSNBC and CNN spent a ton of time on the red states turning purple. I don't have time for your convenient selective memory.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 3:30 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
BUT BUT BUT it wasn't a complete loss, Hillary did get 3 million more votes than her competitor
I laughed my balls off when she said that shite.
I laughed at that too but I laughed even harder after the audience cheered and applauded her when she made that comment.
This post was edited on 5/3/17 at 3:35 pm
Posted on 5/3/17 at 3:33 pm to Rakim
Quote-Clinton on Tuesday said she takes responsibility for her 2016 presidential election loss, but added she would have won if not for FBI Director James Comey, Russian hackers and WikiLeaks.Unquote.
Yeah officer, I take full responsibility for driving drunk, but Leroy next to me in the car kept offering me that bottle and Marvin in the backseat bought that bottle.I felt obligated to take a few pulls......anyways they was way drunker than me so I had to get them home some kinda way.
Hell if not for those two drunks, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Yeah officer, I take full responsibility for driving drunk, but Leroy next to me in the car kept offering me that bottle and Marvin in the backseat bought that bottle.I felt obligated to take a few pulls......anyways they was way drunker than me so I had to get them home some kinda way.
Hell if not for those two drunks, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 3:57 pm to DelU249
quote:
slick willy had trump figured out from the start and the NYT ran a piece of his assessment of trump and you can see in the WikiLeaks emails that he was intentionally kept away
What did bill say??
Posted on 5/3/17 at 4:14 pm to buckeye_vol
i'm sorry I don't want to play pretend with you. they didn't start polling a few days before the election
what's interesting to me is that we've often had the discussion about 538...let's set them aside for a second. every other model had her over 90%. what were those models based on? 538 had her at a 70% chance...what was that based on?
what's the foundation of information they use to determine Hillary has a 90% chance of winning?
you came in the night of and said you were "terribly wrong"...well what were you terribly wrong about? were you terribly wrong because you based your every single perception around some terribly wrong information?
were people shocked that trump won? if they were, then why the frick is that?
what's interesting to me is that we've often had the discussion about 538...let's set them aside for a second. every other model had her over 90%. what were those models based on? 538 had her at a 70% chance...what was that based on?
what's the foundation of information they use to determine Hillary has a 90% chance of winning?
you came in the night of and said you were "terribly wrong"...well what were you terribly wrong about? were you terribly wrong because you based your every single perception around some terribly wrong information?
were people shocked that trump won? if they were, then why the frick is that?
Posted on 5/3/17 at 4:17 pm to Rakim
quote:
Axelrod told CNN on Wednesday. "Let me tell you, he was the least popular presidential candidate to win in the history of polling."
Then you're probably polling the wrong fricking numbers dipshit.
Because polling data, and statistics sure can't be incorrect, it must be something else.
Posted on 5/3/17 at 4:24 pm to Vegas Eddie
quote:who he appeals to, where he appeals to people, why he appeals to them. the jist of it was he saw trump as a formidable opponent and then you can see Clinton staffers including huma discussing it and planning to keep him away from the press.
What did bill say??
He tells BLM activists where they can stick it, hillary makes him go on the apology tour. He was an asset and he was treated as a liability
Bill was reading the room correctly not hillary. If she had she would've gone to Michigan at least once
Page 7 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News