SaltyTiger 7,764 Posted May 26, 2017 Share Posted May 26, 2017 4 hours ago, homersapien said: I can. They want the government to be able to operate in secrecy if they control it. They have become what traditional, real conservatives once opposed. Get real Homie. Did a tree fall on your head? Why should you or conservatives believe the press? For months pre-election all we heard was what a landslide victory Hill would take they Presidency with. For the past, approaching seven months, we have heard nothing but the non-sense drum beat Russia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PUB78 1,354 Posted May 26, 2017 Share Posted May 26, 2017 7 hours ago, quietfan said: Since this is in the 'Smack' forum... Thanks for admitting Breitbart, WorldNetDaily, Drudge, FOXNews & their ilk don't count as real press, since conservatives seem to like them. For what it's worth, I don't have to imagine: It's the same reason cockroaches scurry when the light hits 'em.. Even with "conservative " news sources, I take what they report with a grain of salt. For the "liberal" sources, I never give the benefit of a doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PUB78 1,354 Posted May 26, 2017 Share Posted May 26, 2017 8 hours ago, quietfan said: Since this is in the 'Smack' forum... Thanks for admitting Breitbart, WorldNetDaily, Drudge, FOXNews & their ilk don't count as real press, since conservatives seem to like them. For what it's worth, I don't have to imagine: It's the same reason cockroaches scurry when the light hits 'em.. Plus, I get my conservative news from Salty, 64, Argo and Grumps!!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quietfan 233 Posted May 27, 2017 Share Posted May 27, 2017 1 hour ago, SaltyTiger said: Get real Homie. Did a tree fall on your head? Why should you or conservatives believe the press? For months pre-election all we heard was what a landslide victory Hill would take they Presidency with. For the past, approaching seven months, we have heard nothing but the non-sense drum beat Russia. Where did this (seemingly post-election) fiction of the conservatives that Hillary was predicted to win by a landslide come from? I don't recall any polls predicting Hillary would win by a 'landslide'. Her greatest lead in the polls was post-convention and around the time of the Access Hollywood tape. By November Trump had regained ground in the polls. By election day, most polls showed a tight race with Hillary ahead perhaps 2-3 % points at most, hardly a "landslide". Predictions were certainly close enough to provide considerable suspense on the night of the counting. There may have been a few unrealistic Clinton fanatics who in their fantasies bragged about or expected an impending "landslide". And there were certainly Trump people, including the President himself, who exaggerated Hillary's supposed pre-election lead after the election in order to inflate the perceived magnitude of Trump's upset. But no serious poll was predicting a Hillary landslide on Nov. 9th. Most predicted a slight edge at best, which was reflected by the popular vote. And the Electoral College victory, while admittedly something of an upset, was not a complete surprise as Hillary was never predicted to have a huge, 'landslide level' numbers. It's usually said that 'hindsight is 20/20', but in the Trump camp it seems hindsight is just more 'alternative facts'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
augolf1716 21,096 Posted May 27, 2017 Share Posted May 27, 2017 It was out there I thought she would win easily http://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-track-electoral-college-landslide-510362 BY REUTERS ON 10/15/16 After a brutal week for Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, Democrat Hillary Clinton maintained a substantial projected advantage in the race to win the Electoral College and claim the U.S. presidency, according to the latest results from the Reuters/Ipsos States of the Nation project released on Saturday. If the election were held this week, the project estimates that Clinton's odds of securing the 270 Electoral College votes needed to win the presidency at more than 95 percent, and by a margin of 118 Electoral College votes. It is the second week in a row that the project has estimated her odds so high. The results mirror other Electoral College projections, some of which estimate Clinton's chance of winning at around 90 percent. another one https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2016/10/11/the-prospects-for-a-clinton-landslide/?utm_term=.d7f6fc3e84aa In two national polls, Clinton has moved to a double-digit lead. In the RealClearPolitics average, her percentage is up to about 48 percent in a two-person race; in the Pollster.com average, she breaks 49 percent. According to the RCP electoral map with no toss-ups, she has 340 electoral votes to Trump’s 198. Yup, right now this looks more like Ronald Reagan’s 1980 romp than either of Obama’s wins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaltyTiger 7,764 Posted May 27, 2017 Share Posted May 27, 2017 36 minutes ago, quietfan said: Where did this (seemingly post-election) fiction of the conservatives that Hillary was predicted to win by a landslide come from? I don't recall any polls predicting Hillary would win by a 'landslide'. Her greatest lead in the polls was post-convention and around the time of the Access Hollywood tape. By November Trump had regained ground in the polls. By election day, most polls showed a tight race with Hillary ahead perhaps 2-3 % points at most, hardly a "landslide". Predictions were certainly close enough to provide considerable suspense on the night of the counting. There may have been a few unrealistic Clinton fanatics who in their fantasies bragged about or expected an impending "landslide". And there were certainly Trump people, including the President himself, who exaggerated Hillary's supposed pre-election lead after the election in order to inflate the perceived magnitude of Trump's upset. But no serious poll was predicting a Hillary landslide on Nov. 9th. Most predicted a slight edge at best, which was reflected by the popular vote. And the Electoral College victory, while admittedly something of an upset, was not a complete surprise as Hillary was never predicted to have a huge, 'landslide level' numbers. It's usually said that 'hindsight is 20/20', but in the Trump camp it seems hindsight is just more 'alternative facts'. whatever makes you feel good qf, at least you are engaged enough not to refute the Russia non-sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaltyTiger 7,764 Posted May 27, 2017 Share Posted May 27, 2017 8 minutes ago, augolf1716 said: It was out there http://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-track-electoral-college-landslide-510362 BY REUTERS ON 10/15/16 After a brutal week for Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, Democrat Hillary Clinton maintained a substantial projected advantage in the race to win the Electoral College and claim the U.S. presidency, according to the latest results from the Reuters/Ipsos States of the Nation project released on Saturday. If the election were held this week, the project estimates that Clinton's odds of securing the 270 Electoral College votes needed to win the presidency at more than 95 percent, and by a margin of 118 Electoral College votes. It is the second week in a row that the project has estimated her odds so high. The results mirror other Electoral College projections, some of which estimate Clinton's chance of winning at around 90 percent. Get real Golf. Have you been drinking PBR with the Kennedy family off-spring again? That was written 3 weeks and some change before election day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFAN78 3,890 Posted May 27, 2017 Share Posted May 27, 2017 43 minutes ago, quietfan said: Where did this (seemingly post-election) fiction of the conservatives that Hillary was predicted to win by a landslide come from? I don't recall any polls predicting Hillary would win by a 'landslide'. Her greatest lead in the polls was post-convention and around the time of the Access Hollywood tape. By November Trump had regained ground in the polls. By election day, most polls showed a tight race with Hillary ahead perhaps 2-3 % points at most, hardly a "landslide". Predictions were certainly close enough to provide considerable suspense on the night of the counting. There may have been a few unrealistic Clinton fanatics who in their fantasies bragged about or expected an impending "landslide". And there were certainly Trump people, including the President himself, who exaggerated Hillary's supposed pre-election lead after the election in order to inflate the perceived magnitude of Trump's upset. But no serious poll was predicting a Hillary landslide on Nov. 9th. Most predicted a slight edge at best, which was reflected by the popular vote. And the Electoral College victory, while admittedly something of an upset, was not a complete surprise as Hillary was never predicted to have a huge, 'landslide level' numbers. It's usually said that 'hindsight is 20/20', but in the Trump camp it seems hindsight is just more 'alternative facts'. Seriously? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quietfan 233 Posted May 27, 2017 Share Posted May 27, 2017 Please define "landslide". None of these polls predicted Hillary landslide to me. I would call a 'landslide' at least 55% of the vote, or +10 for Hillary, which none of these predicted. Revisionist history, pure and simple. (Although I concede Hillary was above the 2-3% I cited in some. Of course, Trump also was also favored in some.) http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/president/#! Quote Election 2016 Presidential Polls Tuesday, November 8 Race/Topic (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein IBD/TIPP Tracking Clinton 43, Trump 45, Johnson 8, Stein 2 Trump +2 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton IBD/TIPP Tracking Clinton 43, Trump 42 Clinton +1 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton LA Times/USC Tracking Clinton 44, Trump 47 Trump +3 Monday, November 7 Race/Topic (Click to Sort) Poll Results Spread General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Bloomberg Clinton 44, Trump 41, Johnson 4, Stein 2 Clinton +3 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein IBD/TIPP Tracking Clinton 41, Trump 43, Johnson 6, Stein 2 Trump +2 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein CBS News Clinton 45, Trump 41, Johnson 5, Stein 2 Clinton +4 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein FOX News Clinton 48, Trump 44, Johnson 3, Stein 2 Clinton +4 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Reuters/Ipsos Clinton 42, Trump 39, Johnson 6, Stein 3 Clinton +3 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein ABC/Wash Post Tracking Clinton 47, Trump 43, Johnson 4, Stein 1 Clinton +4 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Monmouth Clinton 50, Trump 44, Johnson 4, Stein 1 Clinton +6 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Economist/YouGov Clinton 45, Trump 41, Johnson 5, Stein 2 Clinton +4 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Rasmussen Reports Clinton 45, Trump 43, Johnson 4, Stein 2 Clinton +2 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein NBC News/SM Clinton 47, Trump 41, Johnson 6, Stein 3 Clinton +6 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton Bloomberg Clinton 46, Trump 43 Clinton +3 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton LA Times/USC Tracking Clinton 43, Trump 48 Trump +5 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton CBS News Clinton 47, Trump 43 Clinton +4 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton IBD/TIPP Tracking Clinton 43, Trump 42 Clinton +1 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton FOX News Clinton 48, Trump 44 Clinton +4 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton Reuters/Ipsos Clinton 44, Trump 39 Clinton +5 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton ABC/Wash Post Tracking Clinton 49, Trump 46 Clinton +3 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton Monmouth Clinton 50, Trump 44 Clinton +6 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton Economist/YouGov Clinton 49, Trump 45 Clinton +4 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton NBC News/SM Clinton 51, Trump 44 Clinton +7 General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Gravis Clinton 47, Trump 43, Johnson 3, Stein 2 Clinton +4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFAN78 3,890 Posted May 27, 2017 Share Posted May 27, 2017 11 minutes ago, quietfan said: Please define "landslide". None of these look like landslide predictions to me: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/president/#! I see where you are coming from. I think if you simply look at your post and recognize 20 out of 24 predictions had Clinton winning, that would be a landslide by some calculations. Obviously, that is not looking a margins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quietfan 233 Posted May 27, 2017 Share Posted May 27, 2017 Just now, AUFAN78 said: I see where you are coming from. I think if you simply look at your post and recognize 20 out of 24 predictions had Clinton winning, that would be a landslide by some calculations. Obviously, that is not looking a margins. I agree most folks predicted a Hillary win, no argument there, so by that standard she was the favorite. I've already conceded Trump pulled off an unexpected upset in most opinions. However 'landslide' does refer to margin of victory, not a count of number of polls taken. My problem is with those who retroactively want to pretend a Hillary landslide was predicted in order to unjustly magnify the significance of Trump's win. It's like the difference between winning as a 2-3 point underdog vs. winning as a 2-3 touchdown underdog. Or Bammers chanting "We just beat the HELL out of you!" when they just pulled off a squeaker. Every sportswriter in the country probably had a prediction regarding the National Championship Game last January, but even if they all picked the same team, I doubt any of them predicted a 2-3 touchdown win. (P.S. I was just editing my earlier post to discuss margin of victory as you posted. Sorry for the crossed postings.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFAN78 3,890 Posted May 27, 2017 Share Posted May 27, 2017 2 minutes ago, quietfan said: I agree most folks predicted a Hillary win, no argument there, so by that standard she was the favorite. I've already conceded Trump pulled off an unexpected upset in most opinions. However 'landslide' does refer to margin of victory, not a count of number of polls taken. My problem is with those who retroactively want to pretend a Hillary landslide was predicted in order to unjustly magnify the significance of Trump's win. It's like the difference between winning as a 2-3 point underdog vs. winning as a 2-3 touchdown underdog. Or Bammers chanting "We just beat the HELL out of you!" when they just pulled off a squeaker. Every sportswriter in the country probably had a prediction regarding the National Championship Game last January, but even if they all picked the same team, I doubt any of them predicted a 2-3 touchdown win. (P.S. I was just editing my earlier post to discuss margin of victory as you posted. Sorry for the crossed postings.) No problem QT. I think when you look at predictions and add in the MSM commentary the landslide narrative is understandable even though, as you've pointed out, that is technically incorrect with regard to margins. I can't say with certainty, but I seem to recall CNN and MSNBC gloating early on about a landslide further fueling the narrative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.