Donald Trump

Status
Not open for further replies.
Not GOP

Not GOP

Well-Known Member
The_Herban_Legend said:
A scandal, most likely leaked by Trump himself, will derail his bid for President. Leaving the intellectually challenged holding the tears of ignorance.
Click to expand...
Trump would make a better president than any one of the Democrat candidates.
The DNC field is so weak that even Joe Biden was thinking about joining the race. How pathetic is that?
 
The_Herban_Legend

The_Herban_Legend

Well-Known Member
Not GOP said:
Trump would make a better president than any one of the Democrat candidates.
The DNC field is so weak that even Joe Biden was thinking about joining the race. How pathetic is that?
Click to expand...
It's plausible but you can't state that as fact. What will you do when he drops out of the race? Will you run to Huckabee?
 
Not GOP

Not GOP

Well-Known Member
The_Herban_Legend said:
It's plausible but you can't state that as fact. What will you do when he drops out of the race? Will you run to Huckabee?
Click to expand...
lol. No, not Huckabee. Trump is not a quitter. He will only get out if things get really bad for him.
When people lead in the polls for 100 consecutive days, they normally stay in the race.
Trump is leading in national polls against the Democrats top prospect. Shrill Hillary aka Shrillary
 
Last edited:
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Not GOP said:
Where is the poll from SurveyUSA?
Quinnipiac has trump ahead in Florida.
The newest Rasmussen poll that just came out has Trump ahead 38 to 36
Click to expand...


In 2010, Nate Silver of The New York Times’ blog FiveThirtyEight wrote the article “Is Rasmussen Reports biased?”, in which he mostly defended Rasmussen from allegations of bias. However, later in the year, Rasmussen's polling results diverged notably from other mainstream pollsters, which Silver labeled a "house effect." He went on to explore other factors which may have explained the effect such as the use of a likely voter model, and claimed that Rasmussen conducted its polls in a way that excluded the majority of the population from answering. Silver also criticized Rasmussen for often only polling races months before the election, which prevented them from having polls just before the election that could be assessed for accuracy. He wrote that he was “looking at appropriate ways to punish pollsters” like Rasmussen in his pollster rating models who don’t poll in the final days before an election. In June 2012, Silver wrote that "Rasmussen Reports, which has had Republican-leaning results in the past, does so again this year. However, the tendency is not very strong – a Republican lean of about 1.3 points." Silver ranked Rasmussen Reports as having the third lowest house effect of the 12 polling firms that Silver analyzed.

After the 2010 midterm elections, Silver concluded that Rasmussen's polls were the least accurate of the major pollsters in 2010, having an average error of 5.8 points and a pro-Republican bias of 3.9 points according to Silver's model. He singled out as an example the Hawaii Senate race, in which Rasmussen, in a poll completed three weeks before the election, showed incumbent Daniel Inouye only 13 points ahead, whereas in actuality he won by a 53% margin – a difference of 40 points from Rasmussen's poll, or "the largest error ever recorded in a general election in FiveThirtyEight’s database, which includes all polls conducted since 1998." Silver was criticized for his 2010 pollster ratings. Conservative polling analyst Neil Stevens wrote, "after the primaries [Silver] said Rasmussen was in his crosshairs for ducking out on a number of races by not polling primaries. According to Silver’s own chart though, Rasmussen polled twice as often as the second place firm, and is still Silver’s primary target", and "Silver can’t even keep consistent his reasons for hating Rasmussen Reports." Mark Blumenthal, publisher of Pollster.com, wrote that Silver's methodology, in which he awards bonus points to pollsters based on their membership in the National Council on Public Polls and their endorsement of the American Association for Public Opinion Research Transparency Initiative, "appear to significantly and dramatically alter rankings prominently promoted as "pollster ratings," ratings that are already having an impact on the reputations and livelihoods of individual pollsters. That's a problem." Blumenthal noted, "My bottom line: These sort of pollster ratings and rankings are interesting, but they are of very limited utility in sorting out "good" pollsters from "bad."

Time magazine has described Rasmussen Reports as a "conservative-leaning polling group." The Washington Post called Rasmussen a "polarizing pollster." John Zogby said that Scott Rasmussen has a "conservative constituency." The Center for Public Integrity listed "Scott Rasmussen Inc" as a paid consultant for the 2004 George W. Bush campaign. The Washington Post reported that the 2004 Bush re-election campaign had used a feature on the Rasmussen Reports website that allowed customers to program their own polls, and that Rasmussen asserted that he had not written any of the questions nor assisted Republicans.

Rasmussen has received criticism over the wording in its polls. Asking a polling question with different wording can affect the results of the poll; the commentators in question allege that the questions Rasmussen ask in polls are skewed in order to favor a specific response. For instance, when Rasmussen polled whether Republican voters thought Rush Limbaugh was the leader of their party, the specific question they asked was: "Agree or Disagree: 'Rush Limbaugh is the leader of the Republican Party — he says jump and they say how high.'"

Talking Points Memo has questioned the methodology of Rasmussen's Presidential Approval Index, which takes into account only those who "strongly" approve or disapprove of the President's job performance. TPM noted that this inherently skews negative, and reported that multiple polling experts were critical of the concept.

A New York Times article claims Ramussen Reports research has a "record of relying on dubious sampling and weighting techniques.""
Click to expand...


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rasmussen_Reports#Evaluations_of_accuracy_and_performance
 
The_Herban_Legend

The_Herban_Legend

Well-Known Member
Not GOP said:
lol. No, not Huckabee. Trump is not a quitter. He will only get out if things get really bad for him.
When people lead in the polls for 100 consecutive days, they normally stay in the race.
Trump is leading in national polls against the Democrats top prospect. Shrill Hillary aka Shrillary
Click to expand...
Mark my words, Donald will drop from the race and leave everything open to Hillary. No, I don't endorse Hillary but the guy you are voting for, Trump, does. He has donated to the Clinton's, since the 90's.
 
Last edited:
The_Herban_Legend

The_Herban_Legend

Well-Known Member
Rrog said:
Donald Trump is merely entertaining to Fox News viewers. They like his rude demeanor. His very adolescent behavior is funny. Nothing more

He's a complete cartoon.
Click to expand...
This is Hillary's last chance at being President. 2008 caught her off guard but this time around she will guarantee victory. When the time is right, Donny, will exit the race leaving it wide open for Hillary.
 
The_Herban_Legend

The_Herban_Legend

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
She's already winning in the polls and Carson is beating Trump in some states
Click to expand...
True but we are a lil over a year out. Things will change. Donny will start to ramp up the craziness, attacking his counter parts on the right. He will not stay in the race, he will pull out. Hillary was worried about Benghazi and her emails. Looks like the storm has passed, in 6 months, Donny will be out of the race. Or he may run as an independent, taking a cue from Ross Perot, dividing the Republican base, and again, leaving it wide open for Hillary.
 
Last edited:
ginwilly

ginwilly

Well-Known Member
Not GOP said:
Interesting. Do any other liberals have Trump conspiracy theories to share with us?
Click to expand...
Not a liberal (in the modern sense) but my theory was he was doing it to increase his brand.

I'm coming around to the fact it's real, but I'm not quite there yet.
 
hyroot

hyroot

Well-Known Member
I think Trump is a diabolical genius. Everything he does and says is intentional. He knows how to play the game. He knows what buttons to push so to speak to get him to the front of the race. He offends people on purpose. He probably doesn't believe half of what he says. He's just playing the game. Look at it from a villainy stand point.

He's lost fortunes to x wives a couple times and built his empire back up. He has tons of international business and political relationships. He knows exactly what he's doing.

Like the logo on his 80's board game says "it's not whether you win or lose its whether you win."
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top