HRC opens a 12 point lead over Dangerous Donnie

[Toro]

"Conservatives" are going Full Retard over polls again, like they did in 2012.

That's why they are retards.

FFS, if conservatives act rationally and intelligently, rather than like spoiled irresponsible pre-teens, they could win this thing.

 

[HappyJoy]

"Conservatives" are going Full Retard over polls again, like they did in 2012.

That's why they are retards.

FFS, if conservatives act rationally and intelligently, rather than like spoiled irresponsible pre-teens, they could win this thing.

And they are going there early. I don't think the unskewed nonsense in 2012 started until October.

 

[jasonnfree]

Clinton Trails By Just 8 Points In Texas
June 27, 2016


A new University of Texas/Texas Politics Project poll shows Donald Trump leading Hillary Clinton by a margin of 41% to 33% in a head-to-head trial ballot match-up in Texas, with 19% preferring someone else, and 8% saying that they don’t yet know who they would vote for.

Things will get interesting if Hillary can compete in Texas

That missing 27% could swing the state

just curious. Why do you want hlllary to be president? What has she done to earn your support? give us a list of her accomplishments that make you want to vote for her.

Lets see......Hillary is the best qualified candidate by far
She has a better temperament to be President
She has seen White House operations up close for 12 years

As a Senator, she pushed for womens rights legislation. 9-11 relief, SCHIP

As Secretary of State she restored battered relations with our former allies and built an international coalition with Russia, China and the EU to enforce crippling sanctions on Iran

But she never ran a beauty pageant, so I guess Trump has her there

She's not even smart enough to properly use a government email server even after it was explained to her and she signed her name saying she understood it. I'll go with the guy who has become filthy rich by doing giant construction projects, and not by freeloading off the taxpayers and doing favors for money like hillary has done.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

New Electoral College Projection Has Hillary Clinton Demolishing Donald Trump

An updated Electoral College projection from Larry Sabato’s Crystal Ball predicts that Hillary Clinton will demolish Donald Trump in the general election this fall.

The website, which is run by University of Virginia’s Center for Politics, has the presumptive Democratic nominee beating Trump by a 347-191 electoral vote margin.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

I'll go with the guy who has become filthy rich by doing giant construction projects, .

 

[Toro]

I don't think Hillary is going to demolish Trump.

I think she'll win, but it will be tight.

But Trump is doing his best to prove me wrong with his bizarre campaign.

 

[HenryBHough]

And, work done for the day, Larry takes a walk.......

 

[Redfish]

Clinton Trails By Just 8 Points In Texas
June 27, 2016


A new University of Texas/Texas Politics Project poll shows Donald Trump leading Hillary Clinton by a margin of 41% to 33% in a head-to-head trial ballot match-up in Texas, with 19% preferring someone else, and 8% saying that they don’t yet know who they would vote for.

Things will get interesting if Hillary can compete in Texas

That missing 27% could swing the state

just curious. Why do you want hlllary to be president? What has she done to earn your support? give us a list of her accomplishments that make you want to vote for her.

If she loses, Trump will be president.

Yes, and that would be good for the USA. So your only reason for voting for the lying bitch is that she isn't Trump?

Are you aware of the proof that came out yesterday proving that she and Obama knowingly lied about Benghazi and the video?

So, once again, why do you want a criminal and proven liar as president?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Clinton Trails By Just 8 Points In Texas
June 27, 2016


A new University of Texas/Texas Politics Project poll shows Donald Trump leading Hillary Clinton by a margin of 41% to 33% in a head-to-head trial ballot match-up in Texas, with 19% preferring someone else, and 8% saying that they don’t yet know who they would vote for.

Things will get interesting if Hillary can compete in Texas

That missing 27% could swing the state

just curious. Why do you want hlllary to be president? What has she done to earn your support? give us a list of her accomplishments that make you want to vote for her.

If she loses, Trump will be president.

Yes, and that would be good for the USA. So your only reason for voting for the lying bitch is that she isn't Trump?

Are you aware of the proof that came out yesterday proving that she and Obama knowingly lied about Benghazi and the video?

So, once again, why do you want a criminal and proven liar as president?

List Hillary Clinton's convictions.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Clinton Trails By Just 8 Points In Texas
June 27, 2016


A new University of Texas/Texas Politics Project poll shows Donald Trump leading Hillary Clinton by a margin of 41% to 33% in a head-to-head trial ballot match-up in Texas, with 19% preferring someone else, and 8% saying that they don’t yet know who they would vote for.

Things will get interesting if Hillary can compete in Texas

That missing 27% could swing the state

just curious. Why do you want hlllary to be president? What has she done to earn your support? give us a list of her accomplishments that make you want to vote for her.

If she loses, Trump will be president.

Yes, and that would be good for the USA. So your only reason for voting for the lying bitch is that she isn't Trump?

Are you aware of the proof that came out yesterday proving that she and Obama knowingly lied about Benghazi and the video?

So, once again, why do you want a criminal and proven liar as president?

I'm not voting for Hillary Clinton, and you're voting for the lying Trump. lol, you lose again Gomer.

 

[Redfish]

We are talking about two different things here, its amazing that you libs don't understand that.

First, yes the pollsters have a very good record of being accurate
Second, the way they sample violates the basic mathematic principles of statistics.

All I am trying to get you fools to understand is that they are not accurate because of math, they are accurate because of the way they create the sample.

^ That is the finest example of back pedaling I have ever seen.

And you still haven't demonstrated, provided evidence or otherwise attempted to prove your point, either the old one (polls bad) or your new one (polls good - method bad).

pay attention fool. I never said that the polls were inaccurate. I said that they were not statistically meaningful. Again, I am sorry is you cant understand the difference.

Nope, you clearly said the polls are biased, bought and paid for and only exist to sway public opinion. Now you are threading a needle and claiming they are accurate but their methods are incorrect, an arguement like that without any evidence looks 'fishy'.

because of the way they are done, they can be manipulated to get a desired result.

Again, I apologize, I made the mistake of thinking that I was discussing this with reasonably intelligent and educated people.

You have yet to demonstrate your point. You're opinion doesn't matter, point to someone who has some credentials on the subject.

I do enjoy your argument. Pollsters are correct but they do it wrong so don't believe them.

Ok, lets try again one last time.

you, and your lib buddies, claim that a sample of 1000 out of 330,000,000 is valid and meaningful, right so far?

Now, lets take away 3 zeroes. What do we now have? a sample of 1 out of 330,000. Do you think that would be statistically valid?

How about taking away 2 zeores. 10 out of 3,300,000. Would that be valid?

in statistics its the ratio of sample size to total population that determines statistical significance.

Class over, dismissed.

 

[Redfish]

Clinton Trails By Just 8 Points In Texas
June 27, 2016


A new University of Texas/Texas Politics Project poll shows Donald Trump leading Hillary Clinton by a margin of 41% to 33% in a head-to-head trial ballot match-up in Texas, with 19% preferring someone else, and 8% saying that they don’t yet know who they would vote for.

Things will get interesting if Hillary can compete in Texas

That missing 27% could swing the state

just curious. Why do you want hlllary to be president? What has she done to earn your support? give us a list of her accomplishments that make you want to vote for her.

If she loses, Trump will be president.

Yes, and that would be good for the USA. So your only reason for voting for the lying bitch is that she isn't Trump?

Are you aware of the proof that came out yesterday proving that she and Obama knowingly lied about Benghazi and the video?

So, once again, why do you want a criminal and proven liar as president?

I'm not voting for Hillary Clinton, and you're voting for the lying Trump. lol, you lose again Gomer.

so are you staying home or voting for a 3rd party clown who has zero chance? either is fine with me. enjoy.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box...poll-voters-prefer-clinton-to-trump-on-terror

Poll: Clinton more trusted on terrorism than Trump

 

[HappyJoy]

^ That is the finest example of back pedaling I have ever seen.

And you still haven't demonstrated, provided evidence or otherwise attempted to prove your point, either the old one (polls bad) or your new one (polls good - method bad).

pay attention fool. I never said that the polls were inaccurate. I said that they were not statistically meaningful. Again, I am sorry is you cant understand the difference.

Nope, you clearly said the polls are biased, bought and paid for and only exist to sway public opinion. Now you are threading a needle and claiming they are accurate but their methods are incorrect, an arguement like that without any evidence looks 'fishy'.

because of the way they are done, they can be manipulated to get a desired result.

Again, I apologize, I made the mistake of thinking that I was discussing this with reasonably intelligent and educated people.

You have yet to demonstrate your point. You're opinion doesn't matter, point to someone who has some credentials on the subject.

I do enjoy your argument. Pollsters are correct but they do it wrong so don't believe them.

Ok, lets try again one last time.

you, and your lib buddies, claim that a sample of 1000 out of 330,000,000 is valid and meaningful, right so far?

nope.

Now, lets take away 3 zeroes. What do we now have? a sample of 1 out of 330,000. Do you think that would be statistically valid?

irrelevant.

How about taking away 2 zeores. 10 out of 3,300,000. Would that be valid?

Why are you beginning at 330,000,000 to begin with?

in statistics its the ratio of sample size to total population that determines statistical significance.

Class over, dismissed.

You proved nothing. For starters you're using the wrong number to begin with, secondly at this point you need some back up, find a source that agrees with you. Third, you are now saying the polls are correct when previously you said they weren't but you still disagree with their methodology and you have yet to explain how they get it right?

You're argument is all over the place, tighten it up and provide some evidence, you're idea of common sense isn't good enough.

 

[Redfish]

pay attention fool. I never said that the polls were inaccurate. I said that they were not statistically meaningful. Again, I am sorry is you cant understand the difference.

Nope, you clearly said the polls are biased, bought and paid for and only exist to sway public opinion. Now you are threading a needle and claiming they are accurate but their methods are incorrect, an arguement like that without any evidence looks 'fishy'.

because of the way they are done, they can be manipulated to get a desired result.

Again, I apologize, I made the mistake of thinking that I was discussing this with reasonably intelligent and educated people.

You have yet to demonstrate your point. You're opinion doesn't matter, point to someone who has some credentials on the subject.

I do enjoy your argument. Pollsters are correct but they do it wrong so don't believe them.

Ok, lets try again one last time.

you, and your lib buddies, claim that a sample of 1000 out of 330,000,000 is valid and meaningful, right so far?

nope.

Now, lets take away 3 zeroes. What do we now have? a sample of 1 out of 330,000. Do you think that would be statistically valid?

irrelevant.

How about taking away 2 zeores. 10 out of 3,300,000. Would that be valid?

Why are you beginning at 330,000,000 to begin with?

in statistics its the ratio of sample size to total population that determines statistical significance.

Class over, dismissed.

You proved nothing. For starters you're using the wrong number to begin with, secondly at this point you need some back up, find a source that agrees with you. Third, you are now saying the polls are correct when previously you said they weren't but you still disagree with their methodology and you have yet to explain how they get it right?

You're argument is all over the place, tighten it up and provide some evidence, you're idea of common sense isn't good enough.

330,000,000 is roughly the population of the USA. If you want to use the number who are likely to vote use 100,000,000 or 80,000,000, or any number you like.

Same principles apply, but I can see that you just aren't able to grasp the pretty simple math involved. So it may be time to move to something you can understand.

How about cartoon characters?

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Morning Joe slams ‘stupid‘ Trump’s attacks on Warren’s heritage: ‘What the hell’s wrong with them?’

 

[SwimExpert]

List Hillary Clinton's convictions.

1 - Malicious Lying Bitchness.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Obama: Trump ‘embodies global elites’
Jordan Fabian - 06/28/16 08:22 AM EDT

So, he's hardly a spokesperson ... for a populist surge from working class people."

 

[HappyJoy]

Nope, you clearly said the polls are biased, bought and paid for and only exist to sway public opinion. Now you are threading a needle and claiming they are accurate but their methods are incorrect, an arguement like that without any evidence looks 'fishy'.

because of the way they are done, they can be manipulated to get a desired result.

Again, I apologize, I made the mistake of thinking that I was discussing this with reasonably intelligent and educated people.

You have yet to demonstrate your point. You're opinion doesn't matter, point to someone who has some credentials on the subject.

I do enjoy your argument. Pollsters are correct but they do it wrong so don't believe them.

Ok, lets try again one last time.

you, and your lib buddies, claim that a sample of 1000 out of 330,000,000 is valid and meaningful, right so far?

nope.

Now, lets take away 3 zeroes. What do we now have? a sample of 1 out of 330,000. Do you think that would be statistically valid?

irrelevant.

How about taking away 2 zeores. 10 out of 3,300,000. Would that be valid?

Why are you beginning at 330,000,000 to begin with?

in statistics its the ratio of sample size to total population that determines statistical significance.

Class over, dismissed.

You proved nothing. For starters you're using the wrong number to begin with, secondly at this point you need some back up, find a source that agrees with you. Third, you are now saying the polls are correct when previously you said they weren't but you still disagree with their methodology and you have yet to explain how they get it right?

You're argument is all over the place, tighten it up and provide some evidence, you're idea of common sense isn't good enough.

330,000,000 is roughly the population of the USA. If you want to use the number who are likely to vote use 100,000,000 or 80,000,000, or any number you like.

Same principles apply, but I can see that you just aren't able to grasp the pretty simple math involved. So it may be time to move to something you can understand.

How about cartoon characters?

Yes, 330m is not the voting population and therefore irrelevant. But that had to pointed out to you with your ninja math skills. This is why I will say it again, find a source to back you up, you can't even get some basic logic right.

Same principles apply? Link to them.

 

[Redfish]

because of the way they are done, they can be manipulated to get a desired result.

Again, I apologize, I made the mistake of thinking that I was discussing this with reasonably intelligent and educated people.

You have yet to demonstrate your point. You're opinion doesn't matter, point to someone who has some credentials on the subject.

I do enjoy your argument. Pollsters are correct but they do it wrong so don't believe them.

Ok, lets try again one last time.

you, and your lib buddies, claim that a sample of 1000 out of 330,000,000 is valid and meaningful, right so far?

nope.

Now, lets take away 3 zeroes. What do we now have? a sample of 1 out of 330,000. Do you think that would be statistically valid?

irrelevant.

How about taking away 2 zeores. 10 out of 3,300,000. Would that be valid?

Why are you beginning at 330,000,000 to begin with?

in statistics its the ratio of sample size to total population that determines statistical significance.

Class over, dismissed.

You proved nothing. For starters you're using the wrong number to begin with, secondly at this point you need some back up, find a source that agrees with you. Third, you are now saying the polls are correct when previously you said they weren't but you still disagree with their methodology and you have yet to explain how they get it right?

You're argument is all over the place, tighten it up and provide some evidence, you're idea of common sense isn't good enough.

330,000,000 is roughly the population of the USA. If you want to use the number who are likely to vote use 100,000,000 or 80,000,000, or any number you like.

Same principles apply, but I can see that you just aren't able to grasp the pretty simple math involved. So it may be time to move to something you can understand.

How about cartoon characters?

Yes, 330m is not the voting population and therefore irrelevant. But that had to pointed out to you with your ninja math skills. This is why I will say it again, find a source to back you up, you can't even get some basic logic right.

Same principles apply? Link to them.

I am not here as your teacher. Go to your local library and check out a stat 101 text. Then read it. That will provide all the links you need.