The Right is truly, truly terrified of Hillary Clinton

[Statistikhengst]

No, you mssed the part where polls taken this far ahread are not really indicative of anything. You're too stupid to know you're stupid.

It's already been proven that very early polls have often been quite on the mark. I guess you are just too stupid to know that you're really, really stupid, eh?

I graciously accept your concession on this numbers issue.

Post proof. Or shut the fuck up.

Oops.
Clinton, Giuliani Top 2008 Presidential Nomination Polls

Nope. You can't make me do that, now can you.

That being said, Google and Bing are your friends.

Silver has proven the predictive power of early polls more than once. Others have done it as well.

So did SUSA in 2008.

And through my own study of both the 2008 and 2012 polling, I easily show it as well.

At the beginning of 2011, almost two years before the 2012 GE, Obama was ahead by 3-4 in Ohio, he as ahead in Pennsylvania, in Michigan, in Virginia, in Colorado, it was a horserace in Florida and North Carolina - just as it ended up being on election night 2012. So, early election polls have more predictive power than people realize. Plus, they are part of a long baseline, a history that can be compared for future races.

You can poo-poo early polls all you want, but you do so at your own peril.

 

[bedowin62]

Obama is not popular among the Independents - who now identify themselves as Independents because they won't identify with the GOP anymore.

But among moderates, he's always held a significant and consistent advantage.

you're a hilarious little troll; such an idiot; all impressed with your self for no reason. and you THINK you're objective; but you're far from it.

you say people call themselves Independants because they wont identify with the GOP?

so you appear to be saying conversely that there are little or no Independents on the Left; especially ones that "wont identify" with the Democrat Party

can you back up either of these points?
any of them?
and if Independants are people who "now identify themselves as Independents because they wont identify with the GOP" THEN isnt it OBVIOUS they wouldnt identify with obama seeing as you are saying they USED to identify themselves as GOP BUT "NOW identify themselves as ingependents"?

 

[The Rabbi]

It's already been proven that very early polls have often been quite on the mark. I guess you are just too stupid to know that you're really, really stupid, eh?

I graciously accept your concession on this numbers issue.

Post proof. Or shut the fuck up.

Oops.
Clinton, Giuliani Top 2008 Presidential Nomination Polls

Nope. You can't make me do that, now can you.

That being said, Google and Bing are your friends.

Silver has proven the predictive power of early polls more than once. Others have done it as well.

So did SUSA in 2008.

And through my own study of both the 2008 and 2012 polling, I easily show it as well.

At the beginning of 2011, almost two years before the 2012 GE, Obama was ahead by 3-4 in Ohio, he as ahead in Pennsylvania, in Michigan, in Virginia, in Colorado, it was a horserace in Florida and North Carolina - just as it ended up being on election night 2012. So, early election polls have more predictive power than people realize. Plus, they are part of a long baseline, a history that can be compared for future races.

You can poo-poo early polls all you want, but you do so at your own peril.

I posted a Gallup poll showing Giuliani and Clinton would be the nominees. That was wrong both ways. You've posted nothing except dreck.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Obama is not popular among the Independents - who now identify themselves as Independents because they won't identify with the GOP anymore.

But among moderates, he's always held a significant and consistent advantage.

what exactly is a "moderate"?
how do you define one?

It's the people who identify themselves as moderates.
My opinion doesn't come into play.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Post proof. Or shut the fuck up.

Oops.
Clinton, Giuliani Top 2008 Presidential Nomination Polls

Nope. You can't make me do that, now can you.

That being said, Google and Bing are your friends.

Silver has proven the predictive power of early polls more than once. Others have done it as well.

So did SUSA in 2008.

And through my own study of both the 2008 and 2012 polling, I easily show it as well.

At the beginning of 2011, almost two years before the 2012 GE, Obama was ahead by 3-4 in Ohio, he as ahead in Pennsylvania, in Michigan, in Virginia, in Colorado, it was a horserace in Florida and North Carolina - just as it ended up being on election night 2012. So, early election polls have more predictive power than people realize. Plus, they are part of a long baseline, a history that can be compared for future races.

You can poo-poo early polls all you want, but you do so at your own peril.

I posted a Gallup poll showing Giuliani and Clinton would be the nominees. That was wrong both ways. You've posted nothing except dreck.

I am aware of that poll. I am also aware of how Gallup totally discredited itself and ending up paying a large fine for having cooked the books in 2012. You know that, right?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Vince Foster's Last Words: Sorry, Hillary, I'm have to come clean on the Whitewater Scandal, so I'm able to sleep at night. I'm willing to let the chips fall where they might

 

[bedowin62]

it doesnt matter what source you show a left-wing idiot like statistikhengst; if it doesn say what he thinks he will try to ridicule it.

obama and by him the Democrat Party; has lost the Independant voters in droves

I didn't criticize the link that was provided independent voters, in spite of the fact that it comes from a rabidly right-wing source. Did you notice that?

But you could help your case by providing a neutral source.

You know, right before the 2012 election, there were similar right-wing articles all over the Blogosphere claiming that Obama was losing the black vote. On election night, he got 93-94%% of the black vote. So....

INFOGRAPHIC: Obama Lost Independent Vote In Almost ...



www.usnews.com/.../infographic-obama-lost-...*





U.S. News & World Report





Nov 13, 2012 - But a closer look at exit polling data shows Obama lost the independent vote in most of those states over the last four years. Independents, who ...



Commentary: Obama losing independent voters - CNN.com



www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/27/avlon.obama.independents/*





CNN





Aug 27, 2009 - Over the course of this summer, President Obama's approval ratings have plummeted among independent voters -- the largest and ...

 

[Derideo_Te]

Interesting. I assumed his poll numbers were dropping. But, rising like a big mouth bass to your bait (-:, I went to real clear politics, and looked at the economist polls for about the past year and three quarters, and Obama's poll numbers with moderates were roughly the same. They were under 50%, but still the overall number was pretty steady.

Old lawyer trick...never ask a question that you don't already know the answer to!

You are correct that the numbers are pretty static hence the partisan allegations are just there to boost the base rather than anything factual.

May I still assume his numbers with moderates or swing voters have fallen since Nov. 2012? It's not that I really lazy, but that the real clear politics site didn't list economist polls going back that far.

The hardest thing is to define Independent and/or Moderate voters. Virtually every pollster has their own definition. Many of those who are claim to be Independent are former GOP who are disaffected by the extreme right takeover however they still lean towards the right. They could be classified as "moderate" in terms of where they stand with respect to hard core conservatives but that is a different flavor of moderate to those that lean to the left.

Obama did have the left leaning Independents in 2012 and it is feasible that some are now disaffected. However that is a fungible number since it was falling when the ACA website was in trouble and it is rising again now that the ACA is proving to be of benefit to a growing number of the electorate. These figures are detectable in the approval ratings for the ACA itself which is now hovering just under 50%.

These swings are also pretty small in real numbers so they are not going to factored into any significant electoral math for the 2014 elections. That is going to be the usual matter of which party can best energize their base as far as turnout goes. The Independents/Moderates are unlikely to play a significant role.

 

[WelfareQueen]

I sincerely hope she runs.

 

[Statistikhengst]

Vince Foster's Last Words: Sorry, Hillary, I'm have to come clean on the Whitewater Scandal, so I'm able to sleep at night. I'm willing to let the chips fall where they might

Link for that quote?

 

[bedowin62]

Obama is not popular among the Independents - who now identify themselves as Independents because they won't identify with the GOP anymore.

But among moderates, he's always held a significant and consistent advantage.

what exactly is a "moderate"?
how do you define one?

It's the people who identify themselves as moderates.
My opinion doesn't come into play.

lol i see

what a joke you are

 

[bendog]

I didnt make the allegation. So you're wrong there. I provided credible substantiation, so you're wrong there. You have provided nothing, so by your own rules you are tacitly admitting you are wrong.
Thanks for playing. Door's to the right.

Your delusions are not a substitute for reality. Your link is partisan and the content failed to support your allegation. Another poster, Bendog, did an independent check at RCP and confirmed that support amongst Independents is more or less stable.

Looks like you are having a problem dealing with the facts, as always.

You mean Bendog who just posted that he assumes independent support has gone down but doesnt have the data?
You're a flaming loser. A total joke. You couldn't post proof of something if you were asked whether the sky was blue.

No actually I posted whether I needed to check my preconceived assumption. Derideo_Te already proved credible in saying my assumption that Obama is bleeding moderate support was wrong. I checked, and I was wrong. I merely asked if I should seek more information. Logically, Obama must have lost support between nov 12 and summer of 13.

 

[bedowin62]

what exactly is a "moderate"?
how do you define one?

It's the people who identify themselves as moderates.
My opinion doesn't come into play.

lol i see

what a joke you are

the you opinion doesnt matter as to the definition of any political entity; and is thus meaningless

you cant count what you cant quantify

 

[The Rabbi]

it doesnt matter what source you show a left-wing idiot like statistikhengst; if it doesn say what he thinks he will try to ridicule it.

obama and by him the Democrat Party; has lost the Independant voters in droves

I didn't criticize the link that was provided independent voters, in spite of the fact that it comes from a rabidly right-wing source. Did you notice that?

But you could help your case by providing a neutral source.

You know, right before the 2012 election, there were similar right-wing articles all over the Blogosphere claiming that Obama was losing the black vote. On election night, he got 93-94%% of the black vote. So....

INFOGRAPHIC: Obama Lost Independent Vote In Almost ...



www.usnews.com/.../infographic-obama-lost-...*





U.S. News & World Report





Nov 13, 2012 - But a closer look at exit polling data shows Obama lost the independent vote in most of those states over the last four years. Independents, who ...



Commentary: Obama losing independent voters - CNN.com



www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/27/avlon.obama.independents/*





CNN





Aug 27, 2009 - Over the course of this summer, President Obama's approval ratings have plummeted among independent voters -- the largest and ...

No, those are all partisan sources because they don't say what the leftist assholes here want it to say.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Nope. You can't make me do that, now can you.

That being said, Google and Bing are your friends.

Silver has proven the predictive power of early polls more than once. Others have done it as well.

So did SUSA in 2008.

And through my own study of both the 2008 and 2012 polling, I easily show it as well.

At the beginning of 2011, almost two years before the 2012 GE, Obama was ahead by 3-4 in Ohio, he as ahead in Pennsylvania, in Michigan, in Virginia, in Colorado, it was a horserace in Florida and North Carolina - just as it ended up being on election night 2012. So, early election polls have more predictive power than people realize. Plus, they are part of a long baseline, a history that can be compared for future races.

You can poo-poo early polls all you want, but you do so at your own peril.

I posted a Gallup poll showing Giuliani and Clinton would be the nominees. That was wrong both ways. You've posted nothing except dreck.

I am aware of that poll. I am also aware of how Gallup totally discredited itself and ending up paying a large fine for having cooked the books in 2012. You know that, right?

They paid $10.5 million for overcharging customers.
Doesn't mean their numbers weren't accurately predictive.
Their final 2012 poll was 50-49 Romney.

THAT is an indication of inaccuracy.

 

[bedowin62]

It's the people who identify themselves as moderates.
My opinion doesn't come into play.

lol i see

what a joke you are

the you opinion doesnt matter as to the definition of any political entity; and is thus meaningless

you cant count what you cant quantify

Also evident then is that self-described moderates may in fact not be moderate; since it is up to them to define themselves.

 

[The Rabbi]

I posted a Gallup poll showing Giuliani and Clinton would be the nominees. That was wrong both ways. You've posted nothing except dreck.

I am aware of that poll. I am also aware of how Gallup totally discredited itself and ending up paying a large fine for having cooked the books in 2012. You know that, right?

They paid $10.5 million for overcharging customers.
Doesn't mean their numbers weren't accurately predictive.

To an asshole like Statistjerkoff it's all the same thing. That's the problem with being stupid: you can't distinguish similar but different items.

 

[nodoginnafight]

what exactly is a "moderate"?
how do you define one?

It's the people who identify themselves as moderates.
My opinion doesn't come into play.

lol i see

what a joke you are

so you prefer to define for other people what their ideology is?

Yeah, as long as people like you disagree with me, I know I'm doing something right.

 

[nodoginnafight]

I am aware of that poll. I am also aware of how Gallup totally discredited itself and ending up paying a large fine for having cooked the books in 2012. You know that, right?

They paid $10.5 million for overcharging customers.
Doesn't mean their numbers weren't accurately predictive.

To an asshole like Statistjerkoff it's all the same thing. That's the problem with being stupid: you can't distinguish similar but different items.

I see you chopped off the part of my post that pointed how gallup HAS been inaccurate.

How dishonest of you.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

The left is truly, truly terrified of an informed electorate.