Jump to content

The 2016 US Presidential Election

Adamski

By Adamski
in The Politics Forum

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 5.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Savage Henry

Savage Henry

Posted
Posted
Trump was horrific. He was totally dominated by Clinton.


Indeed. Imagine that. How many debates are there scheduled? These could break Trump if they are all so one sided.

I didn't see any evidence that Trump had prepared for that at all. Which even I didn't expect.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Paco

Paco

Posted
Posted

I didn't see any of it, but the snap polls show a resounding win for Trump. Only CNN, which Trump calls 'Clinton News Network', has her winning. Drudge, CNBC and interestingly TIME all show a Trump win.

Doesn't seem to be accurate on here but I guess P&B isn't known for its neutrality. Accurate?

Doesn't seem to have been the fireworks and box office we were all expecting though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Savage Henry

Savage Henry

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, Paco said:

I didn't see any of it, but the snap polls show a resounding win for Trump. Only CNN, which Trump calls 'Clinton News Network', has her winning. Drudge, CNBC and interestingly TIME all show a Trump win.

Doesn't seem to be accurate on here but I guess P&B isn't known for its neutrality. Accurate?

Doesn't seem to have been the fireworks and box office we were all expecting though.

Almost all of the analysis is putting Trump significantly behind.  Of course, that doesn't matter, it's the popular opinion of the audiences.  Which also lean towards Clinton.  Wait for fivethirtyeight's synopsis, which will point out the flaws in the polling.

If Drumpf continues to play the pseudo-conspiratorial fruit loop card - "she hasn't got the stamina" - then he'll get smashed in November. It's a painful attempt to appeal to the racist/misogynist truth movement, which accounts for about twelve people.  It's a bizarre tactic.

 

ETA: Pie and Bovril (overt leaning to the SNP notwithstanding) tends to be populated by middle class,  educated males.   And trolls.  So it demonstrates a fairly accurate picture of white, Scottish, male, middle class voting intent. Independence aside, P&B is fairly representative of a certain demographic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Savage Henry

Savage Henry

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, ThatBoyRonaldo said:

Also there was some discussion a few pages back about women 'voting for Hillary because she's a woman' or similar. I wouldn't presume to speak on behalf of women but I suspect if I were one that Hillary vs a guy who:

  • mocked a reporter's periods
  • said he'd date his daughter
  • wants to make abortion a crime

would be a pretty easy choice.

Right.  Towards the end Clinton just dismantled him on the accusations of misogyny.  I'd really like to see the thing again, but I don't recall anything on the emails being brought up, whereas Trump's achilles heel issue, misogyny, came up quite a bit.  

But of course, US voters vote for a party, not a candidate. That's how the electoral college works, so it's literally impossible for people to vote for Clinton purely because she's a woman.

Not much can be said after one debate - and a few hours after that debate - about the lasting effects of one television appearances, but if Clinton didn't make a gain as a result of that - and most of the polls say that she did - she'd be in all sorts of trouble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
banana

banana

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, ThatBoyRonaldo said:
  • mocked a reporter's periods
  • said he'd date his daughter
  • wants to make abortion a crime

:lol:

The daughter one is correct in the context that he was talking if he wasn't her father. The first and especially the third are complete nonsense.

Raging feminist Shillery is the very clear sexist bigot in this contest, against both men and women.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Paco

Paco

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Savage Henry said:

Almost all of the analysis is putting Trump significantly behind.  Of course, that doesn't matter, it's the popular opinion of the audiences.  Which also lean towards Clinton.  Wait for fivethirtyeight's synopsis, which will point out the flaws in the polling.

If this election has shown anything, it's that analysis and 'expert opinion' is utterly worthless. Literally every single major news outlet in the country is vehemently against Trump, with the possible exception of Fox News. Every political analyst and print journalist is vehemently against Trump. People just don't care, similar to Brexit and even the Scottish Independence referendum up here. They don't believe what they're reading in the papers, and seeing on the news, because it doesn't reflect the realities they see in day-to-day life. There was a time when newspaper and TV opinion could completely swing an election. I think it's fair to say, with Scotland, Brexit and now Trump (win or lose) that time is long gone.

Regardless of the result of the election, the US has big questions to answer. And like independence being defeated here, I just don't see it all going away.

54 minutes ago, Savage Henry said:

But of course, US voters vote for a party, not a candidate. 

Do they? As far as I was aware, they would vote for Hillary Clinton/Tim Kaine (Democrat) on the ballot? Had a quick Google and it certainly looks that way. Maybe varies between states? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Savage Henry

Savage Henry

Posted
Posted
Do they? As far as I was aware, they would vote for Hillary Clinton/Tim Kaine (Democrat) on the ballot? Had a quick Google and it certainly looks that way. Maybe varies between states? 



That is how they calculate the popular vote. The electoral college, to which each state contributes its own weighted contribution is what is used to declare a winning party. It's entirely possible - though quite unlikely - for a presidential nominee to win the popular vote and still lose the electoral college. Then on top of that, absentee ballots are only counted if the electoral college is tight.

It's one of the things that make the polls - particularly in this election - so variable because of the sheer number of votes that count in the polls but not in the election. Traditionally, the system favours Republicans in the poll and Democrats in the vote. Add to that the bizarre state of affairs whereby Gary Johnson et al are included in some opinion polls and not others and some ballot papers and not others, you start to get an idea why pollsters in the US are often so divided.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alan Stubbs

Alan Stubbs

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Paco said:

I didn't see any of it, but the snap polls show a resounding win for Trump. Only CNN, which Trump calls 'Clinton News Network', has her winning. Drudge, CNBC and interestingly TIME all show a Trump win.

Doesn't seem to be accurate on here but I guess P&B isn't known for its neutrality. Accurate?

Doesn't seem to have been the fireworks and box office we were all expecting though.

Time and Drudge were open online polls, don't know about CNBC. Plenty of Conservatives frantically tweeting links to online polls straight after, probably because they know their man got pumped and the proper polls would be bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sooky

Sooky

Posted
Posted

Clinton won that, but would it be fair to say it's probably not going to make much of a difference? There was hardly a knock-out blow in there. I can only assume that undecideds remain undecideds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Savage Henry

Savage Henry

Posted
Posted
Clinton won that, but would it be fair to say it's probably not going to make much of a difference? There was hardly a knock-out blow in there. I can only assume that undecideds remain undecideds.



It'd be indicative of a very close election and a likely Trump victory if he gains ground on her, especially after performing as badly as that. The overriding assumption is that she'll wipe the floor with him (as she did) and accordingly take a substantial boost in her ratings.

There are, apparently, a record number of undecided voters who dislike both candidates and will likely choose as close to the election as possible. The assumption is that if Trump continues his bewildering policy of having no actual policies, the more they'll swing to Clinton.

The betting market swung 7% to Clinton after that first debate. Bookmakers are concluding that the Trump campaign is slowly being killed off here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thistle_do_nicely

Thistle_do_nicely

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Paco said:

I didn't see any of it, but the snap polls show a resounding win for Trump. Only CNN, which Trump calls 'Clinton News Network', has her winning. Drudge, CNBC and interestingly TIME all show a Trump win.

Doesn't seem to be accurate on here but I guess P&B isn't known for its neutrality. Accurate?

Doesn't seem to have been the fireworks and box office we were all expecting though.

The thing is that the debates may very well come across differently to the American electorate than everywhere else, pretty much throughout the world let alone our wee subsection on P&B; I firmly remember pretty much everyone I knew mocking Dubya back when I was at school (teachers, schoolmates, family and friends, comedians, even some mainstream news outlets in the UK, all of whom ranged from thinking he was mildly thick to actively hating him) yet he won 2 terms in the states.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...