You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
bigbri wrote:Just an FYI on that story, it's entirely based on Rasmussen polling, which is one of the most right-leaning pollsters out there. It only gets a C+ on Nate Silver's ranking of pollsters.
And I keep reading "the race is close."
Where is it close?
Will someone answer that? I'm begging you.
The battleground states aren't even battlegrounds at this point. Washington Post poll just released has Hillary up by 7, 8, 9 or more points.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/page/201 … DPpMbWibQ#
The great thing about the poll above is you can change it based on different responses, likely voters, registered voters, democrats, etc. Take a look. She gets 88% of Dems to vote for her; he gets 77% of GOP. She gets 39% of Ind.
Alarmingly, she gets 87% of the black vote and 69% of the non-white vote.
I'm not saying Trump will win, but you can't bash Rasmussen as a right wing puppet and then precede to quote the Washington Post.
Washington Post polling gets an A+ rating from Nate Silver. Rasmussen gets C+. Rasmussen bias is 2.0 toward GOP; WaPo is .6 toward Dem.
I trust Nate Silver in this area, but yeah, Trump has banned WaPo from his events. Are they pissed? Probably. Does it affect their polling, which is done by Abt-SRBI of New York? I doubt it.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
In 2006 Interview, Trump Demanded US Troops Leave Iraq—Even if Chaos and ISIS-Like Violence Occurred
Last week, Donald Trump repeatedly asserted that President Barack Obama was the "founder" of ISIS and blasted Hillary Clinton as a "co-founder" of the terror group that has taken over large swaths of Iraq and Syria. But Obama was not in the White House and Clinton was not secretary of state when ISIS originated.
When a conservative radio host on Thursday asked if Trump meant that the Obama administration had "created the vacuum" in the region that allowed ISIS to grow, the GOP nominee stuck to his nonsensical statement: "No, I meant he's the founder of ISIS." Next, Trump claimed he was being sarcastic. Then at a campaign rally, he added, "But not that sarcastic." It was a very Trumpian couple of days. And on Monday, with a speech on national security that Trump read off a teleprompter, he had a chance to declare what he really thought about Obama, Clinton, and ISIS. After repeating the lie that he had opposed the Iraq War before the invasion, Trump did not restate his "founder" claim, but he said that because of Obama and Clinton, "Iraq is in chaos, and ISIS is on the loose." He added, "the Obama-Clinton foreign policy has unleashed ISIS." He insisted that Obama's withdrawal of US troops from Iraq (which actually was compelled by an agreement reached with the Iraqi government by President George W. Bush) "led directly to the rise of ISIS."
Here's the problem for Trump—if being wildly inconsistent and attacking an opponent for supposedly holding a position that Trump himself once advocated is a problem: 10 years ago, Trump called for a complete US withdrawal of troops from Iraq and indicated that he didn't give a damn if this led to civil war and greater violence there. He even predicted that such a move would cause the rise of "vicious" forces in Iraq. But Trump believed this would not be the United States' problem. That is, Trump was ardently in favor of the very actions that he now decries and for which he wrongfully blames Obama and Clinton.
In a 2006 CNBC interview, Trump was asked to critique Bush's performance in the White House. Trump immediately brought up the Iraq War:
I would like to see our president get us out of the war [in Iraq] because the war is a total catastrophe. I would like to see President Bush get us out of Iraq, which is a total mess, a total catastrophe, and it's not going to get any better. It's only going to get worse. It's a mess.
Trump was passionate and insistent. Bush had to get the hell out of Iraq right away:
What you have to do is get out of Iraq. You can do it nicely. You can do it slowly. You can do it radically.
Trump fancied the do-it-fast approach. And he noted that a US withdrawal should proceed, even though it would precipitate more violence in the region and the worst and most violent forces would benefit. It's almost as if Trump foresaw the rise of ISIS—but didn't believe that this mattered for the United States:
I would announce that we have been victorious in Iraq and all the troops are coming home and let those people have their civil war. And, by the way, no matter if we stay or if we leave, the most vicious person that you've ever seen in your—. Saddam Hussein is going to be like a nice guy compared to the one who's taking over Iraq. Somebody will take over Iraq, whether we're there or not, but probably when we leave, will take over Iraq. He will make Saddam Hussein…He will make Saddam Hussein look like a baby.
In his characteristic manner, Trump did not mince his words and he reiterated his solution:
I just said, announce victory, get them home…Let's say, "Victory, Tremendous." Have a big thing in the streets. Then get out real fast before you get shot. Let's get home…Hey, hate us over there. Now how, how, do you—. The people that like us hate us. Those are the good ones. Then you have the double hate where they wanna just shoot us. But how do you solve that problem? You got to get out of Iraq.
Trump was clear at the time: The United States had to remove its troops, even if that would cause a civil war and a dramatic expansion of violence and terror in Iraq and the region. Now he denounces Obama and Clinton, who were not in charge of US foreign policy at that time, for supposedly implementing the policy he demanded. By Trump's own standards—sarcastic or not—he is at least an honorary founder of ISIS.
Watch Trump take the exact position he now slams as "naive" and an example of "bad judgment":
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
This is the genius of Trump. His "crazy statement" now has the media promoting videos of him where he comes off as the likeable prophet. His prediction of what would happen there is spot on.
The intended angle will mostly end up being for the already anti Trumpers, because it's weak. There's nothing technically wrong about his statements there. Whether you go fast or slow he says, there will be civil war. That doesn't excuse Obama from how he's handled a region where the US already has military forces. ISIS has grown on his watch, there's no denying that. Nobody knew who those guys were in 08.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
https://twitter.com/BriTheWebGuy/status/765601789869690883
BTW, in that Texas poll, Trump is only up 6 points. I predict in the next cycle or the one afterward, a democrat will win Texas at the presidential level. His lead is solely because of seniors, and the Hispanic population is booming and overwhelmingly supports Dems.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
https://twitter.com/BriTheWebGuy/status/765601789869690883
BTW, in that Texas poll, Trump is only up 6 points. I predict in the next cycle or the one afterward, a democrat will win Texas at the presidential level. His lead is solely because of seniors, and the Hispanic population is booming and overwhelmingly supports Dems.
Deez Nuts? I thought Twitter polls didn't count? 
I raise you ABC online.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
bigbri wrote:https://twitter.com/BriTheWebGuy/status/765601789869690883
BTW, in that Texas poll, Trump is only up 6 points. I predict in the next cycle or the one afterward, a democrat will win Texas at the presidential level. His lead is solely because of seniors, and the Hispanic population is booming and overwhelmingly supports Dems.
Deez Nuts? I thought Twitter polls didn't count?
I raise you ABC online.
That wasn't a Twitter poll. I would never post an internet poll of any kind. Too inaccurate. Voting bots being the obvious first thing that inflates one result like that ABC poll.
This is a bonafide poll for Texas. You can read the whole thing here. You won't find any good news for Trump in it, except that he holds a shrinking lead in one of reddest states we have.
Re: 2016 Presidential Election Thread
Sorry, I tried finding it. Only got up Twitter stuff.
You underestimate me. If you replace Stein and Johnson with Deez he is up by 9.
That's weird, try this link. Should work. Scroll down a bit.
