Trump still has no path to 270 Electoral College votes-

I meant no offense, it's just the facts. If someone's heroes are all slavers and child rapists it's none of my business.

 

Hillary is already trending upward on RCP polling. Should we throw a going away party for Borat?

 

Its no where close to the truth. Are you sure you didn't confuse the Greeks with the Romans.

 

Polling likely voters? Should we get you some prayers beads for those maybes?

 

Get real. If Trump's supporters are called les despicables, Hillary's supporters should be called les delusionals.

It's as tight as it gets. As I said earlier, the debates will decide who is going to be the next POTUS.


Clinton’s Leading In Exactly The States She Needs To Win

Here’s why that isn’t as good as it sounds.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/clintons-leading-in-exactly-the-states-she-needs-to-win/

nstead, the actual map is likely to be a little messier than polling averages indicate, with the probability of modest errors in either direction. For the time being, Clinton is more likely to be hurt by those errors than to be helped by them. She has one really good Electoral College path, but it’s only one path, instead of the robust electoral map that President Obama had in 2008 and 2012. That’s why our models estimate that Trump is more likely to benefit from an Electoral College-popular vote split than Clinton is, although either outcome is possible.

 

So despite the fact that ALL the current polling shows Trump behind Clinton in the Electoral College or Clinton at 270 or above in the EC......"she" has "only one path"...

while Trump has "many"?


I am recalling Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf "Baghdad Bob" in the early months of 2003.

 

Oh no, it's not Baghdad Bob, it;s Nate Silver, one of your favourite sources. Have you learned how to analyse the polls objectively? Or shall I repost the link again?

 

So can I get you to commit to the accuracy of Nate Silver's analysis.....until Election Day?

 

I've already said it. The debates will decide who is going to be the next POTUS. The race is wide open.

 

Actually, post convention polling is a better indicator than post 1st debate polling. Trump had a post-debate surge that peaked at +1.1 over 5 days then piddled out. Whereas, Clinton had a post-debate surge that peaked at +10 (+8?) that lasted for 30 days.

 

Which one will you commit to Gorn? ABC, CBS, CNN, or NBC?

 

Dang! That post didn't wear well!

538: Trump Now Is Favored to Win This Election Over Hillary
—Ace

From zombie, who says "the entire left just sharted."

Nate Silver's site now says Trump is 54.5% likely to win, and Hillary is just is at just 45.5%.

Oddly, those two figures sum to 100% -- yet I was told this was not a "Binary" election!!! I don't understand.

Update: Another poll came out, the Monmouth Poll, showing Hillary ahead 46-42, which might be why Nate Silver has now adjusted Trump's odds downwards to 50.9%.

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/366022.php

 

Your blogger source lacks credibility.

Go directly to 538 see what Nate Silver is actually predicting instead.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo#plus

 

Trump definitely has a path to 270 as long as Hillary polls below 50 percent

 

Apparently Trump is now just one point behind in Pennsylvania. Just one poll, but that's pretty significant.

 

After the Left squirted, he rapidly massaged it.

Check out Colorado. He modified the CNN poll by moving it 1.0 toward Hillary even though his Pollster ratings only show a 0.1 GOP lean, but with this the odds shifted back into Hillary's favor and order was restored in the Leftwing universe.

Silver mashes his thumb on the scale like this all the time, but the sandcastle that is Crooked Hillary remains just as imperiled.

 

Ironic given that Silver has credibility whereas your blogger has none whatsoever.

 

Didn't Silver predict that Trump had only a 2% chance of securing the nomination and that Brexit would fail?

Democratic hopes of winning Senate fade as Trump proves much more acceptable to the American People than the Left predicted.

Silver will have to update that prediction as well as the election looms like a tidal wave.

Old Nate is working those stats like old Aunt Imelda working the cookie dough:

He claims he "adjusts" the polls in his model to remove pollster bias, and yet:

CNN which he shows as having a 0.1% GOP lean, he adjusted toward Hillary by 1.0 points.
YOUGOV which he claims has a +1.6 Dem lean, he didn't adjust at all.

 

Where you my friend?

- - - Updated - - -

Where you at Baghdad>

 

You know, I kind of promised myself I would resurrect one of the thousands of threads such as this one predicting Trump would lose, if he won. I admit, I didn't think he would, but I also said the only poll that really mattered was the one on November 8th.

So now it seems he did indeed have a path to 270. Imagine that.

 

If I had a nickel for ever time I heard he has no path or a narrow path to 270...

I'm still trying to find all of the times I was mocked for even suggesting Trump could win.

 

For one reason or another some members who most often posted messages that Trump can not possibly win are no longer with us, including a few who incessantly spammed this across the forum.

The corporate propaganda media and press were skillful at marketing that people should accept the inevitability of a Hilary Clinton presidency. However, this backfired on them. Many people don't like being told what they must do and others will support who they see as the underdog.

 

Just another propaganda thread made by a banned troll

 

It appears some members didn't take Clinton losing well and crossed the line in ranting or lamenting on the forum. A couple others just silently disappeared, though I won't mention them not to be calling anyone out. I suspect this would have happened to some Trump supporters if the election had turned out differently. Emotions were running fairly high for some people over the election.

 

I'm not sure why so many of the trolls are now banned. I bet they were using socks.