US Politics XIV: Vote for Pedro - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-30-2019, 07:02 PM   #41
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 64,760
Local Time: 12:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post
Attachment 12286

April 2015.

If I recall correctly, the winner is in a category that’s less than a percent.

And some of the candidates at 1-3% made it farther than some who had actual numbers.
He didn't announce until June, and was near the top almost immediately.

The polls this early aren't the end all be all, but they're also not meaningless.
__________________

Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 04-30-2019, 07:22 PM   #42
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 16,284
Local Time: 12:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
He didn't announce until June, and was near the top almost immediately.

The polls this early aren't the end all be all, but they're also not meaningless.


Because he called Mexicans rapists and murderers that June. Shock shock.

The polls aren’t meaningless and you can imagine that those who currently are polling well will make it to the debates.

For those not polling well, all that matters is if they can qualify for the debates. Like Trump. Like Fiorina. Like Carson.

Of course, those three also all have something in common. They were “outsiders.”
__________________

LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 04-30-2019, 07:27 PM   #43
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 64,760
Local Time: 12:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post
Because he called Mexicans rapists and murderers that June. Shock shock.

The polls aren’t meaningless and you can imagine that those who currently are polling well will make it to the debates.

For those not polling well, all that matters is if they can qualify for the debates. Like Trump. Like Fiorina. Like Carson.

Of course, those three also all have something in common. They were “outsiders.”
Right but Trump never polled poorly. He polled well from the moment he entered the race, so there was no concern of his not making the debates.
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 04-30-2019, 07:38 PM   #44
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 16,284
Local Time: 12:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
Right but Trump never polled poorly. He polled well from the moment he entered the race, so there was no concern of his not making the debates.


What are you talking about? He barely made it into the debate. He wasn’t on every polling, and his last three major polls were 1%, 2%, and “not even on the register.”

He shot up at the debate because of what he said. That’s precisely my point. As long as someone can make it that far, they’re fair game. Donald Trump was a joke until that point.
LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 04-30-2019, 07:46 PM   #45
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 64,760
Local Time: 12:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post
What are you talking about? He barely made it into the debate. He wasn’t on every polling, and his last three major polls were 1%, 2%, and “not even on the register.”

He shot up at the debate because of what he said. That’s precisely my point. As long as someone can make it that far, they’re fair game. Donald Trump was a joke until that point.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...tion-3823.html

He announced in May, was polling high in July, and the first televised debate was August.
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 04-30-2019, 07:51 PM   #46
Blue Crack Addict
 
mikal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Black Lodge
Posts: 26,136
Local Time: 11:44 AM
Trump’s attorney, whoops I mean Attorney General, committed perjury.
mikal is offline  
Old 04-30-2019, 07:55 PM   #47
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 64,760
Local Time: 12:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikal View Post
Trump’s attorney, whoops I mean Attorney General, committed perjury.
Don't forget the obstruction
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 04-30-2019, 07:59 PM   #48
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,098
Local Time: 12:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post

The only things that matter is their bank size
Exactly.

There isn't enough money to go around. Booker and O'Rourke are the only ones below Harris who are raising good numbers (Booker's are just ok). Everyone else just doesn't have $ and furthermore there's been quite a lot written about how corporate donors are viewed as fairly toxic in the D primary which hurts fundraising significantly.

I'm not saying these are final numbers and I do think that Biden is probably somewhat artificially inflated because of a post-announcement bump but beyond the top 5 + maybe Booker and O'Rourke, do you really think anyone else has any sort of a chance? I honestly don't.
anitram is online now  
Old 04-30-2019, 08:03 PM   #49
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 64,760
Local Time: 12:44 PM
Trump also had the smallest bankroll.
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 04-30-2019, 08:18 PM   #50
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 16,284
Local Time: 12:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...tion-3823.html

He announced in May, was polling high in July, and the first televised debate was August.


He announced formally during that nasty speech, but had been (like many candidates) “exploring” already. He polled routinely between 0-4%, often in the noise. His major polling data (which qualifies you for the debates) set for June was, in order: {4, 3, <1, 4, <1, 4, 2, <1, 2, 1, 11, 11, 12, 11, 15}

Unsurprisingly, that change from 1 to to 11 (meaning, barely qualifying to front runner) happened after he called Mexicans rapists and murderers in the middle of June when he announced. But people knew he was running already.

To suggest he wasn’t polling poorly is silly. He wasn’t even on the radar.
LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 04-30-2019, 08:19 PM   #51
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 64,760
Local Time: 12:44 PM
lol ok sure. He wasn't polling well when he wasn't yet running for president. This is true
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 04-30-2019, 08:23 PM   #52
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 16,284
Local Time: 12:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Exactly.



There isn't enough money to go around. Booker and O'Rourke are the only ones below Harris who are raising good numbers (Booker's are just ok). Everyone else just doesn't have $ and furthermore there's been quite a lot written about how corporate donors are viewed as fairly toxic in the D primary which hurts fundraising significantly.



I'm not saying these are final numbers and I do think that Biden is probably somewhat artificially inflated because of a post-announcement bump but beyond the top 5 + maybe Booker and O'Rourke, do you really think anyone else has any sort of a chance? I honestly don't.


We live in a time where one of those zero percenters could expose themselves on stage and say they don’t believe in public correctness and they’d move to the top.

But yes, if some of those campaigners can’t start to build financial support nationally, they’re not going to be president. But many of them are playing the long game (getting campaign roots and will stump for a position in the administration).
LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 04-30-2019, 08:36 PM   #53
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,098
Local Time: 12:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
Trump also had the smallest bankroll.
Not true. He's the richest man who ever wealthied. Believe me.
anitram is online now  
Old 04-30-2019, 08:37 PM   #54
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 64,760
Local Time: 12:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
Not true. He's the richest man who ever wealthied. Believe me.
Right right. My bad.
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 04-30-2019, 09:38 PM   #55
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 16,284
Local Time: 12:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
lol ok sure. He wasn't polling well when he wasn't yet running for president. This is true


Funny that you can laugh even though you were the one that got the dates wrong 🤭

It’s not uncommon for prospective candidates to poll well. He did not.
LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 04-30-2019, 09:48 PM   #56
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 64,760
Local Time: 12:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post
Funny that you can laugh even though you were the one that got the dates wrong

It’s not uncommon for prospective candidates to poll well. He did not.
You're right. He didn't announce in May. He announced in mid June and was towards the top of the polls by July, before the first televised debate in August. So he actually moved to the front even quicker than I led on.

You said he barely made the debates and only went to the top because of his debate performance. This simply isn't true.

You changed your story later on.

All I ever said was that he went to the top as soon as he announced, which is true.
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 04-30-2019, 09:59 PM   #57
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 16,284
Local Time: 12:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
You're right. He didn't announce in May. He announced in mid June and was towards the top of the polls by July, before the first televised debate in August. So he actually moved to the front even quicker than I led on.

You said he barely made the debates and only went to the top because of his debate performance. This simply isn't true.

You changed your story later on.

All I ever said was that he went to the top as soon as he announced, which is true.


Let me ask you: when do you think Donald Trump accused Mexicans of being rapists and murderers?

Because it seems to me that you think that was a statement after the fact, and not the sole cause of his polling jumping up.

I didn’t “change my story.” The dude went from barely eligible to front runner because he said some crude shit on tv.
LuckyNumber7 is online now  
Old 04-30-2019, 10:06 PM   #58
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 64,760
Local Time: 12:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post
Let me ask you: when do you think Donald Trump accused Mexicans of being rapists and murderers?

Because it seems to me that you think that was a statement after the fact, and not the sole cause of his polling jumping up.

I didn’t “change my story.” The dude went from barely eligible to front runner because he said some crude shit on tv.
Holy shit.

He wasn't eligible because he wasn't yet running. He said his vile shit at his announcement.

Joe Biden wasn't debate eligible a week ago, either. Because he wasn't running. He also wasn't in the major polls, which doesn't mean that hypothetical polling placed him high on the list.

Trump wasn't high on hypothetical polls because nobody took him serious until after he announced. Yes, his vile shit got him attention and he held it with his debate performance. But it's not as of pollsters were seriously trying to ask people about potential Trump presidencies before his announcement. Shit, most people didn't take his candidacy seriously until he won.

This is stupid.

And yes, you changed your story. You said he barely made the debate, and only shot up at the debate. Now you're saying that he shot up the polls at how announcement because of what he said, which isn't at all what you said at first because I wouldn't have debated that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post
What are you talking about? He barely made it into the debate. He wasn’t on every polling, and his last three major polls were 1%, 2%, and “not even on the register.”

He shot up at the debate because of what he said. That’s precisely my point. As long as someone can make it that far, they’re fair game. Donald Trump was a joke until that point.
This is dumb.
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 04-30-2019, 10:16 PM   #59
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,583
Local Time: 11:44 AM
Well this is compelling stuff.
Diemen is offline  
Old 04-30-2019, 10:40 PM   #60
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 16,284
Local Time: 12:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
Holy shit.

He wasn't eligible because he wasn't yet running. He said his vile shit at his announcement.

Joe Biden wasn't debate eligible a week ago, either. Because he wasn't running. He also wasn't in the major polls, which doesn't mean that hypothetical polling placed him high on the list.
Dude, prospective candidates more than a year out are still put on polls. Including Donald Trump then and including Joe Biden now. Joe Biden was polling well prior to his announcement. Donald Trump was not.

Quote:
Trump wasn't high on hypothetical polls because nobody took him serious until after he announced. Yes, his vile shit got him attention and he held it with his debate performance. But it's not as of pollsters were seriously trying to ask people about potential Trump presidencies before his announcement. Shit, most people didn't take his candidacy seriously until he won.
And?? You’re angrily responding to me with my point. If he didn’t say that shit, he wouldn’t have jumped up in he polling. His announcement didn’t give him the bump. His choice of words did. If he didn’t say it, he would’ve stayed right where he was as a joke of a candidate.

Quote:
This is stupid.

And yes, you changed your story. You said he barely made the debate, and only shot up at the debate. Now you're saying that he shot up the polls at how announcement because of what he said, which isn't at all what you said at first because I wouldn't have debated that.



This is dumb.

Holy fucking shit. Ok sorry I said debate when I meant “on tv.” That’s not changing my point. It’s April now, it was fucking JUNE then and a joke of a candidate was able to say some shit to raise his polling numbers and yes, thereby late in the game barely qualify for the debates. As in, without saying that shit, his qualification would be in question. As were MANY candidates who polled like he did prior to that incident.
__________________

LuckyNumber7 is online now  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×