An online poll? Those are worth about as much as online petitions. No matter what the results Iâll give it a big eye roll and yawn.
Hillary has been running ads in Texas for weeks and Tim Kaine was here a coupla days recently.
Very Zogbyish.
Post Labor Day, we reach the point in the media handbook that says âPolls are tightening up. Keep your eyeballs here for this exciting race!â
Iâll believe it when I see it but just the fact that there is a possible tossup in Texas must give the GOP Degeneratae fits.
Well, the polls are tightening and I have no problem with media reporting the truth about the polling. What does bother me, however, is when they ignore the truth about Trumpâs many very real scandals in favor of cherry picking any bit of potentially negative information about Clinton. I want most Americans to think itâs an incredibly tight race and that they must go vote for the better off the two candidates. I just want them to know that person is unquestionably Clinton.
Makes me very, very sad and disgusted.
The selective reporting you mention is really a thing. I had been noticing it, and remarking on the deja vu of it all in reference to the 2000 campaign (with Al Gore portrayed as the stiff and dishonest guy who claimed to have invented the internet, vs.George W. Bush, the fella youâd rather have a beer with) when I came on Paul Krugmanâs recent op-ed on exactly the same subject: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/05/opinion/hillary-clinton-gets-gored.html
The New York Times is actually one of the worst offenders, considering their position as the ânewspaper of recordâ and how bad their political reporting can be.
Would be especially delightful if Madame President did win Texas in her landslide victoryâŚ
Survey Monkey is rated C- at 538, so I would take it a huge grain of salt. Having said that, robopolls and online polls tend to favor Trump recently, so⌠this is kind of interesting.
I am bracing shitty polls coming out this week after a few weeks of atrocious hit pieces against her. Despite those attacks, sheâs still leading. Iâve been extremely frustrated and angry about the media, but not panicking (yet).
62 days or so to go. Most people I talked with said Hillary, but some told me they were âundecided.â Probed, it often turned out they were not sure about Hillary yet but they would never vote for Trump. I believe those people are persuadable, esp once the debates start.
Thatâs precisely the piece I had in mind when I typed my comment. There was so much exculpatory information in that FBI report and yet the media focused their attention on either side-eyeing the timing of the reportâs release and/or other minute details that merely gave the appearance of potentially questionable behavior. Meanwhile, Clintonâs opponent paid off an Attorney General to avoid facing fraud charges, and the media shrugged.
Glad to hear it. Thatâs the sense I get too, but I never know if Iâm just projecting or if thatâs truly the sentiment thatâs out there. She really needs to deliver an unmitigated knock out blow during the debate. Sheâs got a tougher job than Trump because sheâs really got to find a way to be her true self (the wickedly funny yet brainy, caring woman so many that know her describe her as), control her desire to punch him in the face, and deliver facts in a way that doesnât lose people or make her look like a know-it-all.
This piece discusses that as well. There is actual evidence of pay-to-play with the Trump University lawsuit and the AGs of both Texas and Florida, but seems to still be a fixation on âopticsâ of the Clinton Foundation. Thoroughly infuriating.
It may be closer there than expected, but it is not a Tossup. I do not buy this one. With Georgia and Arizona at least it has been consistent through all polls.
The area Iâm helping with canvassing/VR-ing is a cobalt blue area (Philly), so itâs not surprising most say Hillary. Then again Philly is the place that carries PA, so we really want/need to get those âundecidedâ on board with us. Will do whatever I can help as a lowly volunteer.
Honestly, the debate thing makes me a little nervous. Trump himself may be fully predictable, but how the debates go is fairly unpredictable due to additional variables (and Iâm not at all pleased with Chris Wallace moderating the 3rd one). I would imagine her team has been preparing for more different scenarios than they would have been against a conventional opponent. Hopefully she will bring her A game.
When is this site going to start requiring writers to check their own work for accuracy before publishingâor, better yet, hiring someone else to do it? As an example:
The 50 state poll of more than 74,000 registered voters, with 5,000 polled in Texas, gave Clinton a slight edge, polling 46 to Trumpâs 47 percent support. The poll also showed Clinton leading by just two points in Colorado and Florida, with the candidates tied in North Carolina.
If you merely reread this paragraph you would notice that 46 is less than 47, not the other way around. The figure in the WaPo survey is 45. A small detail, but this sort of casual sloppiness does not inspire confidence in the article as a wholeâputting aside the WaPo/Survey Monkey online poll itself.
GOP response:
Joy Reid was substitute hosting a show on MSNBC yesterday and had a great piece about this. The Clinton team has been doing a lot of preparation and Trump claimed yesterday that he really hasnât been preparing at all. I think Trump believes he can insult his way through the debates like he has every other debate. My fear is that if Trump doesnât take a pee on the stage or throw the lectern at the audience that it will be reported as a win for Trump; he gets graded on a curve and benefits from the politics of low expectations.
I wish that they had negotiated to have each candidateâs mic turned off when itâs not his or her turn to speak.
I read this just a moment ago.
Good read all in all, but this part is about the debate thingy â and your (and my) fear.
Get ready for news organizations to grade Trumpâs debate performance on a massive curve.
Here is a depressing harbinger of whatâs coming, from CNN today:
âIn front of a vast television audience, the GOP nominee could reshape perceptions of his character and readiness â if he can avoid being drawn into gaffes and personality clashes by Clinton. He will benefit from rock-bottom expectations, given controversies whipped up by his tempestuous personality and the vast gulf in experience between Trump and Clinton.â
In other words, if Trump doesnât try to urinate in Clintonâs direction or manages not to vomit all over his podium, he will have âdefied expectations.â So presidential! In saying these types of things, news orgs and commentators never allow that they are the ones who decide whether the supposed defiance of expectations in question actually should lead us to lower the bar for a candidate or otherwise factor in to how we judge his or her performance. It shouldnât.
There will be a lot of pressure on the news orgs not to play this game, but itâs reasonably possible that weâll see a lot of it, anyway. This is going to be infuriating, so prepare your medicine of choice right now.
I believe itâs true Trump isnât preparing for the debates. Itâs not his thing, he is lazy, incurious, militantly ignorant and doesnât have any focus. But I wouldnât be surprised if the media rewards him for his laziness. Wondering whether Iâll get a severe headache or nausea or anything else in that case. Could easily an overdose and bad med interaction 