Trump Tweets (no more)

[SeijiSensei]

I can't answer that because there are no public figures for Rasmussen at either HuffPost Pollster or RealClearPolitics. They are also not mentioned in John Sides's piece for the "Monkey Cage" blog at WaPo.

Remember that the "correct" answer for the polls was a small Clinton lead. They are estimating the division of the national vote, not the result in the Electoral College. I'll be the first to agree that state polling was especially poor this time around. Clinton won every poll conducted in Wisconsin, for instance, and nearly every poll in Michigan and Pennsylvania as well.

[Reckoner]

Originally Posted by monir

In hindsight, didn't Rasmussen have the most accurate polling at calling the election?

Nate Silver said repeatedly going into the election that all the media was overconfident in a Clinton win and it was quite plausible to see Trump win the electoral college but not the popular vote which ended up happening. Rasmussen might have lucked into the right result, but they have a poor reputation for a reason (bias towards Republicans).

The state polling as SeijiSensei mentioned was just exceedingly poor this time around in states like Wisconsin, but it's also hard to account for last minute breaks in voting due to things like the Comey letter the last week.

[SeijiSensei]

Originally Posted by Reckoner

it's also hard to account for last minute breaks in voting due to things like the Comey letter the last week.

Nate Silver believes the Comey letter probably cost Clinton the election.

[T]he effect of those factors — say, Clinton’s decision to give paid speeches to investment banks, or her messaging on pocket-book issues, or the role that her gender played in the campaign — is hard to measure. The impact of Comey’s letter is comparatively easy to quantify, by contrast. At a maximum, it might have shifted the race by 3 or 4 percentage points toward Donald Trump, swinging Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Florida to him, perhaps along with North Carolina and Arizona. At a minimum, its impact might have been only a percentage point or so. Still, because Clinton lost Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin by less than 1 point, the letter was probably enough to change the outcome of the Electoral College.

A swing of four points isn't out of the question given the size of the effects I measured for other campaign events. Clinton gained three or four points after the first debate and got a similar boost after the weekend that saw the second debate and the release of the Access Hollywood tape. Trump picked up over three points immediately after the Republican convention.

Trump slightly over-performed in the Electoral College compared to the historical relationship shown here:

He received 48.8% of the two-party popular vote and 56.5% of the votes in the Electoral College. The best-fit historical relationship predicts 51.5% of the EVs (3.76 X 48.8 - 132).

[Toukairin]

Another bad night for the DNC. There were 2 districts at stakes (Georgia 6th District and South Carolina 5th District), and they were not able to win even ONE. Obviously, there are people at the DNC who clearly don't know how to do a job out there. Someone will need to change the strategy, and it has to go through a new DNC chairman. I don't care what people say and I'm not American, but Tom Perez clearly has to go. #SackTomPerez

I'm also sick of that fat idiot at the White House grinning again.

[Blueknight78]

looks like trump keep falling apart on approval rates
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/06/20/po...sia/index.html
he is at 36%.

the big reasons is the investigations toward Russia, really looks like the republicans did a big shot in feet by choosen that crazy guy as candidate, he is really making his idiocity being really bad and i can start to foreshadow 2018 ellections the republicans getting really hurt by keep supporting him.

[Toukairin]

Originally Posted by Blueknight78

the big reasons is the investigations toward Russia, really looks like the republicans did a big shot in feet by choosen that crazy guy as candidate, he is really making his idiocity being really bad and i can start to foreshadow 2018 ellections the republicans getting really hurt by keep supporting him.

I wish that will turn out to be true, but I'm severely disappointed at the 2 special elections tonight for all the talk that it would be a prelude to 2018.

[Ithekro]

Well if they want, they can support another candidate for President next time, and leave Trump to the other party he was on the ticket for....the American Independent Party.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Blueknight78

looks like trump keep falling apart on approval rates
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/06/20/po...sia/index.html
he is at 36%.

the big reasons is the investigations toward Russia, really looks like the republicans did a big shot in feet by choosen that crazy guy as candidate, he is really making his idiocity being really bad and i can start to foreshadow 2018 ellections the republicans getting really hurt by keep supporting him.

That's IF the people who are opposing him are actually moving their ass to vote the GoP guys out to punish them, and got eaten up by a mix of apathy and complacency (like, "Hahah, now that those dumb uneducated workers have seen what Trump really is about, they only need to vote his party out without having me going to cast my ballot").

[monir]

Originally Posted by Sheba

That's IF the people who are opposing him are actually moving their ass to vote the GoP guys out to punish them, and got eaten up by a mix of apathy and complacency (like, "Hahah, now that those dumb uneducated workers have seen what Trump really is about, they only need to vote his party out without having me going to cast my ballot").

Originally Posted by Toukairin

I wish that will turn out to be true, but I'm severely disappointed at the 2 special elections tonight for all the talk that it would be a prelude to 2018.

Yeap! Agreed. And Trump is celebrating:

Well, the Special Elections are over and those that want to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN are 5 and O! All the Fake News, all the money spent = 0

Democrats lost where they were supposed to lose even if those races became "competitive." We don't know how 2018 will play out, but as of now it doesn't look like Dems will be able to win district that leans heavily toward GOP.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

It confirms once again that Trump is the elected leader of the United States, and his views and ideas perfectly represents Americans.

The sooner the rest of us accepts this the better we can ge on with our lives. Trump is what Americans wanted.

[GDB]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

It confirms once again that Trump is the elected leader of the United States, and his views and ideas perfectly represents Americans.

The sooner the rest of us accepts this the better we can ge on with our lives. Trump is what Americans wanted.

Still lost the popular vote, still only scrapes wins once in office in areas that are heavily biased towards him.

Sorry, that's not a confirmation of anything except republicans are brainwashed.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by GDB

Still lost the popular vote, still only scrapes wins once in office in areas that are heavily biased towards him.

Sorry, that's not a confirmation of anything except republicans are brainwashed.

No, that just meant Republicans are the representative part of the country.

I have been repeatedly told that American citizens are not actually meant to be responsible for who get voted into office, that it is not their fault that most of them either Vote Trump or didn't vote at all by choice. But that all just meant Americans don't want the blame for their own country. More importantly Americans like to pretend their nation is not exactly what it was always meant to be.

Saying he lose the popular vote is meaningless. Too many Americans don't vote deliberately and as such the popular vote is not a reflection of the wishes of Americans. The total combined citizenry, whether they voted or not, added up to give Trump the presidency. That's what America did as a nation. You can try to hide from the truth all you want, but it will change nothing.

[Wigwams]

Trump is the elected president, plain and simple.

Does his views represent most americans? i think the safe guess is more or less half of the USA only.

going by your logic how the "popular vote" actually does not include alot of people who didnt vote, then the % of trump voters/supporters is most likely even less to the total number of americans.

i just want to point out, you said "his views and ideas perfectly represents Americans", only this i am certain is 100% wrong. america is very diverse and right now divided. if you do not admit you were wrong with this statement, no point in discussing this any further.

[Eisdrache]

It's a justified complaint about common election systems that candidates can win and therefore represent the country while not having the support of the vast majority of all people. The actual turnout in the 2016 elections was ~54%. Both Trump and Clinton got more or less a quarter of all votes (of 100% Americans), meaning neither of them isn't even close to half-point and even less to an actual majority of populace.

In the end Trump won and he represents America but he doesn't really represent Americans. Neither would have Clinton for that matter.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by Wigwams

i just want to point out, you said "his views and ideas perfectly represents Americans", only this i am certain is 100% wrong. america is very diverse and right now divided. if you do not admit you were wrong with this statement, no point in discussing this any further.

Trump hasn't divided the nation enough to not get more Republicans elected.

The view of the nation is that it is fine for Trump to keep doing what he does. Those who think Trump is at least as good or better than Clinton, or don't think Trump matters no matter what he does, are a majority. And this is proven by the low voting percentage. The American people really don't mind Trump winning and that is why they didn't vote. And those who didn't vote at all will still not vote the next time, because they approve of Trump and is fine with his policies.

If you want to prove me wrong, show Democrats gaining seats at some stage.

If you want to insist that Trump supporters are not the majority, it is like trying to insist Obama wasn't the previous president. It is not helpful to imagine an America that doesn't actually exist, there isn't a Left in the United States in reality. Your government wiped it out.

[Valky]

Partisan voters always exist in every country, it's probably stronger in the US especially when you only have 2 major political party. It just proves Republican is doing better job in securing vote than Democrat.

In a way, I kinda agree with the idea that Trumps, GOP, and US are a match. Maybe Trump is the President the USA deserves.

[Eisdrache]

It's just short-sighted to think that all non-voters automatically support the winner / don't care about the outcome. Yes they didn't participate in the process but disliking all available parties is a perfectly valid option. This 'vote for the lesser evil' is just nonsense. Lesser evil is still evil. Instead candidates and parties should be something that a majority of voters sees as positive, not less worse. Nominees represent exactly the number of people who voted for them on election day, no more and no less.

[Ithekro]

Originally Posted by Eisdrache

It's just short-sighted to think that all non-voters automatically support the winner / don't care about the outcome. Yes they didn't participate in the process but disliking all available parties is a perfectly valid option. This 'vote for the lesser evil' is just nonsense. Lesser evil is still evil. Instead candidates and parties should be something that a majority of voters sees as positive, not less worse. Nominees represent exactly the number of people who voted for them on election day, no more and no less.

That was my take on election day. I was not going to vote for Clinton due to her past (a very long line of events in my memory going back to the 1990s) and I wasn't going to vote for Trump. But I was going to vote. Because California has more than two options and several legal write-in candidates, I voted for Saunders. Because I could, legally, and be counted.

Did my voted do anything towards the election results? Not really. Clinton won California with no real contest, by a factor of about 2 to 1 against Trump. Nationally the electoral college sided overwhelmingly with Trump. Trump was elected President. But the one things that mattered to me was that my vote was counted.

Not voting means you are not counted. A protest against a vote just means that those that voted get the say in what happens....the non-voter does not. The only time that not voting works is if less than 5% of the population vote, than the vote is invalid....and that is only for some states, not all.

Much like in Puerto Rico, only those than voted are counted. The protest non-voting just makes those that voted stance look more impressive as percentages of the vote cast are all that matter, not the percentage of those that didn't cast a vote.

[Archon_Wing]

I will be sure to forward those justifications to those people that got detained and denied access back into their own country. I think it'll make things better.

[GDB]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

it is not their fault that most of them either Vote Trump

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

Saying he lose the popular vote is meaningless.

Pick one.

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

The total combined citizenry, whether they voted or not, added up to give Trump the presidency. That's what America did as a nation. You can try to hide from the truth all you want, but it will change nothing.

Then take responsibility as a foreign nation, since resentment about "having to be the world's police" on "our tax dollars" fueled a lot of the Trump support. After all, you can't hide from the truth, right? It all adds up, right?

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

Trump hasn't divided the nation enough to not get more Republicans elected.

In areas that predominately voted for republicans at about a 70% rate, and they barely win now. Sorry, causing an almost 20 point slide in a largely biased area is a HUGE impact. You ignoring context does not change the fact that there is context.

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

The view of the nation is that it is fine for Trump to keep doing what he does. Those who think Trump is at least as good or better than Clinton, or don't think Trump matters no matter what he does, are a majority. And this is proven by the low voting percentage.

That's not how any of this works at all.

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

The American people really don't mind Trump winning and that is why they didn't vote. And those who didn't vote at all will still not vote the next time, because they approve of Trump and is fine with his policies.

Ignoring the many thousands, if not tens or hundreds of thousands, of people who tried to vote but were denied because of GOP-led voter suppression?

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

If you want to prove me wrong, show Democrats gaining seats at some stage.

Learn how American democracy works, then? There's been what, two seats up for vote? In very deep red areas? And they've both been hotly contested?

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

If you want to insist that Trump supporters are not the majority, it is like trying to insist Obama wasn't the previous president.

Trump is the current President. That is the same as saying Obama was the previous President. Saying Trump supporters aren't the majority is not the same as saying Trump isn't the President.