Interesting To See At Election

[bonnie]

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/10/trump-track-win-black-votes-gop-candidate-since-1960/

 

 

TRUMP on Track to Win More Black Votes Than Any GOP Candidate Since 1960

Jim Hoft Oct 25th, 2016 5:19 pm 308 Comments

In the past month the number of black voters for Donald Trump has increased significantly.

At the beginning of October 9% of African Americans supported Trump.

 

 Follow

Ted Carroll @mediainvestors

Black Likely Voters for TRUMP @Rasmussen_Poll 
Oct 3 - 9%
Oct 6 - 12%
Oct 7 - 13%
Oct 10 - 14%
Oct 11 - 19%
Oct 12 - 19%
Oct 13 - 24% !

9:07 AM - 13 Oct 2016

 

 

 

The number doubled and has leveled off at 16% support for Donald Trump.

 

 Follow

Ted Carroll @mediainvestors

Black Likely Voters for TRUMP @Rasmussen_Poll
Oct 17 - 17%
Oct 18 - 19%
Oct 19 - 18%
Oct 20 - 15%
Oct 21 - 16%
Oct 24 - 15%
Oct 25 - 16%

10:48 AM - 25 Oct 2016

 

 

 

This ought to keep Democrats up late at night.

Blacks today make up 22% of the Democratic vote.

If Democrats lost 25% of the black vote they would lose Virginia, Florida, Ohio and North Carolina.

(Washington Post)

If Trump skims 25% of black voters from the Democratic Party he would win the 2016 election in a landslide.

The last Republican to win over 25 percent of the non-white vote was Richard Nixon in 1960.
Nixon won 32% of non-white voters to Kennedy’s 68%.

 

[Bravus]

Rasmussen gets dramatically different (and more-Republican) numbers than all other polling services, and claims Obama is tanking when he has 52% job approval nationally at the end of an 8 year term in which he has been consistently demonised...

Forgive me if I take this claim with a grain of salt. 

Further, a rise that rapid is unsustainable, even if it's real, and there is nothing to explain it... so I don't think it's real.

Only about a fortnight now until we'll know for sure.

[bonnie]

 Just to clarify. The polls are all over the place.Those polls that are more liberal leaning have drastically different numbers most of the time. Whether you think it sustainable or not is immaterial. IBD is reportedly a  accurate poll. Today it is a dead heat and Trump should be in the tank.  Clinton doesnt seem to be able to raise a crowd for a rally.Kaine managed 30-40. For Trump people were waiting in line for 12 hours.Whether you find any one specific poll sustainable or accurate , the fact remains Trump should be way behind. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

[Bravus]

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/cbs-poll-clintons-lead-over-trump-widens-with-three-weeks-to-go/

[bonnie]

I have a lot more faith in IBD than I do CBS. Not as much oversampling it seems.

[Tom Wetmore]

Explaining, and trying to make sense of, the wide variations in the polls - http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-the-polls-disagree-and-thats-ok/ 

You really have to do more than look at the latest poll of only one or a few sources. The best predictors are carefully analyzing all the polls.   Averaging is not the best word, but essentially taking all into consideration, weighing the methodology and assumptions of each to come up with calibrated average.

The efforts in that regard of two reliable rival sites - 

1. FiveThirtyEight.  Here is the their latest forecast updated this morning - http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo 

• Check the results using their 3 different models ( Click on each of the three options at the top of the left margin.) not a huge difference, but interesting
• Here is an explanation of their methodology - http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/a-users-guide-to-fivethirtyeights-2016-general-election-forecast/ 

2.  Real Clear Politics - http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5952.html 

[bonnie]

1 hour ago, Tom Wetmore said:

Explaining, and trying to make sense of, the wide variations in the polls - http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-the-polls-disagree-and-thats-ok/ 

You really have to do more than look at the latest poll of only one or a few sources. The best predictors are carefully analyzing all the polls.   Averaging is not the best word, but essentially taking all into consideration, weighing the methodology and assumptions of each to come up with calibrated average.

The efforts in that regard of two reliable rival sites - 

1. FiveThirtyEight.  Here is the their latest forecast updated this morning - http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo 

• Check the results using their 3 different models ( Click on each of the three options at the top of the left margin.) not a huge difference, but interesting
• Here is an explanation of their methodology - http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/a-users-guide-to-fivethirtyeights-2016-general-election-forecast/ 

2.  Real Clear Politics - http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5952.html 

Perhaps you failed to notice, It will be interesting to see how it all plays out on election day. Not that this particular article is the final word.Polls change almost daily, those that assume a poll today is the final word is rather naive at best and may need your efforts to educate them on polls.  Trumps should be so far in the tank it would be hard to find him. He is not

The rallies and the attendance at each is striking for a candidate liberals say is far behind. When Trump gets thousands and Kaine gets 30 and Hillary doesn't do a whole lot better,it doesn't make sense. Mn is going to be interesting. While I don't expect Trump to take MN, visible support for Trump is evident in the political signs. I have not seen even  one for Clinton on cars or lawns.. It is usually heavily in favor of democrats.

I am pretty sure you could find several more,many saying something different.
IBD: CLINTON +3...

LA TIMES: TRUMP +2...

RASMUSSEN: CLINTON +1...

 

[Tom Wetmore]

Regarding the OP/Topic - Really curious to know the source of the "statistics" of the Twitter screenshots used by Gateway Pundit.  They make no sense at all in comparison to reality or any known reliable actual survey/poll.  Donald Trump's support among African-Americans has been consistently, and remains, in the very low single digits.  3% by the last poll I saw. 

Not really trying to shoot the messenger you have chosen to post here...  BUT... Gateway Pundit is probably among the most unreliable and discredited biased/partisan/extremist far right wing bloggers.  

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/The_Gateway_Pundit 

An example - https://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/10/20/fox-business-gets-fooled-again-gateway-pundits-email-conspiracy-theory/213999 

And this critique by Media Matters - http://mediamatters.org/blog/2010/09/21/jim-hoft-dumbest-man-on-the-internet/170927 

(Yes, I know you likely think Media Matters doesn't matter since it leans left - but even RedState apparently thinks ill off Gateway Pundit - http://www.redstate.com/leon_h_wolf/2016/08/07/breitbart-cites-gateway-pundit-prove-trump-will-win-landslide-facebook-likes/  And a quick check among responsible right leaning sources tends to confirm that to not be an isolated opinion...)

 

But thanks for sharing anyway... 

 

[bonnie]

Not sure what you don't get. With the varying opinions and polls,with disagreement as to numbers it will be interesting to see what election day brings. 

I don't put undying faith in any poll. I was asked twice to participate in a poll,both by democrats. The first was on the number of children going hungry in MN. The questions were so assinie that there was no way the results could be accurate. One question was had I ever shared a meal from my plate with my child ,Of course I have for a variety of reasons. Most mothers with young children do so. It does not indicate a shortage of food. Another was did I ever skip a meal while feeding my children. Then there was the real proof. Has your child ever gone to bed without supper? Yup, a couple of them did and it was their choosing.  Another was did I ever skip a meal while feeding my children. Of course I have,but not because there wasn't enough to go around. Most questions were that ridiculous to prove children are going hungry.

Based on this poll it was proof that one in five children go to bed hungry.

 

Media matters doesn't lean left, anymore and they would be prone on the ground. Again.what will happen on election remains to be seen. It is a convoluted election and I don't believe the polls are anymore than a reflection of a small group of people. So please stop with the lectures on polls. 

[Tom Wetmore]

The point about a single poll is really beside the point and utterly eclipsed by the absurdity of both the substance and source of that which you posted. 

 

Quite to the point made before, if you post stuff from such sources, one must assume you frequent those sites, pay attention to them and seemly find them of some importance or value, or credible enough to share them here.  Either that or you are intentionally just trolling us...

It makes it very difficult to take what you post seriously.

[bonnie]

I believe salon,Huffington Post ,Media matters are absurd.  You must   pay attention to them and seemly find them of some importance or value, or credible enough to share them here.  A lot of others sites are as well. I frequent a lot of sites.

[Tom Wetmore]

Go back and read ALL of what I posted...  Or better yet just do a little basic research on your own to check out the credibility of your own sources before you post them. Like maybe multiple and diverse sources covering the same story.  And at least try to come up with something of substance to establish the lack of credibility of those sites you seem to so fervently distrust.