djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 9, 2015 15:04:58 GMT -5
Trump +14; latest poll has him +10%, polling steadily at 27%. for now, i am viewing the CNN poll as an outlier. his overall numbers are below 30% again. Cruz +1; latest poll has him at 17%, his best result in a year, and his second best ever, and his best level of the campaign. Rubio +1; latest poll has him at 16%, continuing his long ascent, and his best level of the campaign. Carson +10; he is cratering. latest poll has him at 10%, and his worst result since August. note: he has lost half his support in (5) weeks.
the erosion continues in Carson's numbers. he now is in FOURTH, and trailing BOTH Cruz and Rubio, but still within polling error.
if the trend continues (and i doubt it will for reasons i have noted earlier), Cruz and Rubio will be nipping at Trump's heels in four weeks.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 10, 2015 18:46:17 GMT -5
ok, it looks like Donald Trump really is going to be the nominee. his numbers are up significantly in the latest NYT poll:
Trump +15 Cruz +2 Carson +0 Rubio +10
Rubio slipped back to 4th. i think that Paul has his finger on the pulse of the GOP, this is pretty much what he predicted. Carson did not gain, Rubio lost in this poll. he is down to 9%. Cruz didn't gain either. he held even at 16%. so it is all Trump right now. we will have to see if the oversized crushing that is going on about his "bold immigration policy" fades under scrutiny, or whether he continues to dominate.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 11, 2015 12:45:23 GMT -5
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 13, 2015 20:38:13 GMT -5
ok, two days to the end of "silly season", and we have some interesting polling numbers to report. first of all, NATIONALS: Trump +13%.....his latest poll is a nice "dovetail" to the triumphant CBS poll last week, and shows him leading Cruz by only 5%, and at his worst level against the field since December 3rd. again, i would precaution everyone, this is ONLY ONE POLL, so we need confirmation- but this is setting up something i have been expecting for a while, and again, it is happening way more quickly than i thought it would. Cruz +3%- the NBC poll was, simply put, outstanding for him. it is his best number of the 2016 campaign, and he is now almost outside of polling error ahead of Rubio and Carson. i will reiterate, however, he still needs to eat into Trump's lead. it is not enough to be taking from "undecided". he won't win that way. Rubio +1%- the NBC poll was also good for Rubio, and a good improvement on last wee's CBS poll, which is starting to look like an outlier. Carson +9%- the NBC poll was bad for Carson, and good for Bush, who may displace him in 4th place- he is only 4% down in the latest survey. this is kind of where i expected all of this to go. the silly candidates and the very silly candidates are starting to lose ground to the serious candidates. further evidence of this is HERE; www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ia/iowa_republican_presidential_caucus-3194.htmlCruz has lead in the last THREE surveys in Iowa, including a 10% lead in the latest survey. what is most alarming for Trump is that this latest survey is pretty much a mirror image of one that was done SIX DAYS AGO by CNN, where Trump lead Cruz by 13%. that is a 23% swing, if you are to believe BOTH surveys. my own personal opinion is that the CNN survey was an outlier, in that they polled right in the middle of the "ban all Muslims" pledge, before voters had the chance to reflect on how absolutely horrible a policy idea that is- and before even Trump himself had to retrace his steps slightly (he no longer says it should apply to US citizens). in short, this race just got a whole lot more interesting, and almost 3 weeks before i thought it would. edit- not to guild the lilly here, but i just thought i would mention that in the last three months, Cruz is +19% in Iowa. i would describe that as "soaring". and his timing is very good. i would say, not knowing anything more about his campaign, that someone is strategizing very well in his crew.
|
|
marvholly
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:45:21 GMT -5
Posts: 6,540
|
Post by marvholly on Dec 14, 2015 6:18:11 GMT -5
Sorry but Cruz's views scare me as much as Trump. I 'might' be able to tolerate Rubio - need MUCH more research but I have doubts & issues w/less than 1 term senators. Look at where the current one has got us. Although I am not sure anyone could have done better than Obama has.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,931
|
Post by happyhoix on Dec 14, 2015 9:15:10 GMT -5
Cruz has failed to outright attack Trump, even when Trump makes jabs at him. Instead he deflects Trump with humor.
Which is a good strategy for him, because when Trump declines in flames, the voters who were going to vote for Trump will most likely become Cruz voters, and Cruz doesn't want to alienate them by harsh anti-Trump language.
So I would agree Cruz has good advisors, plus Cruz is smart - even though I don't like him and his platform, I know he's smart. As opposed to Trump, who is only loud.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 14, 2015 11:56:03 GMT -5
Cruz is not only smart, but he has run for statewide office, and he CAN work with others. advantages that Trump doesn't have.
edit: silly season ends tomorrow. the poll results from this period will be in about a week from now, and (then) we can get a better read on where we are going.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 14, 2015 12:57:09 GMT -5
tne new Monmouth survey has Trump up by 27%. this is the last survey in "silly season". we will have to see where it goes from here, but this is certainly in direct conflict with the NBC survey out this week....
Trump +15: now running at a new record high level of 31+%. the debate is tomorrow (you know, the one he said he would not attend if CNN didn't donate $5M) Cruz +3: not the best result for him in Monmouth, but it shows his lead over Rubio widening, still. now almost out of polling error. Rubio +1: not a good result for him in Monmouth- he is down to 10% Carson +9: the Carson Crash continues- he is now in single digits for the first time since August. the only good news is that Bush fell, as well.
this is really starting to look like a three candidate race, with Trump widely in the lead.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 14, 2015 13:40:55 GMT -5
i should point out that three recent surveys show Trump GAINING support, wheras the other three show him LOSING support.
there are only two ways that can happen in polling. the first is (as someone earlier suggested) DIFFERENT QUESTIONS. for example, the question "who would you vote for if the primary was held today" is different than "which nominee do you support for President" which is different than "who do you think is likely to win the nomination".
the second is demographic assumptions. if you assume that the enthusiastic tea party Republicans will turn out in far greater numbers than the old line moderates, then that will impact your survey.
i honestly don't know which of these is going on- but it is probably the case that the average of the two assumptions is more or less correct: that part of the party is growing more enthusiastic by the day, and that part is growing more skeptical by the day about Trump.
there is a much clearer trend in the Iowa and NH polls, so i might start ignoring the national poll until i can see some "convergence" there. but right now, it truly is sending me two entirely different messages.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,512
|
Post by billisonboard on Dec 14, 2015 13:56:36 GMT -5
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 14, 2015 14:51:15 GMT -5
the polling error is within a probabilistic range (usually 95%). in other words, there is 5% chance that the poll will fall outside of error, which is long odds. so, let's just say that i think it is highly improbable that SIX polls could show this much divergence. three polls show Trump at 27%, the other three show him at an average of 37%. assuming that every poll had a MOE of 5%, this falls outside of the 1/20 probability range on average. i am not good enough at statistics to tell you what the odds of all six of these surveys actually showing the same thing, but i think it is worse than the odds of rolling a total of more than 10 with two dice six times in a row.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,512
|
Post by billisonboard on Dec 14, 2015 15:27:18 GMT -5
the polling error is within a probabilistic range (usually 95%). in other words, there is 5% chance that the poll will fall outside of error, which is long odds. so, let's just say that i think it is highly improbable that SIX polls could show this much divergence. three polls show Trump at 27%, the other three show him at an average of 37%. assuming that every poll had a MOE of 5%, this falls outside of the 1/20 probability range on average. i am not good enough at statistics to tell you what the odds of all six of these surveys actually showing the same thing, but i think it is worse than the odds of rolling a total of more than 10 with two dice six times in a row. The term I have seen used for what I think you are talking about is Confidence Level. What it means is that there is only (usually) a 5% chance that the number is totally whacked-(outside of the margin of error). When you say that a poll shows Trump at 27% is that of the group of people polled, 27% voice support for him. The plus or miss 5% is that if all those within the universe being measured were to be asked, that between 32% and 22% would voice support for him. (I do read that you qualified the second number to make it an average. Hopefully that isn't to create wiggle room.) Polls showing 37% support with margin of error of 5% show whole universe support of between 42% and 32%. Although it would be weird to have such extremes and I would be looking at other factors if these were the actual results of actual polls, the results do have 32% in common and would reflect that Trump likely has that level of support in the whole universe from which the sample was drawn. The bottom line for me is when news agencies report that a shift of 1, 2, or even 3 percentage points between two polls which each had a margin of error of 4.9% have some real level of significance, I just shake my head.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 14, 2015 17:08:00 GMT -5
the polling error is within a probabilistic range (usually 95%). in other words, there is 5% chance that the poll will fall outside of error, which is long odds. so, let's just say that i think it is highly improbable that SIX polls could show this much divergence. three polls show Trump at 27%, the other three show him at an average of 37%. assuming that every poll had a MOE of 5%, this falls outside of the 1/20 probability range on average. i am not good enough at statistics to tell you what the odds of all six of these surveys actually showing the same thing, but i think it is worse than the odds of rolling a total of more than 10 with two dice six times in a row. The term I have seen used for what I think you are talking about is Confidence Level. What it means is that there is only (usually) a 5% chance that the number is totally whacked-(outside of the margin of error). When you say that a poll shows Trump at 27% is that of the group of people polled, 27% voice support for him. The plus or miss 5% is that if all those within the universe being measured were to be asked, that between 32% and 22% would voice support for him. (I do read that you qualified the second number to make it an average. Hopefully that isn't to create wiggle room.) Polls showing 37% support with margin of error of 5% show whole universe support of between 42% and 32%. Although it would be weird to have such extremes and I would be looking at other factors if these were the actual results of actual polls, the results do have 32% in common and would reflect that Trump likely has that level of support in the whole universe from which the sample was drawn. The bottom line for me is when news agencies report that a shift of 1, 2, or even 3 percentage points between two polls which each had a margin of error of 4.9% have some real level of significance, I just shake my head. you can go to the link at the beginning of this thread. THREE polls have him at 27%. i am not sure what the MOE is on those polls, but i know that 5% error is on the outside of expectations. you have to have a very low sample size to get error that large. anything outside that error would be less than 5% likely. there are three other polls that show him at 35,36, and 41% respectively. the latter poll is outside of the range of error for all five surveys, so it is absolutely an outlier, in every sense. it might be statistically possible, but it is extremely unlikely- certainly well below 5% certainty that it is accurate, UNLESS.... either the questions or demographic assumptions are different between the two sets of polls. there is no other reasonable explanation for a 14% difference. edit: given all i have stated above, the aggregated poll number (31.4%) is the most likely intersection between all of the results so far- but it is a very low likelihood. it is more LIKELY that several polls are "wrong" (ie, asking different questions or using different sampling assumptions)- the question then becomes "which several?"
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 15, 2015 0:28:57 GMT -5
here is another interesting article on the GOP side of the election: fivethirtyeight.com/features/dear-media-stop-freaking-out-about-donald-trumps-polls/what Nate Silver points out, i think correctly, is that Trump's numbers (even in the Monmouth Poll, where he DOMINATED the field) are not really that great. the same can be said for Clinton's numbers, btw- they are about the same, viewed from a similar lens- and that is that of a partisan. first of all, he points out that 32% of 25% of the electorate is 8%. nobody wins with 8%. secondly, the early support is really soft. roughly one in six voters at this time of the year have actually made up their minds. this means that Trump's actual support is maybe 5%, not 32%. the rest might end up being Cruz's support. so, this is still quite early. even the Iowa polling is not very predictive of Iowa, let alone the nation. the collective freakout is PROBABLY nothing. it will PROBABLY come to pass. after all, in 2011, Newt Gingrich lead the field on this day. he not only lead- he DOMINATED. he was up by double digits. he won only his home state of Georgia, that year.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 15, 2015 0:39:45 GMT -5
bills, i looked into this, and the polls are INDEED asking different questions. here is the Monmouth question:
I know the 2016 election is far away, but who would you support for the Republican nomination for president if the candidates were
here is the NBC question:
And, if a Republican primary for president were being held today, which one of the following candidates would you favor
these questions are actually quite different. the first question is quite hypothetical. it is stated as an IF- as in "knowing the some of these candidates won't even be running".
the second question was asking if the primary was held TODAY who would you vote for. that is a more crucial decision.
i would respond differently to those two questions. would you?
the latter poll got Trump only 27%, the former, a staggering 41%.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,512
|
Post by billisonboard on Dec 15, 2015 9:45:44 GMT -5
bills, i looked into this, ... Always a good idea to look beyond the numbers. The RealClearPolitics site makes it easy when all you have to do is follow the links they provide. Looking not just at the latest is good also. The new ABC poll has Trump at 38%. But if you look down that second chart you will see that they have the highest number for Trump in previous months. Makes that Monmouth poll look more curious.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,512
|
Post by billisonboard on Dec 15, 2015 9:55:24 GMT -5
bills, ... i would respond differently to those two questions. would you? ... And to answer your question, "No. To both I would hold to not decided." My state primary is so late on the calendar that I don't worry about picking a horse to ride. It is always decided before I can saddled up.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 15, 2015 11:29:27 GMT -5
bills, i looked into this, ... Always a good idea to look beyond the numbers. The RealClearPolitics site makes it easy when all you have to do is follow the links they provide. Looking not just at the latest is good also. The new ABC poll has Trump at 38%. But if you look down that second chart you will see that they have the highest number for Trump in previous months. Makes that Monmouth poll look more curious. normally, i don't care that much, this early in the year. but these numbers are really all over the map. i mean...14%? come ON! that is a higher % than most CANDIDATES surveyed get!
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 15, 2015 12:10:01 GMT -5
another ABC poll has him north of 35%:
Trump +17; at a new high on the eve of the third debate. clear front runner, and miles ahead of Cruz Cruz +3; now soildly in second as BOTH Rubio and Carson are falling Rubio +1; another bad poll result for him, and he is now back to where he was during Thanksgiving Carson +8; now at a 3 month low, and still plummeting. he is now sitting at about where Fiorina peaked, and strictly second tier. his support has fallen in half from his peak.
this is the last day of silly season. the early primary polling should start being watched carefully from this point forward, although it should be noted that fully HALF of the NH voters make up their mind in the LAST WEEK of the primary.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Dec 15, 2015 15:53:16 GMT -5
another ABC poll has him north of 35%: Trump +17; at a new high on the eve of the third debate. clear front runner, and miles ahead of Cruz Cruz +3; now soildly in second as BOTH Rubio and Carson are falling Rubio +1; another bad poll result for him, and he is now back to where he was during Thanksgiving Carson +8; now at a 3 month low, and still plummeting. he is now sitting at about where Fiorina peaked, and strictly second tier. his support has fallen in half from his peak. this is the last day of silly season. the early primary polling should start being watched carefully from this point forward, although it should be noted that fully HALF of the NH voters make up their mind in the LAST WEEK of the primary. My opinion is this: 1. I would really like Cruz to win. I think he has the true conservative bonafides, and the balls to take on the establishment. 2. I would look for Trump to back up the truck and forget about this foolish attack on Cruz from the left. It's a little hard to remain the "anti-establishment" guy if you think Cruz was acting like sort of a maniac for standing up to the establishment. 3. I want to believe Cruz is "surging" but I think in reality, it's like the Carson surge-- mostly media generated. because... 4. I think the establishment with the help of the media would like Trump and Cruz to bloody each other ahead of the debate so the new establishment golden boy- Marco Rubio- can "triangulate" and stand above the two conservative crazies as the candidate everyone should settle on. 5. Finally, the battle is not for first. Trump has first locked up. The race to watch is the race for 2nd. We have about another two or three weeks in my opinion for a candidate to solidify second and get on with the two-man race.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Dec 15, 2015 15:59:07 GMT -5
BTW- those are all just thoughts off the top of my head.
I think San Bernardino and Trump's muslim comments that followed and the shitstorm that followed effectively ended the presidential race.
Trump's comments were not racist, illegal, unConstitutional, rash, or extreme.
The result was that Trump became the LONE occupant of a position that 75% of the electorate, including 87% of Hispanics, and 67% of Democrats believe to be wise, prudent, and long overdue.
You never know what's going to happen, but here's what's not going to happen: Trump is never getting out. He takes it to the convention, or he goes independent, and all indications are he could win a three way race.
|
|
Shooby
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2013 0:32:36 GMT -5
Posts: 14,782
Mini-Profile Name Color: 1cf04f
|
Post by Shooby on Dec 15, 2015 21:03:00 GMT -5
Who is watching the debate?
|
|
b2r
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:35:25 GMT -5
Posts: 7,257
|
Post by b2r on Dec 15, 2015 21:03:19 GMT -5
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 15, 2015 21:03:50 GMT -5
BTW- those are all just thoughts off the top of my head. I think San Bernardino and Trump's muslim comments that followed and the shitstorm that followed effectively ended the presidential race. Trump's comments were not racist, illegal, unConstitutional, rash, or extreme. The result was that Trump became the LONE occupant of a position that 75% of the electorate, including 87% of Hispanics, and 67% of Democrats believe to be wise, prudent, and long overdue. You never know what's going to happen, but here's what's not going to happen: Trump is never getting out. He takes it to the convention, or he goes independent, and all indications are he could win a three way race. Paul- could you please reply to post 65? TYIA.
|
|
fishy999
Familiar Member
Joined: Aug 9, 2015 20:40:43 GMT -5
Posts: 629
|
Post by fishy999 on Dec 15, 2015 21:34:51 GMT -5
Who is watching the debate? I am- only conclusion so far is that Christie stinks- probably his last appearance in the big show. Like how Trump referred to 'our internet' more than once. So far though quite cordial. Waiting on some fireworks.
|
|
Shooby
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2013 0:32:36 GMT -5
Posts: 14,782
Mini-Profile Name Color: 1cf04f
|
Post by Shooby on Dec 15, 2015 21:44:50 GMT -5
Pretty good so far. CNN doing a good job at this point.
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 38,647
|
Post by chiver78 on Dec 15, 2015 21:58:59 GMT -5
Like how Trump referred to 'our internet' more than once. So far though quite cordial. Waiting on some fireworks. YES!! on both counts. oy. I have to say, I'm a little scared. so far tonight, Carly and Marco sound the most sane, followed not too far off by Rand Paul. somebody hold me, I'm skeered. sent from my electronic distraction
|
|
Waffle
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 12, 2011 11:31:54 GMT -5
Posts: 4,391
|
Post by Waffle on Dec 15, 2015 22:09:41 GMT -5
Who is watching the debate? I am.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Dec 15, 2015 23:52:23 GMT -5
ok, it looks like Donald Trump really is going to be the nominee. his numbers are up significantly in the latest NYT poll: Trump +15 Cruz +2 Carson +0 Rubio +10 Rubio slipped back to 4th. i think that Paul has his finger on the pulse of the GOP, this is pretty much what he predicted. Carson did not gain, Rubio lost in this poll. he is down to 9%. Cruz didn't gain either. he held even at 16%. so it is all Trump right now. we will have to see if the oversized crushing that is going on about his "bold immigration policy" fades under scrutiny, or whether he continues to dominate. There's at least one poll that shows Trump with significant support for his deportation proposal: news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/083115-768970-more-than-half-support-mandatory-deportation-of-illegal-immigrants-poll-finds.htm I said it before, and I maintain it-- Trump won the primary, and probably the election with his suggestion that we temporarily suspend muslims entering the US until we can get a handle on things. Again- on that, three quarters of the electorate agree it's wise, prudent, and long overdue. The ENTIRE establishment, every opponent, the Democrats, and the media were standing on one side with 25% of the voters; and Trump was standing alone with 75%. I think in that moment, it send a clear message: Trump is the only candidate that's serious about dealing with radical islamic extremism. The rest of the candidates, no matter what they say, will hold their fire at a time when a vast majority of Americans are ready and willing to unleash hell and do as I've been saying for years: make radical islamic terrorism, islam's problem- not ours.
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 38,647
|
Post by chiver78 on Dec 16, 2015 0:08:21 GMT -5
ok, it looks like Donald Trump really is going to be the nominee. his numbers are up significantly in the latest NYT poll: Trump +15 Cruz +2 Carson +0 Rubio +10 Rubio slipped back to 4th. i think that Paul has his finger on the pulse of the GOP, this is pretty much what he predicted. Carson did not gain, Rubio lost in this poll. he is down to 9%. Cruz didn't gain either. he held even at 16%. so it is all Trump right now. we will have to see if the oversized crushing that is going on about his "bold immigration policy" fades under scrutiny, or whether he continues to dominate. There's at least one poll that shows Trump with significant support for his deportation proposal: news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/083115-768970-more-than-half-support-mandatory-deportation-of-illegal-immigrants-poll-finds.htm I said it before, and I maintain it-- Trump won the primary, and probably the election with his suggestion that we temporarily suspend muslims entering the US until we can get a handle on things. Again- on that, three quarters of the electorate agree it's wise, prudent, and long overdue. The ENTIRE establishment, every opponent, the Democrats, and the media were standing on one side with 25% of the voters; and Trump was standing alone with 75%. I think in that moment, it send a clear message: Trump is the only candidate that's serious about dealing with radical islamic extremism. The rest of the candidates, no matter what they say, will hold their fire at a time when a vast majority of Americans are ready and willing to unleash hell and do as I've been saying for years: make radical islamic terrorism, islam's problem- not ours. I haven't asked this yet. but how would something like this actually be enforced? would it be by voluntary admission of religious affiliation or by some sort of profiling that has yet to be defined? would you enlighten the rest of ys, since you seem to be all for it. sent from my electronic distraction
|
|