General Election 2016: Clinton -vs- Trump

[Deleted]

We're good.

So... do you accept my campaign promise?

[djAdvocate]

Sept 24, 2016 20:26:34 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

We're good.

So... do you accept my campaign promise?

do what you feel is best for YOU, Richard.  but do it for YOU.

and with that, i am going to go see one of my favourite bands in SF.  gnight.

[Deleted]

Sept 24, 2016 20:33:15 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Sept 24, 2016 20:26:34 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

We're good.

So... do you accept my campaign promise?

do what you feel is best for YOU, Richard.  but do it for YOU.

and with that, i am going to go see one of my favourite bands in SF.  gnight.

Letting things go sometimes actually would be "good for me"... that's the campaign promise I was referring to: If Johnson wins, I promise to work on letting things go.

[Wisconsin Beth]

Sept 24, 2016 20:33:15 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Sept 24, 2016 20:26:34 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

We're good.

So... do you accept my campaign promise?

do what you feel is best for YOU, Richard.  but do it for YOU.

and with that, i am going to go see one of my favourite bands in SF.  gnight.

I hope you have an excellent time.

[djAdvocate]

Sept 24, 2016 20:41:37 GMT -5 Wisconsin Beth said:

Sept 24, 2016 20:33:15 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

do what you feel is best for YOU, Richard.  but do it for YOU.

and with that, i am going to go see one of my favourite bands in SF.  gnight.

I hope you have an excellent time.

thanks, i did.  they started late, went for 75 minutes straight without a break, then marched off stage without an encore.

that might not sound fun to you, but it was a very intense show.

Clinton has slipped in 2 of the tracking polls, and so i am pulling her odds back to 4:3 again.

nothing else has changed significantly enough to report on it.

[djAdvocate]

the polling is slipping fast for Clinton again, and i am not quite sure why.  i had just logged off when i saw it, so i don't have time to comment now, but several states have changed over the last week, and i need to update.

for now, i am classifying this race as a DEAD HEAT.

this is the worst position Clinton has been in during the campaign.  she is not trailing, but her lead is insignificant at this point.

[djAdvocate]

i am moving Clinton back to 5:4 tonight, but see the discussion below about the states

leaning Clinton: CO, NH, MI, PA
leaning Trump: NC, IA, OH
tossup: FL, NV

although nothing has changed, the granular detail is that all of these states are moving toward Trump.

earlier today, i was going to move CO to tossup, but it is so close to the border, that i am leaving it lean for now.
earlier today, i was going to move FL to leans Trump, but again, it is slightly above the border of tossup, so i am leaving it there, for now.

i would SUSPECT that Clinton will get a 1-4% boost from the debate tonight, but i am not sure whether it is my own distaste for Trump that is influencing my opinion or not, so i will wait for the judgment of the polls.

edit: i put Michigan and PA in the "Leans Clinton" column tonight, due to the same poll softening mentioned above.  however, if there is no further movement before this Saturday, i am probably going to take them off again.

[djAdvocate]

update today: odds are the same, but states are in flux:

leaning Clinton: CO, NH, PA
leaning Trump: NC, OH
tossup: FL, NV

i took off MI and IA.  MI is now (barely) in the solidly Clinton column, and Trump is (barely) ruling IA.

[tallguy]

The Arizona Republic, the largest newspaper in the state, endorsed Hillary Clinton on Tuesday, the first time the 126-year-old publication has supported a Democrat for president.

"Since The Arizona Republic began publication in 1890, we have never endorsed a Democrat over a Republican for president. Never. This reflects a deep philosophical appreciation for conservative ideals and Republican principles," the paper's editorial board wrote.

"This year is different. The 2016 Republican candidate is not conservative and he is not qualified. That's why, for the first time in our history, The Arizona Republic will support a Democrat for president," it continued.

Donald Trump, the editorial board wrote, does not understand the challenges the country faces, nor does he have the temperament to deal with them.      link

[Opti]

Powerful Clinton ad on the military experience.

[djAdvocate]

Sept 28, 2016 2:51:26 GMT -5 tallguy said:

The Arizona Republic, the largest newspaper in the state, endorsed Hillary Clinton on Tuesday, the first time the 126-year-old publication has supported a Democrat for president.

"Since The Arizona Republic began publication in 1890, we have never endorsed a Democrat over a Republican for president. Never. This reflects a deep philosophical appreciation for conservative ideals and Republican principles," the paper's editorial board wrote.

"This year is different. The 2016 Republican candidate is not conservative and he is not qualified. That's why, for the first time in our history, The Arizona Republic will support a Democrat for president," it continued.

Donald Trump, the editorial board wrote, does not understand the challenges the country faces, nor does he have the temperament to deal with them.      link

we could dedicate an entire thread to stuff like this.  i have seen at least half a dozen scathing takedowns of Trump in the print media.  i have no idea of whether it will help Clinton or not, but it probably doesn't help Trump.

[djAdvocate]

you guys are going to probably start ignoring this thread, because the polls are going to come hot and heavy for the next six weeks.  but here it goes.  i will probably end up updating daily.

first of all, her odds are the same.  there are two new polls out today.  the LA Times shows Trump +1% from previous, and the Reuters poll shows Clinton +6 from her last survey with them, so the net effect is that Clinton is +3 on average against Trump, which is significantly better than the 1.5% she was up a week ago.  NOTE: NEITHER of these polls includes the debate.  we will see the first of those TOMORROW, probably.

this update is the same as yesterday.  Clinton is still 5:4, and the state breakdown is still:

leaning Clinton: CO, NH, PA
leaning Trump: NC, OH
tossup: FL, NV

i want to add two notes of interest to the national polls as covered by 538.  first of all, the current polling average for Trump (41%) is his BEST for the campaign.  it has come largely on the back of Gary Johnson, who has fallen 1.5% in the last (2) weeks and now stands at just 7%.  Clinton has ALSO risen in the polls.  she now stands at 43%, which is her best number since August.  how is that possible?  well, the undecided vote has fallen to 9%.  i suspect that it is going to continue falling as the election approaches.

it will be interesting to see how the debate impacted voters.  if the survey groups are meaningful, Clinton should get a 1-4% bounce.  if it is on the high end of that range, i think Trump is finished.  being 7 points down with 5 weeks to go, and the first debate out of the way, i don't think there is any way for him to recover. 

but as of today, he is not only very much in it- this race is close to a TossUp.

[djAdvocate]

i am raising Clinton to 4:3 favorite today, based on the national poll mentioned above and some of the Senate polling (which seems to be falling right in sync with the presidential race, right now).

[Deleted]

Sept 28, 2016 11:08:49 GMT -5 Opti said:

Powerful Clinton ad on the military experience.

Our whole country deserves better... unfortunately for her, Hillary isn't "better".

[djAdvocate]

a new PPP poll is out tonight, and it suggests that Clinton will get a 1-4% bounce, in line with my predictions.  this would put her at +3.5 to +6.5 at the end of this "bounce".  as i mentioned before, if she ends up at the HIGH end of that spectrum a week from now, Trump is going to have a very difficult time coming back from that, barring anything extremely good for Trump or bad for Clinton happening in the next six weeks (her bout with Pneumonia cost her 1-4%, so this first debate basically undid that damage).

i am looking at changing a couple of the state races, as well.  i am thinking of moving IA from safely Trump to likely Trump, and Colorado from likely Clinton to tossup.  but i suspect that we will have polling in the next day or two on both those races which will make the decision easier. 

i want to add something here: Clinton is still languishing at the bottom of her polling in many many states.  but, as i mentioned earlier, the state polls lag the national ones, as it is easier to collect data that matches the national demographics.  it will be about a week before we can talk about what is going on NOW (which will then be a week in the past, if you are following me) with any certainty.

one final word: i mentioned that Trump hit a polling high, taking numbers away from Johnson in the 4 way race.  i expect CLINTON to hit a new high in the next day or two.  this is because voters who were previously undecided are starting to make up their minds.  the race is not getting closer, but it is getting more "decided" as time goes on.  i mean that in the most serious sense of the term, not the casual sense.  it will become harder and harder to move the numbers going forward.  i am going to change my guidelines on Saturday to reflect this, which will probably result in fewer states being called Tossup and more being called Likely for both candidates.

[tallguy]

Sept 28, 2016 11:09:35 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Sept 28, 2016 2:51:26 GMT -5 tallguy said:

we could dedicate an entire thread to stuff like this.  i have seen at least half a dozen scathing takedowns of Trump in the print media.  i have no idea of whether it will help Clinton or not, but it probably doesn't help Trump.

And the good people of Arizona are responding by cancelling subscriptions, which is fine and their right to do...and at least one death threat.  Which...isn't.

The Arizona Republic is not the only one:

The Republic is not the first paper to break with a long tradition of endorsing Republican candidates because of Donald Trump. The Cincinnati Enquirer, which has "supported Republicans for president for almost a century," endorsed Clinton and called Trump a "clear and present danger to our country." The Cincinnati Enquirer and Arizona Republic are both owned by Gannett, which also owns USA TODAY.

And The Dallas Morning News, which hadn't endorsed a Democrat since before World War II, said Trump "plays on fear — exploiting base instincts of xenophobia, racism and misogyny — to bring out the worst in all of us, rather than the best."

The Dallas Morning News has also suffered a loss of subscribers, news editor Mike Wilson told Poynter. "Certainly we've paid a price for our presidential recommendation, but then, we write our editorials based on principle and sometimes principle comes at a cost," he said.

Boas told the Times that the potential loss of customers never influenced the decision to back Clinton. "We know we're doing the right thing," he said. "We feel very good about this decision."

 

[djAdvocate]

this fucking nation is losing it's collective mind.

[djAdvocate]

the odds are significantly higher for Clinton this morning.
i have her back at 5:3, and rising.

here is how the states look:

leaning Clinton: CO, NH
leaning Trump: OH, IA
tossup: FL, NV, NC

so, PA is now strongly Clinton, NC is now tossup, and IA is now back in play.  and again, Trump would have to win EVERYTHING in the table here to win the election.

this doesn't mean things are safe for Clinton- not by a long shot.  Colorado is the tipping point state, and it has been trending for Trump for SIX WEEKS now.  nothing that has happened has stopped the bleeding for her there, yet- but it might.

in the 4-way matchup this morning, Clinton is at 43.9%, 0.1% below her all time high on August 13th. 

i think what will surprise a lot of people is that Clinton's numbers have actually been rising for nearly two weeks now.  she hit her low 6 days after she fell sick.  if you will recall, she was also being cagey about her health at the time, which created additional uncertainty.  she has been doing quite well since then, but not for any specific reason.

there is still not enough polling to indicate the magnitude of the post-debate bounce.  so we will see.

[djAdvocate]

there are only three polls out in the last two days, but TWO of them show exactly the same thing:

Clinton is up 6% from a week ago.

i have no reason to believe that is accurate.  there is simply not enough data.  but if it IS accurate, i think this race is pretty much over for Trump (barring anything insane happening).

there is another kinda disturbing thing going on with the third party candidates.  i suspected that this would be a good year for them, but there are a lot of indications that it won't be.  Jill Stein's support has fallen in half from her peak of 5%, and Gary Johnson is down 2% from a couple of weeks ago, at 7.2%.  it looks to me now that the combination of those two will be less than 10%.  i would have expected it closer to 15%, based on early projections.

as much talk as there is about how awful these candidates are (DT & HC), it appears that people are going to vote for them.

[Deleted]

Sept 29, 2016 11:30:30 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

this fucking nation is losing it's collective mind.

You're just NOW realizing this?

[Deleted]

Sept 29, 2016 19:51:39 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Sept 29, 2016 12:30:26 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

there are only three polls out in the last two days, but TWO of them show exactly the same thing:

Clinton is up 6% from a week ago.

i have no reason to believe that is accurate.  there is simply not enough data.  but if it IS accurate, i think this race is pretty much over for Trump (barring anything insane happening).

there is another kinda disturbing thing going on with the third party candidates.  i suspected that this would be a good year for them, but there are a lot of indications that it won't be.  Jill Stein's support has fallen in half from her peak of 5%, and Gary Johnson is down 2% from a couple of weeks ago, at 7.2%.  it looks to me now that the combination of those two will be less than 10%.  i would have expected it closer to 15%, based on early projections.

as much talk as there is about how awful these candidates are (DT & HC), it appears that people are going to vote for them.

And this is surprising the heck out of me. Especially Trump.  But that is because I don't find HRC to be particularly awful, and I actually think she has some strong positives too (along with some negatives)

Trump last year, by most Republicans I know (and I know quite a few) was considered a buffoon, a joke at best, and certainly not a serious candidate.  By the GOP Caucus he was a runner up to Cruz.  Now more and more Republicans that I know, many of them seemingly reasonable people- are finding ways to excuse Trump enough to support him.  It has been a bit of an eye opener for me, but I guess I also don't know why I thought it may be different.  People tend to rally around their "team" no matter how dire the circumstance.

Much as I would like to think it would be different with the Democrats should they nominate such a clown, I do not think it would be so. I think many would still rally 'round the fool.

It is not all dark.  I do know some who still will not vote for Trump (one of whom I am happy to say is my biz partner)  Some folks have enough independent thought to free themselves from party reins, but not as many as one might hope.

Proof of that is readily available. They nominated Hillary and you can see she's as equally supported by her party as Trump is by his.

[Deleted]

Seriously starting to piss me off how Trump and Hillary are considered 'the same'. It's patently ridiculous. And while I'm not a great fan of Hillary in many ways, this insistance that she's the same as Trump is actually making me support her more vehimently than I ever might have otherwise. 

It is a good thing I'm so preoccupied with house stuff, I'd be losing so many friends with this one. 

[Deleted]

Sept 30, 2016 6:06:28 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Sept 30, 2016 6:02:03 GMT -5 oped said:

Seriously starting to piss me off how Trump and Hillary are considered 'the same'. It's patently ridiculous. And while I'm not a great fan of Hillary in many ways, this insist an e that she's the same as Trump is actually making me support her more vehimently than I ever might have otherwise. 

It is a good thing I'm so preoccupied with house stuff, I'd be losing so many friends with this one. 

I am seriously considering dropping Facebook.  I only joined to keep in closer contact with some of my more "socially networked" family, and I don't want to talk politics there.  But it is becoming overwhelming, and also a huge time sink.

I currently have just about everyone on 'hide this person's posts' setting, for my sanity. 

[happyhoix]

I'm curious to see the next polls from Florida, to see if Trump's Cuban dalliance impacts his support in that state.

 

[Wisconsin Beth]

Sept 30, 2016 7:07:55 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

I'm curious to see the next polls from Florida, to see if Trump's Cuban dalliance impacts his support in that state.

 

if I'm understanding DJ's explanation of state polling, we probably womt see that reflected in the state polls for another 7-10 days.

[tallguy]

Sept 30, 2016 6:02:03 GMT -5 oped said:

Seriously starting to piss me off how Trump and Hillary are considered 'the same'. It's patently ridiculous. And while I'm not a great fan of Hillary in many ways, this insistance that she's the same as Trump is actually making me support her more vehimently than I ever might have otherwise. 

It is a good thing I'm so preoccupied with house stuff, I'd be losing so many friends with this one. 

True.  To consider the two of them in any way the same reflects a SERIOUS lack of perspective.  It is short-sighted to the point of blindness.  Or delusional to the point of pathological.   
That is why there is a long list of major Republican figures who are endorsing, working, or voting for Clinton, and a growing list of conservative newspapers who are endorsing her after never endorsing a Democrat in many years if ever.  

[djAdvocate]

Sept 30, 2016 6:08:02 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Sept 29, 2016 12:30:26 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

there are only three polls out in the last two days, but TWO of them show exactly the same thing:

Clinton is up 6% from a week ago.

i have no reason to believe that is accurate.  there is simply not enough data.  but if it IS accurate, i think this race is pretty much over for Trump (barring anything insane happening).

there is another kinda disturbing thing going on with the third party candidates.  i suspected that this would be a good year for them, but there are a lot of indications that it won't be.  Jill Stein's support has fallen in half from her peak of 5%, and Gary Johnson is down 2% from a couple of weeks ago, at 7.2%.  it looks to me now that the combination of those two will be less than 10%.  i would have expected it closer to 15%, based on early projections.

as much talk as there is about how awful these candidates are (DT & HC), it appears that people are going to vote for them.

So I'm thinking the next week should be quite instructive as more polls come out- including some updated state data?

precisely.  some of the state polls are looking quite good for her today.  i am putting her back at 2:1 to win as of this morning.

[djAdvocate]

Sept 30, 2016 6:06:28 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Sept 30, 2016 6:02:03 GMT -5 oped said:

Seriously starting to piss me off how Trump and Hillary are considered 'the same'. It's patently ridiculous. And while I'm not a great fan of Hillary in many ways, this insist an e that she's the same as Trump is actually making me support her more vehimently than I ever might have otherwise. 

It is a good thing I'm so preoccupied with house stuff, I'd be losing so many friends with this one. 

I am seriously considering dropping Facebook.  I only joined to keep in closer contact with some of my more "socially networked" family, and I don't want to talk politics there.  But it is becoming overwhelming, and also a huge time sink.

you can manage it.  the first step is recognizing that it is a problem. 

IMO: FB is a complete waste of time.

[djAdvocate]

Sept 30, 2016 7:07:55 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

I'm curious to see the next polls from Florida, to see if Trump's Cuban dalliance impacts his support in that state.

 

there is a new poll out there today that shows him down.  i don't know if it includes the Newsweek revelations or not.

[djAdvocate]

here are the state updates:

leaning Clinton: CO, NH
leaning Trump: NC, OH
tossup: FL, NV

i took PA off the leaning Clinton list.  it is now safely Clinton.

the tossup states are now slightly Clinton (they were slightly Trump before).

Clinton is now 2:1 to win.

NOTE: we still have not seen much post debate polling, so this is polling from the period leading UP TO the debate.  it will be interesting to see what happens when those numbers start to come in over the next week.  i would expect the leaning Clinton states to come off the table,  tossup states to lean Clinton, and the leaning Trump states to turn into tossups.  interestingly, Trump has done so well in the states that were previously leaning (GA and MO) that i don't think they are within reach for Clinton, even under the best circumstances.  i think Trump already won those states, in other words.