Trump trumps hildebeest in viewer ratings

Everyone likes watching a train wreck.

The RNC was the NASCAR 10-car pileup. The DNC was the pits.

The RNC was the NASCAR 10-car pileup. The DNC was the pits. Originally Posted by Prolongus

You got it backwards, but what else is new?

Here ya go, speedy: Originally Posted by I B Hankering

"Thursday was the highest-rated night of the week for both parties, but Trump had bigger gains, giving him the bragging rights at the end of the convention period. (CNN)"

What did I post that disagreed with anything you posted? The DNC had more viewers the first 3 days of their respective conventions. All I said was that your post failed to mention that. The RNC had more viewers the last day.

If you think the print in bold is important, fine. When you add all 4 days together, the RNC had overall total higher ratings. Nothing I posted said otherwise.

here's the latest polls 7 hours ago : http://www.nydailynews.com/news/poli...icle-1.2733173 Originally Posted by Luke_Wyatt

No matter which side you are on, the 17% undecided is a worrisome statistic.

Here is an interesting article on the states Trump needs to win Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania to have any chance in the electoral vote.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/31/us...race.html?_r=0

No matter which side you are on, the 17% undecided is a worrisome statistic.

Here is an interesting article on the states Trump needs to win Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania to have any chance in the electoral vote. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

#1: Without analyzing the variables as to the poll questions, data processing, and manner of taking the polls it is difficult at best to evaluate the accuracy of the published "results" and whether they even reflect the data .... recent RCP poll result changing to favor Clinton show "an issue" in portraying the "results" as a legitimate trend (I keep going back to 2004, Ohio, and John Kerry regarding the exit polls his people relied upon showing he was carrying Ohio).
#2: The "modeling" using 2008 and 2012 polling and voter results are not particularly reliable, and most definitely for the "swing states" of Pennsylvania and Florida. Based on Trump's announcements during the primary as compared to the results I would suggest he's got some good number crunchers and bean counters looking at what he is doing and predicting where he should go.

The "wild card" in all this poll result watching is that the legitimate results are based on "presumed" accurate answers as to how someone is going to vote. IMO there are a lot of voters who are going to vote Trump, but won't admit it to avoid ridicule, whereas the reverse is true with Clinton .... with some people actually thinking it's Bill Clinton (or he'll be running the show) and a hesitancy to be chastised for not voting for the "First Woman President"! More revelations n Clinton it'll change minds.

At this point in time polls are simply fun to look at. Obviously when polls are conducted at the same time and show major differences, the results must be questioned. However, I find them more reliable and trustworthy than opinion, especially as election day draws closer. You keep going back to a single incorrect exit poll in 2012 and I keep going back to how often exit polls are correct, which is close to 100% of the time -- close but not 100%.

Your "wild card" is interesting. Not sure how much I buy into it but it is interesting. I guess we'll have to wait until November and compare the "final" Presidential polls to the actual results to see if it's true or not.

Your "wild card" is interesting. Not sure how much I buy into it but it is interesting. I guess we'll have to wait until November and compare the "final" Presidential polls to the actual results to see if it's true or not. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

The "wild card" issue of voter confusion has a real, historical basis founded upon the same (and often similar) last names. In the current race Hillary tapped into that "wild card" by asserting in the Spring that she would use Bill for domestic economic issues (tying to his "reputation" for being instrumental in the positive economic picture at the end of his administration in the minds of many voters!). His presence reminds folks "he's around"!

The truth is .... there's a lot of distance between the two of them on issues.

More often than not the answers received are as much a function of the person asking the question as it is the substance of the question. Then similar questions will get different answers. When organizing the data the system used can reflect comparative answers and when the analyst reviews the data they can actually give "weight" to the answers that more favorably represent what they want the poll to show.

In this election you more than likely will have voters who have not voted in a long time, if ever, and you will have blocks of voters who were not aligned with one party or the other historically.

The continual publishing of polls to the public will impact voters who want to vote for the "winner" and be able to say they did, so they want to know who the winner is going to be. It may also affect contributions and endorsements (if the endorsements will make a difference in this race). There is some evidence that "establishment" endorsements for Trump will have a negative impact with voters (for instance ... look at Sanders and his endorsement of Hillary ... as to his followers!).

"Thursday was the highest-rated night of the week for both parties, but Trump had bigger gains, giving him the bragging rights at the end of the convention period. (CNN)"

What did I post that disagreed with anything you posted? The DNC had more viewers the first 3 days of their respective conventions. All I said was that your post failed to mention that. The RNC had more viewers the last day.

If you think the print in bold is important, fine. When you add all 4 days together, the RNC had overall total higher ratings. Nothing I posted said otherwise. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

No one said what you posted was at odds with the cited article, speedy, but you did leave out the punch line.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...nton-5491.html

. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

This was a dumb post anyone with a half brain would have easily assume that Trump's speech would have received a higher ratings because he's noting but a reality star- people were eagerly awaiting what type of foul venom he would spit from his mouth.
Overall, the DNC was a far better organized event and had better ratings and speakers as a whole.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...nton-5491.html Originally Posted by Chung Tran

Are you admitting that Trump is trailing Clinton in most polls?

This was a dumb post anyone with a half brain would have easily assume that Trump's speech would have received a higher ratings because he's noting but a reality star- people were eagerly awaiting what type of foul venom he would spit from his mouth.
Overall, the DNC was a far better organized event and had better ratings and speakers as a whole. Originally Posted by Luke_Wyatt

You'd be one of the "#Grubered" minions that Gruber called stupid, Lubed Wide-ass. The viewer ratings showed that hildebeest sucked hind tit; meanwhile, you just suck, Lubed Wide-ass.

Are you admitting that Trump is trailing Clinton in most polls? Originally Posted by Luke_Wyatt

yes, not only that I'm highlighting how quickly Trump's supposed lead can turn on a dime.. I don't know what the campaign can do at this point.. if that Cleveland bump is already gone, I don't see any hope.

yes, not only that I'm highlighting how quickly Trump's supposed lead can turn on a dime.. I don't know what the campaign can do at this point.. if that Cleveland bump is already gone, I don't see any hope. Originally Posted by Chung Tran

Now we have the debates coming up and let's be honest Hillary is a far better debater than Trump. I would be surprised if Trump wins one debate- his smart ass remarks won't fly in the presidential debates. Trump is already crying foul about the dates of the debates saying they conflict with the NFL- does Trump realize the dates are agreed upon by a bipartisian committee and he's already saying the DEM's rigged the schedule what a fucking ass clown.

yes, not only that I'm highlighting how quickly Trump's supposed lead can turn on a dime.. I don't know what the campaign can do at this point.. if that Cleveland bump is already gone, I don't see any hope. Originally Posted by Chung Tran

The "fundamentals" of the RCP poll was modified to reflect a lead, when in fact based upon the questions that reflect the reality with named candidates on the ballots Clinton and Trump were tied. The number crunching/comparison seems to suggest that Johnson is draining support away from Clinton.

Hope? Clinton is down 16 points from June of last year against Trump.

She's not talking much ... wait to her mouth engages.....