Hillary slips to +5 in RCP

Darth Hussein Omar said:
I wouldn't say they mean nothing but I get the point.
Click to expand...
Meh...one poll shows Trump gaining. That's probably not statistically significant which pretty much means it means nothing. Except to maybe those who are desperately clinging to hope for a miracle. Which it's getting pretty close to where Trump would need one to win.
 
anatta said:
Clinton Foundation/her continual hiding instead of campaigning/Trumps recent sanity..yep
Click to expand...
Well by throwing mud against the wall and hoping it sticks is a fantastic method of convincing yourself in something you already believe in. The vast majority of people though see it as mud slinging and, to wit, it's not gaining any traction.

So there is that.
 
I know this is a political board and this is what we discuss but it really is amazing the thousands of posts up to this point discussing what the numbers are for this race.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
LOL LOL LOL

Keep wishing there Darth and maybe Santa will bring a Dodge Charger too! LOL LOL LOL

Darth, the math is impossible. There simply aren't enough uninformed rednecks to get Trump elected. :)
Click to expand...

You'd better hope you're right or they'll be some serious crow to be eaten, Mott lol.
 
Jarod said:
I agree this is significant. However if you look at the numbers the only thing bringing that number down to 5% is the discredited L.A. Times Poll. Still the movement in the LA Times poll should be concerning for HRC, in a week or so we will know if this it statistical noise or a real move.

I agree 5% is the border between comfortable lead and a simple lead.

Trump's pivot (that he was NOT going to do) is helping him in my opinion in some sectors where certain people were going to hold their nose and vote for HRC.

Tomorrow will be very interesting to see how far he rearranges his signature issue of immigration, I am sure he wont say the word Amnesty, but will he describe it? I saw today where he was suggesting that the wall was more of a figurative term, that it will not necessarily be a physical wall, but in many places more of a figurative wall, an "electronic wall" or surveillance wall. Funny to me because I seem to remember him saying it would be 60 Feet tall!
Click to expand...
Good lord...have ya'll even studied statistics or used them at work before?

The data you're looking at is neither representative nor significant. One poll with a known reputation for bias has Clinton's support declining at the national level. It's not even statistical noise. It is, non-significant data meaning it has absolutely no predictive value.

Nor is the data representative unless the data is defensibly sampled at a State level and it's correlation calculated accordingly.

If you look at more representative analysis, such as, State by State polling, 538 probability calculations and the odds makers line...the data has shown a consistent decline for Trump from 3:1 odds against, to 4:1 odds against to currently less than 5:1 odds against (around an 83% probability).

So the data that IS representative and IS statistically significant has shown clearly that Trump's prospect for election has steadily declined since the primaries.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Good lord...have ya'll even studied statistics or used them at work before?

The data you're looking at is neither representative nor significant. One poll with a known reputation for bias has Clinton's support declining at the national level. It's not even statistical noise. It is, non-significant data meaning it has absolutely no predictive value.

Nor is the data representative unless the data is defensibly sampled at a State level and it's correlation calculated accordingly.

If you look at more representative analysis, such as, State by State polling, 538 probability calculations and the odds makers line...the data has shown a consistent decline for Trump from 3:1 odds against, to 4:1 odds against to currently less than 5:1 odds against (around an 83% probability).

So the data that IS representative and IS statistically significant has shown clearly that Trump's prospect for election has steadily declined since the primaries.
Click to expand...

But you called Trump victory a mathematical impossibility lol. If you knew statistics you'd know events with a 20% probability happen all the time.
 
Darth Hussein Omar said:
Sneaking up on Labor Day so slips and trends start to matter more than they did in April or May. +Five is kind of a critical number. It's kind of the border between comfortable lead and statistical tie.

I think the constant barrage of Hillary's scandals are taking a toll on her campaign. Coupled with a more steady [by Trump standards lol] Trump, who finally figured out how to stay on message; a softening of his stances on immigration; the appeals to minorities and etc has caused the race to tighten up a bit.

We'll see if the trend holds. If it does look for the media to become hysterical in trying to take Trump down.
Click to expand...
I don't know why they do a popular poll, the only one that matters is the electoral poll and Hillary is still winning the electorate.
 
Darth Hussein Omar said:
Yeah, but which outliers do you throw out? The ones that have it close for Trump or the ones that have Hillary up double digits?
Click to expand...
Well that depends on the type of outlier. If the outlier is a result of sampling error, as would most likely be the case in a poll, you simply discard all outliers as being an erroneous measurement. If the outlier is a result of skewness (to the left or right when plotted as a graph) then it means that the data is not randomly distributed and thus contains statistical bias.
 
Last edited:
Mott the Hoople said:
I'd like to know how? This has been one of the most boring Presidential campaigns ever. It's not even close to the hilarity of the primaries. Both candidates are quite unpopular but one far more so than the other that the one, Clinton, has a dominating lead in the electoral college. That and early voting starts soon. I just don't see a path for Trump out of the hole he's dug. He's alienated far to many people. Clinton may not be well loved and she does make conservative mens heads explode but without the womens vote (and Trump is far, far behind in the womens vote) conservative mens vote are simply not determinative.
Click to expand...

There were plenty British versions of you saying that the Leave campaign had no chance, right up to the last minute when they won. I think I might just make a bet anyway on the result. I remember Watermark saying that all the bookies were giving really long odds on Brexit, needless to say they lost a bundle on the 24th June.
 
Last edited:
Mott the Hoople said:
Well by throwing mud against the wall and hoping it sticks is a fantastic method of convincing yourself in something you already believe in. The vast majority of people though see it as mud slinging and, to wit, it's not gaining any traction.

So there is that.
Click to expand...
Clinton Foundation's pay for play is throwing mud against a wall?
Even the NYT (along with WaPo -2 great Hillary shills) is calling for cutting ties. Then there is the multiple positions Abedin held.

I've seen the same level of Democrats denial for her Email classified lying -
with due respect I think you are turning your head rather then see the writing on that wall.
 
anatta said:
Clinton Foundation's pay for play is throwing mud against a wall?
Even the NYT (along with WaPo -2 great Hillary shills) is calling for cutting ties. Then there is the multiple positions Abedin held.

I've seen the same level of Democrats denial for her Email classified lying -
with due respect I think you are turning your head rather then see the writing on that wall.
Click to expand...

The gap is closing! Remember Ralph Nader got 90,000 votes in Florida and stopped Al Gore getting into the White House. Jill Stein may well do the same.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/president/
 
anatta said:
Mott is right though - Tump dug himself a big hole..And Clinton is running a base election ( no outreach beyond the base) whipping
up the masses with fear.
Click to expand...

That's a fair point but the million dollar question is how whipped up are the democrat masses? Trump enthusiasm is undeniable but I'm not seeing it on the other side.
 
Darth Hussein Omar said:
That's a fair point but the million dollar question is how whipped up are the democrat masses? Trump enthusiasm is undeniable but I'm not seeing it on the other side.
Click to expand...
well...she also has a massive out-reach pogram in terms of get out the vote.

Being in Florida (swing state) I've already seen (way too much of ) her ads. Invariably they focus on Trump malapropos / crappy use of language.

But it's enough because of sites like WaPo that gin it up and re-feed back as newz.
IOWs she's running a fear based campaign, not a pro-Hilary one
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top