Today’s Rasmussen 3 November, 2016


"Republican Donald Trump has a three-point lead in Rasmussen Reports’ White House Watch survey. Among voters who are certain how they will vote, Trump now has over 50% support.

The latest national telephone and online survey of Likely U.S. Voters shows Trump leading Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton 45% to 42%. Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson has four percent (4%) support, and Green Party hopeful Jill Stein picks up just one percent (1%). Two percent (2%) like another candidate, and four percent (4%) are still undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)"  Rasmussen Reports


This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

83 Responses to Today’s Rasmussen 3 November, 2016

  1. Swami says:

    At this point I think anyone can find a poll that supports their leanings. What matters are not national polls but rather state-by-state polls, as electoral votes are what will determine the result.
    Fortunately we don’t have long to wait.

  2. LondonBob says:

    Looking like Trump is now edging the toss up states (CO, NH, VA, NV, PA) and will take most, if not all. Not sure if he will quite take MI, WI, MN but he has a chance. IA, FL, NC, OH and ME2 were always in the bag.
    Putin has asked is America a banana republic, we find out Tuesday. Hopefully VA and NH go Trump big enough to be called early, I have work the next day.

  3. Matthew says:

    Tyler’s Christmas came early this year.

  4. kao_hsien_chih says:

    A few additional observations, from what I’ve been following:
    It still seems rather implausible that Trump will win a majority or a plurality, given the existing polls. It bugs me quite a lot, though, knowing how much subjective judgment goes into extrapolating from the polling data and the extent to which subjective judgment is clouded by the evaluators’ bias and preconceptions, but an inability to win majority/plurality does not mean Trump victory is implausible.
    Early voting results, or at least what we know of them–we know turnouts among diff demographics, even if we do not know exactly how they voted–suggest fairly heavy advantage (larger than in previous years) for Democrats. It could mean that Trump will be going down in flames, but it could also mean that the voters who are voting early are different. Early voters tend to be of two types (that are heavily overlapping): they tend to be relatively well off and they have made up their mind early. The well-off Democrats are definitely for HRC. The well-off GOPers are, at best, very unsure about Trump. It is not too surprising, then, that the former should significantly outnumber the latter.
    The skepticism towards Trump among conventional Republicans is very substantial: it is reflected in polls showing Trump not doing as well as he might be expected in strong GOP states like TX, GA, and KS, and I’ve run scenarios where HRC actually carried GA and/or KS under not unreasonable assumptions, given the polling data (which is admittedly a bit old now). While I don’t consider such scenarios too likely, it should be expected that Trump majorities in the usual GOP states will be much thinner than in Romney’s in 2012.
    Trump enjoys enough popularity among working class whites to threaten throughout the Midwest and parts of Northeast. In several of the scenarios that I ran, Trump carried ME and NH (actually more often than HRC carried GA), along with IA, MI, PA. In fact, the numbers that I worked with suggest that Trump had better odds in Maine than Wisconsin. We shall see how that pans out.
    Between these two, the odds that HRC carries big majorities in bicoastal states while Trump carries narrow majorities in most of “flyover” states are relatively high. I would be honestly quite shocked if HRC fails to capture a plurality, even if a small one, (I don’t expect a majority), but I will not be surprised if she loses EV. I still don’t think it’s too likely–but it’s not too far out of the realm of possibilities.
    I will confess that, in this election of numbers beating theories, I remain somewhat attached to one theory–that the “regular” partisans tend to remain partisan. The magnitude of defection and/or abstention seen in the polls among the regular Republican voters seem rather implausible so I am systematically weighing more heavily (in non-statistical way) the scenarios where they stay loyal to the GOP in larger numbers. Maybe this will be another theory that will be felled by the actual results, but the shift in polling numbers do seem to suggest, even if the “predictions” may not be trusted, suggest that a lot of regular GOP voters, even if they might not like Trump, will show up and vote for him. If they do often enough, that could be enough for him to pull off a narrow win.

  5. gowithit says:

    Single poll watching very unreliable, especially with Rasmussen that historically has favored Republican candidates. That being said, though, Trump sure is creeping upward. Gonna be more and more interesting. My personal formula continues to be “ether/or = neither” What a sham/blight on our political process with a Clown and a Corruptess!

  6. Sam Peralta says:

    Col. Lang
    Polls from several key states show they are tightening and several are in the margin of error.
    It looks like even states that seemed like a certain win for Hillary a week ago are much more competitive now including Colorado, Pennsyslvania, Virginia and Michigan.
    Trump seems to be pulling away in Arizona, Ohio, Florida, and even North Carolina.
    Obama is flying Air Force One to campaign in many states and apparently has more campaign stops than even the Crooked One.

  7. Tyler says:

    Look for the Trumpslide coming.
    Trump up in NH, PA, VA, NM. We’re seeing the rout stage of the campaign now.

  8. Peter in Toronto says:

    This is unprecedented, at least in the context of the last 30 years. States which have been blue bastions are now being contested.
    This is very encouraging, even though Trump is not remotely close to what I would consider an ideal candidate, but it does indicate that the people can still wrest control from the stratified upper class of owners and high net worth individuals who decided amongst each other which candidate that either of the parties nominate will fill the leading slot.

  9. Eric Newhill says:

    Looks like Trump has Ohio, Florida and North Carolina and all the other typically red states.
    If he can capture one of the following – WI,MN, VA, PA,CO then he wins.
    If present momentum continues, he should be able to squeak by in at least one of those and come out on top in the EV.

  10. Tyler says:

    I will be a firm yet fair Archon of Emperor Trump.
    All is forgiven, none is remarked on. As long as you bend the knee.

  11. Tyler says:

    LAT has him up almost by six.
    ABC/WP which was still oversampling D by double digits has him tied or up by one.
    IPP had him up by 3 or 4.
    The reason so many pollsters are stumped is kind of the inverse of why Romney thought he was going to “win” and ended up losing: they’re applying the modeling data from 2012 to 2016, assuming record minority turnout for a sick old white woman that a young black man got.
    The Romney campaign used 2010 methodology (mid term elections in which whites and Republicans tend to vote more) to justify its results. This is what is flummoxing Kao, who I attribute charitable origins to.
    Nate Silver and all the other “pollsters” are just more heads of the Leftist hydra, and are intentionally screwing the pooch here.

  12. Tyler says:

    HRC and the Dems trying to claim Trump is a Russian agent was the cinematic equivalent of throwing your pistol at the monster after your weapon has slide locked to the rear.

  13. Joe100 says:

    Of interest the Washington Post indicates there are two possible 269 to 269 scenarios that would shift the election into the House:

  14. different clue says:

    Sam Peralta,
    If Michigan is competitive, then the best way for “the Left” to defeat Clinton in Michigan and force the Democratic Party to pay respectful attention to “the Left” would be to vote for Trump in Michigan.
    This isn’t about getting a “good President”. We aren’t going to get one.
    This is about respect and revenge and a stick in the eye with a red hot poker.
    Voting Trump is very hard for a semi-Leftie to do. It may be a bridge too far for most of us. It may be a bridge too far for me. But Clinton-rejecters should remember that two usually-Democratic votes for the Green Party, or for the Working Class Party, or for some other little Party is just as effective at attriting Clinton’s numbers as one usually-Democratic vote FOR Trump.
    If Clinton could lose Michigan due to enough usually-Democratic vote-leakage to various Third Parties such that Trump just happens to take the state, we wouldn’t have to brag about it. We could act suitably sad and then say: ” Sorry about that. But you really should have given us a candidate we could vote for.” It could be the start of a movement to purge and “bern” the Clintobamacrats from out of the Democratic Party.

  15. Bobo says:

    Should Virginia go Trump, which I have a hard time believing, then the noise of the Draining Swamp will earth shattering.

  16. different clue says:

    Eric Newhill,
    All it takes is enough Bitter Berners in just ONE of those states to switch their votes aWAY from Clinton to default-throw that state to Trump.
    Are there enough Bitter Berners in just ONE of those states? Berners tough enough and mean enough to deny Clinton a victory in that state?
    Those who just can’t vote for Trump can still vote against Clinton. Two votes from Clinton to “something else” is just as effective as one vote from Clinton to Trump.

  17. johnA says:

    I don’t think there is any way to predict this thing now.
    There will be something coming out Friday night or over the weekend.
    I have to believe that either a Hillary or Trump bomb will shift the flow.
    I would look at where the Obama is deployed. That is where Clinton thinks they are in trouble.
    I still quess Hillary a 70% fav.

  18. Eric Newhill says:

    DC, I agree and am counting on it; as I’m sure Trump is too.
    Lot of Bernie Bros in CO and way up North.

  19. Jack says:

    It seems if the polls are to be believed that we now have a real race in many of the swing states and even in Democrat leaning states. Next Tuesday night could be a long one. I am particularly interested in how Democrat leaning states like Michigan, Colorado, Virginia and Pennsylvania vote. And of course traditional swing states like New Hampshire and Virginia which have leaned more Democrat recently.
    Whatever the outcome next Tuesday, as I have noted here frequently, half the country will not consider the next president legitimate. The divide between the coastals and urban population relative to Les Deplorables is a chasm that spans culture and perceptions of reality.
    If the Borg Queen prevails, then we should expect the long knives coming out as the Clintons seek retribution. The FBI agents pursuing the Clinton Foundation will soon be on the street and the DOJ will be packed with the coterie to quash any further investigations. The House GOP will be in a civil war. The representatives that represent Les Deplorables will be in open revolt and demanding investigations of Clintonworld based on all the exposed written communications of the key people. The Borg will use the Borg Queen’s office to consolidate power and further manufacture consent to all the Borgist policies that will be tried to be pushed through the Congress over the opposition of the minority in the GOP.
    If Trump wins despite the Borg’s attempt to manufacture the election result then it will imply that many joined Les Deplorables to give a big fat middle finger to the Borg. There will be an epic meltdown among the Borg. We can then be certain that the Borg will quickly reposition to be all over him like a bee to honey. The traditional GOP establishment will be doing everything possible to snow him to ensure their gravy train is not lost. The probability is very high, IMO, that the Borg will be more successful than it would seem today considering how they pulled out all the stops to trash him. I believe however that where Trump will override the Borg is in our relationship with Russia.
    The next few days will be very interesting to see what surprises these campaigns have up their sleeve.

  20. crone says:

    Obama is campaigning in FL today… Jacksonville. He was in NC yesterday.

  21. Fred says:

    “If the Borg Queen prevails, then we should expect …. retribution.”
    Sultan Erdogan set the tone in Turkey.

  22. Fred says:

    So does an overflowing basket of deplorables outweigh an overflowing cornucopia of corruption?

  23. MasterSlacker says:

    Here’s a well reasoned take on population distribution from Martin Longman’s personal Blog. Demographics assumptions are putting the test to every level and type of polling.

  24. kao_hsien_chih says:

    There’s the demographic distribution of the eligible electorate and there’s the electorate that will turn out.
    In 2012, turnout among minorities was higher than usual, thanks to Obama’s presence on the ticket, while the working class white turnout continued on the downward trajectory that it has been on for some time. While the base numbers for each has changed, there is a notable lack of enthusiasm (if anything, relatively speaking) among minorities for HRC and significant upbeat in enthusiasm among large swaths of working class whites for Trump, relative to Obama and Romney respectively. Taking these into consideration, the demographic distribution of the voters who will actually turn out is more likely to be closer to, or possibly, even whiter than, the demographics of 2012 than what’d be expected simply based on aggregate demographic changes overall. But anticipating turnout by different demographics, across multiple geographies is a tricky business where pollsters are liable to get more subjective than they should.

  25. Haralambos says:

    With all due respect to those analyzing the polls, my thoughts derive from two quotes: thanks to my better half, who loves opera,there is this, “It ain’t over till the fat lady sings.” In 2000, the Supreme Court sang the final aria.
    From my philistine background, there is this, “It ain’t over till it’s over” (Yoggi Berra). Yesterday, it took seven games and extra innings to decide it. I can just hear Harry Caray singing it:

  26. Tyler says:

    Both are looking more and more like solid Trump territory.

  27. Thirdeye says:

    Nate Silver is not a pollster, he is the most rigorous analyst of polling data out there. Trying to slam his approach turned out to be a fool’s errand four years ago and I suspect it is still that way. Obama outperformed Silver’s model because the model is conservative with respect to swings in polling data – it anticipates some regression towards a mean. This year the late swing is going the opposite way and Hillary’s chances are dropping with unprecedented velocity. If the trend continues into the weekend we’ll be looking at a race within the margin of error. We could see Trump outperform Silver’s model this time, not because the model is biased in favor of Democrats but because it is biased against wild swings.
    It does look like Hillary is coming up short in her play to lock up the black vote. At the very least, black voters lack the enthusiasm for Hillary that they had for Obama and Trump’s blue collar appeal is effective with some black voters as it is with white voters.

  28. Thirdeye says:

    When the Cubs started to come back in the Series, Nate Silver made a comment to the effect that the chance of the Cubs taking the series were about the same as the chance of Trump winning. Well guess what?

  29. Kooshy says:

    As far as I can feel, reading and talking to normal life folks, there are as many, anybody but Clinton voters out there, as are the not Trump ones. And I am in heavenly democratic California district.

  30. Thirdeye says:

    Today it’s slightly less than 2:1 and if Hillary’s downward trend continues we’re in tossup territory. Hillary’s been harping on the Trump-the-pig and Russia themes. I suspect those are pretty much played out old news by now. It’s beginning to look like the Hillary camp thought they had delivered the coup de grace with them – hell, I thought they had – but since they evidently haven’t, they’re at a loss for what to do to stop her current slide.
    On the whole Trump-the-pig thing, I’m starting to wonder if it’s backfiring because politically motivated accusations of sexual misconduct have become so common. It seems a large swath of the working population has either seen or heard about such instances and it does not leave a good taste in people’s mouths.

  31. James Loughton says:

    African American turnout is exactly why I thought the Dems should have put Cory Booker in the VP slot. The big AA turnout in 2008 and 2012 had nothing to do with a sudden enthusiasm for voting in that group.

  32. Tyler says:

    lmbo where to begin?
    First, when you’re splitting hairs over semantics (“he’s an analyst!”) and throwing on positive adjectives, it reeks of a poor argument. Second, his 2012 modeling wasn’t exactly hard, considering most of the states were within a point or two of previous data.
    I’m having a laffo over here at your sputtering defense of “He’s not wrong! Its just that muh models don’t predict this and reality won’t conform to want he wants!” Yah okay. Silver was a two hit wonder who constantly underplayed Trump throughout the primaries, and then made the weakest of excuses to try and handwave away his screwup.
    Silver’s models under perform because he puts his thumb on the scale for the Democrats and has legions of people like you who are going to run screaming to his defense and not observe his methods with an unbiased eye.
    I’ve been right so far regarding this election, so let me make another prediction: On November 9th, Nate Silver will blame everyone but himself for calling this thing wrong.

  33. Tyler says:

    I think Cory Booker would have quickly been outed as gay or having a white girlfriend, either of which makes a national black pol DOA.

  34. Paul Escobar says:

    To all,
    Today Eric Trump is reported to have said: “David Duke deserves to be shot!”
    Melania Trump was out decrying the epidemic of “cyber-bullying”
    Good! More of this.
    What worries much of the public about Trump is that he seems accountable only to his ego or characters of ill-repute. They need to see members of standing in his inner circle voice their concerns. This will alleviate much anxiety.
    I highly recommend, sometime in these last few days, that Trump display some form of concession. No matter how trivial or superficial, it will complete the point.
    Good luck,

  35. Tyler says:

    To my leftist friends here:
    If you really want to vote for a woman candidate with principles, just wait for Ivanka to run in 2036.

  36. Haralambos says:

    Thanks, for this. I have always distrusted all of the polls. Folks who think it is a casino and their odds-makers make a huge mistake. I would recommend the book The Big Short

  37. kao_hsien_chih says:

    Many of them will not turn out, and that should show up in relatively turnout among certain demographics–especially the minority, male, and working class. Still, the bicoastal states will not turn red–just lower turnout. This is why I expect that low turnout election would give Trump an advantage: if both never Clintons and never Trumps abstain from voting in significant numbers, it will increase the electoral import of working class whites, who happen to be numerous in the Midwestern swing states and whose turnout will likely be greater than in recent elections.

  38. ex-PFC Chuck says:

    It appears that a Night of the Long Knives may be underway in Turkey.

  39. VietnamVet says:

    Perception Management is running at full steam ahead. It is impossible for me to read Huffington Post. I’m down to selective reading the Washington Post. Forget the OpEd pages. I’ve mailed my ballot for Jill Stein, Chris Van Hollen and Steny Hoyer. According to the polls, I am an army of one. The media hides it but my feeling is that this election has come down to male verses female, caucasian verses minorities, urban verses rural, moral verses venal. Neither candidate has the charism or ideology to unite the American people to overcome these great rifts. The next four years will be awful unless we, the people, start communicating again and jail the wealthy criminals who are price gouging us.

  40. steve says:

    I think you see some of that here in Iowa which has voted democratic in presidential elections every time since 1984, except once in 2004. That’s a track record as democratic as California. Yet it now appears firmly in the Trump camp.
    In the dem caucuses, in 2008 Obama won while Hillary placed third. In 2016 there was essentially a tie between Sanders and Hillary. Imho there is a visceral dislike of Clinton as the status quo candidate going back 8 years, as reflected in those caucus results.
    The state is always lumped in as one of those “non-college educated white states”. The fact is that Iowa has one of the highest percentages of high schoolers who go on to college. The discrepancy? Those college educated kids all leave the state for greener economic pastures. Imho, those parents and families left behind resent the lack of homegrown opportunity for their kids and vote accordingly. It’s not lack of education, but the lack of opportunity for college educated young people.

  41. eakens says:

    They already turned out once for Obama. What did they get and what’s Booker going to do for them?
    Many people, regardless of their skin color, gender, faith, or sexual preference, are going to get into the polling box and vote for what they perceive to be anarchy. That is part of what is going to give Trump the win on Tuesday.
    I went to get a haircut earlier today, and the Vietnamese fellow who cut my hair told me his 80 year old parents, and the rest of his family were all voting for Trump. And this is in the heart of what should be HRC country. And that’s not the first such story I have heard over the past few weeks.
    She’s out of gas, and broke down on the side of the road with every passing car driving by and kicking up dust.

  42. ISL says:

    Dear Colonel,
    When the explicit tapes broke, I thought I could not vote for someone like that. Then, after a week I thought – I am not voting on who to invite to a dinner party, I am voting for president. And as with my counsel, I want a bastard who is on my corner.
    Imagining a Clinton presidency, I see endless investigations and indictments, which will tear the country apart.
    Imagining a Trump presidency, I see either he engages the public, shows his negotiating skills, or is impeached. Meanwhile the dems may develop a backbone in the jelly fish bodies. I cannot see Trump getting in business to where he is without being good at negotiating.
    Perhaps some deal could be arranged where in exchange for a pardon the Clinton’s relocate permanently to Qatar.
    If one takes the ABC poll trend as even vaguely indicating, then -12 points in a week is a trend that indicates Trump landslide. Given that several smoking guns appeared last few days in the wikileaks Podesta emails….
    I do not believe for a second Comey reopened the case without have a darn good idea what is on Weiner’s laptop. I just dont see him as a risk taker like that.
    So this Bernie supporter will

  43. Lemur says:

    Nate Silver’s model was criticized from the ground up by NN Taleb for not taking into account volatility as a factor of probability

  44. Greg S says:

    In my über-liberal town outside of Boston I have seen Trump/Pence signs sprouting up in the past week. I take this not a representative sampling of support, but indictation there is something greater at play for these residents to put out Trump signs. It’s radical, FU-like, behavior in a town like this. And I get the feeling from my liberal acquaintances that they are not only apprehensive about their candidate (though they don’t articulate it) but they seem to be a little more timid about creating a scenario which could lead to civil war. I met with a retired engineer about 3 months ago. He’s in his early 60’s and kind of hippyish (former liberal). This guy developed and has patents on telecom technology which everyone uses. We started talking politics and he said that if Hillary wins the election there will be civil war. At the time I thought this was hyperbole. Now I think it’s prescience.
    I’m a one-issue voter in this election. I don’t want more neocon wars in the Middle East and I especially don’t want WWIII. So I was for Trump early on. But in the past month I’ve been reading Wikileaks (and today DoS) emails and commentary for an average of 8 hours per day. I can’t even sleep at night and wake up in disbelief that this antichrist of a political figure, Hillary Clinton, has a better than 60% chance of winning. And I’ve seen all the forces of the global empire pulling out all stops for her. Hell, even the reliably anti-war people (Noam Chomsky, Katrina vanden Heuvel, Mother Jones, The Nation, et al.) are supporting this monster who would overthrow Assad and start WWIII. She’s promised this in debates and speeches. And the only thing pushing back is the average American, the far left, the alt-right, a few conservative talk show hosts, and the FBI. It’s insane. It’s like Henry V’s The Battle of Agincourt.
    Remember where you were on this equivalent of St. Crispin’s Day. I’m heading up to the battleground state of New Hampshire to do whatever I can.
    Henry V- St. Crispin’s Day Speech- Kenneth Branagh:

  45. Lemur says:

    Conservative Treehouse pointed out that the media would try to gaslight Trump voters with loser polls right up to the end of the penultimate news cycle before the election (concluding the 28th of the last month). So its worth emphasizing much of Trump’s glorious ‘comeback’ is in fact a recognition of where Trump always was.
    The race is even tightening in New York (although Trump won’t win that state)

  46. Greg S says:

    The Washington Post is globalist neocon on bath salts. And now fully unhinged “for her”. Here’s Binyamin Applebaum of the WP earlier today:
    “It is relevant to current events to note that the FBI is basically a collection of middle-aged white men.”

  47. Thirdeye says:

    Primaries > small sets of polling data > more variables > more noise in data > less predictive value from polls (all disclosed by Silver). But don’t worry your pretty little head thinking about the nitty-gritty of analyzing statistical data if it interferes with your notion that you have some special insight.
    If Silver’s statistical model is biased towards it Democrats, then why did Obama outperform it in 2012?
    The electoral map in 2012 was not the same as in 2008.

  48. Tyler says:

    Yeah except I was right on all counts while Big Brain Nate Silver was wrong. Perhaps it is not I who is handwaving?

  49. Tyler says:

    Let me close your italics tag. No charge.

  50. David E. Solomon says:

    Colonel Lang,
    This is not meant for you, but for our wonderful MEDIA (especially for those who call us “CONSUMERS”):

  51. Tyler says:

    I concur Trump didn’t have a 12 point swing, its Vox Borg attempting to recover some of its legitimacy before they call the thing for Hillary only to have Trump win in a 300+ EV blowout.
    Nationally? Trump is probably up by five or six. He is redrawing the map, and the party now belongs to Trump. Look for the Republicans to become the party of the people once again. The old Reagan tripod is done and gone, though.

  52. Phil Cattar says:

    Tyler,Ive already voted for Trump.He will win AT MOST only one of the four states you listed.I will follow up.

  53. Phil Cattar says:

    As you mentioned I definitely think there are a lot of blue collar,black males who are going to vote for Trump in the northern industrial states.I like Nate Silver but some times the math does not add up from polling.I believe it is very possible a number of upper middle class white male voters who wives and pollsters think they are going to vote for Hillary will actually vote for Trump……………………The Trump voters,and I am one,are loud and energetic but one quiet 19 year old Mexican American female in Nevada cancels out the loudest Trump voter…………….Trump could lose the election simply because Puerto Rico has become a basket case in the last few years.I live at one end of the I4 corridor in Florida.The I4 corridor from Tampa to Orlando has exploded with Puerto Ricans in the last few years.They vote for Democrats big time.How does a Nate Silver model or stats account for things like this?……………..A few years ago in an election in Israel the ultra orthodox party had a plan to all tell the exit pollsters they had voted opposite of how they actually voted.Some non orthodox Israelis seeing or hearing the results of the on going exit polls decided their vote was not needed.And the party that the orthodox people wanted to win did,the Likud,I believe.

  54. Earthrise says:

    I start to feel better that even if Hillary gets elected she is dead in the water. But the best way to make all that go away is to launch a good old-fashioned war. I think the war will come early then, if at all. If she loses a year fighting this off, the economy will have probably tanked already, and Eurasia will have had another year to prepare. So the war could be now, or hopefully never.

  55. LeaNder says:

    or having a white girlfriend, either of which makes a national black pol DOA.
    Well, it was pretty obvious Obama had a white mother. No? Room full of mirrors? …

  56. LeaNder says:

    Conservative Treehouse
    an influential cog in the larger network. One of your web home bases?

  57. turcopolier says:

    IMO most American Blacks are of mixed race and the other race is usually White, not American Indian. Cee will have something to say about that. Nevertheless, it is generally resented among Black women when a Black man hooks up with a White woman. pl

  58. LondonBob says:

    Trump could finish on 260 and miss out on a slew of states by just a point or two. Like Brexit I think this will be about turnout.
    Former Army chief backs Trump.

  59. LeaNder says:

    Hmm, I have lost trace of Abramović. Not surprised she now works in NYC. “the grandmother of performance art” (Wikipedia), not really. But I checked the source.
    Bring back the Church Militant.
    They aren’t quite the usual big spenders in the art scene, are they? And those are mainly interested in solid investment or prestige. The ‘umbilical cord’ between art and money? Abramović resumée guarantees that.
    But yes, Trump doesn’t seem to be among them. … 😉
    For the record, I am not impressed by Spirit Cooking. But I also think your friends are fishing a bit arbitrarily. “Bombshell” it isn’t.

  60. LeaNder says:

    Cee will have something to say about that.
    I would be interested*, Pat.
    I have no solid grasp of the topic and its current mutations. To the extend I looked into it, black women seem to outperform black males in the US.
    * triggers this, Cee – Cree, Metis. Surely no solid grasp of that either. Except that “C” may not be able to tell me anything about the last group. 😉

  61. kooshy says:

    Thank you , as usual your comments are very informative,
    I meant to write heavily democratic california district, but I think heavenly is as true.

  62. jonst says:

    Tyler wrote; “All is forgiven, none is remarked on.” Yes, ok, except, however for Whoopi Goldberg. Agreed?

  63. kao_hsien_chih says:

    I think that’s a great and insightful observation about the linkage between geography and support for Sanders and/or Trump. Even as I was running the numbers, I knew something didn’t quite wash about non-college white = support for Sanders if Democrat and support for Trump if Republican formula. Your observation fills in the gap nicely.

  64. kao_hsien_chih says:

    One thing that I’m extremely intrigued about.
    I don’t think Trump has much chance of winning a popular plurality. I do think he has better chance than people think of winning an EV majority. I’m curious what the reaction will be if he winds up in GWB in 2000 situation, with a narrow EV maj but losing the PV by a pct or two, possibly with the electoral outcome in a sizable state (maybe FL again?) in contention? A lot of people never accepted W after 2000. After all the demonization, what’ll people do if Trump wins EV but loses PV?

  65. jld says:

    Why do you think this is likely?
    From what I (barely) know about American electioneering the opposite seem much more probable.

  66. Jack says:

    He has to win at least one state from among Tyler’s list and hold FL, OH, and NC. Essentially he has to sweep. So, if he is going to win, he’ll win big as it is then a change election and the turnout will favor the FU crowd.
    My interpretation of the polls is that there’s too much volatility to filter the signal from the noise.

  67. Jack says:

    You have to give it to the Sultan as he orchestrated a “beautiful” faux coup and now can “legitimately” be the dictator that he always wanted to be.

  68. Tyler says:

    When your leadership is run by Satanists, its kind of a bombshell. Look at the other link about the weird ass code words Podesta and the others use that have ties to BDSM/pedophile slang.

  69. Tyler says:

    Obama’s mother was pretty much a nonfactor in discussion when it came to his life.
    Culturally in the USA, a black man having a white girlfriend/wife pisses off a lot of black women (the ones that actually tend to vote).

  70. Tyler says:

    That arrangement only applies to humans. Animals, are of course, exempt.

  71. Sam Peralta says:

    It looks like Nate Silver is starting to hedge his bets. The classic excuse for all these pundits is the usual, “No one could have seen it coming.” Or “See. I said that he could win New Hampshire”.
    “There’s been a potential breach of Hillary Clinton’s electoral firewall. And it’s come in New Hampshire, a state that we said a couple of weeks ago could be a good indicator of a Donald Trump comeback because of its large number of swing voters.”

  72. different clue says:

    These not-Clinton Democrats and Independents just have to get over their fear of a Trump Administration to feel free to really vote for the not-Clinton of their third party choice.

  73. different clue says:

    One hopes the center-to-far-left Never Clintons will not merely stay home. One hopes they will come out and vote for some third party choice so that their hostile presence may be noted and counted. Otherwise, their sullen absence will be cone-of-silenced and never discussed.

  74. Fred says:

    So is the press more accurate with the polling than Rolling Stone was in its UVA reporting? A jury just found Rolling Stone liable for defamation”
    “A federal jury in Virginia found Friday that Rolling Stone magazine, parent company Wenner Media and reporter Sabrina Rubin Erdely were liable for defamation.”

  75. Fred says:

    “A lot of people never accepted W after 2000.”
    Their elected representatives in Congress went right along with W on most of his policies, like the war in Iraq, which Senator Clinton voted for. I don’t recall a single Democrat losing an election over supporting Bush.

  76. Jack says:

    It seems that the polls in some of the swing states have turned from giving the Borg Queen a lock on the electoral college. Now it seems some pundits are entertaining ideas of an electoral college tie. That would be pure entertainment!

  77. Jack says:

    IMO, the popular vote is a bit over-rated as the big populations are in the coastal and urban areas. IMO, the best indicator of distribution of voter leaning is by county. Elections are tallied by county.
    In any case I continue to believe that half the country is going to be appalled whoever wins the electoral college next Tuesday night. I also believe that if Trump wins, the Borg will make a quick about face and be all over him to keep their gravy train going. And they’ll be more successful than apparent today.

  78. Jack says:

    In the warmongering and liberty stripping most everyone from the duopoly backed Dubya including the “liberal” Borg Queen. To remind, only one senator voted against the unPatriot Act. That’s a good example of the Borg closing ranks.

  79. steve says:

    Nothing scientific about my “poll”, but I know a number of middle-aged, and up, folks here who supported Sanders in the caucuses and who will vote for Trump rather than Hillary in the election. Young folks may vote for her in a reduced turnout, but there is little enthusiasm. These people are not dumb or uneducated, they just have no use for the uber status-quo Hillary who they also view as a complete fake in her public policy positions.
    There is a residue of prairie populism here with a revulsion against east coast elites, particularly bankers. Imho, Sanders would have carried Iowa in a romp.

  80. kao_hsien_chih says:

    Trump’s strongest supporters are working class whites who are concentrated in the Midwestern swing states. It is not inconceivable that Clinton will win big majorities in the bicoastal states while Trump squeaks out narrow majorities/pluralities in the swing states (or lose a whole bunch of them by relatively narrow margins, which would give HRC EV majority and make this whole talk irrelevant). The large majorities that Clinton is likely to win in the states she will likely carry makes it more likely that she will win popular majority/plurality, but narrow wins in the Midwest, if Trump pulls it off, could conceivably give him an EV majority even if he falls short in PV’s.

  81. Eric Newhill says:

    But the Clinton coven…er team… is making Big Magic, “Spirit Cooking” with bodily fluids (of babies? virgins?). Aligned with Lucifer’s legions how can they lose? The power of The Dark side of The Force is not to be underestimated.

Comments are closed.