As have Republicans. You realize the left’s been lecturing on ■■■■■■■■ since 1865, right?
Which polls are you referring to?
All of them. Except when they say what I want to hear.
MidwestIndy: WuWei: SottoVoce:Yup. Let’s completely abandon historical trends. Trump could have a 5% approval rating and would still be favored and easily re-elected. Is that how it works? Abandon history in the name of Trump?
Comparing Trump to any other pattern is useless.
That is true. Also explains why Democrats have grown tired of being lectured on ■■■■■■■■ like morality and values, etc, by the other side.
As have Republicans. You realize the left’s lecturing on ■■■■■■■■ since 1865, right?
Which is what?
If you want your poll to conclude what you want to hear, just frame the question in the right way? It’s ez pz.
Because even though national polls nailed it, county polls in the rust belt were lacking and 80k EC voters means “Trump is the lord and savior”; therefore polls can’t capture his greatness. Or… “patterns” I guess
If you look at the districts in the three states where Trump won the EC it is obvious that his win was razor thin. In some districts a difference of a couple of hundred votes would have given the race to Clinton.
The Democrats are not going to make the same mistake and do campaign lite in those areas.
WuWei: MidwestIndy: WuWei: SottoVoce:Yup. Let’s completely abandon historical trends. Trump could have a 5% approval rating and would still be favored and easily re-elected. Is that how it works? Abandon history in the name of Trump?
Comparing Trump to any other pattern is useless.
That is true. Also explains why Democrats have grown tired of being lectured on ■■■■■■■■ like morality and values, etc, by the other side.
As have Republicans. You realize the left’s lecturing on ■■■■■■■■ since 1865, right?
Which is what?
Morality, values, etc.
MidwestIndy: WuWei: MidwestIndy: WuWei: SottoVoce:Yup. Let’s completely abandon historical trends. Trump could have a 5% approval rating and would still be favored and easily re-elected. Is that how it works? Abandon history in the name of Trump?
Comparing Trump to any other pattern is useless.
That is true. Also explains why Democrats have grown tired of being lectured on ■■■■■■■■ like morality and values, etc, by the other side.
As have Republicans. You realize the left’s lecturing on ■■■■■■■■ since 1865, right?
Which is what?
Morality, values, etc.
For example?
WuWei: MidwestIndy: WuWei: MidwestIndy: WuWei: SottoVoce:Yup. Let’s completely abandon historical trends. Trump could have a 5% approval rating and would still be favored and easily re-elected. Is that how it works? Abandon history in the name of Trump?
Comparing Trump to any other pattern is useless.
That is true. Also explains why Democrats have grown tired of being lectured on ■■■■■■■■ like morality and values, etc, by the other side.
As have Republicans. You realize the left’s lecturing on ■■■■■■■■ since 1865, right?
Which is what?
Morality, values, etc.
For example?
Collectivism
What do you mean “for example”?
Just ask Trump. He’s the greatest thing since Donkey Kong.
MidwestIndy: WuWei: MidwestIndy: WuWei: MidwestIndy: WuWei: SottoVoce:Yup. Let’s completely abandon historical trends. Trump could have a 5% approval rating and would still be favored and easily re-elected. Is that how it works? Abandon history in the name of Trump?
Comparing Trump to any other pattern is useless.
That is true. Also explains why Democrats have grown tired of being lectured on ■■■■■■■■ like morality and values, etc, by the other side.
As have Republicans. You realize the left’s lecturing on ■■■■■■■■ since 1865, right?
Which is what?
Morality, values, etc.
For example?
Collectivism
What do you mean “for example”?
Which morality has the left espoused wasnt supported by the constitution and its various amendments as opposed to the right?
Which morality has the left espoused wasnt supported by the constitution and its various amendments as opposed to the right?
The morality of individualism.
The morality of the right to self defense.
The morality of choice.
The morality of limited government intrusion.
MidwestIndy:Which morality has the left espoused wasnt supported by the constitution and its various amendments as opposed to the right?
The morality of individualism.
The morality of the right to self defense.
The morality of choice.
The morality of limited government intrusion.
The left hasnt been against any of that as a whole.
WuWei: MidwestIndy:Which morality has the left espoused wasnt supported by the constitution and its various amendments as opposed to the right?
The morality of individualism.
The morality of the right to self defense.
The morality of choice.
The morality of limited government intrusion.The left hasnt been against any of that as a whole.
That is absolutely false and you knew it when you typed it. Come on man.
SottoVoce: WuWei: SottoVoce:Yup. Let’s completely abandon historical trends. Trump could have a 5% approval rating and would still be favored and easily re-elected. Is that how it works? Abandon history in the name of Trump?
Comparing Trump to any other pattern is useless.
Why? Can Trump bend the laws of math and statistics?
Doesn’t need to. They don’t apply to him. There are no laws in politics.
“Laws?” So again, in the magical era of Trump, statistics and historical precedent have no place?
Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil to those on the right, I suppose. This anti-intellectual thing is getting old.
WuWei: SottoVoce: WuWei: SottoVoce:Yup. Let’s completely abandon historical trends. Trump could have a 5% approval rating and would still be favored and easily re-elected. Is that how it works? Abandon history in the name of Trump?
Comparing Trump to any other pattern is useless.
Why? Can Trump bend the laws of math and statistics?
Doesn’t need to. They don’t apply to him. There are no laws in politics.
“Laws?” So again, in the magical era of Trump, statistics and historical precedent have no place?
Hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil to those on the right, I suppose. This anti-intellectual thing is getting old.
If there were laws, Trump would not be President.
Trump won because of the electoral college. He lost the popular vote, exactly as predicted by the polls. No “laws” were broken for him to become president.
The statement “an incumbent president has never won re-election with a gallup approval rating less than 48% in the month of elections” is a true statement. Based on objective data. If you’d like to ignore that, or claim it doesn’t apply to Trump, that’s your choice I suppose.
There is quite a variation in poll results:
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/rasmussen-approval/2019/05/03/id/914462/
Realize that the days of calling people at home and actually getting them to answer the phone are long over. Poll results depend greatly on how the poll is conducted and how much weighting each response actually gets.
Trump won because of the electoral college. He lost the popular vote, exactly as predicted by the polls. No “laws” were broken for him to become president.
The statement “an incumbent president has never won re-election with a gallup approval rating less than 48% in the month of elections” is a true statement. Based on objective data. If you’d like to ignore that, or claim it doesn’t apply to Trump, that’s your choice I suppose.
Trump won because human beings cannot be reduced to a mathematical equation. And Newton and Descartes wept.
“Human beings?” We’re talking about elections. Elections are all about mathematics. You can read books and take college courses on election math. If you’d like an esoteric discussion of the mathematic determination of the human soul, you can start a thread on it.
Not only is Trump the greatest thing since sliced bread, according to Trump, the Republican males are too weak to correct him.