patrick.net

http://harlanhill.com/poll-alert-trump-takes-commanding-lead-in-la-timesusc-poll/

Trump Takes Commanding Lead in LA Times/USC Poll

Donald Trump has taken a commanding lead over Hillary Clinton in the latest LA Times/USC Poll. The poll shows Trump leading with 45.1% to Hillary’s 41.7%.

Going into the Republican National Convention, Donald Trump had a very slim lead against Hillary Clinton in the same poll. It’s now clear that the Convention and the most recent WikiLeaks/DNC email scandal is helping Trump.

I'm waiting a few days to see where it settles. I'm not going to cherry pick right now (like you guys). But real politics still has the average of all the polls with Hillary ahead. This is good, but considering what a clown Trump is I'm not happy to see him even close.

What a basket case this country is.

I know you guys equate intelligence and good analysis with liberal bias, but this is the one to watch.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

You should be celebrating that he (or they) has it down to only 58.3% chance that Hillary wins, and the dust hasn't settled from the RNC yet. These are probabilities, not poll numbers. A 58.3% probability of winning reflects a spread of only a couple points in the average polls.

If and when they have Trump ahead, you can imagine me being very disturbed.

Found an infographic that's going to get Hillary elected didjya?
Well you hang on to that.

AS expected. Okay don't listen to me. Go back to your cherry picking. We both know Trumps absolute peak may be happening right now on the heels of the RNC. So you should find the best polls you can right now and savor them, you know, just in case it's all down hill from here.

Chuck Norris endorses Trump.

http://mobile.wnd.com/2016/07/the-people-have-spoken/

Booger says

Chuck Norris endorses Trump.

http://mobile.wnd.com/2016/07/the-people-have-spoken/

Trump should have picked Norris as VP.

Trump up 9 in New Hampshire:
https://twitter.com/kerpen/status/757917305183596544

Trump 48
Clinton 39

Almost another full point!

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/07/26/exclusive-4/
Amish PAC Endorses Trump, Launches Billboards in Pennsylvania

#amish

#amish lol

I passed that billboard this morning.

Roughly 95 percent of Amish and Mennonite voters are Republican

They're racist!

Trump now ahead on Oregan, Nevada, and parts of Maine (which splits it's vote)
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/or/oregon_trump_vs_clinton-5892.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nv/nevada_trump_vs_clinton-5891.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/me2/maine_cd2_trump_vs_clinton-5897.html

errc says

I passed that billboard this morning.

When you saw it, where you thinking like WTF???

zzyzzx says

Trump now ahead on Oregan, Nevada, and parts of Maine (which splits it's vote)

Funny look at those dates, Hillary was trouncing Trump until last week in every supposedly poll.
I guess now they are releaseing the real numbers and Hillary has always been sucking hind tit in this race.
Not that she would think anything was wrong with that.

It's called a convention bounce. It happens every Presidential election year. McCain pulled ahead of Obama in '08 after the RNC convention too.

Polls will start really mattering in another month.

6 Plain Reasons Why Trump Will Win:

1) White turnout is going to be historically high, driven in large part by A VERY PISSED OFF "REAGAN DEMOCRAT" COMPONENT, who view both Bill & Hillary Clinton as The Murderers of The American Middle Class Dream (NAFTA, GATT, TPP) - see this:

www.youtube.com/embed/wwmOkaKh3-s

2) Trump will get a much higher % of the women vote than is the common'wisdom assumption.

3) Trump will get a huge turnout from Pro-2nd Amendment/NRA voters.

4) Trump Will Capture YUUGE % of union member votes (despite union leaders endorsement of Billary).

5) LGBT issues have been taken too far in too aggressive a manner to not only piss off and energize evangelicals, but even moderate Americans, as well. Trump, while not broadcasting messaging against LGBT issues, is perceived as far more reserved (and even pro-states' rights) on this issue, while Shillary is (rightfully) perceived as 'Federal Government Is Going To Force Your Kid's School To Allow Adults With Penises To Be Able To Use The Girls Bathroom & Locker Room.'

6) "October Surprises" - Hitlery is already damaged goods because of Basement Server Classified e-mail Gate, and leaked DNC emails proving Bernie was sabotaged, but wait, there's more damaging stuff on the way, including more leaked emails and investigations that turn up highly damaging information regarding the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Slush fund-Foundation.

#TheAmericanPeopleAreAsPissedAsEverAndReadyToKickTheEstablishmentInTheBallsWithSteelToeBoots - Bitches

The bitch is going down quick!

zzyzzx says

I ought to show that to my Bass player he isn't voting but believes every thing CNN says. .
I know it's just a meme but he wouldn't. He is the definition of low information. If I showed him that said I saw it on CNN last night. He would be convinced that CNN declared him the winner already.

this video from the comment above by freespeechforever really sums up the true cause of trump's support. brilliant!

www.youtube.com/embed/wwmOkaKh3-s

Tenpoundbass says

He is the definition of low information.

But you set a high bar for an informed polity.

You can't expect everyone to know that Clinton ordered the killings at Ruby Ridge, or that Obama ordered the narrowing of airline seats.

+17

rando says

this video from the comment above by freespeechforever really sums up the true cause of trump's support. brilliant!

Did you listen to the entire argument ?

Of course he's right about the big picture, of not chasing (only) economic growth. And automation is going to force us face up to some of these issues fairly soon anyway. But I think the trade deals are more complicated than most people realize. That is, I don't believe total economic isolation of the U.S. would be to the world's benefit or even our own. The deals we make in the interest of our country's participation in international trade do sometimes benefit our corporations at a cost to our workers. It sucks, but it may also be necessary.

Tenpoundbass says

+17

That was comment 666.

And on the night of Pantsuit Pazuzu's acceptance speech before the Demonic Orcs!

[shudders ...]

But I think the trade deals are more complicated than most people realize. That is, I don't believe total economic isolation of the U.S. would be to the world's benefit or even our own. The deals we make in the interest of our country's participation in international trade do sometimes benefit our corporations at a cost to our workers. It sucks, but it may also be necessary.

------------

Is anyone suggesting economic isolation?

I'm curious as to why you suggest that our politicians make trade deals that sacrifice our Labor class, for the benefit of the the Corporate Ownership class, out of necessity. Care to explain?

I would think that a government of the people would make trade deals that benefit The People. Out of necessity.

errc says

I'm curious as to why you suggest that our politicians make trade deals that sacrifice our Labor class, for the benefit of the the Corporate Ownership class, out of necessity. Care to explain?

I wasn't suggesting the American labor getting screwed was anyone's intention. And I also wasn't advocating any specific deal past or present. SImply observing the obvious big picture.

WE as a country have argued and fought against communism and for global capitalism. Many of our corporations are multinational players in a global economy. IT isn't surprising that a natural effect of their growth and the continuing globalization is that cheap labor in other countries is taken advantage of by american corporations (including Trump in a huuuuge way). If we refused to have that occur, or insisted that it not occur this would mean essentially isolating ourselves, and allowing global competing corporations of other countries to take advantage of that labor to their competitive advantage in the global market place.

That should give you a hint as to what I was referring to. But it's not that simple. As things work now, at least iphones are made by an american company.

By the way, if you watch that video, a compelling argument is made that the offshoring of manufacturing was happening regardless of those trade deals. Those deals just tried to optimize trade to benefit american interests. Yes - american corporate interests.

IT's a global economy. It's not that hard to understand. WE have to find ways to do better for our workers. But preventing trade deals that our corporations think are good for them in terms of how they compete (IN THAT GLOBAL ECONOMY), is not the answer. At least I can't see how it is.

I think our focus should be on automation - because that wave is going to be upon us before long, and the potential displacement of labor that comes with that is far greater than the one that comes from manufacturing being offshored. Possibly the latter problem is a blessing, forcing us to face up to some needed pro worker related policies that are going to come from government investing in things like infrastructure, clean energy, and science and technology.

http://heavy.com/news/2016/07/nevada-general-election-polls-donald-trump-rnc-bump-hillary-clinton-las-vegas-who-is-leading-in/

Trump ahead in Nevada

The June GQR Research poll sampled just 300 likely voters. It found Trump led, 47-45 percent over Clinton, with a 5.7 percent margin of error. Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson received 9 percent support when he is included, with Trump and Clinton receiving 44 percent each.
Candidate %
Trump 47
Clinton 45
Other 8

errc says

But I think the trade deals are more complicated than most people realize. That is, I don't believe total economic isolation of the U.S. would be to the world's benefit or even our own. The deals we make in the interest of our country's participation in international trade do sometimes benefit our corporations at a cost to our workers. It sucks, but it may also be necessary.

Nobody is seeking ecconomic issolation. Our trade deals are made by self serving politicians who are weaving their golden parachute. We make trade deals that are made and signed based on optimal conditions for a few potlicians and their fincial backers, that serves their best intersts but kicks the rest of us in the can.

Nobody is saying ecconomic issolation. Just getting a good deal, we never get a good deal. The Clintons got a good deal, GW Bush got a great deal, Cheny got excelent deals, every motherfucker in Congress got a cherry sweet heart of a deal, when they bailed out the banks that were too big to fail. They knew who were going to turn a 40% profit in three months, and invested accordingly. Had you and I done that, we would have been in prison for insider trading.

Tenpoundbass says

Just getting a good deal, we never get a good deal. The Clintons got a good deal, GW Bush got a great deal, Cheny got excelent deals, every motherfucker in Congress got a cherry sweet heart of a deal, when they bailed out the banks that were too big to fail. They knew who were going to turn a 40% profit in three months, and invested accordingly. Had you and I done that, we would have been in prison for insider trading.

Absolutely correct! Being endorsed by criminals like Pelosi who made their fortunes with insider trading is a disgrace. Or isolating Russia which we could make excellent trade deals with to favor middle-eastern oil states is completely fucked up. That's where Trump's appeal comes in, people are starting to wake up that Russia is not the enemy anymore, and hasn't been in a long while. The enemy are globalists bailing out the 1% and legalizing insider trading for themselves while gladly laundering the money of terrorists.

Okay, well I said I would give it a few days after the DNC to update you, but here's an early example for you.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-poll-idUSKCN1092M5

"Clinton leads Trump by 6 points after Democratic confab: Reuters/Ipsos poll"

WE need a few days for the dust to settle after the DNC, but here's Nate Silvers "now cast" which had Trump ahead the other day:

I'm guessing by the middle of next week things will be back to where they were ? The only difference being that more and more of that small number of true independents are making up their minds as time goes by.

I'm still fascinated by the coincidence of Roger AIlles stepping down at the same time that TRump's nomination became official. Someone's head had to roll.

That chart is more Liberal Propaganda Bullshit! Trump has a 2 to 7 point lead over Hillary, your chart shows HIllary over 50, That's a LIE!
shows Hitlery with a 5 or 7 point lead over Trump another lie.

Even Hillary is using the phrase now:

Tenpoundbass says

That chart is more Liberal Propaganda Bullshit! Trump has a 2 to 7 point lead over Hillary, your chart shows HIllary over 50, That's a LIE!

shows Hitlery with a 5 or 7 point lead over Trump another lie.

That chart is from Nate SIlver's 538, probably the best go to site for this kind of analysis.

You might want to consider the difference between probability (that why the title uses the word "odds.") versus polls. Hillary having a 56% percent chance of winning is actually a very small lead. Not long ago she was considered by SIlver, and everyone betting actual money a 4:1 favorite, in other words about 80% likely to win. She might be back to that next week. Stay tuned.

Tenpoundbass says

Trump has a 2 to 7 point lead over Hillary

Maybe before the DNC. You go ahead and hang on to that old data as long as you can. Here, I'll show you a lagging graphic from REal CLear Politics. This one lags a lot because its averaging in polls from several days ago.

Again. That's a lagging graph and hasn't hardly begun to show the DNC bounce.

I know who it's from it's from this Idiot

http://dailycaller.com/2016/05/04/7-times-nate-silver-was-hilariously-wrong-about-donald-trump/

1. June 16, 2015: Why Donald Trump Isn’t A Real Candidate, In One Chart

2. July 16, 2015: Two Good Reasons Not To Take The Donald Trump ‘Surge’ Seriously

3. July 20, 2015: Donald Trump Is The World’s Greatest Troll

4. Aug. 6, 2015: Donald Trump’s Six Stages of Doom

5. Aug. 11, 2015: Donald Trump Is Winning The Polls, And Losing The Nomination

6. Nov. 23, 2015: Dear Media, Stop Freaking Out About Donald Trump’s Polls

7. Donald Trump Comes Out Of Iowa Looking Like Pat Buchanan

His analysis has always been about probability, something you don't understand.

If an analysis indicates something has a 60% chance of happening, and then the opposite (40% chance of happening) happens, it doesn't make the guy an idiot. But I'm not going to bother explaining that to you. Most readers that care, are very capable of understanding this.

WAnt to explode your mind ? Go here and see that Silver currently has 3 different probabilistic analyses of the expected results. The one I posted last night, the "now cast" has actually flipped back toward Trump for some reason.

Go here and try the three radio buttons on the upper right hand side.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

Correct.
However, it does make the data he posts useless...

marcus says

If an analysis indicates something has a 60% chance of happening, and then the opposite (40% chance of happening) happens, it doesn't make the guy an idiot.

marcus says

If we refused to have that occur, or insisted that it not occur this would mean essentially isolating ourselves, and allowing global competing corporations of other countries to take advantage of that labor to their competitive advantage in the global market place.

Bullshit! There is NO reason why stuff sold in USA can't be made in USA. For consumption outside the US, you can have a separate factory somewhere else for that. The US market for most products is big enough to warrant a separate manufacturing location in the US. That, and a lot of things are made in more facility anyway.

I think I almost decoded what you're trying to say. But it still makes no sense. Not if you understand the most basic economics. People tolerate paying more for drugs than people outside the U.S pay, but that has nothing to do with where they are manufactured.

Answer this. SAy we make the Nike shoes here and sell them for $250, and we have a plant in China that sells them there and in a few other countries for $60 (US). Which ones do we sell in Austria, France, Iceland, New Zealand and England (to name only a few) ? Are we going to sell the Chinese Nike shoes made in China by an Amercian firm to everyone except ourselves ? Really ?

If you explore the logic and the example it sets, yes, you're talking about isolationism. Does everyone need to be totally isolationist for your thoughts on this to make sense ?