Would rather rise above all the hyperbole and find comfort with NYT's 'The Upshot' and its showing Clinton having a whopping 83% chance through a 1,000 possible ways of getting elected garnering as many as 347 electoral votes while showing Trump having a trifling 17% chance through only 200 possible ways to get just the bare minimum 270 electoral votes (plus the 4 possible ways that lead to a tie).
24
The real revelation of this election cycle is that a foul-mouthed real estate developer with no experience in politics and one who who commits nearly constant, egregious gaffes is polling above 1% in national polls. We have a serious problem in this country and I venture to say it's not Trump.
195
From an outside perspective I do not see much discussion about real issues on either side. Not that Trump had any idea of what he is speaking at all. His policies are just a mixture between being outright radical and "big", "great", and "tremendous" formed into some sort of statement.
A lot of people see it as choosing the lesser evil. Many people will be disappointed about Hillary winning because it will just be another four, possibly eight, years of business as usual. There will be some tweaks to the system but no big reforms or change. Even some republicans seem to be content with voting for Hillary, knowing she will be upholding the status quo.
As for the polls, of course they will be more accurate going forward, but especially in this race, which doesn't seem to be that much about policies, but more about which candidate is more unpopular, bigger swings of who is in the lead may be possible further down the road.
A lot of people see it as choosing the lesser evil. Many people will be disappointed about Hillary winning because it will just be another four, possibly eight, years of business as usual. There will be some tweaks to the system but no big reforms or change. Even some republicans seem to be content with voting for Hillary, knowing she will be upholding the status quo.
As for the polls, of course they will be more accurate going forward, but especially in this race, which doesn't seem to be that much about policies, but more about which candidate is more unpopular, bigger swings of who is in the lead may be possible further down the road.
17
Why would I believe anything that the New York Times publishes about this Presidential race? Your reporting has dipped to the lowest of the lows along with FOX NEWS. Opinion, opinion, opinion!
74
"Just listening to his words" does not make Donald a racist, misogynist or xenophobe.
It still surprises me that so many Dems, who pride themselves educated, critical thinkers, want to let other people, and the most expansive definitions of those insults, control what they think. They simply do not engage in analysis, and the burden is not on Donald to prove a negative.
For example, his referring to "criminals and rapists" among border crossers is not racist, except in the fevered minds of the left. Of course there are criminals and rapists in that group, along with cartel operatives and all sorts of unsavory people. De facto open borders encourage them to enter the U.S.
No one, and least of all Donald, has weighed in against legal immigration, carried out in an orderly, scrupulous way, that does not involve a huge moral hazard in encouraging future illegal conduct.
Finally, the word "racism", among others, has been stretched so far, and so idiotically, beyond it's 1960s' meaning as to be unrecognizable. Shouting "All Lives Matter!" is racist? Supporting Prop 209 in California, which forbade race as a consideration in higher education admissions and awarding of state contracts, is racist?
I don't accept the left's redefinition of these terms, and neither does Trump. Good for him. Provide some analysis why his statements are racist, and define explicitly what you think racism is, and maybe we'll get somewhere.
Until then, all you're doing is blowing smoke.
It still surprises me that so many Dems, who pride themselves educated, critical thinkers, want to let other people, and the most expansive definitions of those insults, control what they think. They simply do not engage in analysis, and the burden is not on Donald to prove a negative.
For example, his referring to "criminals and rapists" among border crossers is not racist, except in the fevered minds of the left. Of course there are criminals and rapists in that group, along with cartel operatives and all sorts of unsavory people. De facto open borders encourage them to enter the U.S.
No one, and least of all Donald, has weighed in against legal immigration, carried out in an orderly, scrupulous way, that does not involve a huge moral hazard in encouraging future illegal conduct.
Finally, the word "racism", among others, has been stretched so far, and so idiotically, beyond it's 1960s' meaning as to be unrecognizable. Shouting "All Lives Matter!" is racist? Supporting Prop 209 in California, which forbade race as a consideration in higher education admissions and awarding of state contracts, is racist?
I don't accept the left's redefinition of these terms, and neither does Trump. Good for him. Provide some analysis why his statements are racist, and define explicitly what you think racism is, and maybe we'll get somewhere.
Until then, all you're doing is blowing smoke.
28
So this article tells us what, exactly?? It's a waste of newsprint.
21
Then why report "bad" polls? So stupid.
15
Potentially, more people are realizing they -can- vote for a 3rd party, regardless the lack of media coverage, to express their displeasure with either of these two major party candidates. Ultimately, it may be that neither will claim a "mandate" from voters..... perhaps winning by the barest of margins. And in such a year, that's the way it should be.
18
Ms. Clinton is running as the de facto incumbent. Traditionally (and this is no traditional election, agreed), on election day, the undecideds break nearly 90% for the challenger, so that if polls are nearly even on election day, Ms. Clinton is toast.
I saw a fascinating comment section on another publication on how everyone saw so few Clinton signs, Clinton bumper stickers, while the folks said a person would be crazy to put a Trump bumpersticker on a car as it would be vandalized, as has been publicize often with Trump signs on private land.
In the same spirit, people are afraid to tell live pollsters and certainly work associates that they support Trump, as it's not socially acceptable.
I think even NY Times readers agree there is little enthusiasm for Ms. Clinton.
If Trump can use the debates to show hie's not a monster and promises real change, which Ms. Clinton cannot do, he'll win running away as Reagan did in 1980.
If he comes across as a bully, no-nothing in the debates, Clinton wins.
I saw a fascinating comment section on another publication on how everyone saw so few Clinton signs, Clinton bumper stickers, while the folks said a person would be crazy to put a Trump bumpersticker on a car as it would be vandalized, as has been publicize often with Trump signs on private land.
In the same spirit, people are afraid to tell live pollsters and certainly work associates that they support Trump, as it's not socially acceptable.
I think even NY Times readers agree there is little enthusiasm for Ms. Clinton.
If Trump can use the debates to show hie's not a monster and promises real change, which Ms. Clinton cannot do, he'll win running away as Reagan did in 1980.
If he comes across as a bully, no-nothing in the debates, Clinton wins.
14
I am voting for Hillary, she is the most qualified and has greater credibility with me. Trump needs to release eight years of taxes and to provide us with a serious Dr. report on his health. His running mate Gov. Pence needs to unseal his congressional library so we can view his emails and correspondence as well.
58
From the mid-Sixties through the mid-Seventies there was a flourishing alternative press in this country. The reason it flourished was because the regular media simply lost its way, its journalistic perspective swamped by the desire to not appear "biased" in the eyes of the powers-that-be coupled with the desire to increase readership with "dramatic revelations" of questionable provenance, let alone truth.
Many Commenters here have ably documented and denounced the current equivalent, especially in regards to the Times from which we expect better. Perhaps we will again see a flourishing alternative press. Perhaps not. In the Sixties and Seventies that press defined real, physical communities, as it tied together peoples' lives, as they worked to create something better. Such seems alien to the current younger generation which, instead, seems to live in virtual associations.
For those interested in what an alternative press can (or at least once did) look like, check out "The Great Speckled Bird" (Atlanta), "The Berkeley Tribe" (Berkeley), "The Chicago Seed" (Chicago), NOLA Express (New Orleans), "Fifth Estate" (Detroit), "Northwest Passage" (Bellingham), "Quicksilver Times" (D.C.), or any of a hundred others. There is nothing like them today. San Jose, California alone had four alternative papers, and that was before Silicon Valley. Even Barstow had one.
Many Commenters here have ably documented and denounced the current equivalent, especially in regards to the Times from which we expect better. Perhaps we will again see a flourishing alternative press. Perhaps not. In the Sixties and Seventies that press defined real, physical communities, as it tied together peoples' lives, as they worked to create something better. Such seems alien to the current younger generation which, instead, seems to live in virtual associations.
For those interested in what an alternative press can (or at least once did) look like, check out "The Great Speckled Bird" (Atlanta), "The Berkeley Tribe" (Berkeley), "The Chicago Seed" (Chicago), NOLA Express (New Orleans), "Fifth Estate" (Detroit), "Northwest Passage" (Bellingham), "Quicksilver Times" (D.C.), or any of a hundred others. There is nothing like them today. San Jose, California alone had four alternative papers, and that was before Silicon Valley. Even Barstow had one.
12
The Republicans have given the Democrats (not the nation, that's for sure) the gift of a lifetime. But the Democrats could not have picked a sorrier candidate to run against Trump. Her tag line is simply, "I'm not Trump". Frankly, i don't think that's enough. But what she does have - and I do think this will carry her to victory - is the "woman card". There are enough folks out there - and not all women, either - who would vote for any woman to become the first female president. Hillary inherits that benefit.
But when she talks about her having a mandate, pulleeze!!
But when she talks about her having a mandate, pulleeze!!
17
A tight race? Really? I don't think so. No sign of that yet. With Clinton's ground force (get out the vote effort) 2 points is equivalent to at least five points nationwide, more in battleground states. Its probably even more than that when you factor in the people who say they will vote for Trump on the phone, but won't be able to actually do it.
The press has spent too much time churning empty water and writing what Trump says. Other writers are correct, Clinton is being allowed to walk in to the White House almost issue free (thank goodness Bernie extracted a few promises)
The press has spent too much time churning empty water and writing what Trump says. Other writers are correct, Clinton is being allowed to walk in to the White House almost issue free (thank goodness Bernie extracted a few promises)
6
From the mid-Sixties through the mid-Seventies there was a flourishing alternative press in this country. The reason it flourished was because the regular media simply lost its way, its journalistic perspective swamped by the desire to not appear "biased" in the eyes of the powers-that-be coupled with the desire to increase readership with "dramatic revelations" of questionable provenance, let alone truth.
Many Commenters here have ably documented and denounced the current equivalent, especially in regards to the Times from which we expect better. Perhaps we will again see a flourishing alternative press. Perhaps not. In the Sixties and Seventies that press defined real, physical communities, as it tied together peoples' lives, as they worked to create something better. Such seems alien to the current younger generation which, instead, seems to live in virtual associations.
Many Commenters here have ably documented and denounced the current equivalent, especially in regards to the Times from which we expect better. Perhaps we will again see a flourishing alternative press. Perhaps not. In the Sixties and Seventies that press defined real, physical communities, as it tied together peoples' lives, as they worked to create something better. Such seems alien to the current younger generation which, instead, seems to live in virtual associations.
6
Polls, smolls...
How about an article comparing the foreign policy of the two candidates? Or any policy, for that matter? Though it may be a hard pull to find enough to say about Trump's ideas based on the pittance of about 9000 words on only 7 policy proposals on his website, and still have an article without having more words than Trump. In comparison Clinton's website has about 112,700 words within 65 policy fact sheets.
Clinton is involved in everything and shares her ideas, from criminal justice reform to Zika virus, cures for Alzheimer's, or the high cost of EpiPens. These are problems that affect many of us on a up close and personal scale. While the nations of the world veer to a more risky stance it's good to see someone paying attention to, and knowledgeable about all spectrums of America's concerns.
How about an article comparing the foreign policy of the two candidates? Or any policy, for that matter? Though it may be a hard pull to find enough to say about Trump's ideas based on the pittance of about 9000 words on only 7 policy proposals on his website, and still have an article without having more words than Trump. In comparison Clinton's website has about 112,700 words within 65 policy fact sheets.
Clinton is involved in everything and shares her ideas, from criminal justice reform to Zika virus, cures for Alzheimer's, or the high cost of EpiPens. These are problems that affect many of us on a up close and personal scale. While the nations of the world veer to a more risky stance it's good to see someone paying attention to, and knowledgeable about all spectrums of America's concerns.
34
Lots of mention of "High Quality Polls". Why do I get the feeling High Quality = Hillary has a big lead?
24
Hillary is having trouble because she is a women and we are not accustomed to a women speaking so aggressively, it comes across as shrill and abrasive. It might take a long time for Americans to be not be repelled by a women who is ranting and speaking in such an ominous tone, men can do it and come across as strong and appealing. Obviously this is not Hillary's fault, but she must deal with it somehow and I think that is why she is limiting her exposure, people just don't like her. And Trump has been doing plenty of damage to himself, so why go out there and expose yourself to more voters who might learn to dislike you.
13
Too much emphasis on polls. Young columnist here...
we see year after year "how the polls could be so wrong?"
we see year after year "how the polls could be so wrong?"
8
Since Clinton had the DNC rig the nomination againt Sanders, and her continual lying about emails, I see no reason why she is is fit to be president. Bush was a liar and cost many Americans their lives. Do we need another liar?
17
If Hillary's lead has shrunk, we have the NY Times to thank.
Your reporters did to her what they did to Bill Clinton during Whitewater and to Al Gore during his campaign.
In the effort to kowtow to Fox News and pretend that "fair and balanced" means that you pretend that outright lies and dishonesty from a Republican is exactly the same as a Republican-led investigation that led to NO illegal activities being found, you have managed to convince most of the American people that Hillary Clinton is no difference than Donald Trump and just as corrupt.
As the "newspaper of record" you had an obligation to the public and you failed miserably to keep it. I am embarrassed for your editors and publishers. This was an important election and you treated it as a joke.
Your reporters did to her what they did to Bill Clinton during Whitewater and to Al Gore during his campaign.
In the effort to kowtow to Fox News and pretend that "fair and balanced" means that you pretend that outright lies and dishonesty from a Republican is exactly the same as a Republican-led investigation that led to NO illegal activities being found, you have managed to convince most of the American people that Hillary Clinton is no difference than Donald Trump and just as corrupt.
As the "newspaper of record" you had an obligation to the public and you failed miserably to keep it. I am embarrassed for your editors and publishers. This was an important election and you treated it as a joke.
65
She is just awful; and, so is he.
27
I only follow Nate Silver's poll.....her lead is still good though it has shrunk since it was 89% Hillary to 11% the T rump
8
Your polls don't mean squat. And NYT's percentage edge is a joke. We all said your H percentage would shrink as we approach Nov 8. Do you take take us for fools NYT?
3
Trump is often painted as the "war-monger" of the two. Precisely the opposite is the case. Clinton has flip-flopped on gay marriage, the Keystone pipeline, TPP, and probably other issues I'm forgetting about. The only issue she's been consistent on is Middle East war. She's liked them all. Trump claims he opposed the Iraq war. Maybe he's lying; maybe not. But we KNOW Hillary voted for it.
In the "war monger" category, the prize has to go to Hillary, not Trump.
In the "war monger" category, the prize has to go to Hillary, not Trump.
15
This upswing doesn't surprise me after I recently witnessed one of Hillary's tv ads showing on a television for sale displayed in an appliance store. The ad merely showed Donald Trump giving snippets from three different orations (one of which was him saying that he knew more about ISIS than the generals and another was about sending all the illegal aliens back to Mexico). Several other shoppers for new televisions were there also looking at the same screen. A couple of those other folks immediately commented admiringly about how Trump's "got it right" and "has it all figured out," as well as other similar remarks. I didn't say anything, but I thought that whomever put that ad together wrongly made the assumption that any thinking person would hear those Trump-isms and instantly conclude that he was not right for the presidency. But, it seems apparent that showing an ad with Trump making his inane pitches just serves to further advance his brand and his strange distortion of logic. His aphorisms strike harmonic chords with people who are seeking that kind of leader.
The irony is that any differences between an anti-Trump ad showing speaking- from-the-podium clips and any pro-Trump ad with him making similar foolish assertions would be imperceptible to those whose minds are geared for his genre of reasoning. Considering whomever put that ad together, as the saying goes, "with friends like that, one doesn't need enemies."
The irony is that any differences between an anti-Trump ad showing speaking- from-the-podium clips and any pro-Trump ad with him making similar foolish assertions would be imperceptible to those whose minds are geared for his genre of reasoning. Considering whomever put that ad together, as the saying goes, "with friends like that, one doesn't need enemies."
17
This seems to be the general thinking among Hillary supporters:
"Hillary may be dishonest, conniving, a wheeler-dealer [but Trump is even worse, so vote for Hillary]."
There are other choices: Vote for Johnson or Stein, write somebody in (Sanders, for example), or don't vote for anyone. It strikes me as inappropriate to vote for a candidate you believe is "dishonest, conniving, a wheeler-dealer," no matter how bad her main opponent may be.
"Hillary may be dishonest, conniving, a wheeler-dealer [but Trump is even worse, so vote for Hillary]."
There are other choices: Vote for Johnson or Stein, write somebody in (Sanders, for example), or don't vote for anyone. It strikes me as inappropriate to vote for a candidate you believe is "dishonest, conniving, a wheeler-dealer," no matter how bad her main opponent may be.
17
It is about time that people started to wake up and see what is going on. Hillary is Bad news in real life and good news in media outlets like the NYT. however, the NYT has lost whatever credibility it had and people other than the far left are the only people who still think what the NYT says is accurate and unbiased. I cancel my subscription, but I guess it hasn't taken effect yet because I can still make comments here.
26
After reading this "analysis" I think I know less about what is going on than what I did ten minutes ago. No, I know more. I know that we are marking time until November and the political parasites have to keep stirring in junk stories and polls just to keep the discussion alive so that the "news" media who have no clue what real news is, have something to write about and sell.
This would be a better country if we just started telling the truth about each other, dirt and all. It would only take about ten minutes and then we could turn off the power button off electronic device until November 8th.
It would feel like heaven. And the outcome would be the same whether or not we listen to this junk because 98% of us have made our minds up, even if we like to lie to ourselves and our neighbors as if we hadn't.
Library and audiobooks, save a good novel for me. I'm on my way.
This would be a better country if we just started telling the truth about each other, dirt and all. It would only take about ten minutes and then we could turn off the power button off electronic device until November 8th.
It would feel like heaven. And the outcome would be the same whether or not we listen to this junk because 98% of us have made our minds up, even if we like to lie to ourselves and our neighbors as if we hadn't.
Library and audiobooks, save a good novel for me. I'm on my way.
28
you think it will all be over nov 8
think again
thats th day either donny or hillary start running for reelection
2
For as long as she has been in the public eye, Hillary Clinton has consistently made decisions that non-supporters find perplexing. The latest of these was a month-long hiatus from the campaign trail following her party's convention, as if the outcome of the election had already been decided in her favor.
At this crucial point in the race, she let it be known where her priorities have always been. And her fixation on Trump, to the detriment of putting forward her own vision for the country and its future, add to the many reasons I can't trust or vote for her.
At this crucial point in the race, she let it be known where her priorities have always been. And her fixation on Trump, to the detriment of putting forward her own vision for the country and its future, add to the many reasons I can't trust or vote for her.
19
A better title for the article: "Did Hillary Clinton Ever Have a Leader? How to Assess the Pollsters" by Nate Cohn.
For the last month and until just a couple of days ago, The Upshot has told us that Clinton has a 85-90% chance of winning based on an analysis of various polls. Today The Upshot tells us that it's a coin toss.
Fortunately I retire in May 2017. And because I am married to a foreigner from a reasonably stable country with universal health care and have managed my money wisely and have lived frugally, I can afford to retire and reside outside of the U.S. and can do so legally. Once I'm gone, I will never read the NY Times again (I can read in three other languages other than English).
For the last month and until just a couple of days ago, The Upshot has told us that Clinton has a 85-90% chance of winning based on an analysis of various polls. Today The Upshot tells us that it's a coin toss.
Fortunately I retire in May 2017. And because I am married to a foreigner from a reasonably stable country with universal health care and have managed my money wisely and have lived frugally, I can afford to retire and reside outside of the U.S. and can do so legally. Once I'm gone, I will never read the NY Times again (I can read in three other languages other than English).
9
I cannot be the only person who does not answer their cell or home phone when they see a number they do not recognize. Who are these "likely" voters? I've voted in every election for the past 35 years so am a "likely" voter but refuse to participate in these polls.
21
To me the only poll that matters is Gary Johnson's numbers; hopefully he hits 15% so there is somebody else on stage besides these two losers
11
re: Lead has shrunk
If there should be one presidential election that is a runaway, it's this one. Hillary should crush Trump. But we know, like all presidential elections, this one will be close too (52% to 48%?). Yet Hillary will easily surpass 270 electoral votes.
If there should be one presidential election that is a runaway, it's this one. Hillary should crush Trump. But we know, like all presidential elections, this one will be close too (52% to 48%?). Yet Hillary will easily surpass 270 electoral votes.
9
My friends, family members and I who are liberal Democrats have been talking over the holiday weekend and this week about our depression over the tightness of the race, which seems incredible to us given Donald Trump's personal qualities and his lack of knowledge and interest in government and the issues of the day.
We are continuing to work for and to contribute to the Clinton-Kaine campaign, perhaps even more so now that her election is anything but a foregone conclusion.
Indeed, some of us now conclude that whatever we do, Donald Trump is likely to be our next President. The unimaginable will become reality in America. I would like to see more commentary from liberal and progressive voices about what a Trump administration would be like for us and for our country.
Although I still hold out hope that Clinton can win, I feel I've seen this picture before: in 1988, when Michael Dukakis had a big lead for a while before the Willie Horton ad unleashed by the Bush campaign; in 2000, when Al Gore's minor foibles were constantly criticized in the media while another Bush campaign was based on the candidate's likability; and in 2004, when John Kerry, a Vietnam war veteran who served honorably, was turned into a monster by lying "Swift Boaters" commercials.
People who don't want Donald Trump but plan to vote for Jill Stein, Gary Johnson or Evan McMullin or write in someone else need to think about how they will feel when the newscasters announce that Trump has won the election.
We are continuing to work for and to contribute to the Clinton-Kaine campaign, perhaps even more so now that her election is anything but a foregone conclusion.
Indeed, some of us now conclude that whatever we do, Donald Trump is likely to be our next President. The unimaginable will become reality in America. I would like to see more commentary from liberal and progressive voices about what a Trump administration would be like for us and for our country.
Although I still hold out hope that Clinton can win, I feel I've seen this picture before: in 1988, when Michael Dukakis had a big lead for a while before the Willie Horton ad unleashed by the Bush campaign; in 2000, when Al Gore's minor foibles were constantly criticized in the media while another Bush campaign was based on the candidate's likability; and in 2004, when John Kerry, a Vietnam war veteran who served honorably, was turned into a monster by lying "Swift Boaters" commercials.
People who don't want Donald Trump but plan to vote for Jill Stein, Gary Johnson or Evan McMullin or write in someone else need to think about how they will feel when the newscasters announce that Trump has won the election.
27
You are too pessimistic. National polls are useless. Follow only the swing state polls. Clinton will win, the only question is how large a victory.
3
"How accurate are these polls?"
That depends:
If you like the poll results, they're extremely accurate.
If you don't like the poll results, they're inaccurate and flawed -- basically worthless.
That depends:
If you like the poll results, they're extremely accurate.
If you don't like the poll results, they're inaccurate and flawed -- basically worthless.
5
This story was predictable. Expect more "news" reports between now and November that Hillary's poll numbers are dropping or even more predictable that she is trailing Trump "in the polls." Of course, these stories are designed to scare the wits out of anyone fearful of a Trump presidency with the expectation that they will get out there in November to vote for Hillary. The masses are so easily played.
This, of course, is all part of the media strategy to ensure Clinton's election and it is very likely to succeed given that most of Trump's supporters sadly will take the day off to drink beer and watch television or stock car racing without even bothering to vote for the Donald.
The key to victory is to get out as many voters as possible and the demographic profile of the electorate suggests that Hillary's supporters are more motivated to vote than the Donalds.
This country is going to see either the largest turnout in modern history or the lowest. It's also quite possible that there are more people out there who will vote for a third party candidate than pollsters and the public realize which will certainly put a squeeze on the margin of victory.
This, of course, is all part of the media strategy to ensure Clinton's election and it is very likely to succeed given that most of Trump's supporters sadly will take the day off to drink beer and watch television or stock car racing without even bothering to vote for the Donald.
The key to victory is to get out as many voters as possible and the demographic profile of the electorate suggests that Hillary's supporters are more motivated to vote than the Donalds.
This country is going to see either the largest turnout in modern history or the lowest. It's also quite possible that there are more people out there who will vote for a third party candidate than pollsters and the public realize which will certainly put a squeeze on the margin of victory.
6
What we have hear is a strong case of Clinton-Trump fatigue. Two perfectly awful candidates with an electorate pining for a different Republican or a different Democrat to cast their votes for. By this point in time, Clinton should be ahead of the lunatic by double digits, heading for a landslide victory. Any other Democrat would be. Any other candidate but Trump, likewise would be outdistancing Shady Sadie easily (yes, Clinton is that awful). This, in my opinion, will go down to the wire with one of the uglies outlasting the other as voters throw in the towel and opt for bingeing on Law and Order reruns on election day.
7
So, you're saying even money, even odds: Trump or Clinton? I'll put a thousand on Clinton to win, any takers?
9
Strange that there is no consideration WHY her lead has shrunk.
13
HRC has been more less keeping her head down and raising serious swag these days. I expect a full-court press against Trump to be called soon. The guy is a gift horse in a campaign that will be 99% negative... and, seriously, do you want to be kept awake for four years by knowing Trump actually does have the nuclear codes and someone like General Curtis Lemay is his military advisor?
11
ive been following th vegas betting line on th elections for months
as of today, hrc is at 1 for 3
and dt is at 2 for 1
still considerable odds for hrc, but trump has been steadily narrowing those odds for months
2
If you vote for Hillary or Trump you are insane. You have lost the ability to think or empathize. You are an example of learned helplessness.
15
Insane? Lost the ability to think or empathize? Learned helplessness? I think not. But you've covered just about every angle here so I guess you've got this all figured out
4
Look. I see so many people here irate at Hilary for lack of honesty, for opportunism, for being comfortable with too much money. Fine -- conceded. In any normal election year these would all be grounds for not supporting her. But where is the sense that this is NO normal election year? First, Hillary may be dishonest, conniving, a wheeler-dealer... as if her opponent isn't?? So if they share all those problems, what's left to distinguish them...? What's left is that she's running against someone who, whatever his personal views, has deliberately unleashed the most visceral and shocking impulses of hate, racism, and bigotry that have been publicly evident in our country for a long time. Someone who eggs haters on, encourages thuggery at political events, refuses to repudiate support from the farthest fringes of the right wing. Can you imagine the outrage if a candidate on the left were behaving in an analogous way? The danger of Trump is not just Trump, say what you might about his totalitarian impulses and potential personal racism. The ultimate danger lies in the forces he has unleashed, forces that even he may soon be unable to control. Unless you go to the polls determined to send an unequivocal signal against the uprising of this culture of violence and hate you are either part of it yourself or, for some reason of self-interest (lower taxes, whatever) you are willing to let it stand. Before you vote in November, think about what -- and who -- your vote is enabling.
75
The biggest problem is she is stupid and admitted it in the FBI interview. I can tolerate quite a bit in a president, but not stupid.
9
Thanks, Stuart! Extremely well stated.
3
Hillary is no firebrand. She is a policy wonk workhorse. An administrator and team builder. She is also competent. She will have the votes when she needs them. and she will make a great president, if the Republicans don't constipate government.
75
You left out "she's also a crook."
6
The coughing jags Hillary experiences remind me of my now-deceased grandmother.
She's not fit; she's overweight, coughing alot, and she said a concussion prevented her from remembering things when interviewed by the FBI.
It's concerning and I'm someone who does not glorify or exalt youth.
I think some of the poll numbers may reflect the concerns about her health.
She's not fit; she's overweight, coughing alot, and she said a concussion prevented her from remembering things when interviewed by the FBI.
It's concerning and I'm someone who does not glorify or exalt youth.
I think some of the poll numbers may reflect the concerns about her health.
21
Isn't the Donald older than Hillary? And I smiled at the interview with his Dr. who took all of 5 minutes to scribble a health report for him. Like everything Trump faceless and baseless.
4
She is not overweight and she might have allergies. She is not your grandmother...so get over it...Trump is older...
9
Just stop. Please. She has allergies and have you never suddenly had a frog" in your throat that just wouldn't quit?
8
Clinton's lead may have shrunk in some polls, but she is still ahead. Show me a story where Clinton is losing in every poll and the odds of her winning are 20% and you may have something I'd be interested in.
21
"Show me a story where Clinton is losing in every poll"
Give it a couple more weeks. You see Trump is a fast learner, while she is... Well I guess I'll be generous and just say she is not.
Give it a couple more weeks. You see Trump is a fast learner, while she is... Well I guess I'll be generous and just say she is not.
8
Did you see the sample breakdown in the CNN-ORC poll? 28% Democrats, 32% Republicans, 40% Independents. That is not a representative sample of likely voters in 2016. In 2014 maybe.
3
I just find it impossible to fathom that Trump can fake his way through three 90-minute debates. His nonsensical ramblings will be sliced and diced right up until Election Day. Except on Fox.
30
No they won't. Look at the NY Times today. Instead of a headline reading "More Lies from Donald Trump - Can't he ever tell the truth" -- they have "Let's examine Trump's statements".
2
In the 1960 election, Nixon won according to those who listened on radio. He was notably superior on content and policy. JFK won on TV, where his assurance and personality carried him.
Trump's bluster could be very powerful to a lot of people who watch the debates, sad to say.
Trump's bluster could be very powerful to a lot of people who watch the debates, sad to say.
4
He seemed to do well enough to beat 17 of his Republican opponents. I'd be surprised if Hillary can make it through a debate without a "bathroom break".
5
I am really not surprised at the closeness of this presidential election, according to the polls.
Most people I know don't like either candidate, and they are not spending their precious time reading about the candidates, issues, or the election.
Both candidates are viewed as deeply flawed, as the media feeds us one scandal after another, and by now Hillary's emails are treated as more important than Trump's endless bankruptcies, rip-off schemes, political inexperience, and instability.
Like the Brexit British, Americans are fed up, in a foul mood. They are tired of the status quo and smug, clueless, distant establishment politicians. Hillary is nothing if not your quintessential establishment politician. Donald represents excitement, a change, no matter how quirky, erratic, and unfit to be President.
Anything to shake things up. A disastrous attitude, but how else can people voice their disgust when no one listens and no one cares about everyday people in a thoroughly corrupt, corporate, greedy, self-seeking world?
Anyway, I don't think the polls much in this election, because what people may tell the pollsters may be one thing in our partisan political party country. Whom they actually vote inside the voting booth may be quite different.
I can imagine lots of men who claim to be Democrats secretly voting for Trump, and a number of Republican women secretly voting for Hillary.
People are sick of the pollsters too. How about talking about policies & plans?
Most people I know don't like either candidate, and they are not spending their precious time reading about the candidates, issues, or the election.
Both candidates are viewed as deeply flawed, as the media feeds us one scandal after another, and by now Hillary's emails are treated as more important than Trump's endless bankruptcies, rip-off schemes, political inexperience, and instability.
Like the Brexit British, Americans are fed up, in a foul mood. They are tired of the status quo and smug, clueless, distant establishment politicians. Hillary is nothing if not your quintessential establishment politician. Donald represents excitement, a change, no matter how quirky, erratic, and unfit to be President.
Anything to shake things up. A disastrous attitude, but how else can people voice their disgust when no one listens and no one cares about everyday people in a thoroughly corrupt, corporate, greedy, self-seeking world?
Anyway, I don't think the polls much in this election, because what people may tell the pollsters may be one thing in our partisan political party country. Whom they actually vote inside the voting booth may be quite different.
I can imagine lots of men who claim to be Democrats secretly voting for Trump, and a number of Republican women secretly voting for Hillary.
People are sick of the pollsters too. How about talking about policies & plans?
35
"I can imagine lots of men who claim to be Democrats secretly voting for Trump, and a number of Republican women secretly voting for Hillary."
Sad but absolutely true.
There are plenty of folks who will vote because of gender.
To vote for or against HRC or Trump because of gender is silly, not to mention sexist.
Sad but absolutely true.
There are plenty of folks who will vote because of gender.
To vote for or against HRC or Trump because of gender is silly, not to mention sexist.
6
The betting sites still have Hillary Clinton as an overwhelming favorite. At this time of the election cycle, they are a better predictor than the polls.
19
as of today, donald is 2 for 1, hillary 1 for 3
still ahead, but trumps been narrowing that margin for 6 months
2
Mitt Romney was told by his pollsters that he would win in 2012. And the outraged commentators on Fox News who refused to acknowledge their own "quants" tally of electoral votes giving Obama the victory was a monument to the inability of polls to predict the outcome of many elections accurately. The ability of polls recently, moreover, to identify "likely voters" has decreased as cell phones have replaced land lines. The "polls plus" model of FiveThiryEight means more in this context.
All this said, polls traditionally tighten in any race. But the fact remains that Clinton (or any Democratic presidential candidate) has a much easier and more varied path to a majority in the electoral college.
All this said, polls traditionally tighten in any race. But the fact remains that Clinton (or any Democratic presidential candidate) has a much easier and more varied path to a majority in the electoral college.
6
You're afraid Trump can get elected? You should be. Look at history. It's really scarey who has been elected POTUS.
Trump is a liar, he's already alienated the governments and people of most of the world, and he does not have a clue how DC or international politics work. The man in the Mexican government who suggested inviting Trump resigned today.
Worse than DC and the world, I seriously doubt that he understands that our 50 state governments do NOT answer to the POTUS or to federal agencies. He really hasn't a clue what's in the Constitution.
He suggested shooting Mrs Clinton or a nominee to SCOTUS, so he's seriously annoyed the Secret Service. I've been around guns all my life and fully support gun ownership. (Convicted felons and the mentally ill should not be armed.) I'm still highly offended by his stupid remark about 2nd Amendment supporters dealing with Mrs Clinton. Like most gun owners, I don't shoot people who haven't broken into my home.
No one running for any elected office should suggest murder as a solution to a political disagreement. Mrs Clinton is not my favorite person, but she knows national and international politics. She might not do what I'd do, but she'll deal with issues maturely.
When her husband was caught screwing around, Mrs Clinton remained dignified and declined to discuss the matter. If she had anything to say to Bill, she said it in private. She was and is capable of standing up for herself without behaving like a spoiled child.
Trump is a liar, he's already alienated the governments and people of most of the world, and he does not have a clue how DC or international politics work. The man in the Mexican government who suggested inviting Trump resigned today.
Worse than DC and the world, I seriously doubt that he understands that our 50 state governments do NOT answer to the POTUS or to federal agencies. He really hasn't a clue what's in the Constitution.
He suggested shooting Mrs Clinton or a nominee to SCOTUS, so he's seriously annoyed the Secret Service. I've been around guns all my life and fully support gun ownership. (Convicted felons and the mentally ill should not be armed.) I'm still highly offended by his stupid remark about 2nd Amendment supporters dealing with Mrs Clinton. Like most gun owners, I don't shoot people who haven't broken into my home.
No one running for any elected office should suggest murder as a solution to a political disagreement. Mrs Clinton is not my favorite person, but she knows national and international politics. She might not do what I'd do, but she'll deal with issues maturely.
When her husband was caught screwing around, Mrs Clinton remained dignified and declined to discuss the matter. If she had anything to say to Bill, she said it in private. She was and is capable of standing up for herself without behaving like a spoiled child.
43
"I’m agnostic about whether the four-way or two-way polls are better in this particular election, since Mr. Johnson and Ms. Stein blur the line between candidates who deserve inclusion and those who do not."
What does this comment even mean? He does know that they are on the ballot, right? Are polls designed to help track who might win the election, or who might win the next poll?
(FWIW, I was a professional pollster for Gallup from 1984 thru 2014, but all the polling I did was done in developing countries and conducted in home and face to face).
What does this comment even mean? He does know that they are on the ballot, right? Are polls designed to help track who might win the election, or who might win the next poll?
(FWIW, I was a professional pollster for Gallup from 1984 thru 2014, but all the polling I did was done in developing countries and conducted in home and face to face).
8
I'm disgusted, but not surprised, by these developments. What else could happen when the media consistently and daily creates the false equivalency between Hillary's 'supposed' dishonesty, and the ENDLESS litany of Trump's deceits, business cheating & welching, lying, etc. His taxes, even his wife's immigration records aren't pursued by journalists -- despite illegal immigration being his signature issue. But every Hillary email is portrayed as a new transgression, even the innocuous ones --a meeting with a Nobel laureate Muhammad Yunus -- horrors! The obvious double standard makes my stomach turn.
58
Yes, I attribute it to misogyny.
12
If the DNC had the foresight to remain neutral in the primaries, and they had produced a sensible nominee like Bernie, Elizabeth Warren or even Biden, they would have had the vote of this left leaning independent. The fixation with Hillary is at best a recipe for more political gridlock, (over/under for impeachments in first term, 1.5?), at worst they could truly lose one of the most opportune elections in the history of the country.
18
Fivethirtyeight still has Clinton way ahead.
16
nate silver is th most accurate forecaster of politics in history
2
Hillary is no RFK but really, today, is anyone? Trump is trying to make this a personality contest and is he really smart to do this? There is only one qualified candidate to evaluate. Welcome to American Politics--a country that boasts plentiful except in Presidential Options.
1
Candidates love a "tight" race. It generates donations.
Both candidates have enough money.
If you REALLY love this country, donate money to people near you who need it as the holidays approach.
Both candidates have enough money.
If you REALLY love this country, donate money to people near you who need it as the holidays approach.
12
Polls are fun. It is cute how pollsters sell their services as if these numbers really mean anything. History shows that polls are good if you want to believe in the illusion that there is a horse race. Entertaining but unreliable. Remember how Dewey beat Truman and even more recently how labor was suppose to win in Great Britain before Cameron waltzed into 10 Downing St.
6
Clinton will win because Trump is not a serious candidate. He doesn't even use the ammunition we all have against Clinton. He merely insults her, which is calculated to turn off most voters. He barely even advertises. So a Clinton win is inevitable. The only question is the size of voter turnout.
9
Record low, is my guess
5
At 4:47 p.m. today 9/7/16 CNN reported that James Comey of the FBI sent a memo to FBI members saying the decision not to indict Clinton on her emails "wasn't even close."
Nothing on it in the Times as per usual.
"All the news that's fit to print"
Nothing on it in the Times as per usual.
"All the news that's fit to print"
22
How accurate are these polls?
3
These polls only reflect the exact trend as shown repeatedly during the primaries. Bernie was the ONLY candidate who consistently polled head and shoulders above Trump. If Trump wins, we cannot blame the voters, we cannot blame Trump. However, we can blame the DNC for rigging the system for such an awful candidate as HRC.
14
But more voters voted for Hillary than Bernie... So maybe it is the voters' fault?
10
Haha, thanks Heather.
4
Hillary won by 3 million votes...and she is leading TRUMP in the poll that matters fivethirtyeight.com
1
Democrats have only themselves to blame if even Trump can win this election.
15
what is a "likely voter" one that is likely voting for clinton or on that is likely to vote at all?
1
As a leader in this presidential election HRC has been uninspiring and has not energized the American public. She seems to think that if she reduces Donald Trump to a punch line she will prevail. She won't and anyone who doubts this can simply refer to Trump's opponents in the primary election who tried the same tactic and are now standing on the sidelines and hoping that HRC can take him down. Hillary Clinton has a whole lot of problems that are not going away starting with how she came to be the nominee in the first place and not ending with other issues such as Benghazi and emails. She has yet to understand that even with her background and experience she still must earn the support of the American public at large. HRC does not seem to know how to do this. I suppose she can learn but she needs to learn quickly otherwise she will lose this election.
8
She is ahead....fivethirtyeight.com
3
The "polls" will always show its a close race, so folks keep reading newspapers and watching TV. But I gave another $27 to Hillary to make sure she stays ahead.
17
National polling is useless -
11
This article exposes the fundamental dishonesty of media coverage of elections. The media want a tight race. The don't want a landslide. Tight races maintain interest, sell papers, keep people tuned in. Landslides don't.
They did the same thing in 2012 with Romney, who was breathing down Obama's neck (we were told) but who not once -- not ONCE -- led him in poll averages and forecasts.
Here we read the scare headline and the scare subheading (Clinton Lost Her Huge Lead) - Trump on the rise, Clinton losing ground. It's so exciting. Who will win?
Elsewhere the NYT, in the very same department of the NYT (The Upshot), we get an answer: Clinton is 83% likely to win, Trump 17%; and Clinton has 1,000 potential paths to victory, Trump has 20.
Such a close race.
Pay no attention to the scare articles. That's not reporting, it's salesmanship.
They did the same thing in 2012 with Romney, who was breathing down Obama's neck (we were told) but who not once -- not ONCE -- led him in poll averages and forecasts.
Here we read the scare headline and the scare subheading (Clinton Lost Her Huge Lead) - Trump on the rise, Clinton losing ground. It's so exciting. Who will win?
Elsewhere the NYT, in the very same department of the NYT (The Upshot), we get an answer: Clinton is 83% likely to win, Trump 17%; and Clinton has 1,000 potential paths to victory, Trump has 20.
Such a close race.
Pay no attention to the scare articles. That's not reporting, it's salesmanship.
33
It's my understanding that the reason that the CNN poll has Trump ahead is because they simply called more Republicans. Their percentages of D's vs R's was skewered.
Well, THAT works, doesn't it?
Well, THAT works, doesn't it?
14
CNN is very pro-Trump.
7
It's worse than that, I hear! Each pollster was instructed to ask the responder whom he or she supported. If the responder said "Clinton," the pollster was instructed to say "Thank you for your time," and hang up the phone. If the respondent said "Trump," the pollster was instructed to say: "Glad to hear it – he's great! Now let me ask you just a few questions if you don't mind. This won't take more than a minute."
2
The Clinton News Network is pro-Trump? That's hilarious.
3
Can you say, "Trumpexit?"
6
Nobody has ever gotten more politically important by staying home on election day. It is one of the oldest truisms of politics that seniors vote reliably, and so seniors constitute an influential demographic. You can see from 2008 and 2012 that when demographic groups like Latino-Americans, African-American, and young people show up to vote, it makes political decision-makers pay attention to those demographics and try to appeal to them. Staying home only tells political decision-makers that you have taken yourself out of the game.
15
polls predicting a landslide must also carry a risk that many voters will simply stay away, thus potentially invalidating the predicted result.
8
Who in their right mind would vote for either Trump or Clinton??
13
So you're happy to have other voters decide for you then? It is irresponsible in a democracy to throw up your hands and walk off in a huff like a spoiled child.
9
People who take the government of this country seriously, that's who. Those who care about who the Supreme Court justices are, whether the poor will be lifted out of poverty, whether our national security will be secured, whether we can conduct business with other countries in the world. Clinton and Trump have different answers, but both have those goals and the guts ro pursue them. I think Clinton is the only one who can steer us right in these times. Everyone else is a bit player, a one-issue candidate, and would be shredded by the lions in the national and international arena.
5
I am voting for Clinton. I appreciate that the DEMOCRATS help all people...I guess you are too young to remember the 1950's It was not like movies...It was repressive....lack of civil rights, womens rights, gay rights...go back to your drugs....and insular thought pattern
3
It is sad that when the messenger uses crude, cruel, unfair and unvetted processes, procedures and strategies to attack or malign their opponent (we are not talking about sensible reliable relevant criticisms or character assessments), the messenger's larger evaluations and critiques (if there are any, and if they are relevant) gets lost. And the messenger is either another mess or creates more mess...in a system that is already dysfunctional, diseased, disparate and a not-well-functioning democracy.
It appears by taking extreme steps, or making extreme statements and promises, the candidate messengers can do little and claim "well done" or "great".
It is like the ole feminist wisdom,n "The guy who only emotionally abuses you might look like an angel compared to the guy who physically abuses you in a system of too many sexist men". That is how you lower your standards...even in politics.
So who are you left with?
An oligarch's oligarch? Or converted oligarch? Not so sure progressive caught in the middle of the oligarchy...hoping for incremental change (whatever that means).
Third world countries rarely get this right: Learn from them. They end up with bloody cycles of revolution (that usually goes awry or ends in tyranny), or they end up with incremental change that takes many generations to even get public toilets constructed and women's rights enacted.
The status quo is working for somebody from every sector and from every angle. Wow indeed!
It appears by taking extreme steps, or making extreme statements and promises, the candidate messengers can do little and claim "well done" or "great".
It is like the ole feminist wisdom,n "The guy who only emotionally abuses you might look like an angel compared to the guy who physically abuses you in a system of too many sexist men". That is how you lower your standards...even in politics.
So who are you left with?
An oligarch's oligarch? Or converted oligarch? Not so sure progressive caught in the middle of the oligarchy...hoping for incremental change (whatever that means).
Third world countries rarely get this right: Learn from them. They end up with bloody cycles of revolution (that usually goes awry or ends in tyranny), or they end up with incremental change that takes many generations to even get public toilets constructed and women's rights enacted.
The status quo is working for somebody from every sector and from every angle. Wow indeed!
2
What is a "high quality poll" anyway? Perhaps one that identifies it on caller ID as "poll" so that people like me are inclined to pick up the phone? I have no idea how polls can continue to operate and claim results when so many (myself included) ignore calls from numbers we do not recognize.
7
Everyone is putting a lot "game changing" faith in the debates, but supporters of Trump and Hillary will read what they want into the debate. Little will change; Hillary has a big lead in the electoral college.
7
"Hillary will lose because she has lied to the public."
I actually don't think of Hillary as a liar.
But I'm amazed that someone would take on the SOS job and use a private email server to send and receive 100% of her official emails. I understand the counterarguments -- many emails shouldn't have been classified; people sending emails to her should have exercised better judgment; the State Department's own email system got hacked; there's no proof that hers did; and on and on and on.
But, seriously? When one embarks on a 4-year stint as SOS, it's predictable that you'll send and receive at least a few sensitive emails along the way, and so you shouldn't send and receive them using a private server located in your home. People who sent her emails were unable to use an official email address because she never even had one. They either sent an email to her private-server email address or they didn't send her an email; those were their choices. Sure, some prospective sender could have asked Hillary to verify that her email system was secure before sending her an email on that system, but it's likely that anyone sending her an email assumed she'd checked it out with the IT people and that emails sent to and from her server were secure. That's what I would have assumed. True, the SD server was hacked, and we don't know for sure that hers was. But it probably was hacked (after all, even some of her aides' personal emails were hacked) and easily could have been even if it wasn't.
I actually don't think of Hillary as a liar.
But I'm amazed that someone would take on the SOS job and use a private email server to send and receive 100% of her official emails. I understand the counterarguments -- many emails shouldn't have been classified; people sending emails to her should have exercised better judgment; the State Department's own email system got hacked; there's no proof that hers did; and on and on and on.
But, seriously? When one embarks on a 4-year stint as SOS, it's predictable that you'll send and receive at least a few sensitive emails along the way, and so you shouldn't send and receive them using a private server located in your home. People who sent her emails were unable to use an official email address because she never even had one. They either sent an email to her private-server email address or they didn't send her an email; those were their choices. Sure, some prospective sender could have asked Hillary to verify that her email system was secure before sending her an email on that system, but it's likely that anyone sending her an email assumed she'd checked it out with the IT people and that emails sent to and from her server were secure. That's what I would have assumed. True, the SD server was hacked, and we don't know for sure that hers was. But it probably was hacked (after all, even some of her aides' personal emails were hacked) and easily could have been even if it wasn't.
8
NYT had a feature this weekend (link below) on how Clinton spent the last week hobnobbing with the ultra-rich. And Bill and Hillary spent the weekend at Spielberg's estate in the Hamptons. So a former first couple who made > $100m in the last 15 years, still need to ask favors of billionaires. And some wonder why many Americans don't like Hillary.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/04/us/politics/hillary-clinton-fundraisin...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/04/us/politics/hillary-clinton-fundraisin...
25
Completely par for the course for every major party candidate in the last several decades. But I know, it's really really bad because it is 1) a democrat, and 2) Clinton. If it were Romney or Bush or the current republican party nominee (and they did and are doing) you could not care less.
9
M:
Last I checked, Cheney and Bushes (plural) aren't exactly topping the favorability ratings. We're now going on 20 years.
Last I checked, Cheney and Bushes (plural) aren't exactly topping the favorability ratings. We're now going on 20 years.
2
Better to have a president whose policies I agree with who hobnobs with the ultra-rich than a clueless fool who IS ultra-rich
8
Try thinking a little. Some people won't answer these polls, many have only cell phones so they might not be included, and some dislike these polls so they don't respond honestly. They are basically worthless.
6
Yes and no. You're talking about sampling bias. Without proper representation of a population (eg. voters), you will get the wrong number. However, statistics are actually verifiable. If you're bored enough, try the process out with a bag of skittles and see what happens. The problem is people manipulate statistics in order to alter current perspectives thereby influencing future outcomes within a population. Apparently it works well in politics. I think therefore my stat is true. Not so much in other areas.
I am registered as NPA, but my state has a closed primary so I registered as a Democrat so I could vote in the primary (changed back to NPA as soon as my vote was cast). I received a poll in the mail from the DNC. I attached a letter letting them know just what I thought of the DNC, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and Hillary Clinton (nothing favorable). Not sure how they counted that.
4
Somehow she has lost her campaigning touch. I've burnt out on the election so haven't paid much attention, but it was my impression that she has a huge lead in campaign funds. Why then in the last few weeks, when Ttump was holding money raising efforts by rally, Hillary was spending all her time with that the NYT described as her 'friends" raising money from the .00001% She should have been talking to the American people, with just a few ultra rich fundraisers, to prove this isn't going to be another 4 years of by the rich for the rich.
11
Politics aside, Hillary has very limited access from the press. Mr. Trump goes off like Vesuvius daily.
12
"Politics aside, Hillary has very limited access from the press."
She could try giving a press conference and taking questions more often than once every 275 days
She could try giving a press conference and taking questions more often than once every 275 days
3
It seems that too much is being made of two-way polls that don't include the minor party candidates. All four will be on the ballot so that is the realistic contest. The only purpose of a two-way poll is to see who the minor party candidates are drawing more support away from. Its purpose is not to make one of the candidates feel better about a "lead" that won't materialize in the real ballot.
3
Let the fretting begin because the TV talking heads will have the race virtually tied right before election day. It's inevitable. Oh, the entertainment and drama of it all.
9
Donald Trump brings millions to their feet with a farcical belligerence and ferocity that he perfected as a Reality TV star. Never before has the United States seen a leading presidential party nominee - Donald Trump - with absolutely no qualifications to lead our nation. We have never before had a candidate who is so clearly a racist. We have never had such an open discussion about whether a candidate for president was mentally disturbed. Never before have so many openly described a presidential candidate as a fascist.
However, in the face of their certain knowledge about Donald Trump's instability and complete lack of qualification to be President and Commander-in-Chief, the Republican leadership has pledged to support Trump. They are knowingly backing someone who has nothing but contempt for what our nation has fought and died for. Trump has made a laughing stock out of the electoral process. That the contest is close is appalling beyond belief
However, in the face of their certain knowledge about Donald Trump's instability and complete lack of qualification to be President and Commander-in-Chief, the Republican leadership has pledged to support Trump. They are knowingly backing someone who has nothing but contempt for what our nation has fought and died for. Trump has made a laughing stock out of the electoral process. That the contest is close is appalling beyond belief
23
Polls reflect current voting intentions, but do not take into consideration factors that are known and will change. For example NPR published an article about media buys: http://www.npr.org/2016/09/07/492892296/hillary-clinton-is-burying-donal...
Clinton has purchased many times the amount of media as Trump in battleground states. Advertising will likely affect voting intentions.
Another factor that polls do not account for are investments in getting out the vote and other ground operations. These efforts will also affect voting, and surely media organizations know something about how much the two campaigns/parties have invested in them.
Clinton has purchased many times the amount of media as Trump in battleground states. Advertising will likely affect voting intentions.
Another factor that polls do not account for are investments in getting out the vote and other ground operations. These efforts will also affect voting, and surely media organizations know something about how much the two campaigns/parties have invested in them.
2
Is it true, as other outlets are reporting, that CNN cynically altered its methodology to come up with the poll that has Clinton trailing? That's something I'd hope and expect Nate C to address.
7
I would not be surprised by a Brexit-style surprise victory for Donald Trump. All the polling indicated that Brexit would fail, but as it turned out crucial "Remain" demographics simply failed to show up when it came time to cast the vote.
12
I've long suspected the same thing could happen here. The very-last polls showed "Remain" winning 52-48, but the actual vote was 52-48 "Leave."
5
This is wonderful news of Mrs. Clinton's falling numbers in the polls and let's hope it continues sliding down right up until the election. She would make a terrible president and it must not happen. People are beginning to see the true Hillary Clinton which is a woman who is dishonest, conniving and an opportunist. She will do anything and say anything to get elected. The people will no longer be fooled by this undignified woman.
14
Undignified woman indeed! No way she'd ever make an even halfway decent president. No doubt in my mind. When it comes to adjectives like "dignified" and "presidential" I say go with the bloviating fool with the orangutan pelt on his head. Absolutely.
6
Really? Where do you get your facts from, the same place as Donald Trump perhaps? Donald's 'facts' and major policies change from day to day? Dishonest Hilary, really? Have you read anything about the literally 1000s of court cases including bankruptcies, Donald Trump and his companies have defended, the 1000s of workers and small businesses he just refuses to pay for honest work—"sue me if you want your money"? It's just head shaking how anyone can support Trump, a proven liar, an ignorant, preening narcissist who's done nothing for anyone but himself in his whole life!
8
I was hoping for a landslide electoral repudiation of Trumpism. Now I'll settle for a win.
5
I'm surprised commenters have not started castigating him for numerous "microaggressions". He certainly does have the ability to make some people uncomfortable. And the last thing we want in a President is one who is willing to make someone, somewhere, feel uncomfortable. /sarcasm off/
6
Has it? Just because someone says it... doesn't make it true. You can find yourself reeling today to locate who is representing the truth. Some sources say don't pay attention to polls: especially now. Others that this source or that is bias. In this election 2016; when distortions are repeated over and over without fact checking/or holding the speaker accountable then lies have become truth in many people's minds. This vitriolic harangue/name-calling against Hillary Clinton led by a person purporting to be "fit to be a President?" and/or his advisors is not news it is in my opinion slander. Multiple major newspapers around the USA including the NYT, Dallas Morning News, Houston Chronicle, Des Moines Register, Boston Globe, Star Tribune have endorsed Hillary Clinton as have numerous Republicans. So that's never happened before. Rather important. Tell us in a story how many. I wonder why newspapers have stopped branding his exaggerations, distortions or lies as such. Are they worried Trump will sue and certainly given his history that seems likely. Egads who wants this? If you are reporting the news fairly that doesn't seem to mean being silent about gross glittering generalities/name-calling/boorish behavior/misstatements of facts/slander. We need our newspapers/reporters help to cull what is true/false and what the fact shifters bias is. After all Trump's organization is playing to the worse of human nature yet he's still making the front page.
9
So many Dems believe that simply hurling words like racist, xenophobe and misogynist at Donald make it so. Usually, there is zero analysis attached. I don't think those things are true, and I don't think the burden is on him or his supporters to prove a negative.
Outside the Times' echo chamber, there are huge numbers who agree with me. Unlike many here, I have no idea who will win. It's a long way from here to Election Day. In September 1980, Jummy Carter was leading, or at worst tied with, Reagan. Things change.
While I dislike both our present nominees, it's for different reasons. But whomever wins, it won't be the death of the Republuc.
Outside the Times' echo chamber, there are huge numbers who agree with me. Unlike many here, I have no idea who will win. It's a long way from here to Election Day. In September 1980, Jummy Carter was leading, or at worst tied with, Reagan. Things change.
While I dislike both our present nominees, it's for different reasons. But whomever wins, it won't be the death of the Republuc.
36
Too bad.
Well I guess it depends on what those ugly words mean. I believe true racists see race as an essential issue in almost every instance. Those are racists.
2
This is classic Trump-style disinformation. So let's get something straight here. It's not only Democrats that have accused Trump of racism. Republicans, including no less a figure than Speaker Paul Ryan, have accused Trump of racism. On June 7, 2016, Ryan called Trump's remark about Judge Curiel's Mexican ancestry "the textbook definition of a racist comment." Ryan's words, not mine. You can still find the video on CNN.
You want analysis? You cannot see why discrediting an American judge based on nothing other than the judge's ancestry is racist? Media outlets and commentators have talked about it endlessly.
Even a key leader of his own party called Trump a racist, so this isn't some Democratic ploy to discredit him. It's pretty obvious. If you are going to support Trump, at least have the courage to own up to his racism.
You want analysis? You cannot see why discrediting an American judge based on nothing other than the judge's ancestry is racist? Media outlets and commentators have talked about it endlessly.
Even a key leader of his own party called Trump a racist, so this isn't some Democratic ploy to discredit him. It's pretty obvious. If you are going to support Trump, at least have the courage to own up to his racism.
8
Why is everyone so surprised?
27
Why? Because Trump has let us know from the beginning that he was not a serious candidate. He has tried his best to alienate every possible demographic, even his so called base - when he backtracked on deporting all undocumented immigrants. And he has such an unpleasant personality. The fact that he's within 50 percentage points of Hillary is amazing - until you remember how unpleasant she is.
4
She can raise obscene amounts of money, fly around in a 737 and her PACs can run all the ads they want.
None of that is going to convince me to vote for Clinton. I'm sure these polls should be able to extrapolate my position.
None of that is going to convince me to vote for Clinton. I'm sure these polls should be able to extrapolate my position.
49
We can extrapolate your position, so what does anything Hillary does matter to you? Why the defensiveness?
5
I ope you are young enough that your 401K and IRA can recover from the uncertainty of a Trump presidency. Bad emails and a secretive nature vs. a man who believes everything he thinks with no ability to look to the truth. I liked Trump in the beginning, but not any more. He terrifies me.
7
i read "vote for clinton" you have been counted as a voter
1
I find all of these comments regarding MSM bias against Hillary to be remarkable. How anyone can read the NYT or WaPo and not see far more critical stories of Trump than of Hillary simply isn't trying. And hat excludes outright distortions and lies reported almost daily as facts about Trump. Take for example in today's story on Pelosi urging Ryan to eschew usage of hacked emails. The Times states categorically that Trump called for Russia to hack Hillary's server. That is not what he said, he suggested they could find and publish the lost (destroyed) 30,000 emails. At the time he said it hacking her server (or other devices) would have been impossible as she had directed their destruction or wiping (with presumably something more than a dust cloth). It may seem a subtle difference but the implication so blown up by the media that he called for a hack and then repeating that lie frequently is evidence of whom the MSM is backing.
43
" How anyone can read the NYT or WaPo and not see far more critical stories of Trump than of Hillary simply isn't trying."
If you have been trying, how many more? If you're so sure, what's the number?
If you have been trying, how many more? If you're so sure, what's the number?
2
Not to mention in that context it was basically a joke or something to rile up the crowd.
5
The bias is in the amount of coverage. For months there have been at least twice as many stories about Trump in the corporate media on any given day. The old expression "There's no such thing as bad publicity" couldn't be more true when it comes to Trump. Repeated stories about Trump's belligerence, racism and xenophobia win him far more voters than they push away and the corporate media is fully aware of that. This is America after all.
2
I believe that if both parties had been looking out for the interests of their members rather than their moneyed interests, we would not be subjected to this crummy situation of this tight race. Both parties have created the new norm in this economy and they didn't have a clue until the Donald and Bernie came on the scene and pointed out that huge swathes of our population were suddenly thrust into poverty. How pathetic that neither party had the morals to represent their constituents, and now we might be stuck with the Donald. God help us! I will be voting against the Donald.
15
I'll be voting against Trump and only partly for Hillary. I loved Sanders and was thrilled to attend his first speech here in front of crowd of 11,000. Unfortunately, too many voters were not convinced, sometimes for purely irrational reasons. My father is typical of many older and otherwise very liberal DEMS who, possibly due to generational bias simply would not vote for an avowed socialist when they could vote for a Clinton. It does not matter that my parents benefit every day from socialist programs like social security and Medicare; they hear socialism and think communism and every emotional that brings up from their young adulthood. I continue to feel this is less about money and party politics than it is about Americans being low information voters. Coupled with the many who simply refuse to take the time to register or vote, our current situation is no surprise. We really have only ourselves to blame.
3
The debates will change thing, I hope in Clinton's favor. Until then, the trend is meaningful but the actual numbers less so.
8
Leslie, the only way the debates can help Trump is if he can submit the questions he will be asked and have a teleprompter to help him remember his answers.
4
Glen, I would have thought that during the latter Republican debates, but let's face it, the man knows how to bully people, including some moderators. I find it incomprehensible that some people are impressed with that, but.... On any substantive basis, she will be impressive and he will be horrifying.
2
Eh, this is just Biden pulling strings behind the scenes. When the time is ripe he'll enter the race and take all the marbles, right Nate?
7
I find myself a bit bemused by comments focusing on Ms. Clinton's prevarications for the simple fact that they pale in comparison to Mr. Trump's, which are not only immortalized in video footage but have been highlighted by none other than pretty much every leading republican in the country. The man is a veritable Zelig, compulsively saying whatever will inflame adoration (real or perceived) from the crowd he is facing. It appears to be a pathological character flaw, so perhaps his supporters forgive him since he cannot control it as opposed to Ms. Clinton's calculating shading of the truth.
I worked for a former White House Press Secretary for a few years. The fact of the matter is that every politician becomes artful at shading the truth. It's necessary for survival in a world where consensus is impossible and most national events are entirely out of your control.
I will vote for Ms. Clinton, but I will do so holding my nose, unfortunately, and it has little to do with her minor transgressions related to telling the truth. I will do so because Mr. Trump is clearly nothing more than a dishonest, bigoted, misogynistic, narcissistic psychopath.
As for the polls, one can only surmise that when a good capable person is tarred with accusations of wrongdoing that it makes more of a dent than it does when a well documented charlatan is revealed, over and over again, to be simply true to form.
I worked for a former White House Press Secretary for a few years. The fact of the matter is that every politician becomes artful at shading the truth. It's necessary for survival in a world where consensus is impossible and most national events are entirely out of your control.
I will vote for Ms. Clinton, but I will do so holding my nose, unfortunately, and it has little to do with her minor transgressions related to telling the truth. I will do so because Mr. Trump is clearly nothing more than a dishonest, bigoted, misogynistic, narcissistic psychopath.
As for the polls, one can only surmise that when a good capable person is tarred with accusations of wrongdoing that it makes more of a dent than it does when a well documented charlatan is revealed, over and over again, to be simply true to form.
23
Good! Get out there and vote on November 9th!
6
Why do the mainstream media including the NYT just sit there and let Trump get off with not showing his tax returns because he says there "under audit" while continuing to cover the drip, drip, drip of the Clinton e-mail issue? The guy ought to be hammered over this issue every day until he caves.
No wonder its a close race now.
No wonder its a close race now.
32
Yesterday, he publicly challenged her to release her Goldman Sachs speeches, and in return he would release his returns.
You know, there's a really easy way to call his bluff, if the Dems are really interested in his returns.
You know, there's a really easy way to call his bluff, if the Dems are really interested in his returns.
6
It's a close race because that's what's best for the media companies. They have a vested interest in keeping it close despite the risks associated with a trump presidency. They want to sell papers, ads and increase circulation. It's that simple.
4
Wine,
Are you suggesting that the tax returns be held by a neutral party, to be released immediately if Hillary provides a speech text?
Because I suspect there is no way Trump will release them if it's completely up to him, given his adherence to various contracts and agreements for about the past 30 years.
Are you suggesting that the tax returns be held by a neutral party, to be released immediately if Hillary provides a speech text?
Because I suspect there is no way Trump will release them if it's completely up to him, given his adherence to various contracts and agreements for about the past 30 years.
1
I have never thought that Hillary was a good candidate. She had her shot eight years ago and failed. She has too much baggage. We could now be facing the end of civilization because the Democrats are obsessed with the Clintons.
35
Claire McCaskill, Democratic senator from Missouri, would be cleaning his clock right now. Midwest, somewhat moderate, tough as nails, and no baggage.
But she is one of many Democrats who bowed down to Hillary Clinton. Same thing happened when Hillary was literally given the NY senate seat in 2000. I just do no get it.
But she is one of many Democrats who bowed down to Hillary Clinton. Same thing happened when Hillary was literally given the NY senate seat in 2000. I just do no get it.
10
Interesting how when Clinton was up, it showed how the electorate was against Trump.
Now, with some polls showing "tightening", we need to be skeptical of many of those same polls.
It might be better to remain "skeptical" always and everywhere. Rather than cheerlead when your "guy" is ahead, and denounce when he/she/ze are behind.
Now, with some polls showing "tightening", we need to be skeptical of many of those same polls.
It might be better to remain "skeptical" always and everywhere. Rather than cheerlead when your "guy" is ahead, and denounce when he/she/ze are behind.
24
You should be skeptical of any poll. Most are hand picked to garner the results they want. They don't just poll 1000 random people. They pick and choose the types of people they want. This goes for both sides.
5
Reply @Michael from Philadelphia:
They hate her because she's a woman and has the nerve to ask for a raise. They don't hate her when she just does an exemplary job and stays quiet.
See this truly enlightening and persuasive explanation:
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/6/11/1537582/-The-most-thorough-pro...
They hate her because she's a woman and has the nerve to ask for a raise. They don't hate her when she just does an exemplary job and stays quiet.
See this truly enlightening and persuasive explanation:
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/6/11/1537582/-The-most-thorough-pro...
19
Stop. Just stop. We hate her because she is a lying, incompetent career politician who is out for herself and couldn't care any less for the American people.
20
Spot on, Sharon.
3
Hillary was NOT absent from the Public. It's a Big Country & try as She (big "S") may, She can't meet all of us (little "u")!
She was out there Fighting For us! She was discussing crucial policy and world events and collecting $100,000 checks in LA and SF from the glitterratti and the technorati, then She was off to The Hamptons for a Rothschild-sponsored "let's just give Her some love and not ask Her any questions soirée" where a family pic cost $10,000 (beyond the $100,000 to get in the door) and a question from a six-year-old was "on sale" for ONLY $2700, which shows you that, indeed, She is open to questions from the public and it also proves that access can't just be promised - it has to be paid for. It's what made America What It Is Today!
Not to be outdone by Mr Trump, She soldiered on to "The Vineyard" for some more "rough and tumble campaigning - Vineyard Style" until, called once again to duty, She boarded her private jet for a grueling 20-mile flight to Nantucket for more "public contact."
She is Fighting for us. These are her people and she is in there with them, FIghting For us!!!. These are the people who can afford to say "I'm With Her!"
TO: Media Matters
FROM: UpWising, your Paid Poster
RE: Payment for Original Content
You are offering us paid posters 1¢ per word, except Capitalized words are 2¢ per word, and (Our Next President) "Hillary" and "Clinton" are each paid at rate of 5¢ each. My letters are worth much more. I want 5¢ for all words!!!
She was out there Fighting For us! She was discussing crucial policy and world events and collecting $100,000 checks in LA and SF from the glitterratti and the technorati, then She was off to The Hamptons for a Rothschild-sponsored "let's just give Her some love and not ask Her any questions soirée" where a family pic cost $10,000 (beyond the $100,000 to get in the door) and a question from a six-year-old was "on sale" for ONLY $2700, which shows you that, indeed, She is open to questions from the public and it also proves that access can't just be promised - it has to be paid for. It's what made America What It Is Today!
Not to be outdone by Mr Trump, She soldiered on to "The Vineyard" for some more "rough and tumble campaigning - Vineyard Style" until, called once again to duty, She boarded her private jet for a grueling 20-mile flight to Nantucket for more "public contact."
She is Fighting for us. These are her people and she is in there with them, FIghting For us!!!. These are the people who can afford to say "I'm With Her!"
TO: Media Matters
FROM: UpWising, your Paid Poster
RE: Payment for Original Content
You are offering us paid posters 1¢ per word, except Capitalized words are 2¢ per word, and (Our Next President) "Hillary" and "Clinton" are each paid at rate of 5¢ each. My letters are worth much more. I want 5¢ for all words!!!
21
Oh, no!
4
Not all polls are crested equal. The results depend on the methodology and univerese tested.
The CNN polls showing Trump ahead by 2 points chose
28% democrat voters,
32% republicans and
40% independents.
But in the last two general elections in 2008 and 2012 a larger number of democrats voted compared to republicans, so the poll results are skewed.
The CNN polls showing Trump ahead by 2 points chose
28% democrat voters,
32% republicans and
40% independents.
But in the last two general elections in 2008 and 2012 a larger number of democrats voted compared to republicans, so the poll results are skewed.
6
Be very careful when polling the last election or fighting the last war.
9
Today's NYT, front page, tiny print, down in the bottom corner is the story about Trump's pledge to build up the US military, and no comments permitted.
"Mr. Trump proposed bolstering the size of the Army and the Marine Corps, adding ships and submarines to the Navy, and investing in new fighter planes for the Air Force. He said he would end the caps on military spending, or sequester, that were imposed after the 2011 debt ceiling battle, adding that the additional spending would be offset through “common sense reforms” in other areas of government and by paring down military bureaucracy. But he did not offer specifics."
There is daily a lament for "facts". Another piece speculating about polls doesn't quality, in my opinion.
Why not a discussion of Trump's plan to "end caps on military spending". Is this a good/bad thing? Is it needed? How will it affect spending for education, healthcare, climate change?
"Mr. Trump proposed bolstering the size of the Army and the Marine Corps, adding ships and submarines to the Navy, and investing in new fighter planes for the Air Force. He said he would end the caps on military spending, or sequester, that were imposed after the 2011 debt ceiling battle, adding that the additional spending would be offset through “common sense reforms” in other areas of government and by paring down military bureaucracy. But he did not offer specifics."
There is daily a lament for "facts". Another piece speculating about polls doesn't quality, in my opinion.
Why not a discussion of Trump's plan to "end caps on military spending". Is this a good/bad thing? Is it needed? How will it affect spending for education, healthcare, climate change?
26
I agree. A discussion of the candidates plans is much more beneficial than polls that tend to change hourly.
3
There are two solutions to the dip for Clinton in the poles-
GOTV and #tacotrucksoneverycorner
GOTV and #tacotrucksoneverycorner
2
I used to wonder how it was that a Hitler or a Mussolini or even a Berlusconi came to be elected to power in literate societies, as to what happened to the political leadership in those countries, whether the man-in-the-street was aware of what was going on and the bargain he or she was making when voting for this person. I guess it would have been the same way Donald Trump has come to be recognized as a bona fide candidate in the media and elsewhere notwithstanding his hate speeches, his narcissism, his unethical conduct and racism.
Now if it comes to pass that he is elected President, we have to rely on the checks and balances in the system so he does not become an existential threat to some of us. But that's what we thought about his chances for candidacy.
Now if it comes to pass that he is elected President, we have to rely on the checks and balances in the system so he does not become an existential threat to some of us. But that's what we thought about his chances for candidacy.
20
Unfortunately, there will be no checks or balances on Trump's mouth. Remember that it took forever for those checks and balances to deal with Nixon, and many if us thought he'd never get elected.
4
As one who is wary of Polls, regardless of what they say -- I'm just relieved that this article makes the differentiation between low & high-quality ones.
But in the end, voters will still have to decide for themselves.
But in the end, voters will still have to decide for themselves.
5
From the mid-Sixties through the mid-Seventies there was a flourishing alternative press in this country. The reason it flourished was because the regular media simply lost its way, its journalistic perspective swamped by the desire to not appear "biased" in the eyes of the powers-that-be coupled with the desire to increase readership with "dramatic revelations" of questionable provenance, let alone truth.
Many Commenters here have ably documented and denounced the current equivalent, especially in regards to the Times from which we expect better. Perhaps we will again see a flourishing alternative press. Perhaps not. In the Sixties and Seventies that press defined real, physical communities, as it tied together peoples' lives, as they worked to create something better. Such seems alien to the current younger generation which, instead, seems to live in virtual associations.
Many Commenters here have ably documented and denounced the current equivalent, especially in regards to the Times from which we expect better. Perhaps we will again see a flourishing alternative press. Perhaps not. In the Sixties and Seventies that press defined real, physical communities, as it tied together peoples' lives, as they worked to create something better. Such seems alien to the current younger generation which, instead, seems to live in virtual associations.
27
Regrettably, we already have an alternative press, and it's much worse than the mainstream.
6
Jim, I'm not sure what you are referring to by "alternative press." If you can, check out from the 60s and 70s papers such as "The Great Speckled Bird" (Atlanta), "The Berkeley Tribe" (Berkeley), "The Chicago Seed" (Chicago), NOLA Express (New Orleans), "Fifth Estate" (Detroit), "Northwest Passage" (Bellingham), "Quicksilver Times" (D.C.), or any of a hundred others. There is nothing like them today. San Jose, California alone had four alternative papers, and that was before Silicon Valley. Even Barstow had one.
1
Why are we focusing on the polls and not on the fact that Trump bribed the Attorney General of Florida? Why are we focusing on the polls and not on the fact that Trump has still not released his tax returns and has no intention of doing so? Why is Trump getting a pass from the media - "The New York Times" included?
100
or the president talking to the fbi
4
Bernie Sanders is looking better and better.
Thank you DNC, and everyone at The New York Times...
Thank you DNC, and everyone at The New York Times...
49
The longer HRC stays around, the more people see of her, the more the general electorate understands that she has one motive.....enrichment through donations for herself. Never before has a candidate with so few tangible accomplishments been paid so much. World Class Pay to Play at a level that can only be compared to the IOC or FIFA.
Full stop.
Full stop.
48
And Trump's accomplishments?
28
Clearly you're talking about Trump.
25
Some people just won't believe that a majority of people don't like, or trust, Hillary. She's had 20 years to build her political image and it stinks. She's more paranoid that Nixon and less likable....
25
I do not take calls from unknown sources. You will find out who i vote for on Nov 8 and not before. I dislike the influence of polling on elections as much as i dislike the impact of Citizens United. If candidates need polls to strategize positions, we are lost. I can see using them directionality for allocation of resources and event scheduling, that's it but count me out. If you don't know by now where to best allocate resources maybe you are not equipped to steer the ship of state let alone a campaign.
24
With you on this one. I have caller ID and if I don't know the person calling, I just let the phone ring--both landline and cell.
8
Races always tighten between Labor Day and Election Day, don't they? People change or make up their minds based on greater amounts of information over the months.
What were Obama's odds at this point in 2012 and 2008?
What were Obama's odds at this point in 2012 and 2008?
5
the media is trying pretty hard to make this look close.
It aint. Hilary has a landslide coming.
Please start reporting accurately. Atleast try.
It aint. Hilary has a landslide coming.
Please start reporting accurately. Atleast try.
29
You should get out more.
12
Maybe, maybe not. No one wants a second "Dewey Wins!" scenario so the media is cautious.
5
We'll see what happens after the polls close on November 9th.
3
Meanwhile on Facebook my leftist friends are still fantasizing that a Socialist from Vermont would be doing better than Hillary in the polls right now.
16
He would not only do better. He would win for he alone unites the country.
11
Of course he would. Every poll -- every single one -- predicted that Bernie was the only candidate who could beat Trump. Bernie is honest -- and no one can accuse him of not being honest. The American people WANT and moreover NEED what Bernie proposed: free health care and public higher education.
19
Us New York Conservatives definitely do. Bernie was straightforward and inspiring.
8
I guess this is what happens when you think you already have the election in your pocket.
14
It is good that lead shrunk. One thing we democrats do not want a pompous President.
Hillary is already a humbled person, because of last 30 years of political witch hunt.
Even though She would be elected , will be there for all her terms to be politically harrased. This is truth.
So We are expecting a win, but landslide, but a determinative win.
In fact we are talking all about Hillary and Trump but American political party's dominance in this election cycle has been changed.
We are on way to multi party system. GOP is clearly on its way to split, this is coming, either trump wins looses this the fate waiting GOP. following election cycles we are going to see same may take place for Democratic party.
anyway, GOp is not functioning the way it is. solution is siplitting.
Hillary is already a humbled person, because of last 30 years of political witch hunt.
Even though She would be elected , will be there for all her terms to be politically harrased. This is truth.
So We are expecting a win, but landslide, but a determinative win.
In fact we are talking all about Hillary and Trump but American political party's dominance in this election cycle has been changed.
We are on way to multi party system. GOP is clearly on its way to split, this is coming, either trump wins looses this the fate waiting GOP. following election cycles we are going to see same may take place for Democratic party.
anyway, GOp is not functioning the way it is. solution is siplitting.
Explain how a party that controls both houses of Congress and 70% of state legislative bodies is splitting. Or why it would be splitting.
2
I know EinT. I bet these are the same people that predicted (1) that the Republicans were going to lose big time in the 2010 midterms, and then, because hope springs eternal, (2) doubled down on the same bet in 2014. And it worked out so well both times, they're doing it *again,* because surely, surely the third time has to be the charm. Maybe they should all look into Gamblers Anonymous or something.
1
Well, the Times reports, in their efforts to make a splash, have relentlessly stressed the negative in their headlines and focus of articles about the Clinton campaign. So if the people are feeling dubious and fed up about this election, you have yourselves to blame. How about some more positive and generous coverage? Something less snide and clever?
15
I read a few comments here that Clinton hasn't been out there much, or disappeared during August.. No, the mainstream media, including this paper decided not to cover her for sometimes 5 days in a row, only put out negative stories about Emails and the Foundation. At the same time they would show Trump giving speeches reading from the teleprompter, mouthing words that Shawn Hannity and Ann Coulter wrote. Headlines like Trump has softened is tone on immigration, etc. If there is a slip which I don't really believe, it's because of this. Constantly hammering Clinton about nonsense that in the end means nothing.
John Kerry was a war hero who after seeing what was going on questioned the purpose of the Vietnam War. Before the press was done with him, he was a deserter. And George Bush, who was drinking & snorting cocaine, using his father's influence to keep him out of the war. He didn't even have to show up for the National Guard, he was the hero. This is the same media that had half the American people believing Saddam Hussein was a threat to the US
I have said over and over, the papers & TV do this because a real race means higher ratings and bigger ad dollars. Clinton is far ahead and they will do what they can to tighten it up. Go look at the odds makers and see where she stands. Look at the logistics. Woman, Hispanics, Blacks, all minorities. This paper has printed the lists of 100's of prominent Reps that are voting for her. The US media, no credibility.
Orange, NJ
John Kerry was a war hero who after seeing what was going on questioned the purpose of the Vietnam War. Before the press was done with him, he was a deserter. And George Bush, who was drinking & snorting cocaine, using his father's influence to keep him out of the war. He didn't even have to show up for the National Guard, he was the hero. This is the same media that had half the American people believing Saddam Hussein was a threat to the US
I have said over and over, the papers & TV do this because a real race means higher ratings and bigger ad dollars. Clinton is far ahead and they will do what they can to tighten it up. Go look at the odds makers and see where she stands. Look at the logistics. Woman, Hispanics, Blacks, all minorities. This paper has printed the lists of 100's of prominent Reps that are voting for her. The US media, no credibility.
Orange, NJ
32
Of course she was out there. "There" just happened to be the Hamptons or the Vineyard or any place where she could "just happen to run into" the .0001% who are happy to pay to play. It wouldn't surprise me if that shiny new jet just sat on some tarmac waiting for them to coincidentally land there.
4
Do any of you have ANY idea of how horrendously unbelievable it is to have to choose between these two people to vote for, to be the president of this country - the PRESIDENT? This is crazy... Whatever else these two may be, they are CLEARLY not leaders. Why do you in the media stay silent about something so blatantly, and monumentally serious? And where are those of you who are supposed to know what to do to legally end this nightmare, who have the guts to do it and put an end to this disaster so there can be REAL leaders to choose from?
18
Congratulations NYT! Your innuendos, as if they were facts, and your negative coverage of Hillary Clinton is finally paying off! Your failure to scrutinize Trump's false remarks, insults, and behaviors will hopefully be a reflection on you and the rest of the media and, hopefully, your paper and other institutions owned by NYT Co., will suffer the consequences of your failures. If he's elected, you and the rest of the media world will have played a large part for putting Mr. Trump, a near-fascist, in the oval office.
21
Nor very helpful in assessing polls. In the first place, all the comparing polls neglects the fact that the same people are not interviewed over tome; when you have a different sample, you are going to get different results. the only reliable polls about change from one time to another is if the same people are interviewed qt different times. Taking the mean of polls is going to result in a major polling disaster one of these times but probably not this year because of the Trump candidacy. It is simply beyond belief you keep referring to 538; Nat Silver cannot pick a winner in Basketball, and in 2014, he contended there was only a 14% chance 9 Republican senators would be elected. He did not believe Trump would be the nominee. If you really want to tell people about, stop being so superficial and point out how wrong they were in Georgia, Kentucky Kansas where the polls missed both races in these states and in North Carolina there was also a miss. The article here did not do that.
We're finished. As a democracy. As a country where there is real politics, real leaders to vote for.
3
I think based on my own humble polling amongst friends and colleagues; Trump is going to win. I live in Spanish Harlem and work in the Bronx and have for over 50 years. I’m White. There are a significant number of Trump supporters who are keeping their heads down because of the “Racism” label. I’m not suggesting Trump is going to win in New York, the Democrats own NYC. In most of the rest of the country however, polite people avoid being seen too close to the Racist label. Few of them believe Trump is a racist they just want avoid getting tarred. For those of you who believe Trump is a racist, he may be, but I would suggest you read the top 30 reader picks to this Editorial in the NYT two days ago.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/05/opinion/prisons-arent-the-answer-on-im...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/05/opinion/prisons-arent-the-answer-on-im...
17
Polling likely voters gives a sense of who is winning but does not tell us what people overall are thinking. I think that latter is just as important.
4
But "people overall" don't vote. Only voters vote. Thus the focus of the polls on "likely voters."
1
Stop playing dumb.
This isn't a game.
ANYONE who supports Mrs Clinton is actually supporting Mr. Trump.
There is NO OTHER possible reason you'd run the Most Hated Candidate In US History against Trump, unless your intent is to lose.
There is NO OTHER reason you'd run a candidate who herself says she is an atrocious candidate (ex: during the Flint debate) , unless your intent is to help the GOP win.
THIS is not an election where name recognition matters.
ANY DEMOCRAT can beat Trump.
Except for one: the one the entire MSM is backing.
Hm. The MSM -- owned by the 1% -- wants the richest candidate (Trump)?
So hard to believe, right?
Trump is 100% more popular than her on FB (10 million vs 5 million fans) and his rallies are 10 - 200 times bigger than hers.
Keep playing dumb.
There's only ONE reason you tried to keep so many Democrat voters from voting DEM in 2016.
Enjoy president Trump!
This isn't a game.
ANYONE who supports Mrs Clinton is actually supporting Mr. Trump.
There is NO OTHER possible reason you'd run the Most Hated Candidate In US History against Trump, unless your intent is to lose.
There is NO OTHER reason you'd run a candidate who herself says she is an atrocious candidate (ex: during the Flint debate) , unless your intent is to help the GOP win.
THIS is not an election where name recognition matters.
ANY DEMOCRAT can beat Trump.
Except for one: the one the entire MSM is backing.
Hm. The MSM -- owned by the 1% -- wants the richest candidate (Trump)?
So hard to believe, right?
Trump is 100% more popular than her on FB (10 million vs 5 million fans) and his rallies are 10 - 200 times bigger than hers.
Keep playing dumb.
There's only ONE reason you tried to keep so many Democrat voters from voting DEM in 2016.
Enjoy president Trump!
18
Trump’s support may be a mile deep and an inch wide. Nobody's enthusiastic about Hillary, but many will vote for her.
4
Surely you jest?
6
That's exactly what I have thought. Why else would the DNC cram down our throats Hillary Clinton. Even those who are voting for her do so holding their noses. The establishment -- including The New York TImes -- would rather see Trump president than Bernie Sanders, someone who would actually DO something for the people not just talk while making deals behind closed doors.
10
Trump had no idea whatsoever that Russia had already invaded the Ukraine; Trump asked military advisers three separate times why we can't use nuclear weapons since we have them; Donald wants to cut taxes for the super-rich and increase the deficit by $15 trillion; Trump has become the poster boy for the KKK and White Supremacists; Trump has tweeted anti-Semitic messages; he has bribed officials to stop investigating his Trump U fraud.
And the election is close in national polls? The media is bemused by the ignorance and deceit of Trump - he is entertainment and click bait, Calling Trump's potential felonies a brush with campaign rules is not journalism. By contrast, the media has treated Hillary with a very heavy hand for minor infractions.
Gore was Nadered and Kerry was Swiftboated and both lost. We cannot afford to let Hillary be emailed into the ground. A Trump in the White House will be a disaster for the entire planet. There will be no coming back.
And the election is close in national polls? The media is bemused by the ignorance and deceit of Trump - he is entertainment and click bait, Calling Trump's potential felonies a brush with campaign rules is not journalism. By contrast, the media has treated Hillary with a very heavy hand for minor infractions.
Gore was Nadered and Kerry was Swiftboated and both lost. We cannot afford to let Hillary be emailed into the ground. A Trump in the White House will be a disaster for the entire planet. There will be no coming back.
85
The media, that has given Trump so much free publicity, needs to be as
focused on explaining to any voter who might possibly listen, what Trump is really about. I'm grateful that Trevor Noah is trying to educate (though that's really not in his job description) but he alone can't do the job.
focused on explaining to any voter who might possibly listen, what Trump is really about. I'm grateful that Trevor Noah is trying to educate (though that's really not in his job description) but he alone can't do the job.
9
Why doesn't the NYT do a few articles on Trump's former attorney and mentor, Roy Cohn?
Trump fired his friend when he learned Cohn had AIDS. Don't be feeling sorry for Cohn until you learn about his life on the Hill and later.
Do think about Trump's judgment.
Trump fired his friend when he learned Cohn had AIDS. Don't be feeling sorry for Cohn until you learn about his life on the Hill and later.
Do think about Trump's judgment.
3
Well- the DNC should not have showcased dozens of intelligent, astute, scandal free Democrats to speak at the convention. The entire time, I kept asking.."Why aren't they running?" and "Why am I forced to accept Hillary?"
31
Because Hilary's scandal are politics; republican created. A congress who would rather play these political games than spend time on real issues like campaign reform, guns, health care, student loans etc.
Honestly are email/server more important than the above said issues
Honestly are email/server more important than the above said issues
15
Because she is intelligent and astute, and the "scandals" are scandals because the GOP and Fox News say they are.
20
@aaron
The only thing you're being "forced" to do, is make the right decision -- which in my honest opinion, doesn't involve putting a racist into the White House.
The only thing you're being "forced" to do, is make the right decision -- which in my honest opinion, doesn't involve putting a racist into the White House.
14
I find it so interesting that the NYT comment area is such an incredible echo chamber where people get their own thoughts mirrored and amplified by like-minded folk. This is why Hillary supporters are so confused why their candidate is losing support daily. The rest of the country doesn't trust her and look at her as the royal elite -- yes,
Many here are comfortable forgiving her many transgressions. Some even will vote for her while agreeing she is corrupt or inept (or both).
Hillary supporters just need to get out of their bubble more often and consider that those who disagree with them are not stupid. If you did, you'd find those in the hinterlands that do support Hillary for President are actually embarrassed to come out and say it.
Many here are comfortable forgiving her many transgressions. Some even will vote for her while agreeing she is corrupt or inept (or both).
Hillary supporters just need to get out of their bubble more often and consider that those who disagree with them are not stupid. If you did, you'd find those in the hinterlands that do support Hillary for President are actually embarrassed to come out and say it.
40
This so not true. I and my fellow Hillary supporters are not at all embarrassed to show our support. The opening of the Hillary office in Dayton was jam-packed and was a heart-warmingly diverse crowd--young, old, disabled, men, women, all colors. This is the future of the electorate--not a bunch of old resentful white guys. Is the westcoast the hinterlands? I am in the true and valuable hinterlands of Ohio, have many conservative friends and family and they will not say out loud that they will vote for Trump, even though they will. And sorry, but a lot of them actually are appallingly ignorant (is that a nice way of saying stupid?).
2
Hillary will lose because she has lied to the public. She is untrustworthy and this is evident to anyone with without idealogical blinders. A leader must be trustworthy and she is not.
Nixon erased 18 minutes of tape. Who knows if his deletion was about Yoga or serious criminal matters. The country voted the latter. She is in the same boat.
Nixon erased 18 minutes of tape. Who knows if his deletion was about Yoga or serious criminal matters. The country voted the latter. She is in the same boat.
36
Ah nope, actually, you're wrong. Hillary will win. Sorry if this distresses you. To help cheer you up when Trump is getting crushed on election night, I recommend hedging your personal-conviction investment by betting some cold hard cash on Hillary right now.
7
None of it matters. Much like Obama's administration, i will be richer and the poor will be poorer irrespective of who wins. I would rather have Trump win but if Bill's wife wins, it won't make that much of a difference in my life.
1
When one reads the Princeton Election Consortium, a totally different picture emerges. They suggest that the polls drive the news which drives the polls, so they are of less value than if we had a press more inclined to report the facts and less inclined to make non-issues seem important so newspapers and TV can make larger profits. I'd recommend PEC because it doesn't matter to them how many clicks they get. Dr. Wang makes a lot of sense.
8
Blah blah. Anybody paying attention to the country in general and to the electoral map knows the outcome already. Actually, I guaranteed in the summer of 2012 that Hillary would win the 2016 election. Since then, it's only become more obvious that I'm right.
I'm not going to vote for her, by the way, so my guarantee isn't the tendentious bluster of a supporter. I'm not going to vote for Trump either, so I'm not a Trump supporter trying to sow complacency and drive down lefty turnout. I'm just an impartial observer. Hillary will win, and it won't be close. Take it to the bank.
I'm not going to vote for her, by the way, so my guarantee isn't the tendentious bluster of a supporter. I'm not going to vote for Trump either, so I'm not a Trump supporter trying to sow complacency and drive down lefty turnout. I'm just an impartial observer. Hillary will win, and it won't be close. Take it to the bank.
9
There's a place in Hell, according to Dante, for those who are lukewarm or fence-sitting. I suppose, too, also for impartial observers.
9
Probably an even deeper place for those who gamble and win cold hard cash based on their impartial observations.
Won't keep me from laughing all the way to the bank on November 9.
Won't keep me from laughing all the way to the bank on November 9.
2
Yeah, Hillary Clinton, the one who was nominated for president back in August. What ever happened to her, anyway?
12
This is one classic report for the sake of reporting and filling up the pages. You say that most of the polling is based on low-quality polls or rather not so high-quality polls. Why bother ?
8
The press thrives on controversy. Sorry to see that even the NYT will print what they all but call unreliable one way or the other.
It is incredible to me that, if one listens to Trump's daily speeches, they would vote for him. Plan for certain defeat of Isis in place within 30 days, increase military budget over existing limitations, etc. "He says what he means", well, so what, if it doesn't make sense!
I'm hoping that now that Hillary is back on track she will pick up in reliable polls. Smart move to spend last few weeks raising funds and now 2 months of daily campaigning and debating. She even has a plane to accommodate reporters who will probably give her more coverage. Good plans. She knows that what most people hear last is what they tend to recall!
Reality is that all politicians push the truth, make errors and you don't want them as your best friend. Live with it!
I for one, want a President who has the experience, knowledge of the world, Congress and can present positions that can, for the most part, show the element of reasonableness. Of course, we have had one for 8 years and lots of people hate him. Go figure!
It is incredible to me that, if one listens to Trump's daily speeches, they would vote for him. Plan for certain defeat of Isis in place within 30 days, increase military budget over existing limitations, etc. "He says what he means", well, so what, if it doesn't make sense!
I'm hoping that now that Hillary is back on track she will pick up in reliable polls. Smart move to spend last few weeks raising funds and now 2 months of daily campaigning and debating. She even has a plane to accommodate reporters who will probably give her more coverage. Good plans. She knows that what most people hear last is what they tend to recall!
Reality is that all politicians push the truth, make errors and you don't want them as your best friend. Live with it!
I for one, want a President who has the experience, knowledge of the world, Congress and can present positions that can, for the most part, show the element of reasonableness. Of course, we have had one for 8 years and lots of people hate him. Go figure!
This is your regularly scheduled reminder that we had a candidate with a 50/37 favorability and a 50/40 lead on Trump. A candidate who would have put up Ronald Regan-esque electoral college numbers in November against Donald, maintaining the support of the demographics Trump has alienated while still pulling significant numbers of middle class whites. And he probably would have brought Democratic control back to both houses in the process.
Instead, as Wikileaks has since confirmed, the DNC intentionally rigged the primary in HRC's favor. Do I still think she'll win in the General? Yea. But the panic that the DNC apologists are feeling right now, and will continue to feel in this tight race through to November, is entirely of their own creation.
Stop pivoting back to Trump. Stop dumping on Stein and Sanders because their supporters refuse to back your candidate. Accept the truth of what happened here and make a genuine effort bridge the gap on policy. Your deflection and personal attacks will accomplish nothing on Election Day.
Instead, as Wikileaks has since confirmed, the DNC intentionally rigged the primary in HRC's favor. Do I still think she'll win in the General? Yea. But the panic that the DNC apologists are feeling right now, and will continue to feel in this tight race through to November, is entirely of their own creation.
Stop pivoting back to Trump. Stop dumping on Stein and Sanders because their supporters refuse to back your candidate. Accept the truth of what happened here and make a genuine effort bridge the gap on policy. Your deflection and personal attacks will accomplish nothing on Election Day.
16
How did the DNC rig the primary? Seriously, you got any facts to back that up. What Wikileaks proved is that the DNC wanted Hillary to win. That's it. Wanting and rigging are two very different things.
11
And those who claim the primaries were rigged are denigrating--or, indeed, deleting--my vote. Which wasn't bought.
2
And now everyone in this forum wants to blame the MSM and the NYT especially.
Just a few short months ago, the NYT was only giving coverage to Hillary and Trump, but hardly any coverage to Bernie Sanders and you're complaining that the NYT is doing a bang-up job on HRC?
Give me a break! The DNC and NYT made sure she was your nominee. Be happy and stop complaining.
I was a Bernie supporter who plans to vote for Gary Johnson or Jill Stein.
Just a few short months ago, the NYT was only giving coverage to Hillary and Trump, but hardly any coverage to Bernie Sanders and you're complaining that the NYT is doing a bang-up job on HRC?
Give me a break! The DNC and NYT made sure she was your nominee. Be happy and stop complaining.
I was a Bernie supporter who plans to vote for Gary Johnson or Jill Stein.
18
You do remember that Sanders isn't a Democrat, don't you??? -- So it's hardly surprising that the DNC would support their own candidate.
Good luck with your symbolic third-party vote, maybe one day it will really make a difference in this country.
Good luck with your symbolic third-party vote, maybe one day it will really make a difference in this country.
6
Cut off your nose to spite your face.
Small wonder Hillary Clinton is slipping in the polls. Where is she? She's spending time with big donors and not with everyday people, not evena press conference, Ms. Scripted, and people are more and more turned off. Meanwhile the word 'Trump' is in just about every other article published by the NY Times or other news sources. The amount of media coverage he is getting is 10X of that of Clinton, and even 'bad' publicity is good for Trump. Meanwhile I forgot: why should I vote for her? She is a Terrible Candidate. Good President? Most likely. Candidate? Terrible to the extreme.
14
The press sells more papers when the race is close. The day to day coverage of the right-wing instigated "scandals" and phony, partisan "investigations" of Hillary Clinton have taken a toll. They were designed to run her positive numbers down at taxpayer expense. Just ask House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, who said, "Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping. Why? Because she's untrustable." There was no there there, but the narrative that Hillary is "untrustable" is repeated in every story, which becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy. When Hillary was SOS, her popularity was never below 60% favorable and as high as 68%. The press has made the election a horse race by constantly repeated every crazy charge against her, while ignoring for the most part Don the Con's crooked history and idiotic statements. The press follows Trump's trashing of the Clinton Foundation daily. His surrogate on Meet the Press Sunday claimed the Foundation, did no good works, only spends 10% of its funds on charitable work, and is a "hug slush fund" for the Clintons. It's A rated and 88% of its funding goes to its charitable works. There was not a word of dispute on MTP. So a horse race we have now.
16
Not only sells more papers, if the race is close both candidates will raise money in a fury and buy advertising until the Times runs out of paper and Google runs out of electrons.
5
As a Clinton supporter, I find it quite disconcerting that her team seems to take a win for granted as they happily telegraph their strategy (e.g. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/30/us/politics/hillary-clinton-donald-tru... and project an air of confidence that borders on arrogance.
13
Do we need polls to help us decide on a candidate? Are we so culpable that
if the polls are rating our chosen candidate unfavorably, we will simply move over to the other side, or another side (ie: Green Party, Libertarian) -- it seems from looking closely at this election coverage, we are indeed a very wishy-washy constituency.
Some of us know why we are voting for Mrs. Clinton - she respects human rights, social security, Medicare, and universal medical care; good public schools, fair taxation, and intelligent international relations. She also knows what it takes to keep the economy healthy.
For my vote, that's all I need.
if the polls are rating our chosen candidate unfavorably, we will simply move over to the other side, or another side (ie: Green Party, Libertarian) -- it seems from looking closely at this election coverage, we are indeed a very wishy-washy constituency.
Some of us know why we are voting for Mrs. Clinton - she respects human rights, social security, Medicare, and universal medical care; good public schools, fair taxation, and intelligent international relations. She also knows what it takes to keep the economy healthy.
For my vote, that's all I need.
22
I will vote for Hillary Clinton but as far as 'intelligent international relations' goes that doesn't seem to be the case. She's voted for the War in Iraq, and overthrowing the government of Libya. These are colossal blunders. Add to that her stance and policies in Honduras led to the coup that overthrew a democratically elected government. Her embrace of Henry Kissinger is also most disturbing. Ms Clinton needs to wake up when it comes to foreign policy.
3
Yes, you're right. The Iraq war, etc. were wrong, and I hope regrettable decisions. I also hope Mrs. Clinton uses hindsight
to inform foresight . When she speaks of good relations with
our allies, I am much more comfortable than when Trump speaks of conditional support of NATO alliances. Etc .
to inform foresight . When she speaks of good relations with
our allies, I am much more comfortable than when Trump speaks of conditional support of NATO alliances. Etc .
Winston, isn't it easy to I be an armchair strategist, and in hindsight no less? It's important for people to understand what this so-called Iraq war vote was. It was a vote to allow Bush to use his powers as deemed appropriate. As Bill Maher explained once on his excellent show, how was the relatively newly elected senator representing the people who had recently suffered through 9/11 supposed to NOT vote for this. It passed by a landslide. I was against even the invasion of Afghanistan after 9/11 (on the grounds that seeking out the perpetrators covertly would be more effective), but it may have been hard to be sitting in the Senate voting on this. One of my favorite quotes about Hillary was about the night Osama Bin Laden was killed, that they were worrying about it being the same night at the White House Correspondents' dinner, and she said "Screw the White House Correspondents' dinner." And overthrowing the government of Libya--like everything else, Hillary did that on her own--no NATO forces involved? Glad you're voting for her though.
Ms. Clinton goes out of her way to insult any semblance of progressive politics. She actively disdains my support. I have no reason other than disdain for Mr. Trump to vote for her. I live in Louisiana where my vote does not matter--she will not carry this state. I am able to say to heck with her. And I do. I don't want Mr. Trump to win but I also do not like the prospect of electing this war mongering idiot.
20
I dunno the whole "war mongering" thing is just sooooo overblown and hangs on the Iraq resolution vote which was based on the Cheney/Bush lies and was passed with 29 Democrats supporting it, including Biden, Kerry, etc. Lots of company. Otherwise you have no basis to project "war mongering" based on anything tangible. You could also match up her stand on the issues with progressive values by visiting: https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/
But I know, you don't really care. You've steeped yourself in the narratives you want to hear. But while you're at it re-read your own comment and see if you can hear how it DOES clearly read that you want the republican party's nominee to win. There is a man who really and truly DOES insult any semblance of progressive politics.
But I know, you don't really care. You've steeped yourself in the narratives you want to hear. But while you're at it re-read your own comment and see if you can hear how it DOES clearly read that you want the republican party's nominee to win. There is a man who really and truly DOES insult any semblance of progressive politics.
9
Sorry, her "warmongering" reputation doesn't hang on her Iraq vote while in the Senate, it hangs on Mrs. Clinton's record as Secretary of State. Try checking out the NYTimes' 2-part profile of her work in Libya from February 2016, for starters. She has embraced and aggressively promoted regime change in the middle east, wants a no-fly zone in Syria that will put us in line for direct confrontation and potentially WWIII with Russia, and is ready to do Netanyahu's bidding on day 1 of her presidency. Hardly overblown, and not compatible with the progressive stances she promotes on the domestic front.
5
I'm in Oklahoma and my vote for Hillary won't matter either. That's why I'm writing her so many checks, to make up for it.
10
She's a lousy candidate with chronic legal issues. It's not surprising that it's tightening, only that it took so long.
20
What "legal issues"? Can you list even one? Is she a party to any law suit?
Here is someone who is:
https://www.scribd.com/doc/316341058/Donald-Trump-Jeffrey-Epstein-Rape-L...
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-university-idUSMTZS...
Here is someone who is:
https://www.scribd.com/doc/316341058/Donald-Trump-Jeffrey-Epstein-Rape-L...
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-university-idUSMTZS...
9
Did you say "chronic legal issues"???
Guess you missed that part about Trump's numerous lawsuits and campaign bribe of the Florida Attorney General...
Guess you missed that part about Trump's numerous lawsuits and campaign bribe of the Florida Attorney General...
6
It appears that Trump is not being called to account for anything at all. The unreleased suspicious tax returns, the Bondi bribe, the Trump U scandal, the shady business practices, and on and on. When called out at all it is for some off the cuff shocker of an ephemeral remark that gets sloughed off in a nanosecond by the press, and "explained away" by his sycophant supporters.
Contrast the incessant and specious attacks on Clinton for absolutely nothing she had done wrong. The "email scandal" is far from a scandal. The "Benghazi issue" has no substance. The Clinton Foundation operations are only suspect in the minds of the rumor mongers. And yet the Times and other news outlets keep citing fools who believe these are serious matters calling her "untrustworthy," and thereby cementing this sobriquet in the minds of the low-information voters who never bother to check facts. It is hardly surprising that this is creating a drag on Clinton's public image.
In a nation where more people can name Beyonce's latest lipstick shade than name the members of the Supreme Court, such superficial reporting takes its toll. We can all wish that Americans had more substance, but it is this lightweight innuendo that is going to determine the election, and the press must bear the responsibility for its effects.
Contrast the incessant and specious attacks on Clinton for absolutely nothing she had done wrong. The "email scandal" is far from a scandal. The "Benghazi issue" has no substance. The Clinton Foundation operations are only suspect in the minds of the rumor mongers. And yet the Times and other news outlets keep citing fools who believe these are serious matters calling her "untrustworthy," and thereby cementing this sobriquet in the minds of the low-information voters who never bother to check facts. It is hardly surprising that this is creating a drag on Clinton's public image.
In a nation where more people can name Beyonce's latest lipstick shade than name the members of the Supreme Court, such superficial reporting takes its toll. We can all wish that Americans had more substance, but it is this lightweight innuendo that is going to determine the election, and the press must bear the responsibility for its effects.
35
If you have not seen the tax returns, why do you think they are suspicious? Are they any more suspicious than the unreleased Wall Street speech transcripts?
His personal tax return would show you almost nothing. All it shows is the dividends or profits he has taken out that year from any given business. But just because he may have taken little out of any one or multiple businesses says nothing about how profitable those businesses are. That information is in the individual business tax returns. And, as income tax taxes income, and not wealth, the tax return will say nothing about how "rich" he is because it includes no information on the value of his investments in the businesses.
And it wouldn't say much about his charitable donations. As we have already seen, his "charity" is dispensed by separate business entities, and not from his personal checking account.
His personal tax return would show you almost nothing. All it shows is the dividends or profits he has taken out that year from any given business. But just because he may have taken little out of any one or multiple businesses says nothing about how profitable those businesses are. That information is in the individual business tax returns. And, as income tax taxes income, and not wealth, the tax return will say nothing about how "rich" he is because it includes no information on the value of his investments in the businesses.
And it wouldn't say much about his charitable donations. As we have already seen, his "charity" is dispensed by separate business entities, and not from his personal checking account.
9
The tax returns are suspicious mostly because he refuses to release them. There is nothing in the IRS code that says that he cannot do so. If there is nothing damaging in them, then why doesn't he release them?
8
Yes, that's how a lot of us feel about the Goldman-Sachs speeches, William. Spot on.
1
The conventions gave citizens a good side-by-side comparison of the candidates and their party, and what do you know? Hillary Clinton came away the winner in the polls. The upcoming debates should have the same effect. Clinton is going to "look presidential" (despite Trump's protestations to the contrary), and next to her, Trump is bound to come off as the ill-prepared, grossly unqualified poser he is.
12
And Trump will look strong and that is what many Americans want after years of being stepped on albeit in trade, military support, open borders, health care where they don't even negotiate drug prices and on and on. I'm not so sure Trump will look much more appealing to many when he doesn't take Hillary's ___ on stage. I expect him to talk right over her as he did the GOP 17 and that worked for him. Weak but wonkish is not attractive to many viewers.
5
If history is any indicator, Trump will say something stupid and terrible for the 100th time in this election cycle and his numbers will go back down.
5
And when he does say something stupid or do something stupid for the 100th time, maybe, just maybe, the NYT will print it. Wouldn't that be a novel idea.
4
What is this myth about the NY Times not reporting on Trump's ridiculous words (and his ridiculous past). The coverage is pretty comprehensive. Here are all the examples of NY Times headlines to that effect that can fit in this comment box (I can't even fit one month's worth):
"Trump Donation His Latest Brush with Fund Rules" "Trump's Empire: A Maze of Debts and Opaque Ties" "Pay to Play, Mr. Trump?" "Applying for Housing at a Trump Property in the '60s" "What Trump Gets Wrong About Sexual Harassment" "Trial Allowed in Student Suit Against Trump" "Pariahs for Trump" "Trump, the Bad, Bad Businessman" "The Duplicity of Donald Trump" "'No Vacancies' for Blacks: How Donald Trump Got His Start, and was first Accused of Bias" "'He Used Us as Props': Conservative Hispanics Deplore Donald Trump's Speech" "Donald Trump's Alt-Right Brain" "Trump Institute Offered Get-Rich Schemes with Others' Ideas" "Historians Sound an Alarm About Donald Trump" "Trump's Hollow Regrets" "Inside the Failing Mission to Tame Donald Trump's Tongue" "How Do Trump's Conspiracy Theories Go Over in the Middle East? Dangerously" "Donald Trump is Making America Meaner" "The Pull of Racial Patronage" "Why Blacks Loathe Trump" "A Real Estate Developer Can Go Bankrupt. A President Can't" "The Dumbed Down Democracy" "Donald Trump's Bigotry" "No, Donald Trump, America Isn't a Hellhole" "Further into the Muck with Mr. Trump" "Mr. Trump Cues Up Another Conspiracy" "Trump's New High of New Lows" ... run a search!
"Trump Donation His Latest Brush with Fund Rules" "Trump's Empire: A Maze of Debts and Opaque Ties" "Pay to Play, Mr. Trump?" "Applying for Housing at a Trump Property in the '60s" "What Trump Gets Wrong About Sexual Harassment" "Trial Allowed in Student Suit Against Trump" "Pariahs for Trump" "Trump, the Bad, Bad Businessman" "The Duplicity of Donald Trump" "'No Vacancies' for Blacks: How Donald Trump Got His Start, and was first Accused of Bias" "'He Used Us as Props': Conservative Hispanics Deplore Donald Trump's Speech" "Donald Trump's Alt-Right Brain" "Trump Institute Offered Get-Rich Schemes with Others' Ideas" "Historians Sound an Alarm About Donald Trump" "Trump's Hollow Regrets" "Inside the Failing Mission to Tame Donald Trump's Tongue" "How Do Trump's Conspiracy Theories Go Over in the Middle East? Dangerously" "Donald Trump is Making America Meaner" "The Pull of Racial Patronage" "Why Blacks Loathe Trump" "A Real Estate Developer Can Go Bankrupt. A President Can't" "The Dumbed Down Democracy" "Donald Trump's Bigotry" "No, Donald Trump, America Isn't a Hellhole" "Further into the Muck with Mr. Trump" "Mr. Trump Cues Up Another Conspiracy" "Trump's New High of New Lows" ... run a search!
7
Hillary's got to give voters reasons why they should vote for her. For the past two months, her ads have focused on DJT's words. not HRC's positions. She has to change that asap. I fear voters (and viewers) are quickly becoming immune to the Trump one-liners and curse words. What an election
9
In poling analysis their is a belief that a superior ground game can contribute between 1-2 per cent bump over the poll consensus on election day. It is already too late for Trump to catch up to the Hillary campaign, especially with serious money concerns down the road.
2
Well then you have nothing to worry about do you?
2
I have a secure job and solid savings, so, as much as I loathe Trump, it would at least be fascinating in a train-wreck way to see him destroy the country as thoroughly as W managed. Probably worse. Then the Republicans can search for ways to blame his failures on Obama, and then once he's out of office pretend a la Bush that they have no memory of a Trump presidency at all.
17
Seriously, how childish. In a country destroyed do you actually think you will have a secure job or savings.
3
Yes, just like the Democrats continue to blame Obama's failures on Bush.
Her lead has shrunk? What a surprise. The only candidate doing a worse job than her running, is Trump. He's an unqualified clown. She's completely unscrupulous. As between the two, I guess I vote for her.
17
I wonder how good clowns are at juggling the many lawsuits he's going to be standing trial on. The Florida AG bribery charges, the Trump scam "University" trial, and of course this:
https://www.scribd.com/doc/316341058/Donald-Trump-Jeffrey-Epstein-Rape-L...
https://www.scribd.com/doc/316341058/Donald-Trump-Jeffrey-Epstein-Rape-L...
12
Clinton has been treating this election as won. She needs to start seeming available, making herself as warm and fuzzy as she is capable of being. She needs a real explanation of what training she got as Secretary of State, preferably from people who gave the training.
She's become far too distant, and with her unlikeably ratings, she can't afford that.
She's become far too distant, and with her unlikeably ratings, she can't afford that.
6
She can afford that, actually, and plenty more. The election is at least as won as she's been treating it. Wait and see.
1
Some people would actually prefer intelligent and capable over warm and fuzzy.
Besides, since when has "warm and fuzzy" become a necessary trait in a presidential candidate???
Besides, since when has "warm and fuzzy" become a necessary trait in a presidential candidate???
5
I stopped answering my phone when the number is not familiar. I would imagine many others have as well. Polls? The questions are often biased and leading, and there are so many calls that it is intrusive. The only poll that matters is on election day. I'm with her.
13
Maybe a computer screen with a teleprompter embedded in contact lenses?
2
I fear that Trump will be wearing some type of gizmo implanted in his ears to be fed responses in the debates. Is this a possibility? Clnton is not great but the future of this country is at stack in regard to
SC appointments.
SC appointments.
8
By the way, Bush was, in the debates with Kerry.
1
Bush wore an electronic device in his ear during the 2004 debates according to Dr. Robert M. Nelson a NASA research scientist. Clearly, Trump will do the same but it will be far more sophisticated than what Bush wore.
2
Could it be that the public is just weary of polls by now? I know I"m tired of all this pre-election brouhaha. It's been ongoing for over a year. I'd probably hang up on any pollster who called or raced through without much thought. I only accomplished online polls during the primaries.
Breathless anticipation left the house a long time ago. This is the election year that won't end. I don't understand fence sitters or those waiting to see if Trump becomes presidential enough to warrant their votes. A few weeks of good behavior doesn't alter decades of inconsideration, ignorance and indifference. Clinton might have her issues, but she's been basically as honest as the next person in similar situations and considers carefully her words before she speaks.
I might not personally like her, but I understand clearly that our nation's values, steady economic markets and democracy would survive under her stewardship. I have no confidence of anything decent for the citizenry under a Trump presidency.
So please, WA elections, hurry up. Mail out our voter ballots. I just want to end this ordeal. I hope that the only rational and experienced candidate wins. Otherwise, God help us all.
Breathless anticipation left the house a long time ago. This is the election year that won't end. I don't understand fence sitters or those waiting to see if Trump becomes presidential enough to warrant their votes. A few weeks of good behavior doesn't alter decades of inconsideration, ignorance and indifference. Clinton might have her issues, but she's been basically as honest as the next person in similar situations and considers carefully her words before she speaks.
I might not personally like her, but I understand clearly that our nation's values, steady economic markets and democracy would survive under her stewardship. I have no confidence of anything decent for the citizenry under a Trump presidency.
So please, WA elections, hurry up. Mail out our voter ballots. I just want to end this ordeal. I hope that the only rational and experienced candidate wins. Otherwise, God help us all.
4
The media both print and television are more interested in increased readership and viewership and the almighty dollar. The Donald is providing them with increased advertisement rates. Pointing out his many flaws, lies, indiscretions, and overall incompetence is not their priority.
6
Everything I see or hear of Secretary Clinton these days disappoints. For example:
1. Over the weekend I saw a story on CNN about the relationship of both Clintons with a for a profit "university" called "Laureate." Though they ended their endorsement/relationship last year, before they did that they apparently collected something in the neighborhood of $20 million for their "support." This really turned my stomach. It was revolting. It wasn't as if they didn't have enough money for their own daughter's education (and by the way she went to Stanford and Oxford) or were otherwise needy. They were already wealthy when their support for this school begin. How greedy do you have to be to do something like charge millions to support another shady for-profit school. Giving $600,000 speeches is bad; but collecting $20 million in PR fees from a for-profit school is totally disgusting.
2. Over the weekend I saw HRC make a brief appearance in the press section of her new airplane. She seemed totally ill at ease to me and seemed eager to return to her own area of the plane. Every time I think of the possibility of someone like her in the White House I think of something like this (then just say to myself, "well it'll only be 4 years hopefully").
I don't know why other people don't support her, but am not surprised this is happening. She needs to do something people like and trust, but seems incapable of that.
1. Over the weekend I saw a story on CNN about the relationship of both Clintons with a for a profit "university" called "Laureate." Though they ended their endorsement/relationship last year, before they did that they apparently collected something in the neighborhood of $20 million for their "support." This really turned my stomach. It was revolting. It wasn't as if they didn't have enough money for their own daughter's education (and by the way she went to Stanford and Oxford) or were otherwise needy. They were already wealthy when their support for this school begin. How greedy do you have to be to do something like charge millions to support another shady for-profit school. Giving $600,000 speeches is bad; but collecting $20 million in PR fees from a for-profit school is totally disgusting.
2. Over the weekend I saw HRC make a brief appearance in the press section of her new airplane. She seemed totally ill at ease to me and seemed eager to return to her own area of the plane. Every time I think of the possibility of someone like her in the White House I think of something like this (then just say to myself, "well it'll only be 4 years hopefully").
I don't know why other people don't support her, but am not surprised this is happening. She needs to do something people like and trust, but seems incapable of that.
18
I actually wonder the same thing about Donald Trump.
Can't imagine why anyone in their right mind would vote for someone as dishonest and hateful as he is.
And then, there's that Ku Klux Klan endorsement....not a good sign.
Can't imagine why anyone in their right mind would vote for someone as dishonest and hateful as he is.
And then, there's that Ku Klux Klan endorsement....not a good sign.
3
trump:what?huh?davwha?david who?i dont know any david duke...who is he again?
2
I've been around for a very large number of Presidential elections, and I can't recall a candidate of either party that has had to have such effort required to explain his/her deficiencies as a candidate as HRC. (Trump is an anomaly and doesn't count.)
But HRC has to be forgiven for her lies, her errors in the positions she's held, her inarguable incompetence at politics, and her paranoia. It's all somebody else's fault, not hers.
But it is her fault. The right wing hasn't created her unpopularity, it has only fed it.
But HRC has to be forgiven for her lies, her errors in the positions she's held, her inarguable incompetence at politics, and her paranoia. It's all somebody else's fault, not hers.
But it is her fault. The right wing hasn't created her unpopularity, it has only fed it.
15
The media has been obsessed by the so-called email scandal of Clinton's. They need to spend as much time investigating Trump since there is so much we do not know about him. The recent bribery of a state attorney general in Texas and also in Florida is far more worthy of voter outrage than anything uncovered in months of studying Hillary under a microscope. Where is the outcry about Trump's possible felonies in suborning public officials ? He is getting a free pass.
15
As far as I can tell, the New York Times has been diligently investigating Trump for some time, and what I read is appalling (to me at least), but I get the impression these things don't matter much to his supporters.
7
This is an extraordinary, or shall I say "abnormal" election. The winner will not be the favourite or even "preferred" candidate. It will be the least despised or the one that attracts the largest number of "disgusted-with-the-opposition-candidate" voters to the booth – thus unpredictable.
The "stay-at-home-why-even-bothers" will rule the day!
“If voting made any difference they wouldn't let us do it.” ~
MARK TWAIN
The "stay-at-home-why-even-bothers" will rule the day!
“If voting made any difference they wouldn't let us do it.” ~
MARK TWAIN
11
Here's the deal Clinton was never really that far ahead. In the polls she was up big in the beginning of August showed Republicans supporting Trump at around 75-80%. The norm is around 90% for a partisan to support their party's nominee. Many of these holdout Republicans were women appalled by the latest Trump controversy. I said at the time if he could stay out of the news for particularly egregious behavior and somewhat act like a normal candidate the polls would tighten. Clinton didn't help her case either by dropping off the face of the Earth these past few weeks.
At the end of the day she's still ahead but if Trump pulls out a good to great debate, watch out. My inkling is that there are a lot more people looking for an excuse to vote for him than not.
At the end of the day she's still ahead but if Trump pulls out a good to great debate, watch out. My inkling is that there are a lot more people looking for an excuse to vote for him than not.
11
Lots of people are trying to find a way to get comfortable to vote for him, otherwise it's default same ol', same ol'! He probably only has to be nice for a while.
4
Trump is all over the place by virtue of his big mouth. Unfortunately, his followers are selective about what they hear. He screams insults and nonsense and his crowd cheers. He back-pedals later, and nobody listens.
Clinton should take out space and publish some of of Trump's more baffling and indecisive comments on the sports pages. Let the readers know how he plays them, in his own words. Nothing will make people who already dislike Clinton overnight fans, so I think the best approach is to show them the real Trump and the damage he will cause to ordinary people if he is elected.
Clinton should take out space and publish some of of Trump's more baffling and indecisive comments on the sports pages. Let the readers know how he plays them, in his own words. Nothing will make people who already dislike Clinton overnight fans, so I think the best approach is to show them the real Trump and the damage he will cause to ordinary people if he is elected.
4
Ever consider the possibility that it is you that is selective in what you hear? That couldn't be right? You are a righteous "progressive".
4
You say Trump will cause damage to "ordinary people". what kind of damage might that be? Also interesting is that you claim Trump is all over the place. Again, what do you mean? I understand you don't agree with him, but what exactly has he flopped so hard on that you say that about?
We all see things through our own lenses, so I'm curious what you see he's back-pedaled on from your view. These are honest questions.
We all see things through our own lenses, so I'm curious what you see he's back-pedaled on from your view. These are honest questions.
3
bro$, do you not know any ordinary people? Do you not know what an economic downturn would look like? Stock market and 401K's tanking? Possible international hostilities? A poor woman having to find a back room abortion? Lots of potential damage to everyone from an unstable president. Is it all those wonderful new coal jobs that has you so enthused? Don't you remember that Obama is absolutely the founder of ISIS, until it's all just a joke?
2
Mr. Trump has a huge number of bad policies but he excelles on one thing. Using the press. He has reaped millions of dollars in free press and continues to do so.
10
I'm 73 and retired for some years. And in all those years have never seen anyone quite like DT. Divisive, racist, bigot, etc.
Then I go out whether to shop, church, travel and what I see are wonderful Americans. It is hard for me to imagine that on Nov 8th Americans would vote for Trump. I have more faith in America than what these polls are saying right now.
I wouldn't be surprised if HRC won by 6, 8, or 10 points or more.
Then I go out whether to shop, church, travel and what I see are wonderful Americans. It is hard for me to imagine that on Nov 8th Americans would vote for Trump. I have more faith in America than what these polls are saying right now.
I wouldn't be surprised if HRC won by 6, 8, or 10 points or more.
18
Guess what he upside to this article is, folks?
Clinton still has the lead! And it should not be hard to believe his, but Donald Trump is not half the man that Obama is, or the Bushes, or Bill (despite all his idiosyncrasies), or Reagan, or Carter, or LBJ or Ford. Even Nixon, who resigned the presidency amidst the Watergate scandal, at least knew what the US Constitution embodies social values we aspire to.
Now imagine if Trump were the president. Can you honestly see Trump, being infinitely narcissistic and ignorant of the basic constitutional structure in place, step down voluntarily if he were impeached? We know he is close-minded. He has demonstrated that all he wants to do is put on a show, and tries to come off as spectacular at the expense of honor and duty. It should not surprise anyone that he will have to fire at least two Chiefs of Staff before realizing what impeachment means.
What fools will he be making of all of us, whose country is still the greatest political, economic and social experiment the world has ever seen?
Clinton still has the lead! And it should not be hard to believe his, but Donald Trump is not half the man that Obama is, or the Bushes, or Bill (despite all his idiosyncrasies), or Reagan, or Carter, or LBJ or Ford. Even Nixon, who resigned the presidency amidst the Watergate scandal, at least knew what the US Constitution embodies social values we aspire to.
Now imagine if Trump were the president. Can you honestly see Trump, being infinitely narcissistic and ignorant of the basic constitutional structure in place, step down voluntarily if he were impeached? We know he is close-minded. He has demonstrated that all he wants to do is put on a show, and tries to come off as spectacular at the expense of honor and duty. It should not surprise anyone that he will have to fire at least two Chiefs of Staff before realizing what impeachment means.
What fools will he be making of all of us, whose country is still the greatest political, economic and social experiment the world has ever seen?
9
Bill Clinton was impeached but he did not voluntarily step down. Nixon did step down voluntarily, but he wasn't impeached.
5
Roger: correct. I recall that the House Judiciary Committee voted Articles, but it never proceeded to a full House vote. Mostly because some senior Republicans--Hugh Scott and Barry Goldwater, I believe--made it clear that his support was plummeting.
Bill Clinton was impeached by the full House and the Senate voted on his conviction. The vote was fairly close, but way short of the 2/3 required.
Bill Clinton was impeached by the full House and the Senate voted on his conviction. The vote was fairly close, but way short of the 2/3 required.
4
Oh Roger. From Wikipedia, easily googlable:
"On February 9, after voting against a public deliberation on the verdict, the Senate began closed-door deliberations instead. On February 12, the Senate emerged from its closed deliberations and voted on the articles of impeachment. A two-thirds majority, 67 votes, would have been necessary to convict and remove the President from office. The perjury charge was defeated with 45 votes for conviction and 55 against.[23] (Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania voted "not proven,"[24] which was considered by the Chief Justice Rehnquist as a vote of "not guilty.") The obstruction of justice charge was defeated with 50 for conviction and 50 against.[25]"
He was ACQUITTED.
"And so with impeachment and removal by the Senate all but certain, on August 9, 1974, Nixon became the first president to resign."
"On February 9, after voting against a public deliberation on the verdict, the Senate began closed-door deliberations instead. On February 12, the Senate emerged from its closed deliberations and voted on the articles of impeachment. A two-thirds majority, 67 votes, would have been necessary to convict and remove the President from office. The perjury charge was defeated with 45 votes for conviction and 55 against.[23] (Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania voted "not proven,"[24] which was considered by the Chief Justice Rehnquist as a vote of "not guilty.") The obstruction of justice charge was defeated with 50 for conviction and 50 against.[25]"
He was ACQUITTED.
"And so with impeachment and removal by the Senate all but certain, on August 9, 1974, Nixon became the first president to resign."
3
I could be quite wrong about this but, as we get closer to D-Day (11/08/2016), I think (fervently pray) that Americans will take a good look at the outgoing Barack Obama and do the calculus: "should I vote for Hillary Clinton because she's ice and steel or Donald Trump who's nothing if not sulphuric acid"? And "did President Obama serve honorably in spite of all the negatives strewn in his path by a racist Congress? Could Trump"?
13
I will believe Mr. Trump’s pledge to bolster the military when I see x-rays of his bone spurs.
I will believe that Barack Obama was born on the moon before I believe a word that Mr. Trump is saying about his finances.
I will believe Gov. Pence truly admires Mr. Trump on the day that Mr. Trump gives up lying about his love of tacos and profound respect for women, blacks, Mexicans and Muslims.
I will believe every word that Mr. Trump says when KellyAnne Conway stops scripting every word he says.
I will admire Mr. Trump’s children after they say just one true word against the lies, insults and defamations of character he has been uttering throughout the past year.
I will vote in favor of giving Melania Trump a lifetime federal pension of one million dollars per year tax free after she publishes an honest article on the internet giving the world the true scoop on the grossly deformed character of the man she is married to.
I will believe that Barack Obama was born on the moon before I believe a word that Mr. Trump is saying about his finances.
I will believe Gov. Pence truly admires Mr. Trump on the day that Mr. Trump gives up lying about his love of tacos and profound respect for women, blacks, Mexicans and Muslims.
I will believe every word that Mr. Trump says when KellyAnne Conway stops scripting every word he says.
I will admire Mr. Trump’s children after they say just one true word against the lies, insults and defamations of character he has been uttering throughout the past year.
I will vote in favor of giving Melania Trump a lifetime federal pension of one million dollars per year tax free after she publishes an honest article on the internet giving the world the true scoop on the grossly deformed character of the man she is married to.
14
I wonder how the polls are going to react to the heavy duty dirt that is sure to arise in the next few weeks, on both candidates. Wikileaks information must be pretty awful to motivate Nancy Pelosi to lobby Paul Ryan to pledge that the Republicans will not use any hacked information. It always seems that our government is invested in misinformation and obstruction of knowledge of what they do. Don't forget Pelosi's famous line, "We have to pass the Affordable Care Act to know what is in it" in response to a Congressman stating that no one has had the opportunity to read the legislation. Maybe the Vietnam War could have been avoided if the American Public knew that the North Vietnamese never attacked our ships in the Gulf of Tonkin and President Johnson would have been forced to resign for perpetrating such a serious lie. Who knows how far the truth could have taken the U.S.?
6
Who cares about head to head two person polls when there are four principal candidates in a year when both major party candidates are each more disliked than liked? The reality is, four candidates, not two, on Election Day.
With both major party candidates showing such significant dislike numbers, the Clinton voters are composed of Clinton supporters and Trump haters. Similarly, the Trump voters are composed of Trump supporters and Clinton haters. So that is four categories of voters (I recognize some may fall into two categories).
I think the Clinton supporters have weak motivation. And the numbers are not growing. The Trump haters are also already at that point, and their numbers are not growing very much (though Clinton is trying her hardest to expand that number).
Trump supporters have much stronger motivation. Which means many people who normally do not vote will show up this year. And as more and more facts emerge, former Hillary supporters are getting weak knees. You can see it here from day to day in the comments section.
Which means to me that this race is still on the back stretch, and Trump is closing the gap. The final furlong will be rather interesting.
With both major party candidates showing such significant dislike numbers, the Clinton voters are composed of Clinton supporters and Trump haters. Similarly, the Trump voters are composed of Trump supporters and Clinton haters. So that is four categories of voters (I recognize some may fall into two categories).
I think the Clinton supporters have weak motivation. And the numbers are not growing. The Trump haters are also already at that point, and their numbers are not growing very much (though Clinton is trying her hardest to expand that number).
Trump supporters have much stronger motivation. Which means many people who normally do not vote will show up this year. And as more and more facts emerge, former Hillary supporters are getting weak knees. You can see it here from day to day in the comments section.
Which means to me that this race is still on the back stretch, and Trump is closing the gap. The final furlong will be rather interesting.
7
The only credible candidate the Democrats have put forth in the last 16 years was Obama and really he crashed the party. What a bunch of losers. It was apparent for the last two years that Mrs. Clinton was a hugely unpopular candidate nationally who would struggle to beat anyone with a heartbeat. How did they let her run as the party candidate? They should have made her earn it to prove she could actually beat someone besides an avowed socialist(who probably would have a double digit lead over Trump!) What a mess that party is. A lot of focus has been on what a mess the Republicans are but the Democrats do not deserve a pass. How hard is to realize that the party does not represent what the majority of actual working class/middle class/white collar class voters desire? When are these parties going to come up with a platform that doesn't pander to the extremes? When will they actually listen to voters and not run dead in the water candidates? Maybe Trump needs to win so we can hit the reset button on these entire folly that is Washington DC.
6
I could not agree more with your point about both parties having platforms that pander to the extremes. But, I have absolutely no faith that either will be willing or even able to change this. That may be most appalling aspect of the entire political process.
1
She's losing, because she's no good and even the people who support her don't like, trust or believe in her. You can't win an election just by not being someone else. Trump, whatever else he is, is at least authentic. The days of candidates being all things to all people are almost over.
12
Yes, I agree, Donald Trump is an authentic, authentically crazy. I am a supporter of Hillary Clinton, like her, trust her and believe her. Just because someone repeats untrue negatives, still doesn't make it true.
12
If you really do "believe" Hillary, you must be the one that's crazy.
4
Nothing to assess here. This is not substantive news. It's just a fluctuation. Ask the same people polled here next week and there will again be fluctuation. People vacillate. They do it with trifles such as what to make for dinner later and they do it with important decisions, such as voting. Read 'Nudge' and reference "cold and hot states" and their effect on people's decisions.
Why has her lead slipped? Try 'her joyless, unappealing slog through the country' as another piece on the paper puts it. Voters think maybe such a campaign presages a joyless, unappealing presidency. So they look elsewhere.
10
What the heck is a "joyless, unappealing presidency"? George Bush's? This isn't entertainment.
1
As fully examined by poll analysts on MSNBC, the CNN/ORC poll that gave Trump a lead, over weighted for Republicans in that there were more self identified Republicans in the poll than self identified Democrats which skews the actual national party affiliation, making this poll not very useful.
5
I have always been for Hillary but the more I listen to Trump,,, with an open mind......I like him.
I had to learn to listen to him as a business man not a politician.
( huge difference between the two )
I am in business too ,,and also find myself saying things that the media would not like..that's Trump.
I change my mind several times a day.
That's Trump
It now makes sense to me that a business man is what I like for a President.
I had to learn to listen to him as a business man not a politician.
( huge difference between the two )
I am in business too ,,and also find myself saying things that the media would not like..that's Trump.
I change my mind several times a day.
That's Trump
It now makes sense to me that a business man is what I like for a President.
10
Well, if you like businessmen who repeatedly retreat to bankruptcy, leaving their partners to take most of the losses, who claim to still possess successful products that failed years ago, who claim to "know more about ISIS than the generals", but actually know nothing about military strategy or foreign policy, who denigrate foreign imports but have all their remaining products manufactured outside the U.S., who out and out defraud the most vulnerable of their life savings in a phony "university", who bully partners and stiff their vendors, and who bribe attorneys general into dropping investigations into their fraud, who pay so little income tax that they are embarrassed to release their returns...
...then, sure, Trump's your man. Do you run your own business like that? Could you look in the mirror every morning if you did?
...then, sure, Trump's your man. Do you run your own business like that? Could you look in the mirror every morning if you did?
5
So you're going to forget everything the man has said and done over the last year but you're keeping an open mind? Wow.
7
If I were leaning towards electing a businessman as President, I would at least want them to be a successful businessman. To quote Michael Bloomberg's assessment "I'm a New Yorker and I know a con when I see one."
6
If there is a way to lose, the Democrats will find it. Ask Presidents Dukakis, Gore and Kerry, who took August off to "recharge his batteries," leaving the slimeball Republicans to swift boat him with impunity. Hillary is an extremely flawed candidate: the perception of her dishonesty, and her corruption (Goldman Sachs speeches, the emails, her husband's foundation) - whether true or not - and her genuine ineptitude as a candidate, combined with the media's phony equivalency if not outward bias toward Trump (they are working hard to "normalize" him as a candidate; any sane utterance is taken as a sign he could be a plausible alternative) could make her victory very problematical. Sanders would have been a much better alternative, a much clearer contrast to the plutocratic fascist who could end up in the White House. While this should be a watershed election, in which the Republican Criminal Organization, at all political levels,pays dearly for foisting a sociopath upon a dumbed down, gullible electorate, it could be anything but. As Mencken said: nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.
5
Even with the alleged "tightening" there are no states that President Obama took in 2012 where she is actually behind in, and must win states for Trump like Virginia and Pennsylvania are increasingly out of reach while states that were supposed be solid red like Arizona and Georgia are very much in play.
4
She has been doing her best to avoid the commoner and enjoy the wealthier. She has been silent, except one might suppose, private speeches to the well paying businesses, speeches she will not release. Who knows what she thinks, plans. Evidently, maybe, perhaps she has published position papers but they are not words coming out of her mouth, so who knows. Once we had a 91%, ca 1950, a tax on excess income....is that a thought to balance current inequity?
One blusters, one ???????
One blusters, one ???????
8
It is unfortunate that we appear to be on track for seeing a record low voter turnout. The fluctuating polls suggest that people are weary of the system as we know it and are tired of being given the choice between the perceived lesser of two evils. Partisan politicians have done a remarkable job of brainwashing themselves while even our least educated citizens can see through their game. It appears that polling is becoming less accurate over time since most people really don't support either major party candidate and would just as soon flip a coin to make their decision. Regardless, this election seems to be about a race to the bottom.
2
Polls are relatively meaningless, certainly meaningless at this stage. Clinton will rise up again with the Obama bounce, but then fall again, all the time Trump is consistently rising, and rising. His plan seems to be working. His messaging is connecting.
Clinton? Hmmm... sorry, haven't really seen the woman.
Clinton? Hmmm... sorry, haven't really seen the woman.
6
Silly you.
She's been at $100,000-a-ticket fundraisers.
If that's not accessible for you, you don't deserve to see her, I guess.
She's been at $100,000-a-ticket fundraisers.
If that's not accessible for you, you don't deserve to see her, I guess.
5
The best way to assess the polls is to not assess them as being significant. I don't think Clinton's lead has shrunk. There was just no lead for Clinton other than the post Dem convention. Pollsters were just fudging or extrapolating or making up numbers 80-90 days before elections. The media was heavily in favor of Hillary and boosting her candidacy. So either as this article says Clinton's lead has shrunk or that more of the undecided and independents are now moving in the direction of Trump because of the numerous Clinton wrong doings that have come to light and Americans have reached a point of extreme distrust and dislike of Clinton. Gary Johnson and Jill Stein are also cutting into the Clinton lead and getting more coverage and seem like choices better than Clinton or Trump for those who don't like either of them. I am delighted because I have all along being saying the polls mean little and it is the general election on November 08, 2016 that would be the real poll to patiently wait for and be the decisive day of reckoning and judgment.
2
She has spent the last weeks sucking up to big money contributors because she thinks the election is game, set, match. Many voters are just starting to pay attention and are not so convinced Trump is a problem compared to another term of Clinton drama.
The people who tend to vote Republican get out and vote because it is election day while people who tend to vote Democratic need a reason to vote. A lot of people who were active supporters of Bernie Sanders either have no intention of voting for her or voting at all. Many others will vote for Jill Stein or Gary Johnson.
A Trump administration might well prove to be the tipping point for the dissolution of the Republican Party, but I doubt it would take down the country. If A Trump Presidency means no Hillary in the White House and the Republicans joining the Whigs, Federalists and Know-Nothings in the dustbin of history- then bring it on.
The Congress is more important and I would rather a Democratic House and Senate. I will not vote for Ms Clinton.
The people who tend to vote Republican get out and vote because it is election day while people who tend to vote Democratic need a reason to vote. A lot of people who were active supporters of Bernie Sanders either have no intention of voting for her or voting at all. Many others will vote for Jill Stein or Gary Johnson.
A Trump administration might well prove to be the tipping point for the dissolution of the Republican Party, but I doubt it would take down the country. If A Trump Presidency means no Hillary in the White House and the Republicans joining the Whigs, Federalists and Know-Nothings in the dustbin of history- then bring it on.
The Congress is more important and I would rather a Democratic House and Senate. I will not vote for Ms Clinton.
8
Well Okey Dokey, David. You and Bernie disagree. He understands that the real power the president has is in nominating Supreme Court appointments. So by not voting for Clinton you enable the republican party's nominee to seat Scalia's replacement, and likely Ginsburg's. And possibly Breyer's. Good for you.
You are correct the the republican party's nominee would probably not "take down the country" all by himself, but putting the Supreme Court back firmly in the hands of conservative justices for a generation will certainly have a huge impact. Good on you for that.
We can only hope "Deep Red South" means you are not in NC or FL.
You are correct the the republican party's nominee would probably not "take down the country" all by himself, but putting the Supreme Court back firmly in the hands of conservative justices for a generation will certainly have a huge impact. Good on you for that.
We can only hope "Deep Red South" means you are not in NC or FL.
4
Polls or no polls folks, just keep this in mind - if you think W was bad, Trump will be W on steroids. God help this country if The Donald become The President.
2
Fantastic analysis.
2
It is important to remember that the polls of the popular vote on a national vote is absolutely meaningless in the Constitutionally prescribed processes of determining the President of the United States.
Frankly, unless you are a voter in one of the swing states of Ohio, Iowa, Nevada, Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina, your individual vote will probably be irrelevant in the election of the 45th POTUS.
Watch Ohio very closely, as the Presidential election winner in the State of Ohio has gone on to win the national election every single election since 1964.
In all likelihood, your state is either so red or so blue that your vote, which ever way you choose is absolutely moot in the Presidential election.
What has happened is that the two major political parties have been eroding the power of the voter for generations and that power has shifted from the individual voters to the two major political parties through actions such as gerrymandering, which has the repercussion of keeping in office incumbents who would otherwise be dumped by the voters.
Needless to say, those who seek to curry favor with incumbents for their special interest feather the nests of these protected incumbents who gain seniority and power within their legislative bodies.
Add to that the cash explosions of Citizens United and McConnell and those with special interests and dubious character can now fund campaigns of the least capable with unlimited and untraceable cash.
A recipe for disaster!
Frankly, unless you are a voter in one of the swing states of Ohio, Iowa, Nevada, Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina, your individual vote will probably be irrelevant in the election of the 45th POTUS.
Watch Ohio very closely, as the Presidential election winner in the State of Ohio has gone on to win the national election every single election since 1964.
In all likelihood, your state is either so red or so blue that your vote, which ever way you choose is absolutely moot in the Presidential election.
What has happened is that the two major political parties have been eroding the power of the voter for generations and that power has shifted from the individual voters to the two major political parties through actions such as gerrymandering, which has the repercussion of keeping in office incumbents who would otherwise be dumped by the voters.
Needless to say, those who seek to curry favor with incumbents for their special interest feather the nests of these protected incumbents who gain seniority and power within their legislative bodies.
Add to that the cash explosions of Citizens United and McConnell and those with special interests and dubious character can now fund campaigns of the least capable with unlimited and untraceable cash.
A recipe for disaster!
3
I'm a Democrat who won't be voting for Hillary. The Republicans have been right as has Trump. Hillary is deceptive and crooked. And, her cynical cozying up to Goldman Sachs and all the other fat cats shows that she is for sale. I hope she loses. Our country can do better!
9
Please, the Clintons are not for sale. For rent, yes.
5
Since the election is won or lost in the electoral college, why focus on polls that assess the popular vote? Just ask Mr. Gore about that.
2
Fortunately, British Columbia is just a two hour drive away. I will not continue to live among people crazed enough to elevate The Dumpster to the presidency and to seriously contemplate enactment of his proposed program of mass deportation, isolationism and further concentration of wealth in the hands of the few through still more tax subsidies for risky, debt-financed speculative investment and other sporting activities of the ultra-rich. If nothing else, the idea of a former lingerie and nude model, gold-digging human trophy and clueless plagiarist as 'First Lady' just will not compute.
I've got bags packed and a full tank of gas, just in case.
I've got bags packed and a full tank of gas, just in case.
7
Maybe Clinton's poll numbers are dropping because many of the people who were supporting are now waking up to the fact that she's a fake and a fraud, pandering to special interest groups with her lies promising them so many good things, but she's really only beholden to the Wall Street bankers and the foreign contributors to her corrupt Clinton Foundation.
14
Tell me what you actually know about the Clinton Foundation. I suspect not much.
1
Say it! Clinton is collapsing while Trump is surging. Time for change in America!
3
If you get what you say you want, I hope you're looking forward to our invasion. We've heard you have cheap power, and we're taking it.
4
If over 100,000 can be disenfranchised in Brooklyn during the Democratic Primary, then polls can be adjusted to "wag the dog".
We saw Bernie at a small rally in May with over 2500 people who had three days advance notice. He has a rally for Hillary in N.H. and 300 show up. The dems picked the wrong candidate.
We saw Bernie at a small rally in May with over 2500 people who had three days advance notice. He has a rally for Hillary in N.H. and 300 show up. The dems picked the wrong candidate.
4
Well, more lies and the dragging out of the email "scandal" (it's not really... but the GOP wants you to think it is)... has certainly upset many people.
Frankly, if Hillary were running against Bernie she'd lose by a wide margin, IMHO.
Actually, if something befell Hillary and she couldn't continue, wouldn't Bernie be able to step up and take her place? While I don't wish Hillary any lasting ill will, a nice little mental breakdown right now might do us some good.
Frankly, if Hillary were running against Bernie she'd lose by a wide margin, IMHO.
Actually, if something befell Hillary and she couldn't continue, wouldn't Bernie be able to step up and take her place? While I don't wish Hillary any lasting ill will, a nice little mental breakdown right now might do us some good.
2
Beware of their influence that can feed and influence bandwagon follow the crowd sheep-like behavior. Anymore, it's as if elections are about proving which polls are accurate than the other way around.
1
There is not a single group in the nation that Trump has not insulted. None. Yet Clinton is not crushing him in terms of popular votes? How can this be? Just about anyone, even a chimpanzee, should be leading him by 20 or 30 points. How can the Democrats have nominated such a weak candidate? What were they thinking? Trump may become President thanks to Clinton. Disgusting.
1
Maybe it's because he hasn't insulted those groups, liberal hypersensitivity notwithstanding.
2
it would seem as if Americans have hard time committing themselves to vote for anyone. It comes down to choosing between the most detested politician in recent history and the second most detested one. Courageous voters have to decide whether they prefer an incompetent/reckless president or an incoherent reality show star. Indeed the difference is in their style only; both belong to the class of millionaires/billionaires who couldn't care less about most Americans but had the good fortune to come from the right dynasty by birth or by marriage and are entitled to be crowned next. Also, both are not strangers to vast corruption (And indulge in tax evading to hide their fortune in the same fictitious tax heaven address: 1209 North Orange Street.)
Whomever wins it would sure to be an unpopular, unfit person, a Neo-conservative with Republican policy stands and always pro-war. Whomever wins, we - and the rest of our fellow Americans - are sure to lose.
Whomever wins it would sure to be an unpopular, unfit person, a Neo-conservative with Republican policy stands and always pro-war. Whomever wins, we - and the rest of our fellow Americans - are sure to lose.
1
Nobody who thinks Hillary Clinton's incompetent needs to be take all tthat seriously.
She was the secretary of state yet told the FBI she did not know that she was discussing top secret information via her basement email server. If this is not "incompetence" to you, what is?
6
This campaign is like a reenactment of the CIVIL WAR. If Clinton sees it that way, maybe she can mobilize her forces against Trump, in time to beat him in in November.
The Trump forces are highly radicalized with hatred in a holy war. But the Clinton people are not radicalized. at least not yet.
There is still time for Hillary to wake up her supporters to march into battle. The debates count, but if Trump is still standing at the end, it is a victory for him.
Yes, I say this is an UNCIVIL WAR, 2016!
---------------------------------------------------
Is Clinton going to fight back or not? Time will tell.
The Trump forces are highly radicalized with hatred in a holy war. But the Clinton people are not radicalized. at least not yet.
There is still time for Hillary to wake up her supporters to march into battle. The debates count, but if Trump is still standing at the end, it is a victory for him.
Yes, I say this is an UNCIVIL WAR, 2016!
---------------------------------------------------
Is Clinton going to fight back or not? Time will tell.
1
Will be fun to hear Democrats arguing the popular vote doesn't count --It's the Electoral College. Just the reverse of their position after the 2000 race.
5
The polls at this point are meaningless. A diversion from the issues. A better article to write in the service of the American people is to discuss the fact that the republican party's nominee is named as a defendant in a child rape lawsuit. Why this is being ignored must be addressed.
1
Exactly. Where are the investigative journalists who are asking the hard questions? Why is the press silent on demanding his tax returns? Why is the press silent on his wife's immigrant status? Why is the press silent on his son's solicitation of funds from foreigners? Why is the press silent on his bribe to the Florida Attorney General? Why is the press silent on him asking Russia to hack the DNC? Why is the press silent?
4
But the press has not been silent on any of these things. We know about them because they've all been on the front page of the NYT and WaPo, as well as CNN.
Dems have only themselves to blame. To paraphrase the old V8 juice commercial, "Wow! I could've had Bernie Sanders!"
Instead they picked the unattractive, mendacious, corrupt warmonger friend of Big Money In Politics. Way to go Dems.
Instead they picked the unattractive, mendacious, corrupt warmonger friend of Big Money In Politics. Way to go Dems.
8
"Just let anyone say I chose the wrong man or the wrong house and you can stop at thirteen and have all the bad luck you like, or go back to digging coal." Gandalf
We deserve what we get if we are foolish enough to vote for Trump!
We deserve what we get if we are foolish enough to vote for Trump!
1
Mrs. Clinton, for whatever reason, has not been campaigning very hard over the last few weeks. I think as she again hits the campaign trail, her poll numbers will rise significantly.
2
"for whatever reason..."
To suggest that the reason is her health sets off all manner of fireworks. It is a taboo subject in corporate media.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
To suggest that the reason is her health sets off all manner of fireworks. It is a taboo subject in corporate media.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
4
Brexit has shown us how a nation can spite itself. If our country has a reached a point of irrationality that would even make this a close loss for Donald Trump, God help us.
2
Actually, the EU, not Britain, are the ones suffering post Brexit. The Brits, it appears, didn't spite themselves so much as scurry from a sinking ship.
1
Bill, if the EU goes down, Britain goes down.
I refuse to participate in any poll. I'll bet a lot of other people do. I am sick and tired of pollsters calling. When I do participate, I answer with totally off the cliff answers. Pollsters, please look at the do not call list!
1
Well, part of this trend has to do with HRC herself. Apart from her "ethics challenges" magnified by perception of pay-to-play schemes orchestrated by over-zealous aides (e.g., Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills) while at State Dept, HRC is not aggressively going after - and defining - Donald Trump.
By comparison, a recently-formed GOP-Dissident Organization RC16.Org (i.e., "Republicans for Clinton") seems to be doing a more effective job of defining Trump that HRC's better funded Campaign. The latter seems to believe it can easily coast to victory in November, i.e., forgetting a BREXIT-type surprise...!
By comparison, a recently-formed GOP-Dissident Organization RC16.Org (i.e., "Republicans for Clinton") seems to be doing a more effective job of defining Trump that HRC's better funded Campaign. The latter seems to believe it can easily coast to victory in November, i.e., forgetting a BREXIT-type surprise...!
1
The author sounds a little concerned! I think Trump needs to move another 3 to 4 to really tip the race unless of course the lesser polls are failing to capture a possible true ( stronger) support! That can happen sometimes, particularly when you have an unusual democractic poll event ( eg Brexit) or unusual candidate ( eg Michigan Dem primary) or you have high undecideds. Of course the author gave the impression that he was more immediately concerned that the lesser quality and new fangled polls were capturing his support, as I understood him! However, rest assured, all will be revealed on Nov 9, as there's really only two realistically possible outcomes!
Nice work NYT. Give yourselves a pat on the back. When can we bring back the clouds and shadows of Whitewater? Or are we not done with the pall cast over the Clinton campaign by Anthony Weiner's hijinks?
3
Oh come on -- the media manipulates and breathlessly hypes the polls so that the race always looks neck-and-neck right up to the finish line simply to boost campaign advertising. Then -- surprise -- the race that was "too-close-to-call" magically turns into a lopsided victory on election day.
1
Thank you.
We've been given the choice between Leslie Van Houten & Charles Manson. We're dead!
2
How in God's name has the campaign season become so intolerably long and what, if anything, can be done to shorten it?
3
It has been scaled to 19 months in order to get the public to shut it off and become apathetic. This is not a campaign, it is background noise. A deliberate tactic to minimize public participation.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
1
Face it, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump a couple of worn out, obnoxious geezer candidates with nothing fresh to offer in the year 2016. Both of them are where they are only because the Dem and Rep party "leadership" was either bought-and-paid-for (Clinton) or AWOL (Trump). No wonder voters hate them both.
Clinton and Trump both deserve to lose. Period.
Clinton and Trump both deserve to lose. Period.
6
The media, and especially the veritable New York Times, has done is best to turn every story—from Hilary Clinton's clothes to her laugh to her poor advisor's marital troubles to Benghazi and the stupid emails—into the latest breathless "scandal." They are masters in the art of beating dead horses.
Journalists would love nothing better than a Trump presidency because it would be just so much fun to cover. To them, Gore was a braggadocio liar, Kerry a bore, but W was a great guy who gave them all nicknames, chatted them up on the campaign plane, and was "presidential" because he could actually speak a coherent sentence or two during the debates. The same kind of poor judgment they are now offering us when it comes to il Duce from Queens.
I don't believe that Biden or Bernie would get any better treatment. The media loves to attack Dems if only to prove they aren't "biased" like the poor poor right wing (falsely) charges.
To paraphrase Les Moonves, Trump is great for the Times reporters and all the rest of the lot that pretend to call themselves journalists—even if he's terrible for America. It's sickening.
Journalists would love nothing better than a Trump presidency because it would be just so much fun to cover. To them, Gore was a braggadocio liar, Kerry a bore, but W was a great guy who gave them all nicknames, chatted them up on the campaign plane, and was "presidential" because he could actually speak a coherent sentence or two during the debates. The same kind of poor judgment they are now offering us when it comes to il Duce from Queens.
I don't believe that Biden or Bernie would get any better treatment. The media loves to attack Dems if only to prove they aren't "biased" like the poor poor right wing (falsely) charges.
To paraphrase Les Moonves, Trump is great for the Times reporters and all the rest of the lot that pretend to call themselves journalists—even if he's terrible for America. It's sickening.
5
Nobody should be surprised about Hillary sliding in the polls.
Hillary Clinton and her version of neoliberal, globalist corporatism, paired with 'liberal interventionism', is morally bankrupt just like herself and doesn't work for the majority of people in society.
The same way the media didn't see Brexit coming, they won't see Trump winning nor the takeover of France by Le Pen.
I don't support any of these people and I don't believe they have any solutions to offer, but the backlash to the system that Hillary represents has finally arrived.
Mrs.Clinton has maxed out her support and she stands for the status quo at home, i.e. the 99% of Americans continuing to get ripped off by the powerful 1%, and neocon warmongering abroad. From Iraq, to Libya, to Syria, to Gaza, to Afghanistan, she's never seen a war she didn't like, or a coup she didn't support like in Honduras, Ukraine or Haiti.
No wonder there isn't much excitement for her, and there really shouldn't be.
On top of it she is running a Marie Antoinette-esque campaign, courting the ultra-wealthy and hobnobbing with the über-rich while offering some cake to the peasant in form of pre-scripted statements pandering to the issues and/or audience du jour.
It is of little comfort, but WE TOLD YOU SO.
Hillary Clinton and her version of neoliberal, globalist corporatism, paired with 'liberal interventionism', is morally bankrupt just like herself and doesn't work for the majority of people in society.
The same way the media didn't see Brexit coming, they won't see Trump winning nor the takeover of France by Le Pen.
I don't support any of these people and I don't believe they have any solutions to offer, but the backlash to the system that Hillary represents has finally arrived.
Mrs.Clinton has maxed out her support and she stands for the status quo at home, i.e. the 99% of Americans continuing to get ripped off by the powerful 1%, and neocon warmongering abroad. From Iraq, to Libya, to Syria, to Gaza, to Afghanistan, she's never seen a war she didn't like, or a coup she didn't support like in Honduras, Ukraine or Haiti.
No wonder there isn't much excitement for her, and there really shouldn't be.
On top of it she is running a Marie Antoinette-esque campaign, courting the ultra-wealthy and hobnobbing with the über-rich while offering some cake to the peasant in form of pre-scripted statements pandering to the issues and/or audience du jour.
It is of little comfort, but WE TOLD YOU SO.
16
Well said.
Donald Trump has plenty of room to grow whereas Hillary Clinton can only sink further.
Donna Brazile, Nancy Pelosi and others have indicated that more negative things about Hillary and the Democrats are likely to turn up before November.
If I was a betting man I'd put my money on a Drumpf win.
Donald Trump has plenty of room to grow whereas Hillary Clinton can only sink further.
Donna Brazile, Nancy Pelosi and others have indicated that more negative things about Hillary and the Democrats are likely to turn up before November.
If I was a betting man I'd put my money on a Drumpf win.
2
Week then, let's see how well Trump's trickle-down xenophobia works!
1
The most authentic poll readings will emerge September 27th after everyone realizes there's truly no contest here.
3
At what time?
It boggles the mind that a highly qualified candidate, even with all her flaws, can run against a mental defective and only be slightly ahead. That says much about the ignorance of American voters and the deficiencies of our educational system.
8
What boggles the mind is the press and pollsters acting as if the opinions of 800 people can predict what the other millions of us will do.
1
Sure, the public is ignorant.
Blame the education system.
Did it ever occur to you that... maybe... this is not such a highly qualified candidate after all?
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
Blame the education system.
Did it ever occur to you that... maybe... this is not such a highly qualified candidate after all?
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
2
Real Clear Politics has Trump ahead in Maine 1, and a couple of points behind in Rhode Island and New Jersey (yes, Rhode Island and New Jersey). Will most of the media talk about this? The answer is an emphatic no.
I am not predicting a landslide in November. But if there is a landslide, it will be a Trump landslide, with a similar vote as Reagan v. Carter (51 to 41). It would be impossible to have a Clinton landslide.
I am not predicting a landslide in November. But if there is a landslide, it will be a Trump landslide, with a similar vote as Reagan v. Carter (51 to 41). It would be impossible to have a Clinton landslide.
3
The Press has given Trump what Trump wants, namely, unlimited, free, and uncritical advertising, all the while essentially ignoring his egregious past.
While basically no mention (let alone journalistic research) is made of the early racial discrimination in his properties, his association with organized crime in the construction of some of his most emblematic buildings, his multiple bankruptcies, the outsourcing of his products, his thousands of law suits, and most notably, his refusal to disclose his tax returns, Hillary Clinton's trustworthiness is hammered on on a daily basis.
Every branch of the Press has fallen into this pattern of behavior, including, most regrettably, National Public Radio and Television, until now the traditional sources for accurate and balanced reporting.
As Prof. Krugman clearly explained in a recent NYT column, Hillary is being Gored to death by the Press. One must ask what drives this surrendering of objective and critical reporting. It would seem the experience with GW Bush wasn't bad enough.
While basically no mention (let alone journalistic research) is made of the early racial discrimination in his properties, his association with organized crime in the construction of some of his most emblematic buildings, his multiple bankruptcies, the outsourcing of his products, his thousands of law suits, and most notably, his refusal to disclose his tax returns, Hillary Clinton's trustworthiness is hammered on on a daily basis.
Every branch of the Press has fallen into this pattern of behavior, including, most regrettably, National Public Radio and Television, until now the traditional sources for accurate and balanced reporting.
As Prof. Krugman clearly explained in a recent NYT column, Hillary is being Gored to death by the Press. One must ask what drives this surrendering of objective and critical reporting. It would seem the experience with GW Bush wasn't bad enough.
5
I, like many, will vote for Mrs. Clinton, despite many, many misgivings, because having Mr. Trump as president would lead to disaster on disaster.
What makes me cringe is the thought of Mrs. Clinton, on election night, crowing about her landslide victory and claiming a mandate.
The voters are given the choice of four candidates this year, and many of us are casting our ballots for the least offensive turd in the bowl. If there's a mandate, it is no more than, "Don't stink up the joint."
What makes me cringe is the thought of Mrs. Clinton, on election night, crowing about her landslide victory and claiming a mandate.
The voters are given the choice of four candidates this year, and many of us are casting our ballots for the least offensive turd in the bowl. If there's a mandate, it is no more than, "Don't stink up the joint."
4
I think I know why she's slipping in the polls -- she's been gladhanding with the inner circles of the rich and powerful in closed rooms instead of concerning herself with the people.
6
Meanwhile the republican party's nominee is most likely lining up teams of lawyers to deal with the Florida bribery matter, The upcoming Trump "University" scam trial (with his adored judge Curiel), and, of course, the lovely child rape charges that are on the docket in New York:
https://www.scribd.com/doc/316341058/Donald-Trump-Jeffrey-Epstein-Rape-L...
https://www.scribd.com/doc/316341058/Donald-Trump-Jeffrey-Epstein-Rape-L...
2
There is a very simple solution to this crisis. A constitutional amendment limiting voting rights to NY Times subscribers. My polling indicates a 98% margin of victory for Secretary Clinton in this scenario.
7
We have 2 very unpopular candidates. Polled today, I might tell you I won't vote for either one of them. But the closer it gets to November, the more likely I am to go with Clinton. Fence sitters aren't the kind who are likely to take a chance on a candidate as unconventional and potentially dangerous as Trump.
2
Vote New York. Big Bird/Snuffleupagus for President! Elmo can be Secretary of the Interior. Oscar can be Secretary of the Defense. Secretary of State is a toss up. My money is on Count von Count.
2
National polls mean little, if anything. It's those polls taken within the states,particularly the so-called swing states that matter the most. Me thinx journalists are getting lazy (have gotten?) and depend too much on the print outs from the 'big' polls, when they should be out talking to people. It worked for Studs Terkel.
Assuming that both Mr. Trump and Sec. Clinton are disgraceful human beings - and there is a good deal of evidence to support that assumption if one wishes to characterize those people that way - then I will chose to vote for the one that is most prepared to do the job for which they are both running.
Mrs. Clinton is the most prepared candidate in history. She has an in depth knowledge of domestic and foreign affairs. Has a working relationship with legislators on both sides of the aisle. Has negotiated with foreign heads of state and - for better or worse - knows "where all the bodies are buried."
Mr. Trump has demonstrated many times that he doesn't even know what the job entails, let alone how to do it. He has failed repeatedly at every endeavor he has undertaken except to become famous.
I don't want to "have a beer" with either one of them. I would have voted Republican if they nominated a 65' Volkswagen and a glass of chocolate milk as a candidate. But they didn't. They nominated a guy who is completely and hopelessly unprepared to run anything - except his mouth.
Mrs. Clinton is the most prepared candidate in history. She has an in depth knowledge of domestic and foreign affairs. Has a working relationship with legislators on both sides of the aisle. Has negotiated with foreign heads of state and - for better or worse - knows "where all the bodies are buried."
Mr. Trump has demonstrated many times that he doesn't even know what the job entails, let alone how to do it. He has failed repeatedly at every endeavor he has undertaken except to become famous.
I don't want to "have a beer" with either one of them. I would have voted Republican if they nominated a 65' Volkswagen and a glass of chocolate milk as a candidate. But they didn't. They nominated a guy who is completely and hopelessly unprepared to run anything - except his mouth.
2
Higher quality poll: any poll showing Hillary leading by double digits
Dubious, less reputable polls: any poll showing Hillary leading by single digits or Trump leading at all.
Upshot, stop embarrassing yourself.
Dubious, less reputable polls: any poll showing Hillary leading by single digits or Trump leading at all.
Upshot, stop embarrassing yourself.
1
I have subscribed to home delivery of the NYT for over 30 years and I have never seen such one sided reporting for "the paper of record." Trump has said or done so many outrageous things that this newspaper and other media outlets just slide over them without much in depth reporting.It's like journalistic ADD. Mr. Krugman was right when he said that their has been uneven reporting, headlines and innuendo. Why has it taken this long to find out about the Florida AG pay for play? This one was not innuendo. Why doesn't the Times expose his daily changing positions and lies. I suggest that this paper and all media look within their own organizations and their part in the change in polls.
6
Nate Cohn, you are losing it. No longer very accurate. You quote the recent CNN poll showing Clinton down. But you must have missed the word out there that the CNN poll used very questionable polling tactics - like including many more Republican voters than Democrats in the sample. A clear no-no.
3
One of the big reasons that Clinton's favorability rating is low and slipping are the unfair, unrelenting negative attacks on her by the media, the NYT included. It seems The Times have adopted a new theme: "All The News That's Unfit To Print".
5
It's amazing, isn't it! The GOP could have picked any other candidate in their line-up and they would have been assured to capture the WH this fall! God forbid that would have been Cruz, though. This is the year where Romney would have won in a landslide.
What actually most concerns me about Hillary is not the email server per se, but the pandering she is doing to the extreme lefties. If she had run as a rational center candidate as Obama did in 2008, she would win hands down. But she's not doing that and that more than anything is raising the suspicion in me that she would sell her grandmother just to get to sleep in the WH again. That gives me the creeps and erases the moral difference between her and Trump.
No good choice in the fall. Perhaps flipping the coin is the best way out of the dilemma.....
What actually most concerns me about Hillary is not the email server per se, but the pandering she is doing to the extreme lefties. If she had run as a rational center candidate as Obama did in 2008, she would win hands down. But she's not doing that and that more than anything is raising the suspicion in me that she would sell her grandmother just to get to sleep in the WH again. That gives me the creeps and erases the moral difference between her and Trump.
No good choice in the fall. Perhaps flipping the coin is the best way out of the dilemma.....
3
I hate HRC's pandering to the left, too, but a U.S. politician doesn't stand a chance of being elected without making promises that he or she cannot keep. For the Dems it's freebies for everyone, somehow paid for by the rich; for the GOP it's freebies for Big Pharma and "defense" contractors, somehow paid for by stopping gay marriage or restarting school prayer or something like that.
2
zubat:
Common sense would suggest that occupying the rational middle ground should get you the maximum number of votes, if you are dealing with an opponent who voluntarily drives himself to the fringes like Trump. That candidate can harvest across the entire remainder of the spectrum.
I guess I am too naive for politics....
Anyway, through her behavior Hillary has lost my trust, not through her email debacle.
Common sense would suggest that occupying the rational middle ground should get you the maximum number of votes, if you are dealing with an opponent who voluntarily drives himself to the fringes like Trump. That candidate can harvest across the entire remainder of the spectrum.
I guess I am too naive for politics....
Anyway, through her behavior Hillary has lost my trust, not through her email debacle.
Hillary seems to be dying the 'death of a thousand cuts." It is a masterful milking of very little into a great deal by means of repetition. "She had a private server (in case you missed that one)." FBI studies deemed unnecessary for former Secretaries of states with private e-mail accounts, found no crimes committed. "She lied about Benghazi." although a fortune spent on congressional studies found nothing. "She had a private server (in case you missed that one)." Again, no crimes. The family charitable foundation received some donations from some of the thousand of people having business with the State Department. "She's selling access." although there is no evidence it occurred. "She had a private server (in case you missed that one)." Again, no crimes. Never has so little counted for so much.
Meanwhile one outrageous fact after another come out about the Teflon Don. He is constantly caught in lies and contradictions. He makes a virtue of flaunting the Constitutions and international treaties. He promises everything without ever revealing his "secret" plans for achieving it. Fact checkers have run out of ink trying to set his record straight. His whole campaign is built on insult, name-calling and slander. Never has someone in a political campaign been guilty of so many disqualifying blunders. And yet, never has so much counted for so little.
And now we learn the clincher. Hillary doesn't look "presidential" (aka male) and Donald does.
Meanwhile one outrageous fact after another come out about the Teflon Don. He is constantly caught in lies and contradictions. He makes a virtue of flaunting the Constitutions and international treaties. He promises everything without ever revealing his "secret" plans for achieving it. Fact checkers have run out of ink trying to set his record straight. His whole campaign is built on insult, name-calling and slander. Never has someone in a political campaign been guilty of so many disqualifying blunders. And yet, never has so much counted for so little.
And now we learn the clincher. Hillary doesn't look "presidential" (aka male) and Donald does.
8
Can you imagine being the one candidate that lost the presidential election to Donald J. Trump? If that happens it will blow up the Democratic Party. Of course this possibility could have been avoided if the DNC hadn't insisted on Clinton as the nominee. History is indeed being made.
7
Technical analysis of the polls show that Clinton is slipping. Between last week and this, she lost ground to Trump in 48 states, gaining in Hawaii and DC, and staying even in California.
Why? Against a dangerous lunatic, why?
1) She spent far too much time raising money with the super-rich, which AUTOMATICALLY triggers the Progressive Left's distrust of her and fear she won't live up to her promises to Bernie Sanders.
2) She hasn't been talking to the press, and hasn't been able to put the emails or Clinton Foundation questions to rest.
3) She's not been actively campaigning for the critical down-ballot candidates, especially in the Senate where only 5 seats are needed for control (4 with the WH) and several with a shot at key seats, like Ted Strickland in Ohio, aren't doing well. A Clinton handshake could WELL energize them. There are a number of at-risk GOP House seats as well and she's not loudly campaigning for them either. Think about it: Working hard for down-ballot candidates echoes in multiple ways, saying you don't just care about your race, but about the good of the party. Raising money from the rich in Martha's Vineyard for them ain't cutting it. Obviously.
4) Trump has SO much trash it doesn't register as it is on Clinton. The Clinton Foundation issues are nothing next to the Trump Foundation issues, but which does the so-called "liberal" media fixate on?
The eMail deal is NOTHING compared to Trump's alleged bribing of the Florida AG. Why?
Consider!
Why? Against a dangerous lunatic, why?
1) She spent far too much time raising money with the super-rich, which AUTOMATICALLY triggers the Progressive Left's distrust of her and fear she won't live up to her promises to Bernie Sanders.
2) She hasn't been talking to the press, and hasn't been able to put the emails or Clinton Foundation questions to rest.
3) She's not been actively campaigning for the critical down-ballot candidates, especially in the Senate where only 5 seats are needed for control (4 with the WH) and several with a shot at key seats, like Ted Strickland in Ohio, aren't doing well. A Clinton handshake could WELL energize them. There are a number of at-risk GOP House seats as well and she's not loudly campaigning for them either. Think about it: Working hard for down-ballot candidates echoes in multiple ways, saying you don't just care about your race, but about the good of the party. Raising money from the rich in Martha's Vineyard for them ain't cutting it. Obviously.
4) Trump has SO much trash it doesn't register as it is on Clinton. The Clinton Foundation issues are nothing next to the Trump Foundation issues, but which does the so-called "liberal" media fixate on?
The eMail deal is NOTHING compared to Trump's alleged bribing of the Florida AG. Why?
Consider!
3
I would like to hear some outrage over Trump saying yesterday that Hillary Clinton does not look presidential. I totally take that as sexists...she doesn't wear a dark suit and tie as our presidents have...that a woman should not be the president, because we've never had one before.
Can I hear some outrage about his comment... And not let it pass.
Can I hear some outrage about his comment... And not let it pass.
7
It was very sexist and was even to a bunch of "fellows". Hey, fellas, don't you agree this broad doesn't look presidential? Disgusting. I keep trying to stay away from personal appearance in this election because I think it's petty and meaningless, but Donald, come on. Have you looked in a mirror lately?
1
Cable news and to a lesser extent print news has given Trump so much coverage as to validate him. They have endangered our nation to make a buck. Where is the character and integrity of the Fourth Estate?
2
Its hard to imagine a weaker candidate than Hillary, until you look at Trump. The fact that she still mat lose illustrates how incredibly corrupt and unsavory the American people think she is. If she wins we can kiss what is left of our government integrity goodbye forever. Trump is the only choice.
3
It's interesting that in this election, a lead of 8% is described as "huge" (with a margin of error of ~3%, that's as low as 2%). The fact that this lead diminishes as time goes forward -- even against a candidate who brazenly defies rules of civility and politics, even against an opponent with lukewarm support from his own party -- tells you that Hillary Clinton is lacking something major that she had better figure out before we get to the home stretch.
3
Clinton’s sense of humor is like the rimshot and cymbal, whereas Trump’s is more like a slide-whistle.
1
"Mrs. Clinton will need to reach deep and channel her inner Lloyd Bentsen."
I watched that Bentsen/Quayle debate, and must admit Bentsen delivered a real zinger, very funny.
But I also remember that Bentsen lost that election to Quayle. I don't think Bentsen's zinger mattered all that much.
Trump could really blow it at the 9/26 debate, no question. (Only the first debate really matters, if any of them matter.) But if he doesn't, and viewers find themselves able to imagine Trump in the Oval Office (I'll admit: I have a great deal of trouble imagining that), the 9/26 debate could really boost Trump and hurt Clinton.
I watched that Bentsen/Quayle debate, and must admit Bentsen delivered a real zinger, very funny.
But I also remember that Bentsen lost that election to Quayle. I don't think Bentsen's zinger mattered all that much.
Trump could really blow it at the 9/26 debate, no question. (Only the first debate really matters, if any of them matter.) But if he doesn't, and viewers find themselves able to imagine Trump in the Oval Office (I'll admit: I have a great deal of trouble imagining that), the 9/26 debate could really boost Trump and hurt Clinton.
1
W did everything but drool on himself in that first debate with Kerry, and look how that contest turned out. Simple equation: 35 years of lavishly funded dog-whistle racism + 25 years of hate radio + 20 years of FOX = the most misinformed electorate of any advanced industrialized nation.
This is clickbait. Princeton Election Consortium is the last word, having the best poll aggregation algorithm for 20 years now. Clinton is at 93% (Bayesian); worry about the Senate instead which is as usual 50-50.
2
If someone is on the ballot in all 50 states it's incumbent upon pollsters to include that candidate in EVERY poll and NOT start their polling with two-candidate matchups. Consider this scenario: Would you like a roast beef sandwich or a ham sandwich? You choose roast beef. Then you're asked, would you like roast beef, ham, or turkey? Well, you're already predisposed to roast beef, so you're less likely to choose turkey.
Gary Johnson is the only candidate who's been elected (twice) to executive office. He's also sane and honest, characteristics that cannot be ascribed to Mr. Trump or Mrs. Clinton.
Gary Johnson is the only candidate who's been elected (twice) to executive office. He's also sane and honest, characteristics that cannot be ascribed to Mr. Trump or Mrs. Clinton.
He also doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting elected. So if you want to see Mr. Trump in the Oval Office, go right ahead and flush whatever influence you might have over that on November 8 down the toilet by voting for Mr. Johnson.
You do know that at this point in the 1998 election cycle, Jesse Ventura was polling lower than where Gary Johnson currently is, correct? And that Ventura was running against two well-liked establishment candidates, right (Norm Coleman, a future senator, and Hubert Humphrey III, son of a vice-president), unlike this year's legacy-party crop of despised candidates?
I vote principle and conscience, and I do not apologize for your apparent lack of both.
BTW, anytime I mention that I'm voting Johnson in a GOP-centric thread the folks there tell me that a vote for Johnson is a vote for Hillary. OK, both sides, pay attention:
If I am the first voter in my precinct, here is the vote tally before I vote:
Clinton 0
Johnson 0
Trump 0
Here's the vote tally after I vote:
Clinton 0
Johnson 1
Trump 0
OK Clinton shills, show me where the "vote for Trump" is. And Trump shills, show me where the "vote for Clinton" is.
And if neither of you can, then BOTH of you need to stand down and shut up.
I vote principle and conscience, and I do not apologize for your apparent lack of both.
BTW, anytime I mention that I'm voting Johnson in a GOP-centric thread the folks there tell me that a vote for Johnson is a vote for Hillary. OK, both sides, pay attention:
If I am the first voter in my precinct, here is the vote tally before I vote:
Clinton 0
Johnson 0
Trump 0
Here's the vote tally after I vote:
Clinton 0
Johnson 1
Trump 0
OK Clinton shills, show me where the "vote for Trump" is. And Trump shills, show me where the "vote for Clinton" is.
And if neither of you can, then BOTH of you need to stand down and shut up.
1
It really is sloppy journalism when any mention of the CNN/ORC poll occurs without mentioning the skewed sample; 4% more Republicans than Democrats were polled in the likely voter pool. That would be unprecedented. That would be unlikely. That media outlets would continue to write about this single result is disappointing, but not unexpected.
2
There has already been a turning point. If you think it will reverse itself, you are only kidding yourself.
5
Trump does not like to lose--though he has lost many times, he hasn't gotten used to it believe me.
Trump will pull all stops as the date gets closer, he is an attack dog won't care whether he is correct or not. Hillary will have plenty at her hands, and media will have plenty of role.
The polls will only be meaningful after first head-to-head debate.
More Americans will need to be engaged to prevent disasterous outcome.
Will it be Head (H) or Tail (T)?
Trump will pull all stops as the date gets closer, he is an attack dog won't care whether he is correct or not. Hillary will have plenty at her hands, and media will have plenty of role.
The polls will only be meaningful after first head-to-head debate.
More Americans will need to be engaged to prevent disasterous outcome.
Will it be Head (H) or Tail (T)?
1
My assessment: The polls have been wrong over the last year. That pattern will likely continue into election day. Why? The huge hidden vote on immigration. How huge? I bet 10 to 20%. In other words, if Hillary Clinton's lead over Donald Trump in battleground states is only in the single digits I predict Donald Trump will be our next president. Some proof: Recent election outcomes in the United Kingdom, Germany, the Republican primary, and the top "Readers' Picks" comments to the NYTimes's pro-immigration op-eds and editorials over the last 6 months. The top anonymous "Readers Picks" comments overwhelming want undocumented individuals out of the country and want a new merit-based immigration test (end the current family unification priority in current law) for migrants that seek to enter the United States i.e., the migrant show (i) their past practices and lifestyle demonstrate they embrace gender equality, individual civil liberties including same-sex marriage, and free speech, (ii) show they will help improve our nation's economy and not drain public resources, (iii) and show will not take a job away from another individual currently living in the U.S. I hope Hillary Clinton quickly changes her status quo position on immigration, which can still include a path to citizenship for the current 11 million undocumented, but only if they can satisfy the new merit-based test above. If she does not, a likely disastrous one term Trump presidency will follow.
2
Clinton and her corrupt cronies and corrupt news media like the nytimes and AP stole the nomination. It is a terrible loss that we won't have Bernie as our next President. But the next best thing will be seeing Clinton lose.
3
Are we surprised? What finally surfaces as to emails and pay to play is far, far worse than most people thought. And, the FBI director was hardly doing the US a favor by not recommending criminal prosecution. Now we see more criminal acts and out and out obstruction of justice. The FBI director we thought was beyond political. We were wrong. And, then to release the information on the Friday afternoon of a three day weekend, is an old fashioned political ploy to minimize impact. If the FBI had done the right thing and recommended criminal prosecution, we would now have a new Democrat candidate, maybe even Biden and anyone would have been better than HC. I think a lot of people will not vote the top of the ticket. Who knows who that will help?
3
I would welcome a graduate student who would like to take on the task of looking for any correlation between the shifts in polls and the publication of disconcerting news items. My preliminary assumption is that a news story of significance could affect Hillary's prospects, but probably won't have any impact at all on Trump's. The most recent lead stories are talking about Trump's life-long pattern of paying off politicians, with evidence that he has recently done it again. The result: he gains voters. But, then we learn that years ago Hillary apparently sent out more emails, including some that maybe, only maybe she should have thought about more thoroughly (a mistake I probably make a few times every day). The result: she loses voters. The apparent pattern is that Republican voters don't really care if their candidate is honest, accurate, or capable. As Trump himself cautioned us many months ago, he could start murdering people on Fifth Avenue and they will still vote for him. Perhaps we would learn that Republican voters simply expect their candidates to be corrupt and incompetent, while the Democrats and undecideds have the bar set too high. However, the end result is that the reporting on Trump's disastrous values and lifestyle by the NY Times and other media is insignificant and irrelevant to his chances for success. But, at the same time, any story you publish on Hillary holds huge significance for the future of this planet.
5
Trump cheats people, no one cares. He insults and threatens and is vengeful. No one cares. He bribes government officials. No one cares. His proposals swing wildly one way or another and no one cares. Hillary is sloppy with emails and this means she is dishonest and incompetent. The lesson. If you are likeable, it doesn't matter what you do. If you are not, nothing matters.
9
I trust election.princeton.edu the most. Neuroscientist, political hobbyist, Dr. Wang has been the most accurate forecaster of them all election after election since several cycles ago, when he started.
5
But what does he say?
You could just wait for Nov 9. Nov 9 has never been wrong. Don't be so nervy. Relax. Have a glass of something. The result will be what it is. All this polls can effect turnout and result is just an old wives tale, isn't it?
In 2000, November 9 was wrong.
1
Clinton has been nearly invisible in August. The narrowing of the election mainly tracks her losses in the polls, not Trump's gains. Maybe Clinton should give people a reason to want to vote for her.
17
In the last few weeks there were so many bad news regarding Hillary, that even a cool head person like me learned to loathe her. She isn't a leader. She isn't Bill. Now that people have come to this conclusion about her, they are looking for someone else to vote for. Maybe Gary/Jil. Meanwhile DT is very much on message, focus, and presidential. No one pays attention to what he said during the primeries.
2
Trump is enough reason for me to want to vote for Clinton.
1
If you are considering voting for Trump you are not a cool headed person.
Clinton seems to be in hiding. I assume the campaign is spending most of its time worry about the half dozen states that will swing the election, but she hasn't been real visible.
12
We were told white Republican women were 'getable' for Hillary. But 90% of Republicans are for Trump, compared with 92% of Dems for Hill. So where are those white Republican women now? The only change in this time frame is that Trump is now reading verbatim from notes/teleprompter. Is that all it takes for such a goofball to win?
11
This is right on schedule for most presidential races in my lifetime. Toward the end the polls tighten and in a blind panic, people forget the real picture and the electoral vote cast is set pretty early on. People didn't just wake up one morning and realize that Hillary is difficult to trust and that Trump is a race baiting sociopath. We have known this all along. But for some reason every election year, people tell different stories to pollsters that they do at any other time.
19
Hacking pollster databases can be a very powerful weapon to the enemies of the U.S. in influencing the election. If voters feel their candidate is slipping in the polls, they begin to question whether they're backing the right candidate. If they think their candidate is likely to lose, they may not even bother to vote. I don't doubt for a second this strategy of skewing poll results hasn't occurred to the Russians or the Chinese.
It should be asked how well guarded from tampering are the databases containing poll results. Many polls are administered by academic or media organizations without military-grade security and not accustomed to defending against weaponized hacks by state-sponsored agents.
In a tight election, manipulating a poll even by a few percentage points can completely tip the balance in favor of the losing candidate - with all the attendant publicity and media coverage of "winning in the polls".
So a not particularly difficult hack, but one with highly significant power for media manipulation.
It should be asked how well guarded from tampering are the databases containing poll results. Many polls are administered by academic or media organizations without military-grade security and not accustomed to defending against weaponized hacks by state-sponsored agents.
In a tight election, manipulating a poll even by a few percentage points can completely tip the balance in favor of the losing candidate - with all the attendant publicity and media coverage of "winning in the polls".
So a not particularly difficult hack, but one with highly significant power for media manipulation.
10
Einstein,
It is time to change your name. China and Russia are not the enemy. China is America's number one trading partner and its main interest in November is making sure it remains number one with a bullet.
Russia's economy is the economy that most resembles our own. Russia's interests are not sabotaging American interests but in making sure its economic needs and the desires of who we elect in November are in sync.
America has no enemies it has only strategic alliances and economic imperatives. America's opposition is the Western Democracies whose economies continue to drift away from the economic model we currently enjoy. While Russia and China currently have lending rates of 10 and 6.5 respectively the Western Democracies are at zero and are headed downward.
The battle is internal and those you believe are enemies are simply very interested bystanders. If they can influence the election they will but the sides they support are 100% American.
It is time to change your name. China and Russia are not the enemy. China is America's number one trading partner and its main interest in November is making sure it remains number one with a bullet.
Russia's economy is the economy that most resembles our own. Russia's interests are not sabotaging American interests but in making sure its economic needs and the desires of who we elect in November are in sync.
America has no enemies it has only strategic alliances and economic imperatives. America's opposition is the Western Democracies whose economies continue to drift away from the economic model we currently enjoy. While Russia and China currently have lending rates of 10 and 6.5 respectively the Western Democracies are at zero and are headed downward.
The battle is internal and those you believe are enemies are simply very interested bystanders. If they can influence the election they will but the sides they support are 100% American.
1
Why does this surprise anyone. With respect to her e-mails, she is either too dishonest to be president, or not smart enough to be president. Trump (yes, Trump) beats her in the CNN trustworthy category by 15 points. She's a terrible speaker, has not given a real press conference in over a year, and changes her positions with the wind.
And with respect to the "conspiracy" about her health, those who believe she has health problems are basing their opinion on simple observations. If there is a conspiracy, the conspiracy is that she does not have health problems. At age 69, does she first develop a terrible "allergy" that causes coughing that nobody every saw before?
And with respect to the "conspiracy" about her health, those who believe she has health problems are basing their opinion on simple observations. If there is a conspiracy, the conspiracy is that she does not have health problems. At age 69, does she first develop a terrible "allergy" that causes coughing that nobody every saw before?
24
Many Americans live in political flatland, where there are only two dimensions.
It is touching the way you folks pine for divine intervention to eliminate Hillary from the election.
It is touching the way you folks pine for divine intervention to eliminate Hillary from the election.
1
And yet the betting markets still favor her two-to-one, as does Nate Silver.
@ Joseph, My "simple observation" of your comment is that your analysis is simplistic. Does that make it true?
I just read an article in The Guardian which said that 90% of the warming caused by greenhouse gas emissions has been absorbed by the oceans, which are suffering accordingly. If that heat had gone into the atmosphere, the Earth's temperature would have risen by 36 degrees centrigrade already!
And yet, the fact that HC acknowledges global climate change and Donald Trump denies it never appears in print anywhere at all. E-mail servers, Trump U., but nothing about global climate change. Really? What's more important? - put your editorial staff onto that question.
And yet, the fact that HC acknowledges global climate change and Donald Trump denies it never appears in print anywhere at all. E-mail servers, Trump U., but nothing about global climate change. Really? What's more important? - put your editorial staff onto that question.
61
The only issue that's important is who it'll effect most and what does the cost benefit analysis look like for those doing the most paying. That's the real underlying squabble. For eg the cost benefit wouldn't work out for the Koch's. They could tolerate effects of warming. They don't want to pay for swamped less developed countries!
If what you say is correct, so what.
Everything seems to be going dandy.
Anyway, in the winter when everyone is freezing, they'll be glad for the global warming. It will save on the electric blanket.
Everything seems to be going dandy.
Anyway, in the winter when everyone is freezing, they'll be glad for the global warming. It will save on the electric blanket.
You have to wonder what Clinton intends to do with the windfall she's collecting from her ultra-rich friends. Is she going to "introduce" herself to a populace that is already sick to death of her? Will a well placed ad - or 10,000- in swing states really turn the tide? The army of consultants, pollsters and flim-flam men feeding at her trough might be able to answer the question.
20
Get ready for the NEW Nixon all over again.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
1
As much as possible will go to mobilizing the vote for down-ticket Democrats.
1
I agree. The momentum is with Trump, and if he does not implode (still a possibility) and stick to teleprompters (which he has mastered in a couple of months), he will win going away.
2
From the mid-Sixties through the mid-Seventies there was a flourishing alternative press in this country. The reason it flourished was because the regular media simply lost its way, its journalistic perspective swamped by the desire to not appear "biased" in the eyes of the powers-that-be coupled with the desire to increase readership with "dramatic revelations" of questionable provenance, let alone truth.
Many Commenters here have ably documented and denounced the current equivalent, especially in regards to the Times from which we expect better. Perhaps we will again see a flourishing alternative press. Perhaps not. In the Sixties and Seventies that press defined real, physical communities, as it tied together peoples' lives, as they worked to create something better. Such seems alien to the current younger generation which, instead, seems to live in virtual associations.
Many Commenters here have ably documented and denounced the current equivalent, especially in regards to the Times from which we expect better. Perhaps we will again see a flourishing alternative press. Perhaps not. In the Sixties and Seventies that press defined real, physical communities, as it tied together peoples' lives, as they worked to create something better. Such seems alien to the current younger generation which, instead, seems to live in virtual associations.
16
Fortunately, the internet provides everyone access to sources not affected by the same biases as the MSM. Domestic, such as The Intercept, Democracy Now, and the Real News Network. International, such as France 24, Deutsche Welle, Al Jazeera and RT. Many of the insights to be found in those sources have completely escaped notice by the likes of the NY Times.
Polls, leads, and trails come and go. They all have the unquestionable influences from, past histories abruptly unraveling, roller coaster rides of political humdingers depending on the statements they make,their gigantic gaffes, and subtle lacks in finesse.
And then comes the fierce Fourth Estate. Their powerfully professional, often punctilious, and even fastidious analyses of the candidates' words, actions, and their inter-personal demeanors may wield a farrago of forceful effects on the poll numbers. More specifically, the mighty media as a group constantly seek a cornucopia of contributions from ex-politicians, lawyers, economists, military leaders, former office holders, and eminent business magnates.
As a result, the final end products, churned out of the press, after the opinions have been scientifically sieved, act as an amalgamation, roughly representing the set of factors of many commoners.
Last, but not the least, the readers' and the viewers' comments also serve as conduits thru which a torrent of opinions traverse and as a collective force, they chisel out final numbers. And so. beware candidates! Your are monitored incessantly, willy-nilly. Hence, do not even dream of a ''shilly-shally act''.
And then comes the fierce Fourth Estate. Their powerfully professional, often punctilious, and even fastidious analyses of the candidates' words, actions, and their inter-personal demeanors may wield a farrago of forceful effects on the poll numbers. More specifically, the mighty media as a group constantly seek a cornucopia of contributions from ex-politicians, lawyers, economists, military leaders, former office holders, and eminent business magnates.
As a result, the final end products, churned out of the press, after the opinions have been scientifically sieved, act as an amalgamation, roughly representing the set of factors of many commoners.
Last, but not the least, the readers' and the viewers' comments also serve as conduits thru which a torrent of opinions traverse and as a collective force, they chisel out final numbers. And so. beware candidates! Your are monitored incessantly, willy-nilly. Hence, do not even dream of a ''shilly-shally act''.
2
One swallow does not a summer make, nor one poll predict an election. I do not understand why the media report only one poll's results, and not give a fuller picture.
For example, realclearpolitics.com lists many polls and gives an average, and Hillary is still an average of two points ahead of Trump. Her post-convention uptick was higher and lasted longer than did Trump's.
What I would love to read are some really sharp, in-depth analyses for this election: who are the undecided voters and why are they undecided, what are the demographics of independent voters and the reasons behind their choices, what are the characteristics of likely voters?
Most importantly, what are the demographics of the various polls? How were people sampled? (Online surveys rely heavily on self-selection.) How representative are they by age, race, gender, geographic region, etc.? What sort of weighting procedures do they use and how reliable are those procedures?
For example, realclearpolitics.com lists many polls and gives an average, and Hillary is still an average of two points ahead of Trump. Her post-convention uptick was higher and lasted longer than did Trump's.
What I would love to read are some really sharp, in-depth analyses for this election: who are the undecided voters and why are they undecided, what are the demographics of independent voters and the reasons behind their choices, what are the characteristics of likely voters?
Most importantly, what are the demographics of the various polls? How were people sampled? (Online surveys rely heavily on self-selection.) How representative are they by age, race, gender, geographic region, etc.? What sort of weighting procedures do they use and how reliable are those procedures?
8
"One swallow does not..."
I would advise caution with such a metaphor regarding the Clintons and the White House.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
I would advise caution with such a metaphor regarding the Clintons and the White House.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
2
I read articles like this well reasoned one with bad news, take a few deep breaths and consider a few truths:
Poll averages, not individual polls matter. Those are stable - although tightening.
The tightening of the race is the pattern for Presidential races - even ones with a candidate intent on committing political hara-kiri, as the Donald has been until recently, provided s/he stops or at least tones it down - which he has shown some signs of doing recently;
We are testing how deep gender bias is, and whether it will reassert itself even in a race between one patently qualified and patently unqualified candidate. Here it's taking the form of attributing malice to a woman who is striving for high public office. The fervor, the mania behind the "string her up", and "throw her in jail" chants at Trump rallies is only the more extreme bubbling of those deeply misogynist sentiments that show in in the "untrustworthy" polls;
We're testing whether the national media has gone the way of FOX News in sacrificing everything for ratings;
Most of all, we're testing the toughness of this lady who has been through so much, to maintain her composure, and get up one more time than her opponent, and deliver a Lloyd Bentsen.
In 2008, as Obama put it, she did everything he did except backwards and in high heels, like Ginger Rogers with Fred Astaire.
She can do it again. She must do it again. We must lift her up, as Obama asked us to do. Our country depends on it - depends on us.
Poll averages, not individual polls matter. Those are stable - although tightening.
The tightening of the race is the pattern for Presidential races - even ones with a candidate intent on committing political hara-kiri, as the Donald has been until recently, provided s/he stops or at least tones it down - which he has shown some signs of doing recently;
We are testing how deep gender bias is, and whether it will reassert itself even in a race between one patently qualified and patently unqualified candidate. Here it's taking the form of attributing malice to a woman who is striving for high public office. The fervor, the mania behind the "string her up", and "throw her in jail" chants at Trump rallies is only the more extreme bubbling of those deeply misogynist sentiments that show in in the "untrustworthy" polls;
We're testing whether the national media has gone the way of FOX News in sacrificing everything for ratings;
Most of all, we're testing the toughness of this lady who has been through so much, to maintain her composure, and get up one more time than her opponent, and deliver a Lloyd Bentsen.
In 2008, as Obama put it, she did everything he did except backwards and in high heels, like Ginger Rogers with Fred Astaire.
She can do it again. She must do it again. We must lift her up, as Obama asked us to do. Our country depends on it - depends on us.
68
Naw. What we're testing is your apparently unlimited capacity for rationalizing possible defeat.
1
In response to Ann Gramson Hill: I too am very unhappy with Hillary Clinton and expected to do something which I have never done whihc is to sit out the election in November. There are too many reasons to cite here why I find her appalling starting with Whitewater documents that were mysteriously found months later in storage boxes in the First Family's private residence in the White House, Rose law firm documents, lying about being fired upon at an airport in the Balkans, an unauthorized email server in her Chappaqua home, etc. What I will say, and the reason I am voting in November, is her Vice Presidential candidate, Tim Kaine, who is emblematic of Democratic Party principles (as is his wife). My thinking is if Hillary somehow has to resign, I would be greatly relieved to have TIm Kaine in the White House in a nano-second. Donald Trump is in way over his head and, frankly, I think he is privately stunned that he has progressed this far. Donald Trump in the White House is simply not an option. No political experience, money issues both in business and privately, no ability to negotiate anything and a history of bigotry in not renting Trump properties to African Americans. The United States of America and the fundamental principles of freedom and justice for all is not anything Donald Trump has ever demonstrated in his 70 years on this planet.
17
I, also, am not thrilled to vote for Mrs. Clinton but I will and one reason is Tim Kaine. He would make a fine president. I wish he was at the top of the ticket. And there is a high likelihood of Mike Pence becoming president if Trump is elected and then impeached and THAT must not happen to this country! No evangelicals who wish to have Christian Supremacy in this country! No, thank you! And what he would do to women? I can't imagine.
It MUST be Clinton/Kaine!
It MUST be Clinton/Kaine!
2
The cowardly way to avoid the responsibility of a citizen is to not vote. Someone the day after the election will be president. Seriously, whitewater. You forgot Bengahzi
no ability to negotiate anything
Really.
He has over 500 business enterprises employing tens of thousands in over 30 countries.
His name is sterling and people pay him to use it on their projects.
Really.
He has over 500 business enterprises employing tens of thousands in over 30 countries.
His name is sterling and people pay him to use it on their projects.
1
"Trump has to flip some blue states to win. Unlikely."
You must be looking at different polls.
Nate Silver's 538 website indicates Trump probably needs only to hold what he's got and add Florida and Ohio, and Silver's data shows those two states are pretty close to dead-even. (Incidentally, Silver counts Iowa for Trump, and assumes North Carolina will tip into Trump's column by election day, even though NC is presently a toss-up based on polls.)
By the way, "national" polls don't matter much. Only state polls do. If one candidate is up, say, 10% nationally, that may mean the candidate is doing better in swing states, but it may instead mean the candidate is merely boosting his or her lead in foregone-conclusion states. The vast majority of states are in that category, and the populations of "safe Democratic" states far exceeds the populations of "safe Republican" states. If Trump wins, say, Texas by 2,000,000 votes rather than by 1,000,000 votes, he won't get any extra electoral votes. The same is true for Clinton in such large-population states as California, New York, and Illinois.
Remember: Even if one ignores the Florida dispute, Gore won the popular vote in 2000, but he didn't become President.
You must be looking at different polls.
Nate Silver's 538 website indicates Trump probably needs only to hold what he's got and add Florida and Ohio, and Silver's data shows those two states are pretty close to dead-even. (Incidentally, Silver counts Iowa for Trump, and assumes North Carolina will tip into Trump's column by election day, even though NC is presently a toss-up based on polls.)
By the way, "national" polls don't matter much. Only state polls do. If one candidate is up, say, 10% nationally, that may mean the candidate is doing better in swing states, but it may instead mean the candidate is merely boosting his or her lead in foregone-conclusion states. The vast majority of states are in that category, and the populations of "safe Democratic" states far exceeds the populations of "safe Republican" states. If Trump wins, say, Texas by 2,000,000 votes rather than by 1,000,000 votes, he won't get any extra electoral votes. The same is true for Clinton in such large-population states as California, New York, and Illinois.
Remember: Even if one ignores the Florida dispute, Gore won the popular vote in 2000, but he didn't become President.
6
None of 538's projections show that Trump would win if he only keeps the states he's currently predicted to win plus Florida and Ohio. He'd also have to win several other states he's currently losing in.
Also, national polls do matter because trends in state polling nearly always track national polls. And many state polls are done poorly, with tiny sample sizes and by only a few pollsters. So very often paying attention to national polls actually gives you a better picture of what's going on in the election.
Also, national polls do matter because trends in state polling nearly always track national polls. And many state polls are done poorly, with tiny sample sizes and by only a few pollsters. So very often paying attention to national polls actually gives you a better picture of what's going on in the election.
3
Inherent bias seems to dominate the whole US political universe.
Demographics is the destiny! This election will be decided in suburbs like Charlotte, Philly, Cleveland/Columbus, Denver and DC-Virginia. Florida could be a toss up.
I still dont think Trump hasnt been vetted unlike Hillary. She has been in public life for decades. Independents should look at the electability and presidential qualifications before casting their votes. Thats what I will do.
I still dont think Trump hasnt been vetted unlike Hillary. She has been in public life for decades. Independents should look at the electability and presidential qualifications before casting their votes. Thats what I will do.
14
This should be no surprise to voters; Clinton was and continues to be damaged goods and the Democratic Party leadership made a massive miscalculation in selling themselves to the Clinton machine instead of listening to it's rank and file. As a progressive and long-time Democrat, as well as someone who has taken the time to thoroughly research the Clinton machine, it's history, and it's dealings, I am not the least bit surprised that Clinton isn't polling better. It's unfortunate that so many rank and file Dems are so addicted to the Clinton Koolaid that they can't see that Clinton has done as much to destroy the Democratic Party as Trump has the Republican Party, the only difference is that she just happens to do her deeds in backrooms, cloak and dagger style, with a giant, organized machine behind her, while Trump has so little sense of shame he does his right out in the open.
31
You are so right! Yes, Trumps 'brush'- meanwhile when Bill Clinton made a huge error in judgement walking over to talk to Loretta Lynch much of the press had to exaggerate the potential for abuse. I say exaggerate because I am certain the Clinton's could have gotten their message to Ms. Lynch through intermediaries and other methods, instead of walking over the tarmac in front of the press in an attempt to exert influence on a pending investigation. But Trump's 'brush' consists of giving a lot of cash to a DA who leads an investigation of one of his sleazy enterprises. Particularly clear is Trump's intention due to his propensity to brag about buying politicians. But hey, it's just a 'brush' with impropriety.
16
He didn't give cash to the DA.
Trump has so many gaffes, so many warts that the press just seems to slide over the latest ones, like bribing (allegedly) the AG of Florida. Yet despite the right's mantra that the MSM has a liberal bias, they are quite happy to hammer on Hillary Clinton while sliding past Trump:
Consider that the Clinton Foundation pours almost all its money into real charitable functions, whereas the Trump Foundation buys stuff for its charities from....Donald Trump!
Consider that the Clinton campaign is spending money on campaigning while the Trump campaign, now funded by the GOP, is spending money using over-priced Trump-owned facilities.
Who's the REAL crook here? I'd say it's the guy bribing public officials and funneling campaign donations into his own pocket.
Consider that the Clinton Foundation pours almost all its money into real charitable functions, whereas the Trump Foundation buys stuff for its charities from....Donald Trump!
Consider that the Clinton campaign is spending money on campaigning while the Trump campaign, now funded by the GOP, is spending money using over-priced Trump-owned facilities.
Who's the REAL crook here? I'd say it's the guy bribing public officials and funneling campaign donations into his own pocket.
Perhaps most emblematic of this election is some of the press giving The Donald constant and breath taking attention, as when the Washington Post earlier today had a bright red banner at the top of its online edition proclaiming 'Breaking News!' ... that Don has said he will advocate for an increase in military spending.
Even those networks which generally hold views antithetical to those of Donald cover him live with nearly every speech, publicize every utterance and thoughts that he has, while somehow not doing the same for Hillary Clinton. What does this say about our collective psyche and its craving for the constant ‘thrill’ and attraction to someone said to ‘speak his mind’, coming every day and far too often from the bombastic, clueless and self adulating Mr. Trump?
Even those networks which generally hold views antithetical to those of Donald cover him live with nearly every speech, publicize every utterance and thoughts that he has, while somehow not doing the same for Hillary Clinton. What does this say about our collective psyche and its craving for the constant ‘thrill’ and attraction to someone said to ‘speak his mind’, coming every day and far too often from the bombastic, clueless and self adulating Mr. Trump?
21
Pretty simple really. Love him or hate him, everyone is fascinated by Trump and his antics. Hillary is old school by the seat of the pants suit style politics, just one of the guys. Boring. She campaigns on Trump's faults. Where is her plan to improve America or at least keep it on track? She's pathetic.
1
If Mrs Clinton actually gave many public speeches I'm sure they would be covered, and praised effusively in the NYT and WaPo at least. It's her choice to campaign quietly.
The media has done quite a bang-up job in making it easy for Trump to win the debates.
Has any candidate ever had lower expectations coming into the debates than does Trump?
The media has twisted, and taken out of context, every statement it could to make him seem as horribly ignorant, stupid, and bigoted as possible. These attacks worked for a time, bringing his poll numbers down well below Hillary's. (But then the real, not faked up, news about Hillary set them even again.)
But the problem with setting this perception about Trump is that he better live down to it in actual debate performance, or he will win in the eyes of the voters.
And the thing is, as anyone who has listened to his actual speeches -- even impromptu -- will see, he doesn't in reality come across as the monster of lore.
So if Trump wins the debates, blame the media -- there's a price to be paid for engaging in viciously unfair attacks.
Has any candidate ever had lower expectations coming into the debates than does Trump?
The media has twisted, and taken out of context, every statement it could to make him seem as horribly ignorant, stupid, and bigoted as possible. These attacks worked for a time, bringing his poll numbers down well below Hillary's. (But then the real, not faked up, news about Hillary set them even again.)
But the problem with setting this perception about Trump is that he better live down to it in actual debate performance, or he will win in the eyes of the voters.
And the thing is, as anyone who has listened to his actual speeches -- even impromptu -- will see, he doesn't in reality come across as the monster of lore.
So if Trump wins the debates, blame the media -- there's a price to be paid for engaging in viciously unfair attacks.
15
Sure. Our eyes must be deceiving us when we all watched him mock a disabled reporter, mock the standing of a Muslim mother and father whose son ( and them) gave the ultimate sacrifice, say he knows more about Isis than the generals. If a man is a fool and the press writes that he is a fool, it isn't a double negative. The man is still a fool.
All Trump has to do is present himself at the debate as a reasonable and thoughtful candidate. That would blow up the media sterotypes and crack this race wide open. A lot of people feel they are being lied to by the media and is Trump can act the part of a reasonable man, he will have a fighting chance.
1
If you want to know why Clinton's polls have slipped look no further than the headlines of your own newspaper. Not a day went by without some vague, insinuating headline (!!!!clouds, shadows!!!!") headline in the NYT, regarding the Clinton Foundation ("!questions were raised!") or Clinton herself. ("Newsflash !!!!Many people named Donald are saying she is untrustworthy!!!!) Repeated with a steady, pandering, relentless beat. Meanwhile, Trump's very real acts of bribery and corruption remained unmentioned until yesterday, even though the information had been out there for months.
I get that Newspapers are in a tough economic spot. I get you need ratings. I get that Trump is dangerous, and that publically calling him out what he is, a corrupt liar, may get you sued, and that you are all afraid of your personal and professional survival. I get it. But this is the future of our children. Get over yourselves. Stop grading Trump by what he said yesterday ("Look! Today, He was only a little bit racist and only wanted to deport 11 million!") Judge him against the scale of a real candidate for our Highest Office.
This is a hill worth dying on. All of us, if we do not stand up, together, will be complicit. Be brave. Call a bribe a BRIBE in your headlines, not a "brush with campaign law". Speak up.
After all - What have you got to lose?
I get that Newspapers are in a tough economic spot. I get you need ratings. I get that Trump is dangerous, and that publically calling him out what he is, a corrupt liar, may get you sued, and that you are all afraid of your personal and professional survival. I get it. But this is the future of our children. Get over yourselves. Stop grading Trump by what he said yesterday ("Look! Today, He was only a little bit racist and only wanted to deport 11 million!") Judge him against the scale of a real candidate for our Highest Office.
This is a hill worth dying on. All of us, if we do not stand up, together, will be complicit. Be brave. Call a bribe a BRIBE in your headlines, not a "brush with campaign law". Speak up.
After all - What have you got to lose?
169
I could not agree more!!!
you're kidding right? this paper has done nothing but put her forward in the best light possible. unfortunately, with all the stuff she does, this paper still has a hard time casting her in her beacon of shining light. so what does that say about the reality of her candidacy?
2
That's whats so funny. NYT was all in for Hill till they realized they are largely responsible for forcing this monster upon us. A little late for regrets cause the alternative is even worse.
2
All this says is that we won't know until the votes are cast and counted who will be our next president. That's fine because a lot can happen between now and Election Day. So, until everything has been done I'm going to hold my breath, cast my vote, and hope the person I want to win, wins. Never mind the polls. I don't vote according to the polls.
3
@hen3ry:
While you will hold your breath & cast your vote, most of us will hold our nose to cast our vote.
Big difference...and hence the indecisiveness, apathy and disgust among a very large portion of the electorate.
While you will hold your breath & cast your vote, most of us will hold our nose to cast our vote.
Big difference...and hence the indecisiveness, apathy and disgust among a very large portion of the electorate.
1
I think the excellent reporters at the Times should write a few detailed stories about the (1) biased news coverage of Clinton and (2) the relative amount of TV coverage given to Clinton vs Trump. It is certainly newsworthy (and in the public interest) to document blatantly skewed coverage by other news outlets about Clinton's "scandals" and set the record straight about what is partisan innuendo and what is fact. Clinton has made mistakes to be sure but she is not guilty of 90% of what is alleged. Meanwhile, Trump's serial lies on the campaign trail deserve documenting in one place as well as his long list of troubled business dealings, bankruptcies, unethical behavior, criminal proceedings, and his complete lack of transparency on his medical state and taxes.
46
One problem, and not in this election alone, is that poll-watching becomes daily news, and daily newsreaders or newsviewers are politically shaped by the polls and pollsters--with, as Michael rightly notes, diminished attention to the issues by which readers and viewers are also being shaped and misshaped. The pollsters have an inflated sense of self-importance, even imagining themselves as celebrities, and newpapers and media collaborate with a low opinion of their customers as being only interested in these daily gyrations, which their own questionable sense of what matters. News has become newsbiz, and Nate Cohn and others are its flaks.
you made 1 correct point. she is not guilty of 90% of what she is accused of. in actuality, she is guilty of 100% of it, plus what we haven't even heard about.
Hillary must win. Trump in the Presidency would be a disaster for this country. He has no ethics, no conscience, no appreciation of philosophy nor of theology, no sense of obligation to the people of this country, no knowledge of government, of law, of history, of even running a well functioning organization, of developing systems which can work without micromanaging. He knows manipulation and getting around systems intended to assure order and equity, how to get and to keep audiences entertained, and so limits regarding what he says or promises in order to get what he wants. Four years of Trump would make the whole world consider the United States to be not great but pathetic and dangerous.
46
Trump has to flip some blue states to win. Unlikely.
18 states plus D.C . have voted for the Democratic presidential nominee in every election between 1992 and 2012. 242 electoral votes.
13 states have voted for the Republican presidential nominee in each of the past six elections. 102 electoral votes.
If Clinton wins the 19 that every Democratic nominee has won and she wins Florida (29 electoral votes), she wins the White House.
Or if she wins the 19 reliable Democratic states and Virginia (13 electoral votes) and Ohio (18). Or the 19 states plus Nevada (6), Colorado (9) and North Carolina (15).
There are many ways for Clinton to get to 270 electoral votes. There are very few ways for Trump to get there.
18 states plus D.C . have voted for the Democratic presidential nominee in every election between 1992 and 2012. 242 electoral votes.
13 states have voted for the Republican presidential nominee in each of the past six elections. 102 electoral votes.
If Clinton wins the 19 that every Democratic nominee has won and she wins Florida (29 electoral votes), she wins the White House.
Or if she wins the 19 reliable Democratic states and Virginia (13 electoral votes) and Ohio (18). Or the 19 states plus Nevada (6), Colorado (9) and North Carolina (15).
There are many ways for Clinton to get to 270 electoral votes. There are very few ways for Trump to get there.
10
Thank you, I need to hear this kind of information.
One should do it.
It's wrong to try and convince people Hillary was winning by a lot. Trump is calling the shots. His supporters care nothing about truth, facts or reality. Hillary and her supporters are running a terrible campaign, hiding from voters. Trump can pretend to pivot and the media buys it hook, line and sinker. I don't care what the poll numbers are saying: I think she's losing. Trump is right-she seems tired and has no game plan. Exhaustively planning for a debate doesn't impress voters. She needs to get Bill out of the picture and face up to the war she's in. Her ticket has zero charisma right now. She bored everyone in 2008. Worse, she hasn't learned from her mistakes.
10
If anyone believes that Hilary Clinton is not running her program, working her strategy, and going to claw her way into the White House with several strategies for each contingency, you haven't been paying attention. If HRC is boring you, it's because she's already won.
You mean ... you mean ... the air is rushing out a huge hole in the Bounce House and the kids are screaming when they hit the ground ... and none of the adults have noticed?
' Report: All Standing Between Trump And Presidency Is Nation That Made Him Billionaire Celebrity ... The report follows on the heels of a related study showing that the major obstacle standing between Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton and the Oval Office is a nation that doesn’t like women possessing any authority whatsoever. ' - The Onion
1
What I haven't heard explained is Clinton's Bosnia story. That was just fiction, I think!
3
The pilot said that they would be landing in an unusual way because there might be sniper fire.
They did not take sniper fire on the landing, and after she landed she accepted the flowers from greeters on the Tarmac as in the photos you've probably seen.
They did not take sniper fire on the landing, and after she landed she accepted the flowers from greeters on the Tarmac as in the photos you've probably seen.
3
On the other hand, she certainly hasn't got onna TV and sniggered about dating her own daughter.
I think the Bosnia account was a false memory. It was obviously very scary in reality and it looks like she made it into something even more scary in her mind. Hillary had no reason to actively lie about it, because as the first lady traveling with an entourage, she would know there would be a record of it.
I wish you had emoticons we could use
This is comical. Clinton's biggest cheerleader advising how to interpret polls that show her declining. Mrs. Clinton is acting like Nixon, lying, avoiding the press, lying, trying to convince everyone (and herself?) that she has done no wrong. How can I be confident in a candidate that is owned by the "ultra-rich", Hollywood, and the big banks? This country needs a change, and it isn't Mrs Clinton. Maybe the polls are right, and people are beginning to see her for what she really is?
20
So. A really big change is going to come by placing a bigot in the White House??
That's not exactly the kind of change this country needs.
That's not exactly the kind of change this country needs.
Perhaps you've been drinking too much Koolaid.
After Bush v. Gore, anything is possible. Trump could be our next President.
13
You do remember that he has maligned and insulted over half of the U.S. electorate, don't you??
N.
Yes, Trump has been noxious, but that doesn't mean HRC will win. I surely believe and hope she will, and plan to vote for her, but as they say, never underestimate the ability of the electorate to make the wrong decision. This would likely be their worst choice ever, though it is possible since HRC is far from perfect, opening the door for disaster.
She voted for the Iraq War, even though 23 other senators voted against it. Some of them had more info than she had, since they were on the Armed Services Committee and she was not, but the others had about the same info as her. This was, of course, before her days as Sec of State. Still they managed to vote against the war. HRC has also continued to be more in favor of military intervention than many of her Dem colleagues. That, whether we like it or not, hurts her with many voters, particularly those in her own party. Similarly, many Dems are understandably dismayed re: her being personally paid a lot by Wall Street and having big campaign funding from them too.
Those and other issues, though they pale compared to Trump's outrages, still will matter to some voters. If those voters switch to, let's say, Stein, that costs HRC a vote. If they switch to Trump (less likely), it's twice as damaging, not only subtracting a vote HRC , but also adding a vote to Trump.
It's now perhaps all about the debates, where it's her expertise vs his bluster. Sometimes, alas, showiness and persona can win a debate, as in 1960.
Yes, Trump has been noxious, but that doesn't mean HRC will win. I surely believe and hope she will, and plan to vote for her, but as they say, never underestimate the ability of the electorate to make the wrong decision. This would likely be their worst choice ever, though it is possible since HRC is far from perfect, opening the door for disaster.
She voted for the Iraq War, even though 23 other senators voted against it. Some of them had more info than she had, since they were on the Armed Services Committee and she was not, but the others had about the same info as her. This was, of course, before her days as Sec of State. Still they managed to vote against the war. HRC has also continued to be more in favor of military intervention than many of her Dem colleagues. That, whether we like it or not, hurts her with many voters, particularly those in her own party. Similarly, many Dems are understandably dismayed re: her being personally paid a lot by Wall Street and having big campaign funding from them too.
Those and other issues, though they pale compared to Trump's outrages, still will matter to some voters. If those voters switch to, let's say, Stein, that costs HRC a vote. If they switch to Trump (less likely), it's twice as damaging, not only subtracting a vote HRC , but also adding a vote to Trump.
It's now perhaps all about the debates, where it's her expertise vs his bluster. Sometimes, alas, showiness and persona can win a debate, as in 1960.
2
Yep.
As Adlai Stevenson pointed out when running against Ike, when someone told him he'd just given a speech that would "win the vote of every thinking American": "not good enough."
As Adlai Stevenson pointed out when running against Ike, when someone told him he'd just given a speech that would "win the vote of every thinking American": "not good enough."
1
That moment when the cheerleaders of your team, start saying 'oh no, we're going to loose'.
Then again, elsewhere in this news paper, just today, Hillary Clinton polls 84% to Trump's 16%.
So which is which New York Times? how can you print two conflicting stories on the same subject on the same day?
Then again, elsewhere in this news paper, just today, Hillary Clinton polls 84% to Trump's 16%.
So which is which New York Times? how can you print two conflicting stories on the same subject on the same day?
4
You can't read. That statisic (84 vs 16) are the changes of winning, not their poll numbers.
She can be mediocre in the polls and more likely to win due to electoral college votes and how that pans out. Trumps road to to 270 electoral votes is much tougher.
She can be mediocre in the polls and more likely to win due to electoral college votes and how that pans out. Trumps road to to 270 electoral votes is much tougher.
5
The 84% to 16% is a snapshot chance of winning prediction -- not a poll showing the percentage of respondents saying they would vote Trump or Clinton.
Hey, what's the problem? A current poll is not a form of odds-making prediction. But that aside, it does remind us that Trump offers different stories of the same subject on a daily basis. Of course, with Trump the explanation is easy -- He lies. Only this morning I heard discussions on TV that involved Trumpian lies with respect to three specific topics: Obama's citizenship, Iraq, and Libya (Trump now doesn't want to talk of the birther issue, and lies about his documented initial support of our going into both Iraq and Libya). And that's only skimming the slimy surface.
"I’m agnostic about whether the four-way or two-way polls are better in this particular election, since Mr. Johnson and Ms. Stein blur the line between candidates who deserve inclusion and those who do not."
This is the sort of thinking that left Democratic leaders scratching their heads in puzzlement at the 2014 voter turnout - the worst in 70 years. The DNC and the liberal/corporate media has ordained an unappealing, ethically-challenged candidate whose image could be used as a dictionary illustration for the entry, "Washington insider".
Registered independents now outnumber either party by a wide margin, and some of the "high quality" polls Cohn mentions have been reported to under-represent independents in their polling samples.
Whether we end up with a demagogue or a tainted Washington insider in the White House next year, the blame lays squarely on the two major parties, both of which lost touch with the public long ago.
This is the sort of thinking that left Democratic leaders scratching their heads in puzzlement at the 2014 voter turnout - the worst in 70 years. The DNC and the liberal/corporate media has ordained an unappealing, ethically-challenged candidate whose image could be used as a dictionary illustration for the entry, "Washington insider".
Registered independents now outnumber either party by a wide margin, and some of the "high quality" polls Cohn mentions have been reported to under-represent independents in their polling samples.
Whether we end up with a demagogue or a tainted Washington insider in the White House next year, the blame lays squarely on the two major parties, both of which lost touch with the public long ago.
22
Well, the reality is we have a Democrat or a Republican who will win. So daydreaming and getting angry and frustrated is right and needed but the reality is on Nov. 9 a Democrat or a Republican will govern all of us, and with that, make long lasting decisions that will certainly impact our daily lives.
I may be angry, but I'm a realist.
I may be angry, but I'm a realist.
"daydreaming and getting angry and frustrated is right and needed"?
That's the sort of pessimism that our oligarchs - all of whom are quite happy with the status quo - want us to adopt. No thanks.
That's the sort of pessimism that our oligarchs - all of whom are quite happy with the status quo - want us to adopt. No thanks.
Hillary must confront the issues directly. She must accept that she should have kept private and public emails separate. She must accept that while the Clinton foundation is a charity that has spent all it's money on helping people, and not being used to further her nor Bill's comforts, it could be seen as a way for people seeking special attention to get it, even if it has not been. Public life means living in a fishbowl, it means smiling and taking with good humor the most vile and disdainful treatment from the silliest and nastiest of people imaginable, it means having everything one does or says misrepresented and spun by adversaries, and not being affected publically. Power is the ability to do what few others may do and getting and keeping it are not constrained by any rules of God not man, so anything goes in the struggle for power. People like Trump, people without any ethics, without an sense of obligation to people outside of their small tribes, have no problems playing the games that power demands, and they are the reasons that we have courts, prisons, armies and navies.
6
First, the only poll is the one that counts on Election day. Second, tehre are two months left.
Unfortunately, Ms. Clinton continues to damage herself. Considering her opponent, she should have a solid 10% lead right now. But, she continue to emit an aura of mistrust, in both actions and words. It does not help with comments like "I do not recall" when questioned by the FBI, or "having a mental breakdown". Certainly sends the wrong message to hose thinking about the # AM phone call. Then there is the looming Clinton Foundation, Bill Clinton and the e-mail mess that will not go away. And, evasivness, on being forward.
Ms. Clinton has to do what Nixon did in 1952, go in front of the American public and giver her "Checker's Speech". It would have to be done with sincerity. Also, she has to change here strategy so she is not coming off as pandering. She has to give a speech that rival's Al Gore's concession speech.
The question fro her is could it be too late? It will take a great effort to right her version of the "Titanic".
Finally, in Colorado, she leads by two points, until Gary Johnson is factored in; then it is a tie. Johnson polls 12% here. A state Clinton pulled out of, because she thought she had Colorado in her pocket; that is not the case any more.
Unfortunately, Ms. Clinton continues to damage herself. Considering her opponent, she should have a solid 10% lead right now. But, she continue to emit an aura of mistrust, in both actions and words. It does not help with comments like "I do not recall" when questioned by the FBI, or "having a mental breakdown". Certainly sends the wrong message to hose thinking about the # AM phone call. Then there is the looming Clinton Foundation, Bill Clinton and the e-mail mess that will not go away. And, evasivness, on being forward.
Ms. Clinton has to do what Nixon did in 1952, go in front of the American public and giver her "Checker's Speech". It would have to be done with sincerity. Also, she has to change here strategy so she is not coming off as pandering. She has to give a speech that rival's Al Gore's concession speech.
The question fro her is could it be too late? It will take a great effort to right her version of the "Titanic".
Finally, in Colorado, she leads by two points, until Gary Johnson is factored in; then it is a tie. Johnson polls 12% here. A state Clinton pulled out of, because she thought she had Colorado in her pocket; that is not the case any more.
10
I find advice based on phonied facts about numbers and a replay of right-wing drivel less than convincing.
1
Trump may get an assist tonight in the Commander in Chief forum by going second. If he is able to watch Hillary, it will be his chance to become informed on some of the many issues about which he has no knowledge.
6
I suggest three ideas for Hillary Clinton:
1) Get Bernie Sander' TOTAL support and have him out there in the field making inspiring speeches supporting Clinton and attacking Trump, to the max,
2) Pound Trump with his total lack of government experience, as a great danger. Use symbols and gestures, again and again. Try a zero (0) (OK) gesture with fingers and thumb or a thumbs down.
3) I suggest that Clinton pick up on Judy Garland's "Be a Clown":
"Be a clown. Be a clown. All the world loves a clown": (2min)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sfk9ou0Y2kc (2min)
Perhaps, if Clinton loosens up with humor, the voters will warm up to her and she will soar in the polls and win the election...
(Hillary is just too "straight", too much the policy wonk, too boring)
1) Get Bernie Sander' TOTAL support and have him out there in the field making inspiring speeches supporting Clinton and attacking Trump, to the max,
2) Pound Trump with his total lack of government experience, as a great danger. Use symbols and gestures, again and again. Try a zero (0) (OK) gesture with fingers and thumb or a thumbs down.
3) I suggest that Clinton pick up on Judy Garland's "Be a Clown":
"Be a clown. Be a clown. All the world loves a clown": (2min)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sfk9ou0Y2kc (2min)
Perhaps, if Clinton loosens up with humor, the voters will warm up to her and she will soar in the polls and win the election...
(Hillary is just too "straight", too much the policy wonk, too boring)
3
"(Hillary is just too "straight", too much the policy wonk, too boring)"
LET me expand on that.
"(Hillary is just too corrupt, too arrogant, too isolated, too clueless, too greedy, too power hungry, too devious, too conniving, too untrustworthy, too off-putting, too dishonest, too mendacious, too unprincipled, too subject to subornation, too ..... }
LET me expand on that.
"(Hillary is just too corrupt, too arrogant, too isolated, too clueless, too greedy, too power hungry, too devious, too conniving, too untrustworthy, too off-putting, too dishonest, too mendacious, too unprincipled, too subject to subornation, too ..... }
1
Dear Upwising, What about Donald Trump? Where is his honesty? Where is his experience in government? Where is his respect for others?
No, I think what we have is a reenactment of the Civil War drama, 150 years, later. It is crazy...
No, I think what we have is a reenactment of the Civil War drama, 150 years, later. It is crazy...
2
I believe Trump is held to a much lower standard by everyone than is Hillary Clinton. Every day he avoids shooting himself in the foot he's treated more like a skilled marksman. It's sickening. Despite Clinton's failings, this race should not even be close - and yet here we are. I, for one, won't sleep soundly until this thing is over, the hanging chads drop, the Supreme Court stays out of it and Trump is offered the consolation prize of a talk show on Fox. Or maybe he'll start his own media company. Anything but the unthinkable -
19
"Despite Clinton's failings" - this is the problem with voters who prefer to rationalize Clinton's candidacy rather than look it straight in the eye and recognize it for what it is. The race is close because her failings are so egregious that they don't really fall into the "despite" characterization. Any progressive or rational liberal knows she is not a viable candidate, not matter how much you try to rationalize her actions. She has a long history of corruption - both domestic and international - and this is what makes it difficult for us true progressives to even consider backing her. The Dem leadership got in way too deep with the Clinton machine, and instead of listening to their constituents, they decided to sell the entire party down the river with Clinton at the helm.
16
Bodhi, please cite one example of Ms Clinton being indicted and found guilty of corruption. Just one. It should'nt be difficult as Ms Clinton has "... a long history of corruption..."
2
Still mad about Bernie, huh? I'm sorry. Maybe four years of President Trump will make you feel better.
2
So these are the two chump-change choices for America 2016, this the cheap vaudeville offered peasants by our ruling oligarchs?!
Have we collectively - or via the most cynical and corrupt GOP/Dem management - left no shame, no dignity, no integrity at all?
Have we collectively - or via the most cynical and corrupt GOP/Dem management - left no shame, no dignity, no integrity at all?
16
Dear Clinton Campaign,
Stop saying Trump's name!
It is feeding his narcissistic ego to hear his name continuously mentioned in speeches, on the news, in the headlines, etc.
(say 'my opponent" or whatever, but not his name!)
Thank you.
Stop saying Trump's name!
It is feeding his narcissistic ego to hear his name continuously mentioned in speeches, on the news, in the headlines, etc.
(say 'my opponent" or whatever, but not his name!)
Thank you.
10
Better yet, how about talking about the positive things you will do for the country, instead of all the horrible things what's-his-name would do.
I try to stick to "the republican party's nominee". Sounds better than "defendant in a child rape lawsuit". Both are true.
3
Polls of likely voters have been far from accurate in recent elections. They were terribly off in predicting the 2012 presidential winner - remember how Gallup had Mitt Romney way ahead?
But, the race is tighter because Donald Trump seems more normal and Hillary Clinton seems more dishonest.
National polls, of course, are meaningless because we don't elect the president by popular vote.
But, the race is tighter because Donald Trump seems more normal and Hillary Clinton seems more dishonest.
National polls, of course, are meaningless because we don't elect the president by popular vote.
4
The is no metric that in any universe would call the donald "more normal"
2
Clinton represents 'more of the same' to many people. And believe it or not those many people have had enough and don't want 'more of the same'.
The economy and the universe outside of the Beltway and NYC is NOT in good shape or benefitting the majority of voters today.
Unfortunately, Trump represents that potential change or other in this upcoming election. Six of one or half dozen of crazy of the other. We obviously need more choices.
The economy and the universe outside of the Beltway and NYC is NOT in good shape or benefitting the majority of voters today.
Unfortunately, Trump represents that potential change or other in this upcoming election. Six of one or half dozen of crazy of the other. We obviously need more choices.
14
This hardly is surprising considering the media's determination to create a "horse race" by elevating Secretary Clinton's every allergic cough to ill health and holding her every meeting as Secretary of State to some insanely high, and unrealistic, level of purity. At the same time, there has been a serious lack of scrutiny (investigative journalism? concern?) on Trump's sketchy connections to Russia, failure to release tax returns, etc. It boggles the mind that the media simply reports as newsworthy ANYTHING he says and gives it an air of legitimacy.
37
Sorry, but Hillary Clinton comes across like she's got one foot in the grave. Trump has been clever to question her "stamina."
1
Mrs. Clinton could begin by releasing the transcripts (not edited, not redacted) of her $250,000 per hour speeches to Goldman Sachs and a whole rat's nest of other corporate trough feeders.
Here's the list: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-05-24/heres-full-list-organizations-p...
Surely someone, somewhere, has phone video or audio of these numerous presentations .... unless they never happened (and then I think they begin to be called "bribes.")
Here's the list: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-05-24/heres-full-list-organizations-p...
Surely someone, somewhere, has phone video or audio of these numerous presentations .... unless they never happened (and then I think they begin to be called "bribes.")
1
No difference between this campaign for the top job and any other in any democracy. It's just a lot of entertaining, confusing, disruptive noise that won't recede until polling day and the dog that barked the loudest got the most bones. The barking from the Trump kennel, sounding much as coming from the dogs of war, have reached the far outposts of global democracy as never before in my memory of presidential elections. And of a sudden the Trump policies change and he's not gonna be as tough on illegals as first thought etc, etc. but in a two-dog race he's still the lead hound in the publicity stakes. I'll be pleased when the barking abates and we can all get some sleep.
2
@tapp
Maybe you can see this as an unimportant and entertaining dog race because you're sitting way over there in Tasmania -- but believe me. This is important.
Maybe you can see this as an unimportant and entertaining dog race because you're sitting way over there in Tasmania -- but believe me. This is important.
1
Voting for Gary Johnson in this case is akin to holding oneself hostage with a gun to one's head.
Trump is a no-knowing narcissist who deserves a swift kick in the behind, most certainly not the presidency.
Trump is a no-knowing narcissist who deserves a swift kick in the behind, most certainly not the presidency.
9
And voting for Hillary is LITERALLY voting for all war, all the time. During her stint as SoS, we invaded and/or bombed SEVEN countries, three more than Bush/Cheney. Plus Hillary wanted to bomb Iran's civilian power plants.
Johnson is the sole sane choice, and FYI his current poll numbers at this point in the campaign are better than both Perot's when Perot was invited to the 1992 debates and Jesse Ventura's when Ventura beat two (popular, mainstream) establishment candidates to become governor of Minnesota. This race is a true three-way race and Johnson most certainly can win.
Johnson is the sole sane choice, and FYI his current poll numbers at this point in the campaign are better than both Perot's when Perot was invited to the 1992 debates and Jesse Ventura's when Ventura beat two (popular, mainstream) establishment candidates to become governor of Minnesota. This race is a true three-way race and Johnson most certainly can win.
3
I am voting for Johnson, partly because I want to make liberals wring their hands in horror.
3
I'm voting for Johnson because he's the most experienced executive (unlike either HRC or DJT), has a credible, scandal-free track record (unlike HRC) and is a known quantity (unlike DJT). I prioritize policy over Schadenfreude.
1
Hillary needs to go out and make some positive news. The media can't be 100% Trump all of the time so if she's not out there making headlines, the media will use what it's got to make articles about her. Namely, ones about emails, pay to play and hobnobbing with rich donors.
3
Absolutely. Where is she?
1
Well, apparently she is leading by a 15 point margin among Israelis, so not to worry.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/israelis-more-pro-clinton-than-americans-poll/
http://www.timesofisrael.com/israelis-more-pro-clinton-than-americans-poll/
4
Hillary's campaign needs a defibrillator_____________
9
Trump's campaign needs a tax-collector.
1
Trump's campaign team will need visitation privileges at some point:
https://www.scribd.com/doc/316341058/Donald-Trump-Jeffrey-Epstein-Rape-L...
https://www.scribd.com/doc/316341058/Donald-Trump-Jeffrey-Epstein-Rape-L...
1
Public presence and the "stickiness" of scandals affect poll numbers. Trump went to Mexico and to an Af-Am church in August while Hillary was completely absent from the public plus there was another Servergate scandal. Trump did these things without setting a podium on fire or shouting racist/ethnic slurs so they were "wins" for him. Expectations for Trump are very low. Sorry Hillary, even if you and your campaign think Servergate is nonsense and that you have already apologized, you will have to address it each time it comes up. Hiding out with Jon Bon Jovi and Jimmy Buffett may help your fund-raising but it is killing you in the polls.
22
Hillary was NOT absent from the Public. It's a Big Country and try as She may, She can't meet all of Us!
She was out there Fighting For Us! She was discussing crucial policy and world events and collecting $100,000 checks in LA and SF from the glitterratti and the technorati, then She was off to The Hamptons for a Rothschild-sponsored "let's just give Her some love and not ask Her any questions soirée" where a family pic cost $10,000 (beyond the $100,000 to get in the door) and a question from a six-year-old was "on sale" for ONLY $2700,
Not to be outdone by Mr Trump, Illary soldiered on to "The Vineyard" for some more "rough and tumble campaigning - Vineyard Style" until, called once again to duty, she boarded her private jet for a grueling 20-mile flight to Nantucket for more "public contact."
These are her people. These are the people who can afford to say "I'm With Her!"
She was out there Fighting For Us! She was discussing crucial policy and world events and collecting $100,000 checks in LA and SF from the glitterratti and the technorati, then She was off to The Hamptons for a Rothschild-sponsored "let's just give Her some love and not ask Her any questions soirée" where a family pic cost $10,000 (beyond the $100,000 to get in the door) and a question from a six-year-old was "on sale" for ONLY $2700,
Not to be outdone by Mr Trump, Illary soldiered on to "The Vineyard" for some more "rough and tumble campaigning - Vineyard Style" until, called once again to duty, she boarded her private jet for a grueling 20-mile flight to Nantucket for more "public contact."
These are her people. These are the people who can afford to say "I'm With Her!"
The biggest story out there which is barely ever covered is how James Comey, a law enforcement officer, was allowed to chime in with his opinion about Hillary. Has anyone heard of grand jury, does anyone understand why grand juries are secret? For precisely what Mr. Comey's statement and the release of the notes did. It allowed for the creation of innuendo without reference to the total picture. What Comey did was a disgrace but the Times never covered that disgrace.
15
You don't know the law. Look up Executive Order 13526- Classified National Security Information. It applies to the Secretary of State, among others.
5
You are incorrect. As Comey said, "we went at it hard" but they found she was innocent. Ever heard of law enforcement, after realizing and recommending no case, give their personal opinion on the matter? Show me one case. Go ahead, search through history. See if you can find it. Or better don't waste your time. It's a clear case of abuse. But because it's Hillary, and because people like yourself consider her guilty without proof, it's just fine.
2
I will be voting for Hillary although I am in no way a fan. Trump is not the kind of change this kid was hoping for. But these polls should scare the hell out of a lot of people who didn't bother to really the check the pulse of a large swath of this nation these last several years.
In my city and surroundings I see lots and lots of Bernie stickers. And I do mean lots! Even in the sticks among people who always vote red. Also see a few Trump stickers - Usually confined to the burbs. But one will be hard pressed to find a Hillary sticker on a car. I think most people here see that as a, "jeez, everybody will think I like very evasive status quo and not too effective politicians who will say whatever the winds tell her to say - if I throw a Hillary bumper sticker on my ride".
Basically, I'm not holding my breath until November. If Trump doesn't say any more vile things as he is prone to do, he could very well take this one away.
I know, scary.
In my city and surroundings I see lots and lots of Bernie stickers. And I do mean lots! Even in the sticks among people who always vote red. Also see a few Trump stickers - Usually confined to the burbs. But one will be hard pressed to find a Hillary sticker on a car. I think most people here see that as a, "jeez, everybody will think I like very evasive status quo and not too effective politicians who will say whatever the winds tell her to say - if I throw a Hillary bumper sticker on my ride".
Basically, I'm not holding my breath until November. If Trump doesn't say any more vile things as he is prone to do, he could very well take this one away.
I know, scary.
29
Choices such as the one we face in November are what passes for "democracy" in this country. You referred to yourself as a kid, so please, join your fellow millennials in seeking major, substantive reform of our political process, and continue to read the corporate media with a critical eye, uncovering all of their lies, omissions, distortions and dubious premises.
For example, Cohn's statement that, "Mr. Johnson and Ms. Stein blur the line between candidates who deserve inclusion and those who do not."
For example, Cohn's statement that, "Mr. Johnson and Ms. Stein blur the line between candidates who deserve inclusion and those who do not."
1
The Republicans picked a real loser in Trump, but the Democrats not to be out done chose the one person he could beat.
What amazes me is that people believe that Trump will improve the economy and create jobs, but he is advocating the same economic polices of the George W. Bush administration: tax cuts that favor the wealthy and deregulation -- let Wall Street, the banks, and business police themselves. We see how well that worked out, yet the Clinton campaign is not bringing this up!
With this and the hiatus Clinton took from campaigning in favor of fund raising, it makes you wonder if she is making the same mistake that John Kerry did.
What amazes me is that people believe that Trump will improve the economy and create jobs, but he is advocating the same economic polices of the George W. Bush administration: tax cuts that favor the wealthy and deregulation -- let Wall Street, the banks, and business police themselves. We see how well that worked out, yet the Clinton campaign is not bringing this up!
With this and the hiatus Clinton took from campaigning in favor of fund raising, it makes you wonder if she is making the same mistake that John Kerry did.
20
Could the reason be that she is not bringing that up is because she too believes in tax cuts that favour the wealthy, deregulation,let Wall Street, the banks and business police themselves? Is this why she is so frightened to release the transcripts of her speeches to Wall Street and Goldman Sachs in particular.? There are good and sound reasons for not releacing those speeches and they are because they would send her Presidential ambitions to the scrap heap of history. Promises were made in those speeches that would yet one more time allow Wall Street to send the world´s economy into depression. If it were not so she would releace them.
A not insignificant part of her history and campaign that scares the livin heck out of people is her antagonistic views toward China and Russia. Need one be reminded that either country and both together could litterally wipe the Continental US off the face of the earth. Does the US really need a President that would push for war with these two countries?
And despite the 24/ 7 propaganda campaign trashing Donald Trump the American people are sufficiently familiar with HR Clinton,s past, and record as Sec. State, to not want her anywhere near the While House and the nuclear launch codes. Anyone who could make a joke out of and get a laugh over the leader of a country ( Lybia) being murdered by having a baynet shoved up his rectom is too cold blooded for me, and also makes me wonder just what she would be capable of if she was President.
A not insignificant part of her history and campaign that scares the livin heck out of people is her antagonistic views toward China and Russia. Need one be reminded that either country and both together could litterally wipe the Continental US off the face of the earth. Does the US really need a President that would push for war with these two countries?
And despite the 24/ 7 propaganda campaign trashing Donald Trump the American people are sufficiently familiar with HR Clinton,s past, and record as Sec. State, to not want her anywhere near the While House and the nuclear launch codes. Anyone who could make a joke out of and get a laugh over the leader of a country ( Lybia) being murdered by having a baynet shoved up his rectom is too cold blooded for me, and also makes me wonder just what she would be capable of if she was President.
1
I won't go so far as to say that if Mr Trump is elected President we got what we deserved, rather that we earned it by default.
If anyone thinks we did not bring misery to millions on this planet we all share when Mr Bush and Mr Cheney took over the reins of government he or she is in serious need of counseling.
In and of himself, Mr Trump may be a harmless twit, but those behind him at any level will exercise power and control with little stopping their madness to literally eliminate what is left of our democracy and as ominous destroy great swaths of our nation as well as the rest of the planet.
May be tough to consider such thought as reasonable, but who in their right mind envisioned a snake oil saleman as a viable candidate in a race with an intelligent articulate woman?
No doubt the backlash against Ms Clinton has more to do with men's fear of women, than her in particular.
Men in general have at best grudging respect for women who "know their place", but little or none for a woman who has no fear about speaking her mind.
I want to think the polls are no more than a reflection of an inaccurate sampling or perhaps purposely skewed in an effort to lift voter turnout, but if they are an accurate reflection of our culture's status, we are well past the point of no return. If so, we may succumb to a military takeover where even the perceived narrow view of those in command of our armed forces is preferable to the mindless monster Mr Trump has unearthed
If anyone thinks we did not bring misery to millions on this planet we all share when Mr Bush and Mr Cheney took over the reins of government he or she is in serious need of counseling.
In and of himself, Mr Trump may be a harmless twit, but those behind him at any level will exercise power and control with little stopping their madness to literally eliminate what is left of our democracy and as ominous destroy great swaths of our nation as well as the rest of the planet.
May be tough to consider such thought as reasonable, but who in their right mind envisioned a snake oil saleman as a viable candidate in a race with an intelligent articulate woman?
No doubt the backlash against Ms Clinton has more to do with men's fear of women, than her in particular.
Men in general have at best grudging respect for women who "know their place", but little or none for a woman who has no fear about speaking her mind.
I want to think the polls are no more than a reflection of an inaccurate sampling or perhaps purposely skewed in an effort to lift voter turnout, but if they are an accurate reflection of our culture's status, we are well past the point of no return. If so, we may succumb to a military takeover where even the perceived narrow view of those in command of our armed forces is preferable to the mindless monster Mr Trump has unearthed
10
I am sure the high quality polls count take account of the white, working class citizens that usually do not vote, but this year have a reason to make the effort.
As long as Hillary believes that she is certain to win and thus believes that she should say as little as possible, lest she offend someone, Trump will be our next President.
There is little wonder wonder that Hillary's numbers are down. Trump, the consummate back room player, accuses her of malfeasance connected with the Clinton Foundation. Hillary says nothing.
As long as Hillary believes that she is certain to win and thus believes that she should say as little as possible, lest she offend someone, Trump will be our next President.
There is little wonder wonder that Hillary's numbers are down. Trump, the consummate back room player, accuses her of malfeasance connected with the Clinton Foundation. Hillary says nothing.
12
What can she say, she has been exposed for the fraud she is and always has been. I may not like Trump all that much, warts and all, but I believe he is the only one that is going to go in swinging and make a concerted effort to right the ship. Hillary is same old corruption and brokenness and dismantling of the country.
7
Add to that what has evolved in to the utter incompetence and stupidity of the democratic party and the idiotic choices they continue to make.
2
This has been the most disgraceful election race I have ever witnessed. It is obvious that the press has manipulated the process to the point of blatant interference.
When Donald Trump was in the nominating procedure the media fawned over him, they couldn't get enough of his quips and comments. As the other candidates faded the media drew out events as though the candidates were mud wrestlers.
Trump won, fair and square ( at least for politics ).
Now the media is bending over backwards to elect Hillary Clinton. Poll after poll will be rolled out over the next few weeks, for shock value, titillation. However, never be mislead.
The media has an agenda. It is not the agenda of " We the People", it is the agenda of the media.
They will lie, they will fabricate and deceive. The polls are also nonsense, all the polls have been skewed. Believe the poll the day after the election, don't believe what you read in the biased press.
When Donald Trump was in the nominating procedure the media fawned over him, they couldn't get enough of his quips and comments. As the other candidates faded the media drew out events as though the candidates were mud wrestlers.
Trump won, fair and square ( at least for politics ).
Now the media is bending over backwards to elect Hillary Clinton. Poll after poll will be rolled out over the next few weeks, for shock value, titillation. However, never be mislead.
The media has an agenda. It is not the agenda of " We the People", it is the agenda of the media.
They will lie, they will fabricate and deceive. The polls are also nonsense, all the polls have been skewed. Believe the poll the day after the election, don't believe what you read in the biased press.
14
You need to stop watching Fox endlessly. Your statements show how you are so misled that you don't know the truth about any other position when you see it. Remember Fox's assuring Romney that he was leading? Or, maybe you don't. Obviously you haven't seen the sun of day or read anything that didn't agree with your position because the media "is making up everything." Narrow know nothin assumptions based on the Fox yellow journalism is why Trump is present in our politics.
Regardless of who wins, the major loser this year will be what's left of the mainstream media. Their performance has been reprehensible throughout. Other than Fox, which ironically has (shoot me now) the fairest and most balanced coverage of Trump, the traditional media have openly campaigned for Hillary Clinton.
The cost of this will be credibility, and without credibility the media are dead.
The cost of this will be credibility, and without credibility the media are dead.
1
Clinton's final lead in November will indicate the national IQ of the country.
7
Since her fanbois cannot be swayed with facts and logic, all it will prove is that cult of personality is what gets you elected, nothing else.
2
Were going to decide who has the nuclear codes, and people like you use words like "fanbois".
It's pathetic.
It's pathetic.
2
So you tell us that not all polls are equal and some are even questionable. And then, you (the news media) continue to cite these polls as the last word, the bottom line, on how the election is going. I can't turn on the TV or open a paper that doesn't lead with the poll results. There's so much more of critical importance to talk about than simply who's leading on Tuesday and now that lead has shrunk since last Thursday. Since it keeps shifting, I'd think at some point a look at the polls at any one point in time would be considered meaningless - certainly not newsworthy. Yet this is what we keep getting.
3
Given the rate at which the situation continues to change, relying heavily on polls at this point seems a fools errand. Take for example the quite credible report in the present on-line Time Magazine on ISIS' choice of Trump to be the next US President. Other media, including the Times, can ignore this, or they can exploit it, and the impact of their actions on polls would likely be significant. After all, how is a campaign based in large part upon fear of terrorists likely to fare when the "anti-terrorism" candidate is the poster child of the terrorists?
3
Maybe if the media would publish more story(ies) of Trump's 'brush' with bribery and his flip flops and Mexico instead of constantly harping on Hillary's emails the polls might show differently.
It's really interesting how words are being used to influence the articles- Donald's 'brush' as opposed to bribery or scandal? I expect better from the NYT.
And of course it's interesting to see who's skewing the numbers of these polls.
It's really interesting how words are being used to influence the articles- Donald's 'brush' as opposed to bribery or scandal? I expect better from the NYT.
And of course it's interesting to see who's skewing the numbers of these polls.
18
You mean how this paper gives her a pass for her Clinton Foundation corruption, the mess she made in Libya and the use of her server for company business?
6
It has. More times than it has reported how many times Hillary's memory failed her during the FBI investigation, including even claiming not to remember her obligatory training on proper handling of classified information. Have you seen any of this at any length in the NY Times, for example?
3
What more would you have them do? There is a 24/ 7 propaganda push against Trump. Every sylable he utters is anaylysed and the worst brought up about it. Just take a quick look at the front page of the NYT. Just look at the Huffington Post, the Guardian et all.. All against Trump Everyone of them amplifying every single embarrassing thing he says. Nothing is too trivial to bring up.
Mrs. Clinton on the other hand. Every deed she has done is swept under the rug, or rationalized. According to the MSNBC she is as pure as the driven snow. Trump can do no right and Clinton can do no wrong. They are doing to Trump what they did to Sanders. Again. What more do you want. They are i the bag 100% for Hillary Clinton. There is not much more they can do accept call for some gun nut to murder Trump. As a matter of fact I am surprised that they have not had him assasinated with the daily dose of hate they dish out towards the guy.
Mrs. Clinton on the other hand. Every deed she has done is swept under the rug, or rationalized. According to the MSNBC she is as pure as the driven snow. Trump can do no right and Clinton can do no wrong. They are doing to Trump what they did to Sanders. Again. What more do you want. They are i the bag 100% for Hillary Clinton. There is not much more they can do accept call for some gun nut to murder Trump. As a matter of fact I am surprised that they have not had him assasinated with the daily dose of hate they dish out towards the guy.
2
It will all change after the 1st debate on 9/26, the first of three KO's for Hillary. Don't waste your time watching polls until then.
12
The question is whether supporting Trump or Clinton would or could be swayed by the debate outcome. It would be reassuring if such were the case.
To some extent, the question is whether any data matters to anyone anymore. We're all pre-outraged.
To some extent, the question is whether any data matters to anyone anymore. We're all pre-outraged.
8
You mean like when Trump starts hammering how many times Hillary couldn't remember during her FBI investigation being trained in how to properly handle classified information or when she suggested she may not have remembered due to her concussion at the time; or how many times she couldn't recall being warned about her private server or those who questioned it; or how many times her staffers couldn't remember key details; or her claim she had no idea the letter "C" on a classified document meant that; or why she claimed she wanted this setup for convenience but then it turns out she used and ordered smashed at least a dozen Blackberry's along with the hacking danger she admitted she was aware of; or that the guy who set up her server pleaded the Fifth when questioned by the FBI. And all this of course, will be a month before Julius Assange releases the next round of hacked emails Wikileaks has. If I were you, I wouldn't bet on a landslide. Trump is a deeply flawed candidate. But the fact that Hillary is holding on by her fingernails, speaks for itself.
6
All of us old enough to remember the Kennedy-Nixon debate know that Nixon was the clear winner in terms of points awarded for debating skills, but that was not necessarily the case when it came to calling a winner for the visual aspects of the contest.
1
I'm seeing a really fascinating phenomenon in the previous comments.
Poll shows my preferred candidate is winning handily: Hooray, we're gonna win!
Poll shows my preferred candidate isn't winning handily: Pshaw, polls don't really matter! Or pshaw, the pollster was biased.
As for me, the polls that I found more interesting are the favorability numbers: Donald Trump is the most hated major party nominee since Gallup started keeping track in 1956. But don't get too cocky, Clinton supporters: You're backing the 3rd-most hated, and the most hated Democrat ever nominated. All I can say to primary voters is "Congratulations, you've now guaranteed that no matter who wins, we lose."
Poll shows my preferred candidate is winning handily: Hooray, we're gonna win!
Poll shows my preferred candidate isn't winning handily: Pshaw, polls don't really matter! Or pshaw, the pollster was biased.
As for me, the polls that I found more interesting are the favorability numbers: Donald Trump is the most hated major party nominee since Gallup started keeping track in 1956. But don't get too cocky, Clinton supporters: You're backing the 3rd-most hated, and the most hated Democrat ever nominated. All I can say to primary voters is "Congratulations, you've now guaranteed that no matter who wins, we lose."
7
Superficial reasoning: Why one hate matters, and if it is based on lies then it matters a great deal.
The poll doesn't take into account the ways that the Clinton machine will rig the disc-based summarizing of optical scan voting machines and other voting machines in key locations during the November election.
Multiple studies show the ease of creating fractional votes for every vote cast with programmable discs. And multiple studies show the disconnect between exit polls and outcomes for Hillary during the primary.
The election fraud the DNC pulled off to rig the primary for Hillary was the practice run.
Multiple studies show the ease of creating fractional votes for every vote cast with programmable discs. And multiple studies show the disconnect between exit polls and outcomes for Hillary during the primary.
The election fraud the DNC pulled off to rig the primary for Hillary was the practice run.
12
Ann is correct. The Establishment favoring lifetime incumbency for its puppets in various political offices also owns the media who give us tabloid fluff and reality shows while grooming "thought leaders" to persuade us that nothing should change. America began as a republic and is dissolving as a hereditary plutocracy.
Our last hope is/was the courts, the press and the ballot box. Integrity has vanished from all three. Prepare for Hillary's coronation. We can all just sleep late on election day.
Our last hope is/was the courts, the press and the ballot box. Integrity has vanished from all three. Prepare for Hillary's coronation. We can all just sleep late on election day.
10
It's precisely this rigging that may cause an historic turnout, and shake the foundations of our corrupt establishment.
Brexit was a shock to the British establishment; perhaps writing in Sanders, or voting for Jill Stein, will be our Brexit.
I expect to be surprised, the day after, and I believe the American electorate is not as dumb as the establishment wants to believe.
The powers that be, have been comfortably sitting on their own petard, unaware we have the matches, and we shortened the fuse.
This Presidental election has been so un-Presidential, so awfully ignorant, and dismissive of the people, it's beyond embarrassin.
The shouting screaming obvious self-centered nature of Hillary, and the modern day narcissist we know as Trump; what have we done to ourselves.
Brexit was a shock to the British establishment; perhaps writing in Sanders, or voting for Jill Stein, will be our Brexit.
I expect to be surprised, the day after, and I believe the American electorate is not as dumb as the establishment wants to believe.
The powers that be, have been comfortably sitting on their own petard, unaware we have the matches, and we shortened the fuse.
This Presidental election has been so un-Presidential, so awfully ignorant, and dismissive of the people, it's beyond embarrassin.
The shouting screaming obvious self-centered nature of Hillary, and the modern day narcissist we know as Trump; what have we done to ourselves.
3
The fact that so many of Trumpy's supporters believe this sort of drivel is the only reason he's close.
At more than 40% polled favouring Trump, the USA displays boldly that more than 40% of those eligible to vote are relying upon emotional beliefs instead of empirical factual reasoning, despite the Founding Fathers reliance upon a 'well educated electorate'. The long dark path of the USA's decline continues, lead by Trump-Pence and the GOP marching band.
26
Yeah, just like Hillary's die-hards rely on "empirical factual reasoning" to explain -- or actually to sluff off -- why it is that it is the Clinton's and only the Clinton's that seem to be forever plagued by one scandal after the next year after year after year, and why it is that the supposed right-wing conspiracy only seems to be always after her and Bill.
2
Well, it would seem rather unproductive for a right-wing conspiracy to investigate any right-wing or conservative folks, so there you are.
And then the fact that after 30 years there is no real reveal from this right-wing conspiracy. Surely they can't be this ineffectual.
And then the fact that after 30 years there is no real reveal from this right-wing conspiracy. Surely they can't be this ineffectual.
The quality of the polls is questionable. Who's is conducting the poll and do they have an agenda? How are the questions worded? Who is asking the questions? How do they determine the respondents and samples? How is it broken down by race, gender, region etc? I mean, who answers a blind phone call nowadays anyway? Back in college my class was offered "extra credit" for out bound calling for presidential polls during the 1980's. We weren't exactly trained, unbiased poll takers. I wonder where the poll recipients are culled from now. On line? One on one live interviews? Phone calls?
4
The only poll that matters is November 8. I really we are poll obsessed.
12
Give me a break. Why is national polling even news? We do not elect presidents by popular vote. More important is the probability of a particular candidate winning a state and the associated electoral college votes that go with it. So, with a probability of a Clinton win at 85% per Katz in "The Upshot," is there really anything new here?
7
Clinton's speech to the VFW lauding American Exceptionalism was the last straw for me. It's either a write-in or I'm staying home in November - first Presidential election since I was eligible to vote in 1972. Either candidate presents a disastrous choice for our country -- it's just a matter of degree.
19
"Either candidate presents a disastrous choice for our country -- it's just a matter of degree."
A matter of degree is still a difference. And, even if you like neither of these candidates, there are very large differences in both policy positions and demeanor between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.
Elections always are choices between imperfect options. Failing to take a stand between two imperfect candidates is the very definition of copping out.
A matter of degree is still a difference. And, even if you like neither of these candidates, there are very large differences in both policy positions and demeanor between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.
Elections always are choices between imperfect options. Failing to take a stand between two imperfect candidates is the very definition of copping out.
25
By staying home you choose the worst of the two. Congratulations.
Not to mention Supreme Court selection(s), which, left in the hands of someone like Trump, will be disastrous for generations to come.
3
Hillary Clinton is paying the price of familiarity. She's been in the national spotlight for, what, 40 or so years? No one who has been around that long is going to hold on to popularity, even if she were Mother Theresa incarnate. Why is that?
Because familiarity breeds contempt. Plus, she is overly and overtly private. Plus, she's a woman, and we're not there yet. And finally, because Trump is much more entertaining. Reporters love him; the cable news networks can't get enough of him, and no one -- no one -- is seriously looking into his background, associations, personal peculiarities, and his ability to lie like a rug with utter indifference to anything approximating the truth.
We like to be entertained as a nation. People are going to vote Trump into the White House for the sheer thrill of it.
Because familiarity breeds contempt. Plus, she is overly and overtly private. Plus, she's a woman, and we're not there yet. And finally, because Trump is much more entertaining. Reporters love him; the cable news networks can't get enough of him, and no one -- no one -- is seriously looking into his background, associations, personal peculiarities, and his ability to lie like a rug with utter indifference to anything approximating the truth.
We like to be entertained as a nation. People are going to vote Trump into the White House for the sheer thrill of it.
46
Excellent summary and a sad of a commentary on the current American political process. I just hope Americans elect HRC even if I feel that they deserve to get Trump rather than this fine woman as president - the rest of the world does not deserve the disastrous consequences of a Trump presidency.
34
A must read: Wired magazine, June 6, 2016: "The Polls Are All Wrong: A Startup Called Civis Is Our Best Hope to Fix Them."
Due to sampling and methodology issues, polls are inaccurate at best. It is very difficult to find out exactly how the various polls are designed and how representative they are of the electorate. The upshot: Clinton's campaign uses sophisticated data science techniques to understand the electorate. There is little evidence to suggest that the Trump campaign does this. The author suggests watching the Clinton campaign and the decisions it makes (eg, where it spends time and money) for insight into what is actually happening with the various segments of the electorate.
Due to sampling and methodology issues, polls are inaccurate at best. It is very difficult to find out exactly how the various polls are designed and how representative they are of the electorate. The upshot: Clinton's campaign uses sophisticated data science techniques to understand the electorate. There is little evidence to suggest that the Trump campaign does this. The author suggests watching the Clinton campaign and the decisions it makes (eg, where it spends time and money) for insight into what is actually happening with the various segments of the electorate.
4
Readers must ask themselves: How can a poll possibly pretend to be valid if it does not offer the full range of possible choices? As much as the democrats and republicans wish otherwise, the third party candidates are simply not going to go away, and neither are those of us who are disgusted with the awful choices that the two main parties wish to force upon us.
9
What i can't understand is that whatever Secretary Clinton does is considered cause for a federal investigation, while whatever Trump does in terms of flip-flopping, name calling, outright lying, etc. are disregarded as the insignificant lapses of a "baby Christian" who is learning from his mistakes and slowly becoming "presidential". Could it be that America isn't willing to accept the fact that a woman is more qualified to be president, or that Bernie independents are willing to allow a potential loose cannon to be in control of the "button" because their champion didn't win, or to ensure the establishment of an ultra-conservative supreme court to undo the progress we've made as a nation regarding the welfare of the voiceless poor, the struggling middle class and civil rights, or a combination of these reasons. Consider your motivations carefully, America, before you enter the ballot booth in November. Avoid making a decision similar to one made in Germany before World War II !
142
Or maybe America is finally fed up with the Clintons' act.
6
Is it worth throwing out the baby with the bath water? In this case it would not only be foolish but dangerous!
Or maybe not.
The difference between the national polls and the state polls reflects a Clinton victory. Even if Trump wins all the "toss up " states, he would still lose the presidency.
12
I'm not religious but thank god.
3
You're right David, no worries. Those who can't stomach voting for Hillary can be assured of her victory without their support and can just stay home.
3
You should read what is written before commenting, or declaring that I'm right.
I suggested nothing of what you say.
I suggested nothing of what you say.
Well the media in general (including the so-called "liberal media") have done a bang up job of portraying her as being as dishonest and unlikable as Donald Trump who spits out lies and falsehoods as part of his normal speech. No wonder her negatives are going up.
Make no mistake: if Trump wins this election we will come to regret it deeply. But the mass media with its abject fear of being portrayed as anti-conservative or too liberal, will be able to step up and take a bow for meaningfully helping to make it happen, by pretending that Ms Clinton's transgressions, such as they are, can be compared in any way, shape or form to the monstrous Mr Trump.
Make no mistake: if Trump wins this election we will come to regret it deeply. But the mass media with its abject fear of being portrayed as anti-conservative or too liberal, will be able to step up and take a bow for meaningfully helping to make it happen, by pretending that Ms Clinton's transgressions, such as they are, can be compared in any way, shape or form to the monstrous Mr Trump.
190
Right. Because the NYT is opposed to Hillary Clinton. Sheesh - it's difficult to believe that a person could actually interpret this paper that way.
9
Thank you! We need more people saying this! He is has committed atrocious acts, indisputable ones not innuendo, and they do not compare to Ms Clintons professional life of service. Let's keep saying it!
Exactly....a potentially real scenario is a world overwhelmed in chaos under a Trump administration. Fingers will be pointed at those media companies that shamelessly profited from the sensationalism of Trump.
1
Is anyone looking at the third party candidates? If not, those who are dissatisfied with the main choices might be pleasantly surprised, as I was.
13
One's an isolationist who wants to privatize Social Security and have the Holy Market handle pollution; the other is an anti-vaxxer who thinks too much WiFi in the house hurts kids.
I'll take a pass, thanks.
I'll take a pass, thanks.
38
But keeping it real, neither of them will win. Not even close. Voting of either of them is an act of lodging a tiny protest, not determining who the next president will be. So it's nice to be pleasantly surprised, but not relevant.
8
FYI, Jill Stein has said repeatedly that she is NOT anti-vaccine. That is just the establishment media distorting her position:
"We have a real compelling need for vaccinations," Stein said. "It requires an agency that we can trust to sort through all of those concerns. To assure the American public, whether it’s vaccinations, whether it’s administering estrogen to, you know, treat symptoms of menopause, or at one point it was the solution to prevent Alzheimer's and then it was discovered — oh, my goodness — it may actually contribute to Alzheimer's — it's really important that the American public have confidence in our regulatory boards so that all of our medical treatments and medications actually are approved by people who do not have a vested interest in their promotion. In my experience, this is not a radical idea. This is basic common sense."
"We have a real compelling need for vaccinations," Stein said. "It requires an agency that we can trust to sort through all of those concerns. To assure the American public, whether it’s vaccinations, whether it’s administering estrogen to, you know, treat symptoms of menopause, or at one point it was the solution to prevent Alzheimer's and then it was discovered — oh, my goodness — it may actually contribute to Alzheimer's — it's really important that the American public have confidence in our regulatory boards so that all of our medical treatments and medications actually are approved by people who do not have a vested interest in their promotion. In my experience, this is not a radical idea. This is basic common sense."
2
As with the "Shy Tory" and "Shy Leave" voters in the recent UK elections, beware the "Shy Trump" voters in November, a factor which may not be showing itself in the polls. Democratic voter turnout may well be the pivotal factor in this election.
28
Polls can be skewed and the press by constantly talking about her trailing etc just adds to the perception of her being in grave danger - the press and GOP have created a story around the emails and the foundation and some voters who have no interest in searching for the real information just swallow every thing these two entities put out. Trump is a crooked businessman and yet no press reporters have aired this as much as the nonsensical email and foundation issues. The press needs to be more objective and not just look for ratings.
52
No, I think it's time for the press to be more SUBjective. Trying to be objective, trying to paint all these false equivalencies, trying to say that, yes, Trump is a danger of Biblical proportions but Hillary is unpopular too, is doing the nation a grave disservice. Journalists always talk about the responsibility of the press. Time to be responsible.
12
I just have to hope that the "liberal" press is trying their hardest to scare people into voting so that Trump gets crushed.
I know why Treasonous Trump isn't well liked. I need not go into the reasons, as I don't have the space to list them. 1500 characters is not enough. My question, and I've been trying to wrap my head around this, is why is Hillary so hated and disliked? I'd like to have a really good explanation for these feelings about her. Is it because congressional republicans spent millions of our tax dollars constantly bombarding us with "she's a liar?" She used her own server and various cell phones. So what? What LAW did she violate? The multi-million dollar republican inquiry into her activities, Libya, Benghazi, proof that she was hacked, the Clinton Foundation pay for play "scandal," has produced no evidence, no PROOF that she violated any LAW. No proof that she was hacked. Just like the animus and hatred the republicans have showered on Mr. Obama from day one, I see the same being directed at Hillary simply because she's a Clinton. What proof have the republicans and Treasonous Trump ever supplied that she's ever done anything wrong? Her only mistake has been to try to improve America. The hatred directed at her in the early 1990s when she tried to formulate national healthcare has never stopped. To further distinguish her from Treasonous Trump, when he was getting deferments in the 1970s, she was was helping children in the South. But the drumbeat of hating Hillary goes on, unabated and unexplained. I guess it's just a case of false perception becoming reality. How sad.
353
Totally agree. It seems that when folks do their best to help others, those who hate do-gooders are so ashamed of their own shortcomings that they attack those who actually made a difference for the good. Probably a psychiatrist or psychologist has a medical term for this transference of one's own inadequacy to hate of another who is successful.
15
I'll provide you with an answer in regard to the email server but few people care to put in the effort to see that answer. Look up and read Executive Order 13526-Classified National Security Information. Just google the number and title. It's on the White House website. Then read the tiresome document.
As a civil servant with a top secret security clearance I would have been immediately disciplined, including dismissal, for committing the security violations that Hillary did with her email server.
As Secretary of State she has 'original classification authority' for information produced in the State department. It's impossible that she would not know what a 'C' marker on a paragraph would signify or she is grossly negligent and incompetent.
Just read the executive order.
As a civil servant with a top secret security clearance I would have been immediately disciplined, including dismissal, for committing the security violations that Hillary did with her email server.
As Secretary of State she has 'original classification authority' for information produced in the State department. It's impossible that she would not know what a 'C' marker on a paragraph would signify or she is grossly negligent and incompetent.
Just read the executive order.
21
I also am not a Trump fan and do not want to see a Republican as president either, but much of Hillary's problems are brought on by herself.
When I first heard about her private server many months ago I knew it would be a problem as I was surprised that government emails ever left the closed controlled government system. She was no low level employee and having a private servers in your home is a big deal when it concerns State Department correspondence. What's worse is her explanations. I know the Republicans are building up every flaw they can find, but this was a poor judgement call on her part.
I also think her campaign style borders on being shrill. If she talked more directly to the people like Elizabeth Warren she might be more likable.
In any case I will be voting for Hillary as Trump is just plain dangerous, but I wish there was a different democratic candidate.
When I first heard about her private server many months ago I knew it would be a problem as I was surprised that government emails ever left the closed controlled government system. She was no low level employee and having a private servers in your home is a big deal when it concerns State Department correspondence. What's worse is her explanations. I know the Republicans are building up every flaw they can find, but this was a poor judgement call on her part.
I also think her campaign style borders on being shrill. If she talked more directly to the people like Elizabeth Warren she might be more likable.
In any case I will be voting for Hillary as Trump is just plain dangerous, but I wish there was a different democratic candidate.
8
Have several hunches re polls. Invariably they turn out to be correct. Recall 1948 when Truman pulled out a "surprise" victory over Dewey.Everybody was surprised except Truman himself who saw how the polls were trending long before November election. Dewey, a great attorney and pubic servant lost, in my view , because of his mustache, which gave him a stuffy cold physiognomy. Elections have been won or lost on less.Re present election, I wonder how many rural whites, still smarting over Obama's mocking of them, and his disdain for this socio economic group, left behind by offshoring,overseas trade deals and illegal immigration, will be motivated to turn out in numbers out of dislike for HRC and the President, and their affection for the Manhattan entrepreneur.I also wonder how many have been polled. If u go into the heartland,drive through the country enclaves where these folks live, u see a plethora of Trump signs on front lawns. Combine this grass roots support with growing number of black millenials who have had it with being taken for granted by the Democratic Party and will remain home, and you'll have a real race on your hands. It does not pay to p--s off our home grown "cagoulards,"as the Democratic Party has done.These folks, whom Kesey called the "dangerous disappointed"in our society, may turn out en masse as well to vote for DT. There r so many variables, unknowns in this election that, as one of ur writers remarked, no one really knows what is going on.
12
The east/west coasts tend to underestimate how unappealing HRC is to the people that live in all those flyover states. If Joe Biden had been able/willing to become the candidate this election would be over. Instead, there is a chance that the ultimate clown candidate could actually win this thing.
20
No wonder her lead has slipped. The media constantly reports all the grossly hyped and distorted "criminal conspiracy" messaging - torturously created and endlessly repeated by the Right. There is little objective analysis of it all: the endless double standard weirdness of it all, and even the fact that Clinton is not doing anything wrong or illegal at all! Money raising that was entirely normal for decades, and still actively celebrated on the Right, is seen as dark, back room shady deal making if done by Democrats - even by Democrats. Yes, Clinton made mistakes with emails, but they were *mistakes,* not the nefarious machinations of an evil technology wonk, trying to pull a fast one on the American people. Clinton's true sins are that she's still standing, still successful, and still raising money, something the "there should be only one Party, us" GOTP cannot tolerate!
The tragedy is that the media still buys it, as does much of the Left which firmly holds to their feckless "where there's smoke there must be fire" thinking - even though all the smoke is being frantically spewed by Right Wing Messaging. It was a dark day when the Left lst its ability to withstand Right Wing messaging, and an even darker day when Bernie Sanders adopted the Right's Clinton Hate message as the foundation of his campaign, rather than arguing from the issues only.
Clinton is good, decent, and competent. Trump is an utter train wreck. Nothing is going to change that between now and November!
The tragedy is that the media still buys it, as does much of the Left which firmly holds to their feckless "where there's smoke there must be fire" thinking - even though all the smoke is being frantically spewed by Right Wing Messaging. It was a dark day when the Left lst its ability to withstand Right Wing messaging, and an even darker day when Bernie Sanders adopted the Right's Clinton Hate message as the foundation of his campaign, rather than arguing from the issues only.
Clinton is good, decent, and competent. Trump is an utter train wreck. Nothing is going to change that between now and November!
222
Very well said. It is indeed a tragedy that the democrats have fallen prey to the right wing conspiracy.
Gwbear**** Right On My Brother ... or Sister
I wish I could give this comment 1000 recommendations.
I like Hillary a lot. She is a policy wonk full of things she would do. But, I am not sure she will win. The press and others seem to like to attack her. Now the new thing is that she can't remember if she got instructions on sending emails. Who would remember that and who cares. When taking on the Secretary of State role she was probably instructed on a number of things more important. All the horrors of Clinton seem to be peeled back to nothing. My gosh, who could care about the emails. No matter how much I look into it, there seems to be nothing there. Where's the beef with this pay to play emails. Someone at her husbands foundation asks someone in the state department for a meeting with a donor that was never arranged. I don't see where she is crooked anywhere. She seems more like Saint Mother Teresa to me. Anyone investigated that much must have done something wrong. but--nothing. Yet the words emails and foundation become proof of Crooked Hillary in the press now.
This is a society that has lost the ability to discern between good and evil and who cares. Someone makes a sex tape with an athlete can make a living on the internet these days. There seems to be no substance behind fame and success now. It is all bizarre memes on the internet and media. The press now gets its direction from youtube and snapchat. The election may be decided on truthiness, smears and the will of the uneducated and hucksters.
This is a society that has lost the ability to discern between good and evil and who cares. Someone makes a sex tape with an athlete can make a living on the internet these days. There seems to be no substance behind fame and success now. It is all bizarre memes on the internet and media. The press now gets its direction from youtube and snapchat. The election may be decided on truthiness, smears and the will of the uneducated and hucksters.
42
There is no substance behind fame and success! I agree. There is none. Why support a famously married person to a infamously disgraced president? Especially when she lacks the integrity and charisma to successfully lead a department that she took a vow to separate from graft. I can't find an iota of substance. (C)
3
It must be killing everyone at the NY Times to have printed this article. Hillary's lies and the amount of effort she put in to erase e-mails is staggering. The program she used to erase the emails Bleachbit, would never be used to erase emails concerning yoga and other trivial things. Nixon erased 16 minutes of audio tape, Hillary erased 17,000 e-mails. She lies all the time, over and over again, her health is poor, she can't stop coughing.
The NY Times has failed the American public on their coverage of Hillary Clinton, she's as corrupt as any American politician in the history of the United States.
The NY Times has failed the American public on their coverage of Hillary Clinton, she's as corrupt as any American politician in the history of the United States.
79
Unlike Clinton, who, as fact checkers have determined, rarely lies, Trump assaults the American public with a vomit of lies every times he opens his too small mouth in a too big face. He lies so much and engages in despicable conduct so much, and has done so for his entire life, that the entire press corps can't keep up with him. So sad.
9
Apparently, you need a refresher course in U.S. history.
But, when facts don't matter, you can believe anything you wish.
But, when facts don't matter, you can believe anything you wish.
1
"The NY Times has failed the American public on their coverage of Hillary Clinton, she's as corrupt as any American politician in the history of the United States."
If they are all corrupt (and I'm not denying it) then a person might as well vote for the candidate that most represents the direction they would like to see the country take in the future. Simple once you learn to breath only thru your mouth and not your nose.
If they are all corrupt (and I'm not denying it) then a person might as well vote for the candidate that most represents the direction they would like to see the country take in the future. Simple once you learn to breath only thru your mouth and not your nose.
If Bernie was still in the running it would be a done deal by now for President Sanders.
38
Absolutely correct.
3
But he's not. Michael Phelps could probably beat either of them as well, but that's a moot point.
1
Well he's not, and the Bernie people really need to move on.
1
No one wants to investigate Trump because they will have to deal with a lawsuit, or at least the threat of one. Who wants that headache? Especially if he will likely not be POTUS.
2
I was frankly stunned that CNN/ORC chose to conduct a poll over Labor Day weekend, and none too surprised that their results deviated from the consensus. CNN and ORC probably got more attention as a result, when their figures appeared all over the television networks yesterday, but they lost some credibility with me. The universe from which you are sampling over Labor Day weekend is unrepresentative of the universe of adults in many hard-to-determine ways. What kinds of people stay home? Older and poorer perhaps? Who goes away? Younger and wealthier Americans maybe? American families are gearing up for the fall and may not be accepting of pollsters phone calls. Even with cell phone calling and rebalancing by age and sex cannot eradicate the effects of a sample drawn from a a distorted universe.
Take just the simple measure of party identification. From Pew's long-term chart, 30 percent of Americans identified as Democrats in 2015 compared to 24 percent of Republicans. In the CNN/ORC poll Republicans outnumbered Democrats 32 percent to 28 percent. The Republicans have never had an edge in party identification since 2003. There is no reason to believe such a relatively stable indicator of political opinion would swing as far as the CNN/ORC poll would lead you to believe. I think they just had too many Republicans in their sample.
http://www.pewresearch.org/data-trend/political-attitudes/party-identifi...
Take just the simple measure of party identification. From Pew's long-term chart, 30 percent of Americans identified as Democrats in 2015 compared to 24 percent of Republicans. In the CNN/ORC poll Republicans outnumbered Democrats 32 percent to 28 percent. The Republicans have never had an edge in party identification since 2003. There is no reason to believe such a relatively stable indicator of political opinion would swing as far as the CNN/ORC poll would lead you to believe. I think they just had too many Republicans in their sample.
http://www.pewresearch.org/data-trend/political-attitudes/party-identifi...
7
Check the basis of the latest CNN poll - millennial age range listed as "NA" on all questions. Is she losing to Trump without millennials weighing in?
When will the DNC wake up to the fact that BERNIE can knock it out of the park and Hillary's numbers will just keep tanking. There is no reason to vote for her except Trump, like Hillary, is a horrible choice.
On top of that, the DNC, that now las an election fraud lawsuit against them in progress, has lost all credibility.
And Hillary looks more frail and afraid of the American people every day.
When will the DNC wake up to the fact that BERNIE can knock it out of the park and Hillary's numbers will just keep tanking. There is no reason to vote for her except Trump, like Hillary, is a horrible choice.
On top of that, the DNC, that now las an election fraud lawsuit against them in progress, has lost all credibility.
And Hillary looks more frail and afraid of the American people every day.
36
I've polled in over 100 Federal elections, including the 1976 Presidential. There are few precedents, but in my experience when the race is between two wildly unpopular candidates, the pre-Labor Day polling will show fluctuating results.
I think it will come down to the inevitable moment during the September 26th debate when El Trumpo starts frothing about Benghazi or whatever. At that precise instant, Mrs. Clinton will need to reach deep and channel her inner Lloyd Bentsen. The outcome of the debate and perhaps the election itself depends upon her stoically and unflappably taking his punch and then so thoroughly putting him in his place that no matter what he spews in response, it will be game over.
Here's a suggested riposte: "That's nice, Donald, but the truth is that the American people have had enough of your selling out our country to the Russians and your crooked dealings with the New York Mob. We have just two words for you -- you're fired!"
Forget investing more money in more sophisticated polling and analytics or suggestions gleaned from the likes of me in the Comments section of the New York Times. Mrs. Clinton needs to be working with Letterman, Leno, Colbert, and Maher to get down pat the devastating put downs she will need to come out on top of this predictably gruesome dog fight.
If she can do that, she wins. America loves nothing better than to see a bully put in his place.
I think it will come down to the inevitable moment during the September 26th debate when El Trumpo starts frothing about Benghazi or whatever. At that precise instant, Mrs. Clinton will need to reach deep and channel her inner Lloyd Bentsen. The outcome of the debate and perhaps the election itself depends upon her stoically and unflappably taking his punch and then so thoroughly putting him in his place that no matter what he spews in response, it will be game over.
Here's a suggested riposte: "That's nice, Donald, but the truth is that the American people have had enough of your selling out our country to the Russians and your crooked dealings with the New York Mob. We have just two words for you -- you're fired!"
Forget investing more money in more sophisticated polling and analytics or suggestions gleaned from the likes of me in the Comments section of the New York Times. Mrs. Clinton needs to be working with Letterman, Leno, Colbert, and Maher to get down pat the devastating put downs she will need to come out on top of this predictably gruesome dog fight.
If she can do that, she wins. America loves nothing better than to see a bully put in his place.
63
Here's another suggestion for her: "Americans are tired of being assaulted with a vomit of lies every time you open your mouth."
The media would repeat that "vomit of lies" phrase ten thousand times and he would never get free of it for his whole life.
The media would repeat that "vomit of lies" phrase ten thousand times and he would never get free of it for his whole life.
8
I don't recall Lloyd Bentsen winning however. Clever put downs aren't sufficient in this climate. Nor were they in that election. People crave authenticity and the sense that the candidate is being real with them, that they could have her/him in their home and feel easy. Bizarre given these candidates, but the one who can best demonstrate this will win.
1
Mrs. Clinton arranged for the sale of 20 percent of our uranium supply to the Russians by way of donation to the Clinton Foundation. Other than admiring Putin's leadership, what's he done? As far as utilizing late night talk show hosts, they've already tried and they just look like the biased jerks that they are.
2
I just don't get it. Who are the undecided? How many are there of them? Do they wake up one day saying they'll vote for Clinton and the next Trump and the next Johnson? I read somewhere--and I hope it is true--that more than 90% of the population already knows who they are voting for.
Just because the polls change--does that mean people have changed their minds? What exactly is changing? Who is asked?
Just because the polls change--does that mean people have changed their minds? What exactly is changing? Who is asked?
4
Voters are indecisive because they loathe both of these candidates. I know because I feel the same way.
I dislike and distrust Clinton but feel Trump is a terrible candidate.
Who will I vote for in the end? Or will I simply stay home (which would be a first). I honestly don't know. This is the worst Presidential election in my entire voting history.
What is desperately needed is an additional box to check: None of the above. If that received 51% of the vote, they should have to scrap the whole election & start anew. It would be the only sane outcome at this point.
I dislike and distrust Clinton but feel Trump is a terrible candidate.
Who will I vote for in the end? Or will I simply stay home (which would be a first). I honestly don't know. This is the worst Presidential election in my entire voting history.
What is desperately needed is an additional box to check: None of the above. If that received 51% of the vote, they should have to scrap the whole election & start anew. It would be the only sane outcome at this point.
11
@funkyirishman asks: "How to assess the latest polls?"
I think most people are so sick of hearing about these two ridiculous candidates that they are simply tuning the whole thing out at this point.
Two years of campaigning for a presidential race held every four years is idiotic. America is the only nation whose presidential elections are run this way. The billions of dollars spent on this overdrawn farce is mind-boggling...and depressing.
Time for a new system - and to take the power away from these two corrupt private parties and give it back to the electorate.
A pox on both the Democratic and Republican parties...and the mindless media as well.
I think most people are so sick of hearing about these two ridiculous candidates that they are simply tuning the whole thing out at this point.
Two years of campaigning for a presidential race held every four years is idiotic. America is the only nation whose presidential elections are run this way. The billions of dollars spent on this overdrawn farce is mind-boggling...and depressing.
Time for a new system - and to take the power away from these two corrupt private parties and give it back to the electorate.
A pox on both the Democratic and Republican parties...and the mindless media as well.
30
One interesting thing about the polls is that Trump's share doesn't change. He gets 39% to 42% consistently. Hillary's share is sliding back. Trump isn't gaining, Hillary is slipping. Now that she seems to be weathering the lastest (perhaps last) of the email fol-der-ol, and she is interacting with the press again, her numbers will likely creep back up. Let's hope so. Of course, election day turnout will be the real poll. How will Trump react to being #2? He'll scream about cheating and a rigged system. It's called the Constitution, Donald.
2
Maybe it's time for her to ask for another billion or two from her 'donors' in return for a even a louder promise of war with Iran. That, coupled with the fact that every warmongering Republican or faux-Democrat are singing her praise, should do the trick.
26
Bernie could have beaten Trump, Hillary will not beat Trump, come this November . Johnson and Stein will take to many votes away from her.
22
Maybe at a game of Whist.
1
Only if people are foolish enough to let that happen by being blind to to what will really happen if Trump wins. Bernie is not running, Johnson and Stein cannot win - what's the real alternative here?
1
/Johnson and Stein will take to many votes away from her./
But how many is "to" many?
But how many is "to" many?
A candidate with a sizable lead is the media's nightmare.
13
Reading an article like this, I wonder how many people have had a heart attack just imagining a Trump presidency. Seriously, I bet the number's in the triple digits.
Come to think of it, what's that ache in my left shoulder?
Come to think of it, what's that ache in my left shoulder?
9
American will be the laughing stock of the world and we will all be in danger if Trump actually wins. Regardless of how one feels about Hillary, the only sensible action is to vote and to vote for Hillary.
23
Part of the reason may be that Clinton disappeared during the month of August and was found hob-knobbing with wealthy donors on eastern L.I. That certainly doesn't sit well with many former Bernie supporters.
65
Right, because Bernie invited his supporters to stay at his third home, which he just bought for $600K cash. Man of the people.
1
How can Cohn include the CNN poll as a "high quality"poll when its assumptions about voters (e.g., there are more Republican voters and more non-college educated white voters in the population than there actually are) are glaringly incorrect?
This is yet another example of the Times and other MSM attempting to throw the election Trump's way.
Shame!
This is yet another example of the Times and other MSM attempting to throw the election Trump's way.
Shame!
6
Amusing! ..."how to assess Hillary's slip in the polls." It's plain and simple -- you don't need a mathematician. HRC is a horrible candidate. Americans do not trust her. She has demonstrated what her family's priorities are time and time again. Money, money, money! Money buys power. This seems to be Hillary's ultimate goal in life. So much so, in fact, that to ordinary television viewers, her quest seems to have affected her health. More than 100 million dollars now spent on anti-Trump propaganda, and still that will not "buy" her the salvation she seeks!
58
"She has demonstrated what her family's priorities are time and time again. Money, money, money! "
Interesting argument coming from a Trump supporter.
Interesting argument coming from a Trump supporter.
3
And what exactly is Trump's priority if not "money, money, money" and power? He never served the country in any capacity in his 70 years, and suddenly you assume he as any sort of altruistic motives?
If she is a horrible candidate, that goes triple for him. Bribing an AG to help not getting charged? Doesn't get more crooked than that.
If she is a horrible candidate, that goes triple for him. Bribing an AG to help not getting charged? Doesn't get more crooked than that.
2
As opposed to Trump and his apparent lack of need for $$$$$ to get where he needs to go.
Poll, schmoll, hole, mole……
There's a little over 2 months to election day. How many polls have to be done?
What I'd like to read in the NYTimes is a comparison of polls from the past and currently. What kind of questions are being asked, and a what big events might have happened at different times during the polls.
That would perk my interest rather than reading about another poll. Mrs. Clinton has led before, and today she's behind. The reverse is true for Mr. Trump. And how about the other 2 people, Mrs. Stein being one of them.
Just give me 1 poll every week or 2 weeks instead of every day - I'm getting "polled out".
There's a little over 2 months to election day. How many polls have to be done?
What I'd like to read in the NYTimes is a comparison of polls from the past and currently. What kind of questions are being asked, and a what big events might have happened at different times during the polls.
That would perk my interest rather than reading about another poll. Mrs. Clinton has led before, and today she's behind. The reverse is true for Mr. Trump. And how about the other 2 people, Mrs. Stein being one of them.
Just give me 1 poll every week or 2 weeks instead of every day - I'm getting "polled out".
2
The Clinton campaign seems narrowly focused on letting Trump trip up himself and winning the election by default. What if by some long shot he stops tripping for a couple of weeks?
In news coverage what Clinton has to say is important yet hardly "newsworthy" - I hear her on NPR shouting about defeating ISIS. Okay...
It is Hillary Clinton that needs to start appearing more, and appearing more presidential. Stop with the shouting, please.
Hillary is at her best articulating calmly yet firmly the best path forward with a confidence that contrasts with the vicissitudes of Donald Trump.
In news coverage what Clinton has to say is important yet hardly "newsworthy" - I hear her on NPR shouting about defeating ISIS. Okay...
It is Hillary Clinton that needs to start appearing more, and appearing more presidential. Stop with the shouting, please.
Hillary is at her best articulating calmly yet firmly the best path forward with a confidence that contrasts with the vicissitudes of Donald Trump.
7
This is the same as two airplanes, one taking off and the other (crash) landing. Certainly at some point both planes must be at the same height. What is the question here.
1
There is so much "noise" in these polls.
The article points out one - people go on vacation in late August - generally, employed people and families. Who stays home? AARP card-carrying Trumpists in their air conditioned condos.
The "high-quality" CNN poll contacted 610 landlines and 405 cellphones. Who is most likely to have a landline? AARP card-carrying Trumpists in their air conditioned condos. Who is more likely to have a cellphone? The stats may be slightly in favor of Dems, but I have plenty of Republican friends here in NY that have only a cell phone.
Among those who are contacted via cell phone, who are more likely not to hang up and waste their time on a poll? Those with nothing but time to waste - namely, AARP card-carrying Trumpists in their air conditioned condos.
Why on earth does the news media attempt to infer causality relating to poll result changes? Particularly when the polls have become less and less predictive over time?
The article points out one - people go on vacation in late August - generally, employed people and families. Who stays home? AARP card-carrying Trumpists in their air conditioned condos.
The "high-quality" CNN poll contacted 610 landlines and 405 cellphones. Who is most likely to have a landline? AARP card-carrying Trumpists in their air conditioned condos. Who is more likely to have a cellphone? The stats may be slightly in favor of Dems, but I have plenty of Republican friends here in NY that have only a cell phone.
Among those who are contacted via cell phone, who are more likely not to hang up and waste their time on a poll? Those with nothing but time to waste - namely, AARP card-carrying Trumpists in their air conditioned condos.
Why on earth does the news media attempt to infer causality relating to poll result changes? Particularly when the polls have become less and less predictive over time?
9
Who votes? AARP card-carrying Trumpists in their air conditioned condos.
2
The two least trusted and unfavored candidates in Presidential History.
The losers--the American public who are told we have to vote for one or the other.
The FACT a majority of the people view Trump and Hillary so unfavorably and untrustworthy shows we are pretty smart. Much smarter than the two parties who forced these candidates on us.
Bitter--you bet I am.
The losers--the American public who are told we have to vote for one or the other.
The FACT a majority of the people view Trump and Hillary so unfavorably and untrustworthy shows we are pretty smart. Much smarter than the two parties who forced these candidates on us.
Bitter--you bet I am.
50
This kind of "they're both terrible" comment is free for Republicans, since they do truly regret their candidate.
4
Fair enough but its time to swallow the bitterness and think about what the big picture would be under either candidate. Hard to do, but Supremely important -
get it? Supreme ? (as in Court)
get it? Supreme ? (as in Court)
1
Is she even running a campaign? Living smack dab in the middle of a '"Red State" I don't expect to see her ads, but she has been MIA from the press about her message. The only news about Hillary is whatever Chaffetz and Trump create. Her surrogates talk about whatever Trump's latest gaffe is, but outline no positive reasons to vote for her. Trump makes great arguments to vote against him everyday, the Clinton campaign can do little to amplify that. What they can do, and haven't done, is give Americans a reason to vote for her. Don't tell me about 15 point plans available on her website, tell me what Hillary's vision for America is? The fact that the NYTimes only reports on the "he said, she said" aspects of this campaign tells me there is little else report.
277
It's not our fault if you are too lazy to read, or listen to her policy speeches.
6
Why should the Clinton campaign spend resources on a state that has never been in play for Democratic presidential candidates? Address your complaint to the Electoral College scheme, in which states that are unbudgingly partisan are simply allocated to one side or the other while the candidates court the swing states and evolving-purple states.
It is interesting to note that the purpling effect is one of red trending blue and never in the other direction. But the fact remains that you're unlikely to see her live in Idaho, and it's up to the media to choose what occupies column-inches and airtime.
I don't really get your disdain for the material that has been compiled on her website, not when you then complain about poor access to her vision.
A "reason to vote for her"? Are you serious? The only plausible alternative in our money-saturated two-party system is a deranged psychopath who would be manipulated constantly by the Roves and Aileses and Cheneys of the darkest recesses of a morbidly extreme Republican Party.
If that's not reason enough, all the positive press and plain-spoken truth in the universe will fall short.
It is interesting to note that the purpling effect is one of red trending blue and never in the other direction. But the fact remains that you're unlikely to see her live in Idaho, and it's up to the media to choose what occupies column-inches and airtime.
I don't really get your disdain for the material that has been compiled on her website, not when you then complain about poor access to her vision.
A "reason to vote for her"? Are you serious? The only plausible alternative in our money-saturated two-party system is a deranged psychopath who would be manipulated constantly by the Roves and Aileses and Cheneys of the darkest recesses of a morbidly extreme Republican Party.
If that's not reason enough, all the positive press and plain-spoken truth in the universe will fall short.
4
You are acceding far too much power to the NYT's coverage of the Clinton campaign. Their failure to report on substance is not the same thing as the Clinton not offering substance.
And when you say that you are more interested in her "vision" than the specifics of what she plans to do, it's not clear what your own interest in substantive policy is. You can pull together the vision from the specifics of her plans.
And when you say that you are more interested in her "vision" than the specifics of what she plans to do, it's not clear what your own interest in substantive policy is. You can pull together the vision from the specifics of her plans.
3
When the media, including the Times, has two standards in reportage regarding the candidates it's not surprising that the race has tightened. Trumpo has basically been given a free pass by the media on the following points:
Trump’s casino bankruptcies.
Trump’s habit of refusing to pay contractors who had done work for him, many small businesses
Trump University, which includes not only the people who got scammed and the Florida investigation, but also a similar story from Texas where the investigation into Trump U was quashed.
The Trump Institute, another get-rich-quick scheme in which Trump allowed a couple of grifters to use his name to bilk people out of their money
The Trump Network, a multi-level marketing venture (a.k.a. pyramid scheme)
Trump Model Management, which reportedly had foreign models lie to customs officials and work in the U.S. illegally
Trump’s employment of foreign guest workers at his resorts, which involves a claim that he can’t find Americans to do the work
Trump’s use of hundreds of undocumented workers from Poland in the 1980s, who were paid a pittance for their illegal work
Trump’s history of being charged with housing discrimination
Trump’s connections to mafia figures involved in New York construction
The time Trump paid the Federal Trade Commission $750,000 over charges that he violated anti-trust laws when trying to take over a rival casino company"
No tax return disclosure
"All the news that's fit to print" - Not hardly
Trump’s casino bankruptcies.
Trump’s habit of refusing to pay contractors who had done work for him, many small businesses
Trump University, which includes not only the people who got scammed and the Florida investigation, but also a similar story from Texas where the investigation into Trump U was quashed.
The Trump Institute, another get-rich-quick scheme in which Trump allowed a couple of grifters to use his name to bilk people out of their money
The Trump Network, a multi-level marketing venture (a.k.a. pyramid scheme)
Trump Model Management, which reportedly had foreign models lie to customs officials and work in the U.S. illegally
Trump’s employment of foreign guest workers at his resorts, which involves a claim that he can’t find Americans to do the work
Trump’s use of hundreds of undocumented workers from Poland in the 1980s, who were paid a pittance for their illegal work
Trump’s history of being charged with housing discrimination
Trump’s connections to mafia figures involved in New York construction
The time Trump paid the Federal Trade Commission $750,000 over charges that he violated anti-trust laws when trying to take over a rival casino company"
No tax return disclosure
"All the news that's fit to print" - Not hardly
771
What a laugh you are. The Times hammered Trump every day for a month while they consistently downplayed Hilary's emerging lies and corruption. But like most of the left you are blind to it.
8
As Simon and Garfunkel sang, "A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest." You only know about the things listed in your comment because they were reported in the NYT. You simply are frustrated that the world is not reacting to them the way you are. The fact is that most Trump supporters don't read the NYT. The NYT is preaching to the choir. Trump supporters watch Fox News, or read the Washington Times. As such it wouldn't matter even if the NYT became more of an advocate than it already is for Clinton.
9
I don't understand something. Before about 3 weeks ago, the NYTimes was highly favourable to Mrs. Clinton, and against Mr. Trump and Mr. Sanders. I'd read daily articles against the 2, and sometimes nary an article about Mr. Sanders - as if he didn't exist.
Lately now, we have unfavourable articles about both candidates.
What happened in the last 3 weeks to "balance out" the articles on both candidates? Also, I want to read articles about the candidates are saying in interviews and speeches. I'm getting tired of reports such as Mrs. Clinton coughing, Mrs. Clinton's latest "faux-pas" from the past, Mr. trumps hairdo, Mrs. Trumps latest slip of the tongue, and so on.
It's too bad, newspapers just can't write about something with more content in it rather than the "fluff" that passes for reporting on a daily basis.
Lately now, we have unfavourable articles about both candidates.
What happened in the last 3 weeks to "balance out" the articles on both candidates? Also, I want to read articles about the candidates are saying in interviews and speeches. I'm getting tired of reports such as Mrs. Clinton coughing, Mrs. Clinton's latest "faux-pas" from the past, Mr. trumps hairdo, Mrs. Trumps latest slip of the tongue, and so on.
It's too bad, newspapers just can't write about something with more content in it rather than the "fluff" that passes for reporting on a daily basis.
4
If the media cannot get across the perception that an obvious ignorant buffoon is an ignorant buffoon, what justifies their continued existence?
22
Hilary is a corrupt lying buffoon, which do you prefer? Like most on the left lying is OK if it's your liar.
13
In this case I'd say the right and the left and for all the same reasons.
Polls always narrow towards election day. Check.
Polls are methodologically flawed. You betcha.
Polls don't capture cellphone users. Sure.
Media bias messes up results. Understatement.
People are on vacation. Keep trying.
Perhaps. Maybe. Possibly. In some universe that looks a lot like this one... there just aren't that many voters willing to turn out for Clinton. Expecting voter participation of Obamic proportions is ridiculous. You must be kidding. Hence, the race is uncomfortably close. Whoops goes the DNC.
Polls are methodologically flawed. You betcha.
Polls don't capture cellphone users. Sure.
Media bias messes up results. Understatement.
People are on vacation. Keep trying.
Perhaps. Maybe. Possibly. In some universe that looks a lot like this one... there just aren't that many voters willing to turn out for Clinton. Expecting voter participation of Obamic proportions is ridiculous. You must be kidding. Hence, the race is uncomfortably close. Whoops goes the DNC.
17
Bernie would be way ahead. Nice going DNC. Thanks, Debbie, Nancy, Chuckie, Harry, etc. As we watch Trump being sworn in you will have no one but yourselves to blame.
131
Well, while I voted for Bernie in the primaries, I'm sure his "evil socialist" tag that the right would hang on him would be a significant drag.
1
Right. It won't be the zealot Bernie supporters that we can blame, you know, those who vote for Trump or stay home or vote for Stein or Johnson. Nope. Just blame the DNC, despite it having been shown by multiple news sources that their actions did nothing to alter the outcome of the Dem primary (3+ million votes for Hillary, just sayin').
But blaming the DNC is just oh so convenient. Much easier to complain, protest, and abstain from voting (or vote 3rd party) than it is to actually get out there and do something to rally support for Clinton. That, and that alone, is the only way to beat Trump - vote Clinton, and get everyone you know to vote Clinton. Anything else is fantasy.
But blaming the DNC is just oh so convenient. Much easier to complain, protest, and abstain from voting (or vote 3rd party) than it is to actually get out there and do something to rally support for Clinton. That, and that alone, is the only way to beat Trump - vote Clinton, and get everyone you know to vote Clinton. Anything else is fantasy.
4
But he'd have Jill Stein's 3-4% and likely half for Johnson's 9% too.
1
Just give pollsters answers they want to hear...Garbage in.
3
This is not much different than what polls were showing in the primary season: a tight race between Clinton and Trump, with some giving the edge to her, and others to him. The electorial map still shows a comfortable lead for Mrs. Clinton, though, and that really hasn't changed much, either. But, a better ground game by the GOP in November could change that, along with complacency by Democrats who think she's already sent Bill to pick out new drapes for their White House, because she has things all wrapped up.
86
This should be no surprise to anyone. During the primary season, the polls showed she would be a weak opponent to Donald Trump and generally gave Sanders a lead over Trump of at least 6-8 points. Hillary has introduced herself three times now during this campaign, first in the "Scooby" van on her listening tour, next at her big rally on Roosevelt Island and finally at the Democratic Convention. Trevor Noah referred to her as "Grandma Nixon" on the Daily Show and, whatever she does, that impression of her is going to stick as will the thought of the Clintons occupying the Lincoln Bedroom again and all the baggage that brings to mind.
She will get my vote only because the alternative is unbearable to contemplate. But had any Republican with integrity been nominated, e.g., Mitt Romney, he would have had my vote.
She will get my vote only because the alternative is unbearable to contemplate. But had any Republican with integrity been nominated, e.g., Mitt Romney, he would have had my vote.
1
If Google News is your home page you have seen that Donald Trump has dominated the Top Stories ranking probably 95% of the time for the past year.
The list is the end result of algorithms that are built to seek profit for news organizations. Donald Trump has mastered the manipulation of the results.
The shark has been jumped. The media jumped it in search of profits. Donald Trump mastered the manipulation techniques necessary to command top billing. He is the first to do it, and the best at it.
If you don't like it then change the way the media does business.
This was a media business revenue choice that is hiding behind a computer algorithm to make it look like the outcome was not in anyone's control. Trump controls it.
We will all reap the consequences.
Below is the list right now. Trump is on top, as he is every day.
Top Stories
Donald Trump
iPhone
Rodrigo Duterte
Colin Kaepernick
Roger Ailes
ITT Technical Institute
Zika virus
Taylor Swift
Hillary Clinton
Bachelor in Paradise
5
Just waiting for Election Day to be over, to be put out of my misery. This abysmal election cycle, with two utterly unfit, OLD candidates is like a really long version of the Jerry Springer show. Our presidential elections are a joke.
The media's relentless coverage is enough to turn off even responsible voters. I may not even vote at this point. That's a first for me. Both candidates are repugnant and UNACCEPTABLE.
The media's relentless coverage is enough to turn off even responsible voters. I may not even vote at this point. That's a first for me. Both candidates are repugnant and UNACCEPTABLE.
13
Why not just report high quality polls?
2
Hillary's "I'm stupid" defense has not helped her. Who wants to support stupid?
20
Everyone supporting Trump apparently - he seems the epitome of stupid to me
5
Who wants to support an ignorant Fascist on the other side?
3
"I’m agnostic about whether the four-way or two-way polls are better in this particular election, since Mr. Johnson and Ms. Stein blur the line between candidates who deserve inclusion and those who do not." WRONG! Pls dont forget that the electoral college votes are given to whichever candidate receives the largest number of votes in each state (or jurisdiction in case of Nebraska). This means you must consider the third party candidates.
For example, Washington Post's latest survey data for some states showed Clinton leading in the two-candidate match up but behind in the four-candidate match up. The latter is what would actually determine the outcome for the electoral college.
For example, Washington Post's latest survey data for some states showed Clinton leading in the two-candidate match up but behind in the four-candidate match up. The latter is what would actually determine the outcome for the electoral college.
7
If the race is tightening then I suggest that Hillary makes herself more visible to regular Americans instead of laying low and hanging out with the uber rich.
I am also nauseated by all these Hillary supporters that keep telling me to vote for her when she isn't doing enough to earn my vote
Talk to her not me
Tell her to balance her fundraising with interviews, public speeches etc. I get the feeling that she is taking the liberal democratic base for granted again.
I remain concerned by her constant outreach to republicans. She's avoided all the recent race issues and really hasn't spoken out much on traditional democratic issues such as global warming, gay rights etc. it's clear to me that doing so will pull her away from her recent center right tilt
I am also nauseated by all these Hillary supporters that keep telling me to vote for her when she isn't doing enough to earn my vote
Talk to her not me
Tell her to balance her fundraising with interviews, public speeches etc. I get the feeling that she is taking the liberal democratic base for granted again.
I remain concerned by her constant outreach to republicans. She's avoided all the recent race issues and really hasn't spoken out much on traditional democratic issues such as global warming, gay rights etc. it's clear to me that doing so will pull her away from her recent center right tilt
16
/she isn't doing enough to earn my vote/
Would it help if she gave you a pony?
Would it help if she gave you a pony?
1
I think Trump will lose in a landslide on the big day.
5
don't bet on it. Trump may be egotistical, but he knows to put Americans first -- not like clinton who takes money from foreigners who pay for favors. When it comes down to it, Clinton will be chewed up and spit out by russia and the middle eastern leaders. She is fair game for them, and they will laugh their heads off if she wins. However, it is the American people who will be the big losers.
8
Its unfortunate that many people believe that Nadar's vote gave away the election to George W. Bush in Florida, which is not fact. Florida was the contested site (which through manipulation of new digital voting machines then owned by Neil Bush) as well as 15,000 votes not counted in Gadsden County-reported in the New York Times, and the unconstitutional matter of allowing the supreme court to decide when it should have gone to house of representatives, as well as other states closely decided as well (there were other states in the election). Unfortunately with polls, its all manipulated to keep people interested. Too much of one sided reporting (Trump's follies) and no mention of other side at all (clinton) people get wry of the hype. As well as NYT not mentioning third parties or supporting their advertisements. Jill Stein has a great campaign, solid policies and is FOR THE PEOPLE. Too bad the oligarchy of politics only slides one way.
3
Totally ridiculous and inaccurate analysis of the 2000 election. FYI the media cost Bush tens of thousands of votes when they erroneously called Florida for Gore and also dishonestly claimed polls had closed in the Florida panhandle.
I seem to recall them calling the race for Bush before stepping back and calling it too close to call. How many thousands of votes do you think that cost Gore by your logic?
You recall is poor. I watched it and they called it for Gore. Then he refused to concede when they reversed it.
HRC's lead has shrunk because Americans are waking up to the fact she is dishonest.
30
And when has Trump been honest? If people think she is dishonest, why do they trust him?
1
Don't blame Trump for running. Don't blame the voters. Blame those who promoted Clinton over Bernie Sanders.
127
I can blame those, and still blame the voters.
Your assumption Bernie would be winning is pretty lousy considering his pretty significant loss. It wasn't even close. Many centrist Dems would not ever vote for him and certainly not Republicans. His candidacy would have ensured a Trump victory. Maybe you can't see this reality because you are not in the US.
Cover the Trump scams and scandals. He seems to get the Good Old Boy Double Standard Pass every single day.
His taxes? His wife's immigration info? His fake University scam?
226
The Times has published at least 6 front page articles about Trump University. By your definition this means the issue hasn't been covered?
5
Taxes-- The IRS has them. What are you going to do about his taxes that the IRS can't?
Wife--Any immigration issue she had would have been in the 1990s, well before she ever even met Trump. But if you still want to "go after the wife," call up the old guard GOP for advice first.
Fake University-- Bill Clinton raked in $18M for being "chancellor" of a fake university. It was called Laureate University. Trust me, you don't want to poke this snake.
Wife--Any immigration issue she had would have been in the 1990s, well before she ever even met Trump. But if you still want to "go after the wife," call up the old guard GOP for advice first.
Fake University-- Bill Clinton raked in $18M for being "chancellor" of a fake university. It was called Laureate University. Trust me, you don't want to poke this snake.
Of course it has! Thanks in part to your "unbiased" coverage, NYT, and your failure to thoroughly investigate and report the seemingly endless failings of Mr. Trump. All we ever read about is Clinton's clouds and shadows.
25
Ana, You haven't been reading the NYT much have you? Every since Trump locked up the candidacy the NYT propaganda machine has launched attack after attack on Trump.
The problem with Hillary's candidacy is that she has been exposed as a corrupt liar whose only defense seems to be "I'm stupid".
The problem with Hillary's candidacy is that she has been exposed as a corrupt liar whose only defense seems to be "I'm stupid".
14
You are joking right? The Times has amplified every silly thing Trump has done while they consistently support Hilary. Only confirmed biased Times readers think that the Times coverage of Trump has been fair. Even the Public Editor called them out but you probably lost that page from the newspaper.
12
Are you reading a different NYT? The one I read is hopelessly biased in favor of Clinton
6
Boy, the only evidence that most people need regarding Clinton's "scandals" seem to be that saucy headlines about them are in print.
2
National polling is just a beauty contest. I'd rather see statistical projections for electoral college votes.
4
Let's just note that Five Thirty Eight as of today has Clinton at 67% to win.
2
But not long ago there she was closer to 80.
5
I'm voting for Clinton but I know Trump will win because that is who the Television industry wants to win. Polls are meaningless. Track coverage.
3
Inaccurate/unreliable polls? In part you can thank mass marketers and robocallers for that. I, for one, never answer my landline phone anymore so poll and survey takers will never reach me. I'm sure I speak for lots of folks.
6
Hear, hear! My land line rings about every thirty minutes these days from robocallers with "political messages". Even my answering machine knows not to acknowledge the robots.
So who IS picking up the phone to talk to these pollsters and generate polls that are then headlined in media?
Meh. If pollsters want to know how the tide is running, they should go to the local diner.
So who IS picking up the phone to talk to these pollsters and generate polls that are then headlined in media?
Meh. If pollsters want to know how the tide is running, they should go to the local diner.
1
How about less on the polls and personalty issues and a little more coverage of actual positions of the candidates?
You know, old-fashioned NEWS coverage and analysis!
You know, old-fashioned NEWS coverage and analysis!
485
NYer - I absolutely agree. But then, that doesn't sell papers or advertising, does it?
Secretary Clinton basically took the second half of August off to fundraise. Her campaign ceded every second of the 24/7 news cycles to Trump's daily hysterics and shifting story lines. I think this was a mammoth mistake. It provided low information voters the opportunity to take Trump seriously as well as allowing the Trump campaign's disinformation, smear and conspiracy initiatives to operate almost unchallenged. This election isn't about policy - it's about which one of these candidates can make the other less acceptable - and Clinton can't afford to let a day go by when attacks go unchallenged outside of Tweets. And worst of all - almost all of the momentum in the polls has been dramatically benefitting Trump - and that can create a dangerous bandwagon effect. We'll see if Clinton's return to active campaigning and the debates move the needle in the other direction, and as professionals, maybe they have a strategy that's taken all of this into account. But if we suffer an election catastrophe in November, I think we can look back to August when Clinton let Trump off the ropes.
7
Like with GW Bush and Reagan but even more so, Trump's bar has been set so low that any semblance of competence is viewed as a plus. Hillary's bar has been set so high that if she tells a little lie (while Trump lies constantly) she is excoriated. If Trump makes any sense at all in the debate, he will "win", because he will exceed expectations. As Krugman wrote a few days ago, it's like Bush v Gore all over again, only more so.
11
I have been opposed to Hillary on the basis of her foreign policy decisions as SoS, so all of these scandals are secondary to me.
But I agree with Hillary's supporters that her lies gain more traction than Trump's.
And I admit that Hillary's lies bother me more than Donald's.
I speak only for myself, but Hillary seems sanctimonious and self-righteous, as if she is somehow so much smarter than the rest of us that she has to condescend. She also seems "sneakier" than Trump. She engages in dishonest behavior while presenting as a paragon of moral virtue. Trump engages in dishonest behavior and it is a trait that he is quite comfortable owning, a lack of hypocrisy.
Then there is the fact that Trump's crimes all occurred as a private citizen, while Hillary had taken an oath to the country.
Trump is definitely repellent, but I just don't think he's as vile as Hillary.
And, before anyone hurls insults at me, let me EMPHASIZE that my perceptions about Hillary are ONLY my perceptions, and they could well be completely wrong.
I shared them in the spirit of curiosity, as in, why do I find Hillary more unpalatable than Trump? Because it is indeed curious, and lots of people feel similarly.
So if the Clintonites are serious about winning, they need to grasp why so many of us have such a visceral reaction to Hillary, as opposed to just hurling the usual talking points: You're racist! Sexist! And too many other things that I have been called since the primaries got underway.
Time is short.
But I agree with Hillary's supporters that her lies gain more traction than Trump's.
And I admit that Hillary's lies bother me more than Donald's.
I speak only for myself, but Hillary seems sanctimonious and self-righteous, as if she is somehow so much smarter than the rest of us that she has to condescend. She also seems "sneakier" than Trump. She engages in dishonest behavior while presenting as a paragon of moral virtue. Trump engages in dishonest behavior and it is a trait that he is quite comfortable owning, a lack of hypocrisy.
Then there is the fact that Trump's crimes all occurred as a private citizen, while Hillary had taken an oath to the country.
Trump is definitely repellent, but I just don't think he's as vile as Hillary.
And, before anyone hurls insults at me, let me EMPHASIZE that my perceptions about Hillary are ONLY my perceptions, and they could well be completely wrong.
I shared them in the spirit of curiosity, as in, why do I find Hillary more unpalatable than Trump? Because it is indeed curious, and lots of people feel similarly.
So if the Clintonites are serious about winning, they need to grasp why so many of us have such a visceral reaction to Hillary, as opposed to just hurling the usual talking points: You're racist! Sexist! And too many other things that I have been called since the primaries got underway.
Time is short.
192
You've been greatly influenced by the right wing radio and TV propaganda. Keep in mind that Hillary's "crimes" have been all investigated and she has been exonerated, while there has been no investigation into Donald's many crimes. And he hasn't even released his tax returns, because then his hypocrisy will be laid bare.
95
Putting perceptions and personalities aside it seems that our greatest question should be do we want Clinton or Trump appointing the next justices to the Supreme Court?
39
It's appalling to think an intelligent person is prepared to vote for a presidential candidate based on what amounts to gossip. Ms. Hill, are there any other criteria you use in your selection? Things like experience, behavior, national security, level-headedness, a portfolio of sound, progressive plans for American government, and common decency? Or is your decision based purely on your "perceptions?" If the latter, then God help us all.
87
It's amazing how close to the sky the pile of coincidences is that Clinton has built...a cloud of filth follows her every move
Whenever gangsters found themselves in court they either pleaded the fifth or claimed "they could not recall..."
It appears Clinton may be the Manchurian Candidate. How much other stuff is missing? Who is she really loyal to? The Saudis? Goldman-Sachs? Koch Brothers? All of them?
Whenever gangsters found themselves in court they either pleaded the fifth or claimed "they could not recall..."
It appears Clinton may be the Manchurian Candidate. How much other stuff is missing? Who is she really loyal to? The Saudis? Goldman-Sachs? Koch Brothers? All of them?
10
Fair or not, this is a campaign in which the broad majority of the electorate are wearing metaphorical t-shirts that say "I'm NOT with stupid," which point to whomever they consider to have earned that appellation. As has been said over and over, neither candidate is particularly well-liked. And at a time where many people of all political persuasions and stripes feel ill-served by our government and stranglehold the current two-party arrangement has on the political process I think it's going to be difficult for either candidate to get a truly commanding lead, despite the GOP candidate's obvious shortcomings.
So the campaign is going to get more ugly the closer we get to Election Day, and may end up being a squeaker.
So the campaign is going to get more ugly the closer we get to Election Day, and may end up being a squeaker.
2
One of these columns, I stated that Trump weakness is coming from the words he used to characterize the issues. The media pounded on him calling him all kinds of names such as racist and bigot. I said he can reverse them by being more of a gentleman and talk about issues in more depth than a skin deep. But, Hillary Clinton can't reverse email scandals, support Middle East wars and high paid speeches that ties her to Wall Street. Adding to that, she makes up things like being under sniper attack, the name Hillary given because of Edmund Hillary or Colin Powell suggested the email server. She never answers the questions straight, questioning her authenticity. These things, she cannot reverse them unless she takes bold steps such as releasing the transcripts of the gold plated speeches. The race is going to be a toss up and Trump has plenty of room to pull a November surprise.
11
How can "polls" be trusted at all? If they rely on telephone questions, most people just find it to be a nuisance call and cell phones are not a part of the public database. If pollsters camp out in front of a store, most people will not given them the time of day. Polls are very inaccurate since it only measure who chooses to answer - often the most ardent supporters. Once the debates start, then the substantive issues will arise but that will not cure the ideotic belief in poll numbers.
7
The plot of the Trump bio thickens. If these revelations of bribes don't turn off his supporters, I simply give up. (Even his sister's ascent to the Federal Bench was helped along by Trump calling on Roy Cohn, btw.) But these bribes to AGs and NYC powers that be not only reveal the way money has corrupted politics, but how Trump has turned the knob of that money lever.
12
And what about all of the bribery monies the Clinton Foundation received for foreign powers to get access to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton? Trumps potential bribes turn me off but not as much as Hillary turns me off, for dozens of reasons.
9
Wait, so, not only do I have to stomach the absurdity of your endless obsession with untrustworthy polls and your bogus predictive algorithms being shoved down our throats on a daily basis as if they were substantive news, I also am now being asked to follow your advice about how to interpret the nonsense? LOL.
9
She's playing it too safe, sending Biden and Kaine out on the campaign trail while she sits back. Understandable, given that she's horrible on the stump and the experts say that Trump can't possibly win. But a dangerous game. Ask Dewey.
She probably sees the debates as the cinch knot, but always risky to put every egg in the same basket.
She needs to start campaigning a lot harder than she has been. It doesn't matter, really, that she's not great on the stump. She doesn't have to be great. But she has to at least be.
She probably sees the debates as the cinch knot, but always risky to put every egg in the same basket.
She needs to start campaigning a lot harder than she has been. It doesn't matter, really, that she's not great on the stump. She doesn't have to be great. But she has to at least be.
15
Nate - The NY Times "Upshot" has Hillary's chance of winning @ 83% today. Should we not be using that as a solid barometer? If not, what is the purpose of that daily analysis? thanks
98
Why was the "Upshot" prediction not included in this article on how close the polls are?
Should I be reassured by these "Upshot"numbers?
I'm tired of reading this field goal analogy. It makes no sense if the race is polling at a dead heat.
Does this simply mean that Clinton could well lose the popular vote but the electoral college path is nearly impossible for Trump to win?
Why not make that clear? Then the country can begin to adjust and not be sideswiped by a Bush / Gore surprise come November.
Should I be reassured by these "Upshot"numbers?
I'm tired of reading this field goal analogy. It makes no sense if the race is polling at a dead heat.
Does this simply mean that Clinton could well lose the popular vote but the electoral college path is nearly impossible for Trump to win?
Why not make that clear? Then the country can begin to adjust and not be sideswiped by a Bush / Gore surprise come November.
1
Exactly.
And when picking your Polling Nates, stick with Nate Silver and the analysis of the Electoral College tally -- which is the ONLY thing that matters. I'm still puzzled at the pointless nattering over any other sort of poll analysis.
Electoral College. Electoral College. Electoral College.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo
And when picking your Polling Nates, stick with Nate Silver and the analysis of the Electoral College tally -- which is the ONLY thing that matters. I'm still puzzled at the pointless nattering over any other sort of poll analysis.
Electoral College. Electoral College. Electoral College.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo
good points, Tom and Westvillage
Hillary will continue the great progress made by Barack Obama. By enormous contrast, trump is an existential threat to America. The only way to defeat that is not to defeat trump, but to crush him. Hillary must have a landslide. Get out the vote for her.
55
A great job by Obama. I'm glad you are better off as nobody I know is.
6
Thank you for the best laugh I've had in quite a while.
3
You must live in a depressing place. I suggest you move. I suspect that Obama has become a convenient scapegoat for the all the ills that might befall a human thru-out his or her life. Cancer? - Obama! Car broke down? - Obama! Husband forget your anniversary? - You Know Who! When did people start blaming all their ills on whoever might be convenient rather than looking within for the problem. I hear plenty of people parroting out this trash and yet they never once consider the real reasons for their problems. Why? - Its Easy! That and many people (not in all cases) are too lazy to pull themselves out of whatever mess they find themselves in. Its too easy to whine. And since when does everything always have to get bigger and better? The earth isn't going to survive long with that growth mentality. Can your life be trashed by forces beyond your control? Yes. Can you do something about making it better again ? - Maybe if you try....
I've heard that the British bookies are better at predicting US elections than are our own polls.
When I was in the UK at the beginning of August Trump was a long shot. Since then his odds have lowered considerably and now stand around 7/4. Clinton is still the favorite.
We'll see.
When I was in the UK at the beginning of August Trump was a long shot. Since then his odds have lowered considerably and now stand around 7/4. Clinton is still the favorite.
We'll see.
3
Remember that bookies set the odds so that money is evenly wagered on both sides. So bookies, really, aren't setting the spread, it's the market. The odds have narrowed because so many folks were betting on Trump at 10-1 or whatever--the bookies simply responded to the market so that all of the money doesn't go on Trump.
1
We the public will be bombarded by poll results ad nauseum. 8th of November cannot come fast enough.
5
If anything, this is a prime example of why Polls shouldn't be taken seriously as the prime indication of where the presiential campaign is heading; because it's up one day, and down the next --- but always dependent upon who is conducting the survey, and where, and with whom.
2
We need to find out "what the h*** is going on!" This I can tell you. The standard ebb and flow of political polling preference is going on, that's what. There was no way short of Trumpian child molesting that Hillary Clinton was going to sustain a double-digit lead, unbroken, through early November.
Everybody needs to calm down and to stretch their memory expand beyond today's four-second chunks into four or eight years. Polling preferences swing. They always have, always will and are now.
Believe me. Buh-LIEVE me!
www.endthemadnessnow.org
Everybody needs to calm down and to stretch their memory expand beyond today's four-second chunks into four or eight years. Polling preferences swing. They always have, always will and are now.
Believe me. Buh-LIEVE me!
www.endthemadnessnow.org
3
Why is it the NYT doesn't run these articles dissecting the meaning of polls when its chosen candidates are comfortably ahead?
10
LOL. If she is ahead in the next poll, no dissection needed. This newspaper us no longer a newspaper. I started reading it in third grade over 50 years ago.
7
Skip the polls. If you have a preference, then go vote in November. Nothing else matters. Not today's poll, or tomorrow's, or next week's.....
What pollster predicted that Trump would be the Republican nominee? (Before it was obvious, that is.)
What is this American obsession with trying to "know" the answer before an event ever occurs? One might as well ask the weatherman what temperature it will be on election day, and whether it will rain (or snow).
What pollster predicted that Trump would be the Republican nominee? (Before it was obvious, that is.)
What is this American obsession with trying to "know" the answer before an event ever occurs? One might as well ask the weatherman what temperature it will be on election day, and whether it will rain (or snow).
19
Mr. Hamilton,
You don't need to be a psychologist to understand that excessive planning and attempts to predict/control the future are all necessary, but inadequate, attempts to manage one's anxiety.
Regardless of which candidate you support, surely we can all offer tolerance for those among us engaged in Anxiety Management.
It may be an exercise in folly, but if anxiety is assuaged, the purpose has been met.
You don't need to be a psychologist to understand that excessive planning and attempts to predict/control the future are all necessary, but inadequate, attempts to manage one's anxiety.
Regardless of which candidate you support, surely we can all offer tolerance for those among us engaged in Anxiety Management.
It may be an exercise in folly, but if anxiety is assuaged, the purpose has been met.
1
"One might as well ask the weatherman what temperature it will be on election day, and whether it will rain (or snow)."
Um, isn't that the *whole purpose* of a weatherman?
Um, isn't that the *whole purpose* of a weatherman?
The fact is that with essentially a two-party system, when if comes down to it, people tend to vote for one or other, and that means the Republican will always be within shouting distance of the Dem candidate, thus making the "undecideds" and unaffiliateds the difference makers. This is true no matter who the Republicans run.
Add to that the absolute hatred of Hillary by a great number of voters - including some Dems - this is anything but a shoe-in for Mrs. Clinton. And this is exactly why the DNC and MSM should not have ordained her, and essentially dismiss Bernie Sanders. If Sanders were the nominee, you would have your double-digit lead.
Add to that the absolute hatred of Hillary by a great number of voters - including some Dems - this is anything but a shoe-in for Mrs. Clinton. And this is exactly why the DNC and MSM should not have ordained her, and essentially dismiss Bernie Sanders. If Sanders were the nominee, you would have your double-digit lead.
11
Bernie never faced a barrage of attack ads from the left. It's easy to pretend he would be polling better, but by now Trump would be slinging the words Communist and Socialist all over Bernie.
6
How to assess the latest polls ?
More and more Americans have lost their minds.
More and more Americans have lost their minds.
372
So I guess Funkyirishman is voting for Trump!. Great
That presumed they had one to begin with.
Don't forget: Trump *loves* the poorly educated...for a reason.
Don't forget: Trump *loves* the poorly educated...for a reason.
Watching from Canada, that's exactly how I feel.
The only Clinton Foundation "scandal" is the one created and fueled by Right Wing media. It is just another way to spell "Swiftboat."
And how about those Trump tax returns....?
And how about those Trump tax returns....?
740
He said he'd release them when she releases her Wall Street speech transcripts.
7
Since the 1970's with the exception of Gerald Ford all Presidential candidates have released their tax returns.
Hillary Clinton's speeches are not equivalent to Donald Trump's tax returns.
Hillary Clinton's speeches are not equivalent to Donald Trump's tax returns.
6
He also said beforehand that he "would love to release them". No mention of her speeches then. Basically he lied. Yet fell free to think he is trustworthy.
(Plus, do you think for one second that he would hesitate to release them, if the content was good for his image?)
(Plus, do you think for one second that he would hesitate to release them, if the content was good for his image?)
4
The depths to which she has shrunk are quite apparent, except, not strangely, to those who support her candidacy.
Real Clear Politics (RCP), that averages major polls, had her ahead about seven points a month ago. Today, head-to-head with Trump, she leads by 3.3 points. In a four-way with Libertarian Gary Johnson and Green Jill Stein, Mrs. Clinton’s lead is now only 2.4 points. Virtually all polls taken over the past week show Trump ahead, tied, or trailing but within the margin of error.
It’s not hard to assess the polls if a frank assessment doesn’t gore your gizzard: Trump has all the momentum; and it’s probably due largely to his adoption of some measure of gravitas and moderation of some of his policy positions, as well as onboarding of more experienced (at winning) staff, and his willingness to listen to them. The continued predations of eMailGate and the prospect of another WikiDump of 33,000 “disappeared” emails with the most embarrassing highlighted remains a threat – particularly if made available after mid-October, when it would be very difficult for her to recover IF the contents indeed are highly embarrassing. Then, Mrs. Clinton is just not good in front of a crowd, and Trump assuredly is. She must truly be sweating the upcoming debates.
Trump could win. It’s not in the slightest bit farfetched.
Real Clear Politics (RCP), that averages major polls, had her ahead about seven points a month ago. Today, head-to-head with Trump, she leads by 3.3 points. In a four-way with Libertarian Gary Johnson and Green Jill Stein, Mrs. Clinton’s lead is now only 2.4 points. Virtually all polls taken over the past week show Trump ahead, tied, or trailing but within the margin of error.
It’s not hard to assess the polls if a frank assessment doesn’t gore your gizzard: Trump has all the momentum; and it’s probably due largely to his adoption of some measure of gravitas and moderation of some of his policy positions, as well as onboarding of more experienced (at winning) staff, and his willingness to listen to them. The continued predations of eMailGate and the prospect of another WikiDump of 33,000 “disappeared” emails with the most embarrassing highlighted remains a threat – particularly if made available after mid-October, when it would be very difficult for her to recover IF the contents indeed are highly embarrassing. Then, Mrs. Clinton is just not good in front of a crowd, and Trump assuredly is. She must truly be sweating the upcoming debates.
Trump could win. It’s not in the slightest bit farfetched.
37
Some where over the rainbow . . . .
Richard Luettgen. NJ: "Trump could win. It’s not in the slightest bit farfetched."
Maybe not. I have seen many comments from people who say they will vote for Trump - not because they believe in him, not because they respect him, not because they think he will make a good President, far from it, they want to give the finger to politics and politicians in general. A minute of gotcha for four years of hell - go figure!
Maybe not. I have seen many comments from people who say they will vote for Trump - not because they believe in him, not because they respect him, not because they think he will make a good President, far from it, they want to give the finger to politics and politicians in general. A minute of gotcha for four years of hell - go figure!
4
Which is why people need to stop kvetching and go out and volunteer. There are phone banks all over the place. Go and canvass in a swing state, like PA. Get voters thinking about how they're going to cast their ballot (including via early voting, which starts in only a few weeks in some states). Work the problem, don't whine about it.
Polls go up. Polls go down. The only takeaway I get from polling today is just how uninformed, misinformed and ill informed the American people are. Who could possibly be undecided about Donald Trump after a year of listening to him embarrass himself hourly? How does he get higher marks for honesty when their have been as many as 5 lies a day for a year now? How uninvolved is the populace that they're still kicking the tires on this Coup De Evil with the rag top? How many of these unforgivable statements and actions will be swept under the rug by voters who weren't paying attention then and are only half engaged now? The only thing these polls tell me is that The American public may be the only population on the planet comfortable enough in their lives to treat national elections like they were voting for who will be the king and queen of their prom.
4
The drum beat of doubts, smears, contempt, derision- the media meme of Least Likable Candidates ever- the sneering self-righteousness of left wing and Bernie supporters--this all adds up to the 'swing' voters swinging on whim to Trump.
Folks must stop taking pot shots at the email thing or even efforts to raise money for the Clinton charity. Everyone must stop nitpicking & posturing or making false equivalences (Trump cheated in business & taxes, HRC cheated by deleting private emails).
Endorsement from 90 weirdo retired generals do not a statesman make.
Folks must stop taking pot shots at the email thing or even efforts to raise money for the Clinton charity. Everyone must stop nitpicking & posturing or making false equivalences (Trump cheated in business & taxes, HRC cheated by deleting private emails).
Endorsement from 90 weirdo retired generals do not a statesman make.
8
Seriously, who has any interest in taking polls or answering pollsters anymore? I never answer my landline and don't answer cellphone numbers I don't recognize. As for online polling, those seem easy to manipulate with multiple computers, browsers and isp addresses. I believe political polling has seen its best days and what's going on now is less a sampling of actual candidate preferences and more a reflection of general disinterest in polling.
8
Agree ...2 months left .. Give us a break
The unfavorability rating given Hillary Clinton was a fabricated collections of opinions constructed by unreliable polls the verity of which is highly suspect for at least two reasons: the media's interest in keeping some visible aspect of strife between the major candidates because it boosts readership or listeners; and a conservative bias actually is its infrastructure. For more than 30 years for its own reasons the media has been constructing a portfolio of negative that is essentially fictitiously biased. Some of the news agencies are worse than others but on the whole there is a general grudge and hostility towards the Clinton and Hillary is the mark at the moment. There is reason the Clintons distrust the news, but Hillary is making the effort to get beyond that. She hasn't really learned yet that social media is the better way to get the news out to the people of America like The Rump has! and that is the way of the future!
1
Gee the NY Times drumbeat for Hillary hasn't turned the tide in her favor. What is this world coming to?
66
nobody reads it and half of those who do don't trust it.
6
The volatility of the American electorate is unnerving. The fact that Trump has managed to sew up the gap in spite of his blatant racism and incapacity to lead is beyond the comprehension of most people around the world. Trump is successful at creating an ongoing swirl of media coverage and the content of he says doesn't seem to matter. As long as Hillary is the object of attacks--the majority of which are highly questionable-- Trump has a chance of beating her. It is a profoundly disturbing reflection on the state of the United States. We cannot deny that the world's greatest democracy is at risk.
282
"We cannot deny that the world's greatest democracy is at risk."
You mean Switzerland, I assume, but I suspect they will be thriving long after the US has dissolved into chaos.
You mean Switzerland, I assume, but I suspect they will be thriving long after the US has dissolved into chaos.
2
To me it just shows how many mindless primitives live in the United States.
1
You have articulated sane citizens' concerns in the most articulate way and that too in a few sentences. Thank you.
As Richard Nixon, a smart observer of elections and polls once said, presidential campaigns have a fluctuating rhythm and timing is important.
Also, third-party candidates are likely to lose support as the election nears, and the choice becomes, shall we say, "existential." This clearly happened I recall in the election of 1948, when, at the last minute, voters switched from Henry Wallace to Harry Truman.
Also, third-party candidates are likely to lose support as the election nears, and the choice becomes, shall we say, "existential." This clearly happened I recall in the election of 1948, when, at the last minute, voters switched from Henry Wallace to Harry Truman.
1
Nate Cohn hedging his bets. He can't tolerate another debacle like predicting that 'Remain' would win in the Brexit vote. He knows that Hillary will lose, and now he's covered himself.
15
Mr. Cohn also predicted Trump would not be the GOP nominee. If he wants to stay relevant, he needs to travel around some of the Midwest and Southern states and see what's really going on. Sadly, he's had his head in the sand during this election season. The country has become a frightening place to live.
8
The only poll that counts is the one showing your candidate ahead.
15
Sometimes...I think I would make a better president.
Anyone else feel the same?
Anyone else feel the same?
13
Hard to say... Don't know you
5
My beagle would make a better president.
2
Only if I either had a billion or could raise it from my friends. That's the entry ticket.
There is no national popular vote nor electoral vote election. There are 50 state popular and electoral vote elections plus the District of Columbia.
The Republican Party is the political party of a majority of white Americans. The Democratic Party is the party of a minority of white Americans and a majority of black, brown and yellow Americans.
The Republican Party is the political party of a majority of white Americans. The Democratic Party is the party of a minority of white Americans and a majority of black, brown and yellow Americans.
3
I have conducted and analyzed many surveys over the years for consumer products and brand images. There is a high correlation between what is called "top of mind" awareness and standing in the polls. Trump has enjoyed a huge advantage in media coverage since he began his campaign, and the news media have learned that their ratings are higher when Trump is on the screen. So they lead with Trump on almost every segment. This translates to high "top of mind" awareness or salience for him, which in turn shows up in higher rating in polls. If one conducted a one question poll--"name a political candidate"--there is not question that Trump would be named by more people than Clinton. The television media in particular, have exploited Trumps outlandish behavior and statements to their own advantage, and that has impacted the polls. I hope for the nation's sake, it hasn't affected the ultimate outcome of the election.
Joel
Joel
534
But most of his press has been bad! How do the polls explain the great admiration that so many Americans apparently feel for a guy who snubs voters by saying his tax returns are none of their business; who is clearly a racist xenophobe; who has committed so many campaign contribution improprieties (if not broken laws as demonstrated in today's NYT article). And yet he is polling even with Clinton. None of the bad press on Trump seems to bother his supporters. I could understand if this were mitigated in any way by good press, but there simply isn't any!
America it seems (or half of it), has completely and totally lost any ability for critical thinking....
America it seems (or half of it), has completely and totally lost any ability for critical thinking....
John's post illustrates the problem. He simply can't imagine that anyone sees things differently, or disagrees with him. In John's world, people agree with him, or they're stupid. Good luck with that.
1
"How to assess the polls?" I'm sorry, the article told us next to nothing about how to assess them, outside of the author advising that he prefers registered voters to likely voters.
I know absolutely nothing more about how and why the polls are indicating a tightening race, then when I began reading the article.
I know absolutely nothing more about how and why the polls are indicating a tightening race, then when I began reading the article.
7
No worries Hillary Clinton has it in the bag even if a large percentage of democrats decide to sit it out.
2
I will go ahead and say what no one else dares admit here.
Americans will not tolerate being lied to. THAT is what is changing the polls and put Trump ahead yesterday in one valid poll.
Concerning her secretive email system, we cannot stand secretive liars whose first choice is always the illegal one, and Hillary willing destroyed government property - our property - after it has been subpoenaed. EVERY single email that she saw or sent during that time was OURS to see and make decisions based on that information - including the metadata.
The kicker is that her ignoring the rules got good people killed in two countries that we know of so far. She ignored the law because she KNEW she was doing illegal things accepting millions of dollars for access - and she is STILL doing it.
The saddest part? Our devout progressives stand in line wanting her to do it to them again.
Americans will not tolerate being lied to. THAT is what is changing the polls and put Trump ahead yesterday in one valid poll.
Concerning her secretive email system, we cannot stand secretive liars whose first choice is always the illegal one, and Hillary willing destroyed government property - our property - after it has been subpoenaed. EVERY single email that she saw or sent during that time was OURS to see and make decisions based on that information - including the metadata.
The kicker is that her ignoring the rules got good people killed in two countries that we know of so far. She ignored the law because she KNEW she was doing illegal things accepting millions of dollars for access - and she is STILL doing it.
The saddest part? Our devout progressives stand in line wanting her to do it to them again.
50
Trump lies very time he opens his mouth. Lie after lie after lie.
So keep telling yourself that lying is what matters to you...but it clearly does not.
So keep telling yourself that lying is what matters to you...but it clearly does not.
6
Trump l'oeil is Mr. Honest then? At least we didn't tolerate Bush and Cheney's lies, right?
1
You're saying Trump doesn't lie? I have some nice land for you in Florida, very cheap. You're gonna love it. Trust me.
3
Still can't bring yourselves to say Trump is leading in various polls.
Just wait for the debates...
Trump is going to be our next POTUS.
Just wait for the debates...
Trump is going to be our next POTUS.
17
Next and maybe last.
2
What’s going on?
The media has decided the only story worth covering in excruciating detail is the Clinton Foundation, essentially helping to continue what GOP rep Kevin McCarthy explained earlier this year about why the GOP launched the 9th Benghazi "investigation" (ie, to drive down Clinton's poll numbers) with the only change being the "scandal" de jour - delete Bengazi, insert Clinton Foundation and you got your ready made "scandal".
It's a win-win for the media and GOP - the media gets its "scandal" story to grab eyeballs and the GOP gets to watch Hillary Clinton's poll numbers to go down.
The media has decided the only story worth covering in excruciating detail is the Clinton Foundation, essentially helping to continue what GOP rep Kevin McCarthy explained earlier this year about why the GOP launched the 9th Benghazi "investigation" (ie, to drive down Clinton's poll numbers) with the only change being the "scandal" de jour - delete Bengazi, insert Clinton Foundation and you got your ready made "scandal".
It's a win-win for the media and GOP - the media gets its "scandal" story to grab eyeballs and the GOP gets to watch Hillary Clinton's poll numbers to go down.
235
[[What’s going on?
The media has decided the only story worth covering in excruciating detail is the Clinton Foundation.]]
The Clintons knew in 2009 that she would be running again in 2016. Every one of her problems is self generated. Speaking fees, the foundation, email servers, blackberrys. How is it possible that two lifelong lawyer/politicians couldn't plot an easier course through all of that?
How could she changed her fortunes?
DON'T have any illicit dealings as SoS. Don't have a private email server. When ANY questions arise, turn over ALL of your emails to the Feds.
The Clintons' problem is they need people to follow them through every twist and turn in their explanations. They need to be viewed as flawless.
The media did not make this a story, she did.
The media has decided the only story worth covering in excruciating detail is the Clinton Foundation.]]
The Clintons knew in 2009 that she would be running again in 2016. Every one of her problems is self generated. Speaking fees, the foundation, email servers, blackberrys. How is it possible that two lifelong lawyer/politicians couldn't plot an easier course through all of that?
How could she changed her fortunes?
DON'T have any illicit dealings as SoS. Don't have a private email server. When ANY questions arise, turn over ALL of your emails to the Feds.
The Clintons' problem is they need people to follow them through every twist and turn in their explanations. They need to be viewed as flawless.
The media did not make this a story, she did.
12
Yes, but that is not my point. My point is the amount of coverage the media devotes to it, which is absurd, especially compared to the list of real scandals that involve Donald Trump that don't get nearly the scrutiny or coverage.
2
The Republicans had the good sense to ignore another Bush. Perhaps they didn't compromise the independence of the RNC as the Clintons did with the DNC. Now the voters will have to stamp "put paid" on the other dynastic wannabe.
3
I took just enough stat classes in college to be dangerous.
I recall Dr William's oft repeated warning - Discard worrisome data at your own peril !
I recall Dr William's oft repeated warning - Discard worrisome data at your own peril !
7
A Presidential candidate is bad for the country if they are:
a. Dishonest
b. Uneducated about the Issues
c. Crazy
It doesn't make many of us overly excited that Hillary "only" has one of these flaws while Trump has all three.
a. Dishonest
b. Uneducated about the Issues
c. Crazy
It doesn't make many of us overly excited that Hillary "only" has one of these flaws while Trump has all three.
42
Crazy, however, Trumps them all.
1
Looking for the honest politician is like waiting for Godot.
Hillary clinton is on the more honest side of the line as Fact checking clearly shows. The "hillary is a pathological liar" myth is nothing more than a fox news and breitbard sponsored propaganda. Shame on you for believing it.
Even so honesty has nothing to do with being a good candidate. In fact being completely honest is bad. It is a sign of amateurism and that is a cardinal sin.
A candiadte is bad for the country, when they are
a. Uneducated about the issues
b. Unable to compromise and reach past the partisan lines
c. Likely to be influenced foreign powers
d. Likely to antagonize and vilify a large chunk of the country.
e. Likely to antagonize and upset international allies.
These are the 5 properties a president should never have. Trump has all of them. Clinton has none.
It shouldn't be a contest. That it is is just as much an indictment of trump voters as it is of Stein and Johnson voters who chose to indirectly support trump instead of the person who they all know would definitely make the better president.
Hillary clinton is on the more honest side of the line as Fact checking clearly shows. The "hillary is a pathological liar" myth is nothing more than a fox news and breitbard sponsored propaganda. Shame on you for believing it.
Even so honesty has nothing to do with being a good candidate. In fact being completely honest is bad. It is a sign of amateurism and that is a cardinal sin.
A candiadte is bad for the country, when they are
a. Uneducated about the issues
b. Unable to compromise and reach past the partisan lines
c. Likely to be influenced foreign powers
d. Likely to antagonize and vilify a large chunk of the country.
e. Likely to antagonize and upset international allies.
These are the 5 properties a president should never have. Trump has all of them. Clinton has none.
It shouldn't be a contest. That it is is just as much an indictment of trump voters as it is of Stein and Johnson voters who chose to indirectly support trump instead of the person who they all know would definitely make the better president.
2
I'd add in "Just plain stupid" to that list. We've had far too many of those on presidential tickets in my lifetime: Dan Quayle, George W Bush, Sarah Palin, and now Trump. If I can give the Democratic Party credit for one thing, it's that they consistently refuse to nominate idiots.
2
Polls are bunk. What is the probability that any poll will accurately predict the future?
1
It is not looking good for Hillary Clinton. The revelations about her email scandals, her Clinton Foundation scandals, her Benghazi scandals; etc ... they just keep coming day after day. And that excludes the nightmare about to unfold when Julian Assange begins releasing documents relating to Hillary Clinton that he promises demonstrate the extent to which she is lying.
It wasn't meant to be like this. All she can do is condemn Trump as a bad racist. But it seems fewer and fewer Americans are prepared to swallow her lies any more.
With all her expert advisers employed to demolish Trump, it isn't working. The Clinton campaign has been rattled by Trump's popularity, success and messaging. She is spending a fortune on advertising... Trump is not. Hillary Clinton is discovering that Trump has rewritten the script for political campaigning, and there os nothing she can do to stop him.
It seems that Hillary Clinton is soon going to face her very own "Jeb Bush moment" when Trump trounced him in the primaries.
It wasn't meant to be like this. All she can do is condemn Trump as a bad racist. But it seems fewer and fewer Americans are prepared to swallow her lies any more.
With all her expert advisers employed to demolish Trump, it isn't working. The Clinton campaign has been rattled by Trump's popularity, success and messaging. She is spending a fortune on advertising... Trump is not. Hillary Clinton is discovering that Trump has rewritten the script for political campaigning, and there os nothing she can do to stop him.
It seems that Hillary Clinton is soon going to face her very own "Jeb Bush moment" when Trump trounced him in the primaries.
26
Where is your common sense? You are such a fanatic of Trump thatyou are not getting the message from your brain that Trump has zero skills or experience to run the world's highest position!! Get with the program. Even if he gets someone like Dick Cheney as an assistant!!!
2
Assuming most polling data are acquired via telephone, are there any studies that show which voters (party, demographics, etc.) do not answer calls that are anonymous, unsolicited or blocked? This seems rather important to the poll's accuracy. If there was a reliable way for pollsters to identify themselves when they call, I would participate.
5
These frequent Upshot columns make me think of predicting the outcome of some sporting event rather then filling the most important position in our country.
I do not like any of the choices, but expect Clinton to win based on her getting enough electoral votes. It will be close on the popular vote because both candidates are so unpopular.
Looking forward to the 2020 election with a different set of candidates from both parties.
I do not like any of the choices, but expect Clinton to win based on her getting enough electoral votes. It will be close on the popular vote because both candidates are so unpopular.
Looking forward to the 2020 election with a different set of candidates from both parties.
3
A good assessment, Nate. I think that maybe voters who follow the polls and who are committed to one of the candidates are perplexed to see the closeness of the polls. They're saying to themselves, "But my candidate is the clear choice given the defects of the other!" Yes, given the low favorability ratings of each of the major candidates, it's amazing that there are any polling results.
We are learning about the affect of uncertainty on statistical models, which is one reason I immensely enjoy reading your column. The uncertainty is some noise pattern in the distributions. But I wonder if all of that distaste for either candidate is part of the uncertainty.
It's different each time. Kennedy-Nixon was really close; unlike this election, each candidate had strong support from the voters in their parties. There was uncertainty for a different reason, namely, it was just where the decision point fell. In this election, voters are being deterred from supporting any candidate, so we could ask, who's going to show up on November 8, if anyone?
This election cycle is one that we will be studying for a long time. One final piece of humor, this is an election in which the great Pat Paulsen could have done well.
We are learning about the affect of uncertainty on statistical models, which is one reason I immensely enjoy reading your column. The uncertainty is some noise pattern in the distributions. But I wonder if all of that distaste for either candidate is part of the uncertainty.
It's different each time. Kennedy-Nixon was really close; unlike this election, each candidate had strong support from the voters in their parties. There was uncertainty for a different reason, namely, it was just where the decision point fell. In this election, voters are being deterred from supporting any candidate, so we could ask, who's going to show up on November 8, if anyone?
This election cycle is one that we will be studying for a long time. One final piece of humor, this is an election in which the great Pat Paulsen could have done well.
5
All of this shows the real questions to be raised about these calcualtions that say Clinton is, say 82% sure to win early in the game.
Any fool knows the result in some elections. It was clear early Reagan and Clinton were to going to win in 1984 and 1996. Any reasonable Democrat was certain to win in 2008, and this year any reasonable Republican who emphasized the economy and wages was certain to win.
But this year the reasonable candidates like Christie and Kasich adopted extreme right wing economic programs and were wiped out by an unreasonable candidate who hit the right issues. Then the Democrats nominated their worse possible nominee. Obviously Trump's moderation today cut heavily into her lead.
The basic fact remains: Clinton still should lose 5 to 10 points if only Trump seems more reasonable to an electorate that yearns for change
Trump has mobilized the Perot votes who shot up turnout in 1992 and 2004 (when Bush used Perot's slogan "united we stand" and overthrew Saddam, and his appeals for minority votes should dampen their turnout.
It is a nightmare for pollsters to weight their numbers, but if Trump has a good debate and Hillary starts coughing during them and is thrown off by new e-emails, Trump should win by 10 points. But those are huge "if's" and he easily could lose.
Any fool knows the result in some elections. It was clear early Reagan and Clinton were to going to win in 1984 and 1996. Any reasonable Democrat was certain to win in 2008, and this year any reasonable Republican who emphasized the economy and wages was certain to win.
But this year the reasonable candidates like Christie and Kasich adopted extreme right wing economic programs and were wiped out by an unreasonable candidate who hit the right issues. Then the Democrats nominated their worse possible nominee. Obviously Trump's moderation today cut heavily into her lead.
The basic fact remains: Clinton still should lose 5 to 10 points if only Trump seems more reasonable to an electorate that yearns for change
Trump has mobilized the Perot votes who shot up turnout in 1992 and 2004 (when Bush used Perot's slogan "united we stand" and overthrew Saddam, and his appeals for minority votes should dampen their turnout.
It is a nightmare for pollsters to weight their numbers, but if Trump has a good debate and Hillary starts coughing during them and is thrown off by new e-emails, Trump should win by 10 points. But those are huge "if's" and he easily could lose.
12
Exactly. She is a terrible candidate and any old school Republican would be wiping the floor with her. She is only competitive in this race due to the absolute fecklessness of the Republican establishment, and frankly, only IN this race due to fecklessness of the Democratic establishment.
4
The polls are meaningless. I prefer to pay attention to Gallup's latest poll that shows Americans believe that Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton is the Most Admired Woman in the World - for the 20th year in a row. Of course, the press doesn't talk about that.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/187922/clinton-admired-woman-record-20th-time...
http://www.gallup.com/poll/187922/clinton-admired-woman-record-20th-time...
445
Hmm, so she is the most admired person in the world for lying about Benghazi, instituting a pay to play as Secretary of State, destroying evidence that could implicate her in the E-Mail scandal, continuing to confabulate on every question asked of her, continuing to tell her "ultra-wealthy" supporters - don't worry about what I say, still being a misogynistic enabler of a impeached sexually abusive husband. If that is the most admired person in the world, who is number 2 "Caligula"!
15
That doesn't shed much light on the question. In the Gallup poll you cite, 13% of Americans picked Clinton (for their first or second choice). Clinton certainly has a core that will vote for her that exceeds 13%. But this number doesn't replace the polls that say 40-something percent of likely voters will vote for her. 13% is nothing in that context.
Also note, historically Clinton has averaged 16% in your poll, so the 13% that was enough to let her win actually represents a decrease in her standing.
I think Clinton's weakness in the election polls reflects the basic truth of this election: both candidates, while they have their fervent admirers, are actually disliked by a significant proportion even of their own parties. That some indications suggest Clinton leads among registered voters and lags among likely voters says to me that she just doesn't motivate a lot of people to go out and vote. It's an enthusiasm lag, probably due to the emails and the perception of misuse of the Clinton Foundation. If Trump didn't have the same problem (or worse), this election would already be over.
Also note, historically Clinton has averaged 16% in your poll, so the 13% that was enough to let her win actually represents a decrease in her standing.
I think Clinton's weakness in the election polls reflects the basic truth of this election: both candidates, while they have their fervent admirers, are actually disliked by a significant proportion even of their own parties. That some indications suggest Clinton leads among registered voters and lags among likely voters says to me that she just doesn't motivate a lot of people to go out and vote. It's an enthusiasm lag, probably due to the emails and the perception of misuse of the Clinton Foundation. If Trump didn't have the same problem (or worse), this election would already be over.
4
You have to admit the GOP smear machine is very efficient and persuasive. Even many Democrats have swallowed the lies.
8
There's something about predicted outcome that's - well, boring. Upsets are a lot more entertaining, and for my own part, I cannot think of a more gorgeous post-election morning than that one in 1948. Too young to have voted, I was yet delighted by the picture of smiling HST holding up a copy of the Chicago Tribune proclaiming his loss to Tom Dewey. So much for that, ChiTrib!
Polls have real value, but there are so many ways to tilt 'em, intentional or otherwise. The poll is just another of the spices flavoring the political stew, and spices must always be used carefully . . . with a grain of salt, perhaps.
Polls have real value, but there are so many ways to tilt 'em, intentional or otherwise. The poll is just another of the spices flavoring the political stew, and spices must always be used carefully . . . with a grain of salt, perhaps.
15
Dear Earl,
The difference between the outcome in 1948 and a potential less "boring" outcome in 2016 is that Harry Truman became a near great president who made one of the most difficult decisions ever in politics, and Donald Trump may go to succeed GWB as worst president ever by starting a nuclear war. Will that possibility be enough entertainment for you?
The difference between the outcome in 1948 and a potential less "boring" outcome in 2016 is that Harry Truman became a near great president who made one of the most difficult decisions ever in politics, and Donald Trump may go to succeed GWB as worst president ever by starting a nuclear war. Will that possibility be enough entertainment for you?
6
Oh yes, my pleasure at HSt's re-election included the one-in-the-ear aspect for the pollsters - and I can again use the word "delight" when contemplating Harry's stature of today, especially in light of the churlish treatment accorded him by his successor.
Should Mr. T. achieve election it would be something less than entertaining: far more like horror.
Should Mr. T. achieve election it would be something less than entertaining: far more like horror.
What if the models are based on old assumptions ? What will the role be of the 50% who in the past did not vote ? What if some of them now vote ?
Remember that the weather models in Louisiana perdicted showers they got the worse floods in history from historic rainfall.Many now agree it was a modeling error.Lets not forget those who argued that the stock market was rational.
Remember that the weather models in Louisiana perdicted showers they got the worse floods in history from historic rainfall.Many now agree it was a modeling error.Lets not forget those who argued that the stock market was rational.
10
I don't get why it is considered "choose your own adventure" to include Johnson and Stein. They are both attractive and legit candidates who are jointly drawing +10% of the vote. I would consider any poll that leaves them out as unrepresentative and unfair. It is not the job of the pollster and press to "preserve" the 2 party system by censoring the 3rd parties.
79
Stein is a spoiler with about as much presidential timber as a small-town councilwoman, not even a mayor. What credentials does she have for the presidency? Who on earth believes she can perform in that job any more than Trump can. If someone is an unrepentant Nader voter, who equated Gore and Bush, Stein must look like James Madison. Amazing how short people's memories are. We're voting to put someone into the presidency. She should be qualified to do it, as Secretary Clinton is.
243
Stein is a vehicle for progressive voters to show their displeasure with DNC's neoconservative, money-grabbing & warmongering stance is NOT appreciated.
Both Bernie Sanders and Trump have shown that buttressing of oligarchs is a CHOICE, and not necessary to win elections.
Both Bernie Sanders and Trump have shown that buttressing of oligarchs is a CHOICE, and not necessary to win elections.
8
Aside from her program Ace, Stein has the main qualifications of both frontrunners combined, namely that she isn't either of them.
11
As a Clinton supporter, I have been concerned by the sense of inevitability created by the daily probabilities calculated by the NYT. A wide margin favoring Clinton gives cover to those who consider third party voting, while expecting Clinton to win.
Recalling that 97,000 Nader voters in Florida turned the US over to one of the worst Presidents in history in 2000, I hope we do not repeat this blunder in 2016.
As we learned in the pathetically low turnout election of 2010, which ushered in the Tea Party, unprecedented gerrymandering and a dysfunctional Congress, you get what you don't vote for.
Don't boo, vote.
Recalling that 97,000 Nader voters in Florida turned the US over to one of the worst Presidents in history in 2000, I hope we do not repeat this blunder in 2016.
As we learned in the pathetically low turnout election of 2010, which ushered in the Tea Party, unprecedented gerrymandering and a dysfunctional Congress, you get what you don't vote for.
Don't boo, vote.
1003
If Hillary is elected I think we can be pretty certain she will not be two-term president. Whether one supports her or not she is a serial liar and it's just not good enough to say other people might be worse. Her only case for the presidency has devolved to claiming she is not as bad as Trump. Unfortunately they are both vile and untrustworthy individuals. We deserve better.
Or we could go with 'none of the above' and vote Stein.
Or we could go with 'none of the above' and vote Stein.
33
Please stop blaming Nader. It's so lazy. Millions voted for Bush. Millions did not vote. Gore made the mistake of not using Clinton more on the campaign trail. Gore's reluctance Watson good part due to Bill Clinton's behavior in the Oval Office. But still people blame Nader. Gore could not even carry his home state.
23
This is such an important point because so much depends
on down ballot candidates like the House and the Senate. You cant assume those predicted calculations are really a assessment of sampling at many different times.
on down ballot candidates like the House and the Senate. You cant assume those predicted calculations are really a assessment of sampling at many different times.
2