Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AP-GfK Poll: Americans overwhelmingly view Trump negatively

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • BF69
    replied
    Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
    I think that they were about even or had a slight drop from Obama's reelection year, which compares poorly to the sharp increase in GOP involvement.
    DoD,

    Turnout in Primaries isn't a great predictor of General Election success. It remains to be seen if the GOP can convert those numbers into high turnout in November or if the poor Dem numbers mean all that much.

    If wishful thinking were an electoral asset GOPers would have put Romney in the WH 4 years ago. Seeing a fair bit of that again this year.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daemon of Decay
    replied
    Originally posted by Salinator View Post

    Isn't there also a decline in Democrats voting in the primaries in this election cycle?
    I think that they were about even or had a slight drop from Obama's reelection year, which compares poorly to the sharp increase in GOP involvement.

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
    Your joking, right.

    Dems well be out in force to keep Donald in one of his golden Trump Towers
    My prediction, as of how things are right now, if it is a match up between Clinton and Trump is:

    Minorities won't vote for either one in any large numbers. There will be no Black for Obama effect. Women won't support either for any particular reason.

    Instead, it will come down to who the Independent vote hates or fears more in office. The "true believers" on the Left and Right (about 25% apiece at most) will vote for their favored candidate. The other 50% will vote against the one they think is more dangerous.

    That will be a matter for how things shape up post convention.

    Leave a comment:


  • BF69
    replied
    Originally posted by Salinator View Post
    I believe the Trump hatred is exaggerated and fanned by instigating media and skewed polls. According to the media and polls, Obama 08 and 12 should have been massive landslides. They were not, but it was repeated so many times that some still think that - even as far an idiot or two that still claims that Obama won by the largest margin ever in history, along with their imbecile claim that he is also the smartest POTUS ever even though they don't know his goshdarn GPA and IQ.

    Two of the true landslide victories in history was Reagan 80 and 84, who incidentally was the target of the Dems as well as the Reps.

    I wouldn't trust the polls. Doc got his ass kicked the last two POTUS election cycles using data from the polls. Just because people answering question by pollsters say they disapprove of what Trump said or how he said it does not mean they will not vote for Trump with the moment is finally upon them.
    Doc got his ass kicked because he picks & chooses his data to suit his desired conclusion. He wanted Obama to lose so he produced 'proof' that it was going to happen. When it didn't he refused to accept that he had been wrong & blamed Chris Christie & the weather. That went on for several years. The problem wasn't the polling data, it was the person interpreting it.

    As I recall Sal in 2012 you were a member of the 'Unskewed Polls' cult that asserted that polls were being 'skewed' to predict an Obama victory. People in the Romney camp drank the same kool aid. Those of us who read more sensible commentators actually picked the election result. Turns out the polls weren't 'skewed', they were 'correct'. Once again, the problem wasn't the polls, it was the people interpreting the data - in this case Dean Chambers & a bunch of Obama haters who couldn't accept reality.

    Some polls are junk. Individual polls are unreliable. Polls in Primaries are less reliable than POTUS elections. Polls taken overall & viewed conservatively give a reasonable snapshot of the mood of a particular electorate. Deciding this is all 'skewed' is all about the bias of the observer & says nothing about the pollsters.

    I'm fascinated to see you saddling up this horse again Sal. Short memory? Guess faith really is immune to fact. Going to be fun to watch you ride this one yet again and then the next time.

    Leave a comment:


  • Salinator
    replied
    Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
    It's part of the back and forth in the narrative right now.
    Why is it that Trump haters seem to think that Dems will turn out in force to defeat Trump, but Republicans somehow will not turn out in force to defeat Hillary?

    Simply going by the jump in republicans voting in the primaries for this election, there's some evidence to suggest a more motivated GOP electorate.
    Isn't there also a decline in Democrats voting in the primaries in this election cycle?

    What the Trump supporters don't understand is that this isn't necessarily a good thing, and the idea that all Republicans will back the nominee is wishful thinking. Plenty of republicans are fired up against him, after all.
    I think most Republicans that are not Trump supporters will do either one of two things if Trump wins the nomination. Vote Trump or stay home. I cannot imagine a mass exodus of Republicans to the Hillary camp to vote for someone they hate just to spite the one they despise.

    How Republicans that chooses to stay home will depend on the support of the other candidates. Could you really believe that there would be no traditional reconciliations and endorsements after Trump becomes the nominee?

    Every single primary that I remember has been just as vicious and things said and blown out proportion. I believe the Trump hatred is exaggerated and fanned by instigating media and skewed polls. According to the media and polls, Obama 08 and 12 should have been massive landslides. They were not, but it was repeated so many times that some still think that - even as far an idiot or two that still claims that Obama won by the largest margin ever in history, along with their imbecile claim that he is also the smartest POTUS ever even though they don't know his goshdarn GPA and IQ.

    Two of the true landslide victories in history was Reagan 80 and 84, who incidentally was the target of the Dems as well as the Reps.

    I wouldn't trust the polls. Doc got his ass kicked the last two POTUS election cycles using data from the polls. Just because people answering question by pollsters say they disapprove of what Trump said or how he said it does not mean they will not vote for Trump with the moment is finally upon them.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daemon of Decay
    replied
    Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
    Your joking, right.

    Dems well be out in force to keep Donald in one of his golden Trump Towers
    It's part of the back and forth in the narrative right now.

    Simply going by the jump in republicans voting in the primaries for this election, there's some evidence to suggest a more motivated GOP electorate.

    What the Trump supporters don't understand is that this isn't necessarily a good thing, and the idea that all Republicans will back the nominee is wishful thinking. Plenty of republicans are fired up against him, after all.

    Leave a comment:


  • Half Pint John
    replied
    you're likely to have more Democrats staying home this election than Republicans,
    Your joking, right.

    Dems well be out in force to keep Donald in one of his golden Trump Towers

    Leave a comment:


  • Gixxer86g
    replied
    Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
    Actually, the polls we've seen by a variety of different groups are (mathematically and statistically speaking) probably right on the money.

    However, as with many things in politics, the numbers can be misleading and lead to some false conclusions when one doesn't consider the other independent variables at work.

    Most importantly is that in these many polls that show Trump as unpopular/losing against Hillary, they are asking Americans and generally not likely voters. When half of Americans won't even vote, that drastically shifts the numbers.

    Some might wonder why, since if you just cut out a random half then the ratios would remain the same. However, that ignores the fact that different groups vote in varying amounts from election to election. Due to voter disenfranchisement and a lackluster field - and the normal "8 year slump" the incumbents normally face - you're likely to have more Democrats staying home this election than Republicans, who are more fired up (as seen in primary participation rates).

    So while it could be factually true that Trump is viewed very negatively by most Americans, that doesn't mean this number - even if 100% applicable to the wider population - represents his actually voter support.

    tl;dr - the people polled don't necessarily represent the electorate, meaning Trump could have more support from voters than amongst the general population.
    Good post.

    I still don't trust them. Too many ways to skew and manipulate the group, the material, and the results.

    Just look at my personal experience at my job. I'm confident if I worked at a Starbucks, my personal experience would be the opposite.

    And another thing I note from personal experience, is that many of those that support, or will vote for, Trump don't like him.

    Leave a comment:


  • Daemon of Decay
    replied
    Originally posted by Gixxer86g View Post
    Because the poll is a load of crap. Based on who I deal with at work, co workers, and customers, it's more like 7 to 10 in favor of Trump.
    Actually, the polls we've seen by a variety of different groups are (mathematically and statistically speaking) probably right on the money.

    However, as with many things in politics, the numbers can be misleading and lead to some false conclusions when one doesn't consider the other independent variables at work.

    Most importantly is that in these many polls that show Trump as unpopular/losing against Hillary, they are asking Americans and generally not likely voters. When half of Americans won't even vote, that drastically shifts the numbers.

    Some might wonder why, since if you just cut out a random half then the ratios would remain the same. However, that ignores the fact that different groups vote in varying amounts from election to election. Due to voter disenfranchisement and a lackluster field - and the normal "8 year slump" the incumbents normally face - you're likely to have more Democrats staying home this election than Republicans, who are more fired up (as seen in primary participation rates).

    So while it could be factually true that Trump is viewed very negatively by most Americans, that doesn't mean this number - even if 100% applicable to the wider population - represents his actually voter support.

    tl;dr - the people polled don't necessarily represent the electorate, meaning Trump could have more support from voters than amongst the general population.

    Leave a comment:


  • Grognard Gunny
    replied
    Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
    Interestingly, it appears most Americans hate Hillary too and the overwhelming majority of voters plan to vote against her or against Trump rather than for a candidate they believe in or want. It's shaping up to be an election of the least objectionable rather than the best qualified.
    Which makes the third of fourth one in a row, from my POV.

    I do have to admit, however, that the level of "objectionable" HAS dropped to a new low.

    One is forced to choose between a pair of REAL losers now.

    GG

    Leave a comment:


  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    Interestingly, it appears most Americans hate Hillary too and the overwhelming majority of voters plan to vote against her or against Trump rather than for a candidate they believe in or want. It's shaping up to be an election of the least objectionable rather than the best qualified.

    Leave a comment:


  • Grognard Gunny
    replied
    Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
    Trump supporters are going to feed us Hillary.

    The good Gov from Ohio seems like the only GOP candidate that doesn't belong in Loony Toons.
    Agreed, and HE ain't no bed of roses either.

    GG

    Leave a comment:


  • BF69
    replied
    Originally posted by Massena View Post
    Trump gets about 35% of the Republican electorate in the primaries. That means that 65% don't like him and will not vote for him.
    Not necessarily. Based on polling the figure is around 25% of GOPers who say they won't vote for him. When the rubber hits the road it may be less than that, but anything less than a big turnout will be death for his chances.

    If he is the nominee and runs against Hillary, that means Hillary wins and that might be a landslide.

    And the Republican electorate is about 40% of the eligible voters...

    And no one has to work hard to discredit Trump, he's doing that all by himself by lying, going after women for no reason, not knowing or understanding foreign policy, and always trying to verbally overpower people who don't agree with him.

    In short, he's a lying demagogue who is not qualified to be President of the United States and has no discernable qualities that are admirable.
    Agree with most of that. Hilary will take him to the cleaners.

    Leave a comment:


  • BF69
    replied
    Originally posted by slick_miester View Post
    Trump's delegate lead makes him the odds-on favorite to win the GOP nomination. Even if he doesn't capture the 1,237 delegates needed to win outright, just so long as he shows up at the convention with the largest number -- which is likely -- then it'll take divine intervention to deny him the GOP's banner.
    There are mixed views on this Slick. Very few states allow the candidates to select delegates who support them, so most delegates are GOP party members. While they may vote for Trump in the first round, when they are bound to, it is likely that will be his high water mark. Cruz & to a lesser extent Kasich have been working the State Conventions hard to get people selected as delegates who might go their way in the second round.

    I'm not sure what happens to delegates bound to candidates who have dropped out - in particular Rubio. Are they also bound for the first round?

    If Trump turns up 50-100 delegates short he might grab the nomination. If the gap is wider I'm less certain. This could be the messiest convention since Chicago '68.

    And then Hillary will hammer him in November. The only real question is if Bernie Sanders is the Democratic nominee. What happens then?
    Short of an indictment Hilary is home. Bernie has to get a string of big wins in big states. Narrow wins won't do it. He does well in Caucuses, open Primaries & states where white people make up more than 80% of the people voting. There are next to none of those left. Certainly not enough to get him over the line.

    If it is Sanders v Trump then the Great Bouffanted Bloviator might just win. Two awful candidates.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    I imagine most of America would cheer the mushroom cloud.

    Incidentally, considering that the area around DC is just a giant mass of lobbyists and other hangers-on, what "collateral damage"?

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X