*More Speaker Ryan House Changes

[miketx]

If libtards could do anything except cry over typos, they might have actually amounted to something other than a large group of imbeciles who have voluntarily encased their minds inside an impenetrable conundrum of their own making.

 

[Geaux4it]

The far righties are fearing the impending Trump melt down.

We've been hearing about that impending meltdown for a while. I didn't think he'd last as long as he has, but he has. Might happen yet, but it's looking more and more like he's got staying power. Which frankly scares the morons in the RNC even more than the DNC, and they're terrified of seeing Hillary on a stage with him.

The mistake was to pay attention to polls in the first place, particularly the idiocy that because Trump has the support of only a third of republicans he's 'in the lead'; two thirds of republicans don't support Trump, Trump has no organization at the state level heading into the primaries, where Trump will suffer the same fate as McCain in 2000.

Nonsense

-Geaux
=======

What if the polls are underestimating Trump’s support?

We’ve grown quite accustomed in recent months to looking at Republican polls and finding the same result: Donald Trump is doing very well in the GOP presidential race. But look a little closer and an unexpected detail emerges.
FiveThirtyEight published a piece earlier this month noting that in traditional polls – a human being calls respondents and asks scripted questions with multiple-choice answers – Trump’s support is lower than in polls conducted online or through automated, robo-call surveys.
And while some subtle variances are easily overlooked, the FiveThirtyEight analysis found a sizable, statistically significant difference.
So, what’s the explanation for this? Should we discount online polling that has no real track record in primary races? Should we assume this is just a temporary fluke that will sort itself out once the primaries begin in earnest?
It’s worthy of a conversation, but Bloomberg Politics ran an interesting piece yesterday raising a possibility that hasn’t generated much attention.
Polls may be underestimating Donald Trump’s support, according to intriguing new research that says the Republican front-runner benefits from a “social desirability bias” – some people who plan to vote for him are too embarrassed to admit it.
The study, published Monday by Morning Consult, found that Trump fares about six percentage points better among likely Republican voters in online polls than when a pollster is speaking by phone to a live human being. Moreover, the report indicated, the higher an individual’s educational attainment, the greater the likelihood that the respondent wouldn’t admit on the telephone to supporting Trump.
Now seems like a good time to pause and talk a little bit about the “Bradley Effect.”

What if the polls are underestimating Trump's support?

 

[9aces]

The far righties are fearing the impending Trump melt down.

We've been hearing about that impending meltdown for a while. I didn't think he'd last as long as he has, but he has. Might happen yet, but it's looking more and more like he's got staying power. Which frankly scares the morons in the RNC even more than the DNC, and they're terrified of seeing Hillary on a stage with him.

The mistake was to pay attention to polls in the first place, particularly the idiocy that because Trump has the support of only a third of republicans he's 'in the lead'; two thirds of republicans don't support Trump, Trump has no organization at the state level heading into the primaries, where Trump will suffer the same fate as McCain in 2000.

Oh yeah, and McCain got the nomination in 2008 when he "had the primary organization", how'd that work out?

Trump's a different breed of animal, best get used to it. And I say that as someone who does NOT currently support Trump in the primary election. He's 4th on my list.

 

[miketx]

Unless some leftwing trash kills Trump, he will win. The people have had enough of this socialist democrat bullshit. When he wins, I hope the lot of them leave the country. Only problem with that thought is that no one would be stupid enough to take the piss pant idiots.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I never new libtards were as stupid as those here.

Yup, you are a far righty.

That all you got are typos? Typical demented leftard pole smoker.

That's all a demented far righty like you can do: minimalize your own stupidity.

 

[Care4all]

The far righties are fearing the impending Trump melt down.

We've been hearing about that impending meltdown for a while. I didn't think he'd last as long as he has, but he has. Might happen yet, but it's looking more and more like he's got staying power. Which frankly scares the morons in the RNC even more than the DNC, and they're terrified of seeing Hillary on a stage with him.

The mistake was to pay attention to polls in the first place, particularly the idiocy that because Trump has the support of only a third of republicans he's 'in the lead'; two thirds of republicans don't support Trump, Trump has no organization at the state level heading into the primaries, where Trump will suffer the same fate as McCain in 2000.

Nonsense

-Geaux
=======

What if the polls are underestimating Trump’s support?

We’ve grown quite accustomed in recent months to looking at Republican polls and finding the same result: Donald Trump is doing very well in the GOP presidential race. But look a little closer and an unexpected detail emerges.
FiveThirtyEight published a piece earlier this month noting that in traditional polls – a human being calls respondents and asks scripted questions with multiple-choice answers – Trump’s support is lower than in polls conducted online or through automated, robo-call surveys.
And while some subtle variances are easily overlooked, the FiveThirtyEight analysis found a sizable, statistically significant difference.
So, what’s the explanation for this? Should we discount online polling that has no real track record in primary races? Should we assume this is just a temporary fluke that will sort itself out once the primaries begin in earnest?
It’s worthy of a conversation, but Bloomberg Politics ran an interesting piece yesterday raising a possibility that hasn’t generated much attention.
Polls may be underestimating Donald Trump’s support, according to intriguing new research that says the Republican front-runner benefits from a “social desirability bias” – some people who plan to vote for him are too embarrassed to admit it.
The study, published Monday by Morning Consult, found that Trump fares about six percentage points better among likely Republican voters in online polls than when a pollster is speaking by phone to a live human being. Moreover, the report indicated, the higher an individual’s educational attainment, the greater the likelihood that the respondent wouldn’t admit on the telephone to supporting Trump.
Now seems like a good time to pause and talk a little bit about the “Bradley Effect.”

What if the polls are underestimating Trump's support?

And how does that make him fare in the caucuses, where the votes have to be made in Public, and not hidden? I'm not certain if people who don't want to admit they would vote for him, would admit in front of a caucus crowd... that they would vote for him?? Or maybe that's not the case, just don't know?

Also, seems like the internet could have the same people voting multiple times, just by having a second email address.... whereas a phone poll is calling your house once, and only the person that answers the poll questions is part of the polling numbers.

The Internet, you can also have your wife go and vote or your adult child go and vote.

 

[miketx]

That's all a demented far righty like you can do: minimalize your own stupidity.

Wow 'tard! That's about the 5th time today one of you libtard piss panties has quoted my typo! I don't have to do anything! You keep proving how stupid your sorry asses are by your own display of your fecundless diatribe of typo attacks! Lmao. keep it up piss pants, I love it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

That's all a demented far righty like you can do: minimalize your own stupidity.

Wow 'tard! That's about the 5th time today one of you libtard piss panties has quoted my typo! I don't have to do anything! You keep proving how stupid your sorry asses are by your own display of your fecundless diatribe of typo attacks! Lmao. keep it up piss pants, I love it.

You just don't have what it takes, do you? The simple fact is that Trump will not be the nominee.

 

[ScienceRocks]

I never new libtards were as stupid as those here.

You're the one attempting to bring about another dark age and you think other people are stupid? You're laughable.

If you want to cut something then get our military out of the nation building and repeal the tax breaks. You'll see most of our troubles go away.

 

[miketx]

You two piss slurpers will be in this crowd.

You just don't have what it takes, do you? The simple fact is that Trump will not be the nominee.

Have what it takes to do what? Oh I get it, never mind.

You're the one attempting to bring about another dark age and you think other people are stupid? You're laughable.

If you want to cut something then get our military out of the nation building and repeal the tax breaks. You'll see most of our troubles go away.

So, pisstard, raising taxes and bringing our military home will solve all our problems? You should run for orifice. Another tax and spend demtard.

I'll tell you one thing that if we did bring our military home and deploy them to our borders it would solve a boatload of crap.

 

[9aces]

I never new libtards were as stupid as those here.

You're the one attempting to bring about another dark age and you think other people are stupid? You're laughable.

If you want to cut something then get our military out of the nation building and repeal the tax breaks. You'll see most of our troubles go away.

You know, one of the funniest things in your sig. Say no to small government, and yes to accountable government.

Hint: If it's not small, you can't make it accountable.

 

[ScienceRocks]

I never new libtards were as stupid as those here.

You're the one attempting to bring about another dark age and you think other people are stupid? You're laughable.

If you want to cut something then get our military out of the nation building and repeal the tax breaks. You'll see most of our troubles go away.

You know, one of the funniest things in your sig. Say no to small government, and yes to accountable government.

Hint: If it's not small, you can't make it accountable.

As a person that has studied political science I say you're wrong. Most european countries of western europe are far less corrupt then ours and our main worry in this country is the corruption of the corporations.

Please tell me that you're not for deregulating and allowing them to crap on the workers as they did in the 19th century.

 

[JakeStarkey]

miketx does not grasp that Trump will not be the candidate. Now al-shabab is using Trump's Muslim ban speech to recruit. This is rocking America.