The most recent ebb that has challenged the flow was the Vice Presidential debate on Tuesday. It was considered a strong performance by Mike Pence and a questionable performance by Tim Kaine. In and of itself, a Vice Presidential debate rarely would matter, but in this election everything seem amplified. Moreover, the Pence performance provided the media with an excuse to change the narrative again... and in many ways slow whatever momentum Clinton had gathered from the first debate.
Not reverse it, mind you.... but at least slow it considerably.
Now if Donald Trump truly wants to retake control of the race (where he appeared to be prior to the first debate) he simply needs to show up and provide a reasonable debate performance. It doesn't have to be spectacular. It doesn't need to be Reagan Mondale, or Bentson Quale... it simply needs to pass the credibility test (something he appeared to be doing through the first third of debate one). In fact, if he does nothing more than perform for 90 minutes as he performed for the first 30 minutes of the first debate, it will no doubt be enough.
Rumors are that Trump has decided to actually prepare for this debate (as they said he did for the CIC Forum which he performed well). He is said to be more comfortable in the debate format of this debate, and there is speculation that he may be more aggressive in countering attacks.
The reality is that the biggest mistake Donald Trump made in debate number one was taking the moderator questions seriously and actually answering them. This is politician rule number one. Never answer the question being posed. Always brush it off and move it to a topic you want to talk about. While occasionally a moderator will press for an answer to an unanswered question, a nimble politician will be able to dance around the subject until there is no choice but to move on. The old run out the clock strategy.
The problem for Clinton is that her expectations will no doubt be very high for this debate. Being declared the "winner" of debate number one, has not necessarily been a good thing for recent Presidential candidates. Many of the definitive debate performances came in either debate two or debate three. If Trump can hold his own in debate two, he will have at least a neutral field advantage in debate three with Fox New's Chris Wallace being the moderator. That will be the last debate, and the one that will stick in people's mind moving into November.
53 comments:
i do wish for a little payback from chris wallace in the last debate.
just a little.
a couple of specific and detailed questions on her private email server and benghazi. and then some professional yet harsh follow ups when she trots out her canned bullshit talking points.
Amusing comment, Ch. I could hear you whistling in the dark as you sought to skirt past the graveyard.
Are you aware of how many states are no longer pink but light blue and tending bluer?
Whistle some more.
James - the whistling you are hearing is the wind blowing in one of your ear holes and then out the other...
I am aware that several polls have already started to move back to Trump, including all four of the Tracking polls. Gravis just came out today showing the race tied again.
This is a consistent pattern... that I wouldn't expect someone like you to see. Like the gas price post. Clinton supposedly gets a four-five point bump (or more) from something (even if it seems totally unreasonable) from the usual media polls, while many of the weekly and daily polls barely move. Then as time wears on, the media polls drift back to where they had been prior. This is probably the third or fourth time this has happened. The only difference is the first couple of times, they pushed Clinton into upper single or lower double digit leads. Now her peak seems to be four to six points.
In other words, I don't take too much stock in what color the states are at 528 or anywhere else. Especially when Silver is currently adjusting everything towards Clinton as a matter of "trend". If I look at "all" of the polling (not just the polls I like) there does not appear to still be any "trending" towards Clinton.
Funny, Ch. You were whistling with delight when Silver had Trump at a 48% chance of winning, but now that he has fallen to a 14% chance of winning, you are skeptical...
Hmmmmm.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/#now
Permit your readers to look at this -- along with the map, the graph, the "snake."
Doomsday for Trump.
Eh. A Katrina-level or Sandy-level hit by Matthew could change this race. Either way.
In 2008, the contrast between McCain's and Obama's responses to the Lehman collapse - even though Bush was still president - was the final nail in McCain's hopes.
Anonymous Indy Voter said...
Eh. A Katrina-level or Sandy-level hit by Matthew could change this race. Either way.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
i hear robby the mook made a major weather channel ad buy for granny the liar.
just what those on the edge of the storm, or those with loved ones in its path want to be bothered with while seeking the latest info.
"i'm GOUGH, GOUGH, granny mcfaceplant COUGH, and i COUGH, COUGH, approved this COUGH, COUGH, COUGH, message."
James -
Silver has a history of overstating the chances of Democrats/Independents beating Republicans... he's made that same mistake five times over the past three elections in Senate elections alone.
You find people who make mistakes credible... because it's what you want to believe. I find people who make the same mistakes over and over... prone to continue to make them.
For instance, look at Ohio:
RCP shows Trump leading in six of the past seven polls... and the only poll that Clinton leads is Monmouth (which she dropped from +4 to +2). He otherwise leads by 5 in four of the past seven polls and has an overall lead of 2.4%
Silver shows the race basically even with Trump winning 51% of the time to Hillary's 49%. He does so by propping up polls from early Sept and using obscure pollsters that he hasn't even graded... and by effectively "adjusting" reputable pollsters such as Quinnipiac, Selver, CNN, and Fox news by as much as three points towards Clinton.
______
When the time comes (and that time is not October 6th) - we'll see where the race stands. Right now, we are simply in the midst of some ebb and flow. I think it's currently ebbing and Silver still thinks it's flowing.
CH, first is I disagree, Trump needs to have a Reaganistic moment. He's got too many problems that just looking normal.
The dislike percentages are different by 62% to 47%,
His recent history of Tweets, Ms Piggy, etc, has alienated the college educated white, suburban voters, who in the last few elections were decisive when the Republican won, George W. Bush is an example.
The biggest problem is the 27 to win map on your page. To have a chance, he will need to take Nevada, Pennsylvania, Colorado and Florida.
I think you are underestimating his problems and overestimating her negatives.
If this storm smashes into Jacksonville, or Savannah, or Charleston there may not even be a debate Sunday.
His recent history of Tweets, Ms Piggy, etc, has alienated the college educated white, suburban voters, who in the last few elections were decisive when the Republican won, George W. Bush is an example.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
which MSDNC "pundit" spewed that nonsense? the same one who started the lie about trump being outraged at pence's debate win?
Actually Roger -
Florida, Nevada and Colorado would do it.
Florida, Nevada and New Hampshire would do it
Florida, Colorado and New Hampshire would do it
Florida and Pennsylvania would do it
Florida, Nevada and Colorado would do it.Clinton leads by 11% and the Hispanic and urban female in Colorado is going to be the factor, and he's not going to make that. Nevada, given the Mormon contingency, lead by Mitt are not supporting Trump.
Florida, Nevada and New Hampshire would do it Nevada, as I said it's unlikely, but even then, New Hampshire is in NO way going for Trump.
Florida, Colorado and New Hampshire would do it See the above.
Florida and Pennsylvania would do it. Clinton is pulling away in Pennsylvania, because of the urban contingencies, African American and again, he college educated women.
Every one of these depend on Florida. The Cuban violation of the embargo, and once again, the college educated women. A lot of it may depend on the fact that the President is putting FEMA resources in large numbers are going to help Clinton, because Trump gases half of his campaign on opposing everything the Kenyan born Muslim.
He needs a Reaganesque movement and Clinton is too prepared to let him get away with it.
And CH, I don't think Trump can avoid being himself. Or even if he does fairly well, its not going to change the direction of the arrows on the graph.
New Hampshire is in NO way going for Trump.
No way eh?
The Suffolk University/Boston Globe poll surveyed New Hampshire likely voters earlier this week and found Clinton with a slim lead over Trump, 44 percent to 42 percent. That’s well within the survey’s margin of error of 4.4 percent.
Nevada: Trump vs. Clinton
Emerson: 10/2 - 10/4 700 LV Clinton: 43
Trump: 43
CH I subscribe to the Fivethirtyeight update. This is the latest comment. I just got it, and it reinforces my comments.
By Harry Enten
Gary Johnson averaged just 7 percentage points in 11 national polls released on Thursday, continuing a string of bad results for the Libertarian Party nominee. At the same time, the number of undecided voters appears to be falling. Those two trends are combining to remove some of the uncertainty in our forecasts — historically, the number of undecided and third-party voters has been strongly correlated with both polling volatility and polling error. The share of voters not supporting the major-party candidates remains higher than it was at this point in the 2012 campaign, for example, but the more it shrinks, the safer Hillary Clinton’s lead becomes.
"Johnson is losing support, and most of his supporters had the Bern and they hate Trump more than they hate Clinton." My comment.
Clinton and Donald Trump now combine for a little over 84 percent of the vote. That’s the highest their combined share has been since we started issuing our forecasts in June. There hasn’t been a huge change, but it’s meaningful.
"Unless Trump has a HUGE moment, the undecided dislike Trump more than they do Clinton."
So basicly you are supporting your opinion with an opinion.
That's a classic appeal to authority (and not a very good authority) fallacy.
Thanks for playing.
Now that Hillary has been declared the Winner, can we discuss what she will do ?
You know real policy, real work and real middle income re-building.
HB, Jane and Odopie, you all three are all in, have been all in for Hillary, ok, good for you, congrats you won, she is now going to continue to move this nation further and deeper into Socialism.
But, on policy, does she have today, a plan to cut the tax rates for those in the middle income and lower, cut Federal Tax Rates on both earned income and unearned income.
IS it really that hard for you on the left to talk the details of President-Elect H.R. Clinton?
Seems to me this would be something you want to do, tell us how her plan today is the one that will regrow middle income earners, how she will drop tax rates on both payroll Federal taxes and on unearned income.
New Hampshire?
RCP New Hampshire.
Clinton +5.0 Trending ^
Nevada: +Clinton Clinton +1.4 Trending ^
Three polls show Clinton 3% 6% 2%
Trump Fox News 3%
One tie.
RCP Poll Average 48.0 43.9 Clinton +4.1Trending Up
4-Way RCP Average 43.9 40.7 Clinton +3.2Trending Down
I don't base my beliefs on cherry picked numbers like Menstra does.
I base my comments on the facts.
Eh. New Hampshire just moved to Tossup at RCP today.
OTOH, Michigan moved to Leans Clinton. A net plus for Her Inevitableness.
Roger,
538 produces an amazing amount of analysis, statistics, spreadsheets, speculation, and regression testing...
Unfortunately, they are simply less accurate than pretty much everyone else who does projections... probably because they overthink and believe in their own intellectual superiority.
The race did not go from near tossup to a Clinton sure thing in 10 days (which is what 538 has shown). In fact, the race "structurally" hasn't probably changed much since before the conventions. Whenever the dust settles from whatever "big event" the media wants to play... gravity pulls the race right back into the 55/45 sort of race that many of you just don't want to acknowledge.
And to be clear Roger... a couple of weeks ago you acknowledged that Trump was looking more and more likely to win.
He had done "nothing" Reagan-like to make it to that point. He simply offered a reasonable alternative to Hillary Clinton. I don't believe he has to do anything spectacular to see the numbers improve in his direction.
CH, I thought he had a 50% chance, but the debate and his other stuff, Tweet Fest and more of Trump being Trump and alienating millions of voters who are moving as the finally see what kind of shit he is.
Giuliani's daughter and Meagan Kelley have both announced that they are with Hillary Clinton.
I think that if it becomes apparent that Trump will lose, we will see quite a few more will defect.
A short while ago, Ch was dancing with delight when Nate Silver had Trump at a 48% chance of winning.
Ch found that credible.
Now Silver has Trump down to a 14% chance of winning.
Ch finds that incredible.
Roger, it has already bcome apparent.
And more and more are jumping ship.
And Trump just blew his supposed Town Hall debate preparation/live practice.
He just couldn't stop being Trump.
It was a fiasco of a non-debate, non-town hall preparation mess.
Prediction: Another richly deserved disaster for Trump on Sunday night.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/donald-trump-town-hall-debate-prep-229267
Thirty minutes ago, Silver dropped Trump's chances of winning to 12.8%.
:-}
I don't base my beliefs on cherry picked numbers like Menstra does.
I base my comments on the facts.
Those were the latest post debate polls. At least I have actual facts.
You trying to call opinion facts doesn't make it so.
...whatever it is he was doing [last night], it's not going to do much to prepare him for what's coming. To start, the moderator—conservative radio personality Howie Carr—is an unabashed Trump supporter. The same was true of the crowd, whose questions were all softballs. Among them:
What advice would you give to young Americans looking to achieve the American Dream?
What is your favorite childhood memory? Go Donald!
What would you say to convince Hispanics who are deceived by Obama, Clinton and the biased media to vote for you?
HA HA HA HA HA
Obviously, the crowd, moderator, and questions will not be so Trump-friendly on Sunday. Meanwhile, the candidate also struggled with timing on Friday. He routinely ignored the two-minute clock, and also failed to make it through the 90 minutes that were scheduled, scooting off the stage after 30 minutes. There will be no commercial or bathroom breaks on Sunday.
Trump did work on some aspects of his game, though. Specifically, his attack skills. He managed to slam, at various points, Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL) [GOOD!], journalists John King and and John Harwood, FiveThirtyEight's Nate Silver, the media, Latinos [GOOD!], and the Commission on Presidential Debates. The folks at the CPD may think Trump has forgotten about the microphone problem, but rest assured, he has not.
So, it appears that Trump's plan for debate number two is to wing it, not worrying about annoying things like policy details and world affairs, and instead spending most of his time taking shots at anyone and everyone who displeases him. The careful reader will notice that this is very similar to his plan for debate number one. And we all know how that worked out. (Christopher Bates wrote this.)
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
I mistakenly put the above here. Ch will delete it.
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/
Your candidate has been getting weaker, and it's almost impossible.
The American people are smarter than Trump "thinks".
Even Giuliani's daughter is smarter than her father.
Donald Trump’s weeklong slide in the presidential race started when he showed up to the first debate unprepared and spoiling for a fight. On Tuesday evening, Mike Pence helped slow it by doing the opposite.
But if the rehearsal yesterday is an indication, he's going to keep dying in the polls.
Top Issues to the American voters:
Jobs and the Economy (HB why did you say this economy is "Booming")
Gallup
Good Jobs Percent of Adult Population 45.6% -0.1
Engaged at Work 34.3% -0.4
Economic Confidence -10 -3
Consumer Spending $88 -11
Obama Approval 51% -3
Ch was dancing with delight when Nate Silver had Trump at a 48% chance of winning." Jane
Complete lie, it is all your side does.
Want to debate this Economy, Hillary refuses, Bubba told the World ObamaCare has failed, is hurting those of us the work and earn and pay our own way.
And that Russian Reset that was hers, wow, now that is an issue worth talking about.
And Syria, how is that going for your team, let me help, We lost, Putin won and that sucks.
Back to the debates, Trump us very comfortable in town hall format. Hillary us not... unless she pays a child actress to pose as an audience member with a question.
And tge third debate will also be positive for trump because Chris Wallace will ask the questions that the others ignore.
Hillary has done numerous such "debates" involving direct questions from the audience.
Trump has never done one. The questions last night were funneled through the moderator.
Yeah she's so good at them that she pays actresses to ask softball questions.
Trump is far more comfortable in this forum.
Myballs said...
Back to the debates, Trump us very comfortable in town hall format. Hillary us not... unless she pays a child actress to pose as an audience member with a question.
__________
A guess balls is referring to this:
_____________
Six-year-old Wants to Ask a Question at the Town Hall Debate
A six-year-old girl, Sophie Cruz, wants to ask a question at the town hall debate on Sunday. Here is her question, which has been circulating on social media:
"If you deport my parents, what happens to me? I am 6 years old and an American citizen. I have a 3 year old sister who is also an American."
For Hillary Clinton, the answer will surely be something to the effect that she is not going to deport the parents of young American citizens.
For Donald Trump, there is no easy answer. He could suggest that little Sophie voluntarily go with her parents, but that is not likely to be a popular answer with Latino voters.
If he says that her parents should put her up for adoption, much of the country will start attacking him within minutes. His best hope is that the question isn't asked. (Tannenbaum wrote this.)
You guess wrong.
*I guess..
_______
SOPHIE: "If you deport my parents, what happens to me? I am 6 years old and an American citizen. I have a 3 year old sister who is also an American."
TRUMP: "SHADDUP, YOU LITTLE BRAT! Just because you two were born here shouldn't make you American citizens, I don't care what the Constitution says!"
or
"SHADDUP! You're not a real six year old kid. You're a fake actress hired by Hillary! Get outta here, you little fake!"
TRUMP IS A RACIST WHOM WE CANNOT SUPPORT, SAY EVANGELICAL LEADERS
Evangelical Leaders Don’t Want Trump To Win:
The ‘Integrity Of Our Faith Hangs In The Balance’
This is bigger than partisan politics, they claim.
Nearly 100 evangelical leaders have signed onto a letter urging their fellow Christians to vote against Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, who, they write, “has fueled white American nationalism with xenophobic appeals and religious intolerance at the expense of gospel values, democratic principles, and important international relationships.”
The letter was posted to Change.org on Thursday, and had nearly 5,000 signatures by midday Friday.
The evangelicals behind the letter do not necessarily endorse Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, they write ― but they are united in their opposition to Trump, who is working to maintain the Republican stronghold on the evangelical community.
“Imperfect elections and flawed candidates often make for complicated and difficult choices for Christians,” the letter reads. “But sometimes historic moments arise when more is at stake than partisan politics ― when the meaning and integrity of our faith hangs in the balance. This is one of those moments.”
Evangelical voters tend to support Republicans ― former President George W. Bush won 78 percent of evangelicals in 2004, Sen. John McCain of Arizona won 74 percent of them in 2008, and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney won 78 percent in 2012, according to exit polling.
Trump is likely to win with evangelicals this year, polling suggests. That support will “probably have much less to do with him personally than with his rhetoric on abortion and his promises to protect Christianity in America,” political science professors Paul Goren of the University of Minnesota and Christopher Chapp of St. Olaf College wrote in The Washington Post this week.
Letter from evangelicals---------
The evangelical leaders who signed the Change.org letter wrote that they object to the media’s representation of evangelicals as “mostly white, politically conservative, older men,” and that they come from a number of races, ethnicities, denominations and ages. Trump has performed worse among black, Latino and Asian voters than he has with white voters.
Trump’s efforts to fuel the birther movement ― which claims President Barack Obama, the nation’s first black president, was not born in the U.S. ― along with his statements on Mexicans, immigrants and Muslims inspired their opposition, the leaders wrote.
Most evangelicals support immigration reform that would allow some undocumented immigrants to stay in the country, and faith groups have been active in advocating for welcoming refugees, including non-Christians. In the letter, evangelical leaders wrote that immigrants and refugees are “those whom Jesus calls ‘the stranger’ in Matthew 25, where he says that how we treat them is how we treat him.”
“Because we believe that racial bigotry has been a cornerstone of this campaign, it is a foundational matter of the gospel for us in this election, and not just another issue,” they wrote. “This is not just a social problem, but a fundamental wrong. Racism is America’s original sin. Its brazen use to win elections threatens to reverse real progress on racial equity and set America back.”
"If you deport my parents, what happens to me? I am 6 years old and an American citizen.
Well Sophie, how would you feel if somebody cut in line in front of you at school?
You wouldn't think it's fair would you?
That Sophie is just what your parents did. They cut in line in front of everybody else who are waiting to get into the country legally.
And because they cut in line, there's a little boy or girl who is being deprived of the blessings you enjoy being in this country.
Now is that fair?
My mom and pop said they were offered money encouraging them to come here and work. They desperately needed the money. Why was nothing ever done to the people who illegally paid them?
Maybe ... appearing Presidential, reassuring wavering voters that the true Trump is a reasonable human being, and demonstrating at least an awareness of basic policy isn't what Trump needs. It's too late for that, especially now with his open mike locker room talk about sexually assaulting women. I think that by now we all know better; we know that Trump is none of those things.
Trumps chance at this point is in mobilizing new voters from the demographics which the Clinton campaign publicly holds in contempt, who will only vote for someone completely different than what's come before. Trump needs to bring it on full bore, in your face without apology. He needs to ramp up his reality TV act, look Clinton in the eye and declare, "Hillary, you're Fired!" That might work.
Wp, if you think this guy still has a better chance than a snowball in hell, you really are either naive or so filled with Hillary hate as to lack all judgment.
I suspect the second.
Well that's a little over the top. I can only say that I'm objective because I don't support either one of these candidates. I have no partisan bias, and can evaluate the situation based on facts rather than animosity and magical thinking.
The fact is, for all your reliance on second-rate pollsters, you have no idea what the voter turnout is going to look like and therefore you have less than no idea what the vote will be. There are two candidates, both unacceptable, yet one will win. Maybe your guess will turn out to be right and Clinton will win, maybe not, but I can tell you one thing that I think you've missed. When otherwise reasonable and intelligent people express an opinion or analysis and you can't think of any justification other than they're stupid, the problem almost never lies with the other guy.
Post a Comment