politics and politicians
See other politics and politicians Articles
Title: Is Trump Really In First Place?
Source:
FlashReport
URL Source: http://www.flashreport.org/blog/201 ... s-trump-really-in-first-place/
Published: Jul 15, 2015
Author: Arnold Steinberg
Post Date: 2015-07-16 00:35:34 by Tooconservative
Keywords: None
Views: 3764
Comments: 41
And in another column, I dissected one much publicized and deeply flawed specific national survey – the Wall Street Journal/NBC poll and showed how its results were unreliable, if not preposterous. To participate in a debate, all candidates should at least (a) be announced and (b) agree to back the party’s nominee. But if the RNC will primarily use polling as the criterion, I concluded the best approach would be a first debate that consists of two equal status debates on consecutive nights, thus two news cycles. Night one would feature candidates 1,3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, and 15; and the second night would feature candidates 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16. Besides the obvious fairness of offering all sixteen candidates equivalent exposure, this approach also means that Donald Trump could suck up the oxygen at only one debate. Now comes a much-vaunted USA Today/Suffolk University Poll widely reported on networks that shows Trump “surging” to a first place lead of 17 percent, compared to a distant 2 percent in the last USA Today poll. Trump likely has increased his ballot strength, even dramatically, but this much? CNN has reported this story repeatedly, because its agenda is to feature Trump and divide the Republican Party. The television pundits authoritatively and disingenuously say Trump’s 3-percent margin over Jeb Bush, at 14 percent, is “within sampling error.” But there’s much more to say about problems with this survey that is making national headlines. This survey’s sampling distribution by region, race and age is based on the 2010 census, which is dated and also not even relevant, because it hardly is indicative of overall turnout, certainly not of Republican turnout. If you are not defining the universe correctly, the survey is suspect. A sample correctly drawn from the wrong universe obviously does not represent reality. But let’s pretend the universe is correct and look at the sample. The sample is of 1000 “adults,” not voters, verified or not. At most, only 85 percent of those adults actually are registered to vote, and at most only 65 percent of those actual voters would vote in a primary. That means at most only 51 percent (.85 x. 65) of these one thousand adults, or any adult grouping within it, are relevant to the primary elections. The survey of “adults” relies on self-identification of Republicans, not actual voter registration. Worse, it adds independent “adults” who merely claim they would vote in a Republican primary, even if in some states with a closed primary they would be ineligible to vote. Regardless, the total claimed is 349 adults who are supposed Republican primary voters. Significantly, when we apply our conservative 51 percent assumption, that 349 becomes only 178 even possible Republican primary voters, with a margin of error of plus or minus about 7.5%. That’s sampling error, not errors arising from flaws. Remember, we don’t even know if the universe from which the sample is drawn is really appropriate. Regardless, that “statistical” theoretical margin of error doesn’t tell the full story. The interviewers tried to minimize bias by rotating the order of the 16 candidates. Thus, for the 178 respondents, we have only about 11 per rotation pattern. That’s hardly enough to allow for unknown reaction to each sequence of candidates. Finally, if all that were not enough, this survey was conducted from Thursday/ July 9 through Sunday, July 12. Friday, Saturday and Sunday generally are less reliable for polling and normally part of an extended study. And during these four specific days, Donald Trump dominated the news. For example, I heard him speak Saturday morning in Las Vegas at the Freedom Fest. He was entertaining and fun and well received. But in the hallways, the libertarians remained skeptical of his crony capitalism. But the media coverage of this event and his Arizona appearance was substantial. In this USA Today survey, the ballot question includes only names, not senator or governor, so Trump – with high identification, was given a further edge over insufficiently identified elected officials. In reality, Trump may be gaining, possibly at the expense of some conservative candidates and thus ironically helping Jeb Bush. But if and when Trump collapses, those conservative candidates would benefit, but it’s still unclear whether one conservative would emerge against Jeb Bush. Now if you think I’m too harsh on this particular survey, consider this: the USA Today interviewers asked whether the respondent had heard of several of the presidential candidates. But they asked these ID question after asking the ballot question that mentions the candidate names. Now, that’s oxymoronic. Donald Trump has enough money to do a poll, and do it right. But why should he? Arnold Steinberg, strategist and analyst, is the author of graduate texts on politics and media, and a court-recognized expert on quantitative research and media who has taught at Pepperdine’s Graduate School of Public Policy. He has conducted 2000 studies. Poster Comment: More reasons to question the upcoming poll-based GOP debates, as well as Trump's current polling. The Republican National Committee and networks want to limit debates to the top ten presidential candidates, based on averaging polling results from five different national surveys. In a prior column, I explained how this approach is unfair because debate performance drives polls, not the other way around. Also, early national surveys are especially volatile and hardly predictive of finalists. Finally, equally averaging the apples and oranges of surveys with different size (and limited) samples, and quite varied and even dubious methodologies. produces strange vegetables indeed.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: TooConservative (#0)
Yes. (for good or ill)
Agreed. He is saying what lots of people want to hear. What have the other collective 15 or so said lately?
That The Donald should STFU. потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
That The Donald should STFU. Did the other 15 say it, or some GOP spokeshole? Did anybody pay the slightest attention to them? Trump is dominating the daily news cycle. The rest of them could be in the witness protection program.
Fuck You. Not you TC the author. But you are dumb too.
Propaganda. Bush shouldn't be in the debate. The polls are inaccurate. Only 12,334 people have contributed to his campaign. Trump gives you GOPe turds the shits. You need to change your diaper.
Fuck You. Not you TC the author. Anyone so morally bankrupt as to vote for anything with an (R), is unfit for office. By pledging blind allegiance to the party, they've disqualified themselves, IMO. Such a deranged and corrupt individual, might even vote for a Bush!
Trump shouldn't be in the debate. Only one person has contributed to his campaign.
Agreeing to back the party's nominee is pretty much what makes a political party. If you participate as a candidate, you are obligated to support the nominee because you would expect them to support you if you were the nominee.
Who really cares? This is mid-July and nobody but political junkies are paying any attention at all to politics at this time. This is mostly the media trying to pump up controversy in order to sell advertising. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
10 candidates on a stage is 8 too many . I favor a series of one-on-one Lincoln- Douglas style debates . The moderator being there to referee to make sure candidates stick to a set time limit per response with the candidates setting the agenda for the topics . The candidates also do the Q&A .
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
On the Dem side, you could have a series of Bernie/Hitlery debates. Will that work for you? I see no big rush to winnow the GOP field. Most of the candidates are static at present, neither gaining or losing in polling against Hillary. It's still the pre-season. Most of these candidates are still warming up and readying their message and branding and name recognition strategies. Name recognition will be a big factor. Trump, for instance, is only unrecognized by 2% of the public. Hitlery has about the same number. So is Bush, or at least the Bush name brand. This is one reason I've said all along that the GOP conservative base voters should pick one candidate early on and stick with them. Cruz is generally a lousy retail pol, almost as bad as Hitlery. Perry isn't glib, plays into the "another dumb Texan" meme. Paul has missing missing opportunities, made a few rash statements; better retail pol than his dad but a hard sell to a lot of GOP voters. Rubio just seems kinda slimy as a pol, relies on flowery rhetoric that sound too much like Peggy Noonan material. Kasich is too often a bit of a loose cannon but does have a track record in Ohio but he isn't really a national pol. I don't see how Trump can last too long, though he can probably hold 8-10% no matter what. That means that Bush will overcome the field with his warchest when the campaign moves to high-dollar media markets like Florida. Only if the base unites early on a single candidate is there any chance to stop Bush.
LOL ! Si vis pacem, para bellum
Hillary can stop Bush. The GOP can unite around Trump to stop both her and Bush.
By pledging blind allegiance to the party, they've disqualified themselves, IMO. Such a deranged and corrupt individual, might even vote for a Bush! " Very, very true! Si vis pacem, para bellum
LOL, come on Stone, tell us how you REALLY feel. Si vis pacem, para bellum
An echo chamber snooze fest .Better than taking melatonin. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
The American political system no longer works like this. Since we went to state by state voting on presidential candidates rather than the old back room system the very nature of the inter party campaign makes each candidate antagonistic to the other. How can you support a candidate (and not sound like you don't mean it) you just spent months claiming is incompetent and wrong for America, etc.? Sure, people understand it is a game - but that also creates cynicism. Maybe political parties should refrain from direct election of a candidate - especially if a party like the GOP seems to be composed of people who want to reproduce the anger they feel when listening to AM talk radio onto the campaign trail.
I have my eyes on Walker . But I agree ...much too early to separate the wheat from the chaff. Evita seems to think that Bush ,Rubio ,and Walker are her biggest threats based on her comments this week. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
EXACTLY. The repuke establishment gets all sweaty if someone not in the "club" appears that might outshine the "chosen club member" F the Club. Blind loyalty to "the club" & its chosen select ones is why this country is sinking beneath the waves. F em. Si vis pacem, para bellum
Walker seems ok. But he can't even convince his wife and kids to be against faggots and dykes pretending to be married. He can't even sell the truth to his own family.
Question all you like... his numbers are as real as any other. People that are tired of the same old bullshit, uncontrolled spending and agenda based legislation, are fed up. So far Trump is the only candidate that speaks without fear. I respect that. It's that political silence that generally means a politicians plan to sit the fence and bow down to the minority voice. Trump is willing to cater to the majority on touchy issues, regardless of voting demographics. Trying to please all voters, to gain support is the problem we have in Washington. Rand has been quiet.... and I know why. Is it politically smart to hold your tounge this early in the game to avoid the kind of libtard backlash that Trumps been getting? Probably.... but I respect him less for it. Either way, anything will be better than another 4 or 8 year term with an agenda based politician. Soon, we will realize that politicians that use the highest office to cater to the black population, or the female population... or the fag population... are not fixing what our greatest problem is. We need a person that has the agenda of our ECONOMY... that benefit the blacks, females and the fags, along with everyone else. Trump can do that. For all you that spit at him, you must either like status quo, you're a closet (D)...or have a candidate so unviable that you're blinded frustration. Either or, I personally think everyone in this forum should get behind Trump as a very suitable alternative to KILLary, should he be the (R) rockstar this time next year... and if you don't, you should go post where Meguro posts or some other libtard shithole socialist gathering place for self important people. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Trump doesn't have staying power .His act will get as old as Christie's . But the GOP field should take a lesson about his message . Meanwhile Monica Crowley has a good op-ed explaining the Trump surge: First and most importantly, he unabashedly champions America — and Americans. He has very effectively turned the tables on the left, which has weaponized its agenda against anyone who dares to disagree with it. We are branded as racists, sexists, Islamophobes, homophobes and bigots, while they use the full force of government to force compliance. Most Americans are sick of being turned into the enemy, stripped of both our hard-earned money to pay for the leftist agenda and our ability to feel good about ourselves in our own country. Further, by turning what Hillary Clinton calls “everyday Americans” into the enemy, the left has made it harder to see and deal with our real enemies, such as the Islamic State, Iran, Russia and the Muslim Brotherhood. The subtext of Mr. Trump’s message? Stop making us the enemy. That’s immensely powerful. Second, he is unapologetic. He has refused to cave in to the leftist mafia- style intimidation racket, which gins up faux outrage and applies public pressure for an apology. After Mr. Trump’s comments about Mexico, the predictable outrage cycle began, and some of his business partners dumped him. And yet, he refused to apologize, because he was largely correct: A whopping 71 percent of non-American citizens in federal prisons are from Mexico, while Mexican criminals make up a stunning 16 percent of all convicts serving time in federal penitentiaries. That’s a major burden for the American taxpayer and a dangerous situation for us all. Mr. Trump doesn’t give in to the leftist mob — and neither should the other candidates. Third, he fights back. His comments on illegal immigration stirred great controversy, but they were simply one part of his broader message that America is slipping away quickly — at the hands of the professional political class that cares more about retaining power than it does about the American people. Many voters believe the 2016 election is the last chance to save the country before it slides under the waves of statism. Mr. Trump gives voice to that anger, fear and frustration — and conveys the will to push back. His campaign slogan sums it up: “Make America great again.” Fourth, he is the anti-politician. When Mr. Trump says “China is eating our lunch,” “I respect Mexico greatly as a country. But the problem we have is their leaders are much sharper than ours, and they’re killing us at the border and they’re killing us on trade,” and “I would take [the Islamic State] out so fast,” those “everyday Americans” hear truth and action, two things largely missing from the governing class. Details are thin as to how he would accomplish those things, but so what? Hillary Clinton isn’t exactly bursting with policy details at this point, either. Lastly, he is anti-establishment. Many conservative voters feel utterly betrayed by a Republican establishment that has relentlessly marginalized them, their candidates and their beliefs. Mr. Trump is telling the base that he hears and shares its concerns. Last week, Reince Priebus, chairman of the Republican National Committee, asked Mr. Trump to “tone it down.” Mr. Trump responded with a massive rally in Phoenix at which he said illegal immigrants “flow in like water.” The more others, such as fellow candidates Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio and Rick Perry, criticize Mr. Trump, the more “establishment” they appear to the base, and the more support Mr. Trump receives. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jul/15/monica-crowley-the-real-reasons- donald-trump-is-su/#! Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
I have a pet theory that many Americans have zero understanding of issues but they love a fighter. This of course means they would gravitate to the left or right candidate based on how well they fight for their views.
Trump lives in New York and listens and is a guest on plenty of AM talk radio shows and on FOX tv comment shows back in the day. He probably listens to what the callers are saying and re-packages the message - what any good business man would do - see what the demand is and fill it.
Absolutely!
Pretty good theory.
I have a marketing background and my ears kind of pick up stuff. Trump's 'stump' style is almost a mirror image of Howard Stern's style when Howard gives speeches. That could be because they grew up in the same area and people all talk like that from suburbia New York but it could be Trump borrowing Stern's style. Stern will self reference when making a speech (he ran for gov against Pataki as a Libertarian) and talk about himself and his past dates (Trump did that) and call other candidates weak, etc and claim he is the greatest this or that - king of radio, of media, etc.
I agreed with you based on my personal observations. I find very few people really knows what’s going on. They listen to “drive music” going back and forth to work and then catch 30 minutes of TV local news in the evening at home, if they find time. They are out about on weekends golfing and seeking entertaining venues. They start the same routine again on Monday. They catch sound bites or pick up sketchy information during short conversations here and there. So, when someone draws their attention….they are attracted. And Trump surely is drawing a lots of attention.
That's why I posed this... "should he be the (R) rockstar this time next year." IMHO, he has a 50/50 chance at the top poll in a year. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Rand and the others seem to think Trump will have his candidate-of-the-week moment, like Cain or Gingrich in 2012. So taking on Trump is just a way to make his current supporters mad so that, when Trump collapses, they still won't like the guy(s) who took him down. So the other GOP candidates seem to think that libmedia or Trump's own big mouth and colossal ego will do him in, sooner than later. Then they'll each try to scoop up as many of Trump's supporters as possible. Trump can only ride the horse he is on so far. Right now, he's the raging populist. But that never seems to sell in modern campaigns and didn't even work when William Jennings Bryan tried to do it a century ago.
The DNC has still spent the most and run the most ads against Rand Paul. That may change now but it was a real pattern for a while there.
Trump can ride his horse to election day if he chooses. He is less like Cain or Gingrich and more like Perot with his resources. He can say whatever he wants because he does not give a damn about donors or the party PTB. Hillary Clinton has taken in $46.7M and has spent $18.7M or 40% of it, spending $230K per day. Her favorability ratings have dropped. At this burn rate, she has to raise a fortune in order to not run out of money, as she did when campaigning against Obama.
That fact right there should be enough to get every registered voter to support Trump UNLESS that voter is socialist, agenda driven or a retard. We have a few right here on LF I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Trump's my man this time. He's the only one I like. I will even hold my nose and pull the "R" lever, if he's the nominee. If he's not, but runs Independent, I'll pull the "I" lever. The rest of the Republican and Democrat fields can eat shit and die.
Your insight is non existent. Trumps supporters aren't going to go anywhere. You don't get it. As Vicmonte said. All the other Republicans can eat shit and die. I would say except Cruz. Like Vic. I'll pull the I lever for Trump too. The more you kick and scream like a 2 year old crying for attention. The more clear it becomes that you are GOPe and I will never vote for any of them.
Trump is gonna win. I talk to a lot of people. He has a whole lot of support. Even among Obama voters. He can certainly win. Despite tooconservatives whining and shilling to the contrary.
Apparently I'm living in your head, rent-free.
I just don't get why you like the establishment so much. Trump comes along and all you do is rip him. He would make a good President. I don't agree with everything about him. But I see he loves the country. I'm seeing Obama voters who will vote for him. I'm seeing 69 year olds who will vote for him I'm seeing people in their fifties and fouties. Late twenties to early twenties people too. I know at least 6 people from 18 to early twenties who are on board. I'm seeing GW Bush supporters supporting Trump. I'm seeing people who have never been interested in politics vowing to vote for Trump. They will too because I will get them registered. Perry shot himself in the face when he dissed Trump. He will never get out of the single digits. Rand Paul doesn't have a change. Ted Cruz I like but he is a long shot. If Cruz has a chance I could still vote for him. He'd make a great VP for Trump. Sorry if I am rough on you sometimes. You're an ok guy.
I'm an Independent. I hate Republicans and I hate Democrats. But I like Trump: he is bold and unafraid to say it the way he perceives it. Or at any rate, he's not afraid to say what it is that huge numbers of people want. He's believable, to me. Of course, I like Sarah Palin for the same reason, and voted for her in the General Election. And Perot the first time (second time, Dole). Trump is my guy. Trump is your guy - and think how far you and I are apart on so many things. But we both like Trump. Is it because we're bamboozled? Or is it the same phenomenon as with Reagan. Fair to say that Reagan Democrats and the Country Club never saw eye to eye, but they both thought Reagan could LEAD, so they both followed him. It's like that with Trump: he has charisma. He's smart. He can lead. And he is an in-your-face New Yorker. I live and work around New York. Lived and worked directly in the city for years. Went to law school there. New York is a jungle of abrasive, aggressive, brash people. But you do not survive and thrive in New York if you're stupid. The competition is too ferocious. The people, too mean. Trump is at the top of the New York real estate market - an economic battlefield that is a perpetual war zone. He can run organizations, run a budget, run people. He can talk to all kinds - New Yorkers can do that because the city is the most diverse in the world. But he has practical common sense. AND he understands that we live in a democracy, dammit, and the people want Border control. No matter WHAT the "this is a REPUBLIC, not a DEMOCRACY, so the people can go hang themselves because WE, the archons, know what is best" types have to say, the candidate who will be a populist and go right to the people, demagogue the issues, and then RULE on that - HE will be popular, and he will win. I happen to think that the people are, as a group, smarter than the leaders. So I like populism. I think the vox populi is more reliable than the vox Cours Supremis, or the vox Senatus. Republicans don't agree. But they can suck eggs. I'll vote for Trump EVEN THOUGH he's running as a Republican. And the Republicans don't nominate him I hope he runs third party. I'll vote for him that way too. He's the man of the hour, the man we need. We needed Perot. We needed Sarah Palin. And we need Trump.
Is Trump Really In First Place?
#2. To: Pericles, TooConservative (#1)
Yes. (for good or ill)
#3. To: nolu chan, Pericles, TooConservative (#2)
What have the other collective 15 or so said lately?
#4. To: SOSO, Pericles, TooConservative (#3)
What have the other collective 15 or so said lately?
#5. To: TooConservative (#0)
To participate in a debate, all candidates should at least (a) be announced and (b) agree to back the party’s nominee.
#6. To: TooConservative (#0)
but it’s still unclear whether one conservative would emerge against Jeb Bush.
#7. To: A K A Stone, TooConservative, the false god R, Satan (#5)
To participate in a debate, all candidates should at least (a) be announced and (b) agree to back the party’s nominee.
#8. To: A K A Stone (#6)
Bush shouldn't be in the debate. The polls are inaccurate. Only 12,334 people have contributed to his campaign.
#9. To: hondo68 (#7)
To participate in a debate, all candidates should at least (a) be announced and (b) agree to back the party’s nominee.
#10. To: TooConservative (#0)
Is Trump Really In First Place?
#11. To: TooConservative (#0)
#12. To: tomder55 (#11)
10 candidates on a stage is 8 too many . I favor a series of one-on-one Lincoln- Douglas style debates .
#13. To: nolu chan (#4)
" The rest of them could be in the witness protection program. "
#14. To: TooConservative (#12)
I don't see how Trump can last too long, though he can probably hold 8-10% no matter what. That means that Bush will overcome the field with his warchest when the campaign moves to high-dollar media markets like Florida. Only if the base unites early on a single candidate is there any chance to stop Bush.
#15. To: hondo68 (#7)
" Anyone so morally bankrupt as to vote for anything with an (R), is unfit for office.
#16. To: A K A Stone (#5)
" Fuck You. Not you TC the author. But you are dumb too. "
#17. To: TooConservative (#12)
On the Dem side, you could have a series of Bernie/Hitlery debates. Will that work for you?
#18. To: TooConservative, hondo68 (#9)
(Edited)
Agreeing to back the party's nominee is pretty much what makes a political party. If you participate as a candidate, you are obligated to support the nominee because you would expect them to support you if you were the nominee.
#19. To: TooConservative (#12)
This is one reason I've said all along that the GOP conservative base voters should pick one candidate early on and stick with them. Cruz is generally a lousy retail pol, almost as bad as Hitlery. Perry isn't glib, plays into the "another dumb Texan" meme. Paul has missing missing opportunities, made a few rash statements; better retail pol than his dad but a hard sell to a lot of GOP voters. Rubio just seems kinda slimy as a pol, relies on flowery rhetoric that sound too much like Peggy Noonan material. Kasich is too often a bit of a loose cannon but does have a track record in Ohio but he isn't really a national pol.
#20. To: A K A Stone (#6)
" Trump gives you GOPe turds the shits. You need to change your diaper. "
#21. To: tomder55 (#19)
I have my eyes on Walker .
#22. To: TooConservative (#0)
(Edited)
More reasons to question the upcoming poll-based GOP debates, as well as Trump's current polling.
#23. To: GrandIsland (#22)
#24. To: tomder55 (#23)
Third, he fights back.
#25. To: tomder55 (#23)
Fourth, he is the anti-politician. When Mr. Trump says “China is eating our lunch,” “I respect Mexico greatly as a country. But the problem we have is their leaders are much sharper than ours, and they’re killing us at the border and they’re killing us on trade,” and “I would take [the Islamic State] out so fast,” those “everyday Americans” hear truth and action, two things largely missing from the governing class. Details are thin as to how he would accomplish those things, but so what? Hillary Clinton isn’t exactly bursting with policy details at this point, either.
#26. To: GrandIsland (#22)
#27. To: Pericles (#24)
#28. To: Gatlin (#27)
#29. To: Pericles (#28)
#30. To: tomder55 (#23)
Trump doesn't have staying power .His act will get as old as Christie's .
#31. To: GrandIsland (#22)
Rand has been quiet.... and I know why. Is it politically smart to hold your tounge this early in the game to avoid the kind of libtard backlash that Trumps been getting? Probably.... but I respect him less for it.
#32. To: tomder55 (#19)
Evita seems to think that Bush ,Rubio ,and Walker are her biggest threats based on her comments this week.
#33. To: TooConservative, GrandIsland (#31)
Trump can only ride the horse he is on so far.
#34. To: nolu chan (#33)
He can say whatever he wants because he does not give a damn about donors or the party PTB.
#35. To: TooConservative (#32)
#36. To: TooConservative (#31)
Trump can only ride the horse he is on so far. Right now, he's the raging populist.
#37. To: Vicomte13 (#35)
The rest of the Republican and Democrat fields can eat shit and die.
#38. To: A K A Stone (#37)
Despite tooconservatives whining and shilling to the contrary.
#39. To: TooConservative (#38)
Apparently I'm living in your head, rent-free.
#40. To: A K A Stone (#36)
#41. To: TooConservative, Grandisland, Out damned spot (#38)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]