Trump cheats at golf - the ONE and ONLY politics thread

The polls were temporarily tight, but the projections are still solidly for Clinton.

538 (the actual model, not the clickbait alternates): 60.9%

Princeton Election Consortium: 65% and 85% (two different probability models)

NYT: 70%

And I still think polling-based models are missing the problem with Trump's abdication of ground game.

I wish it were 99.9% across the board, but she is winning and favored.

 

I think Nate feels personal, moral responsibility to get the sane off their butts and to the polls to vote.

He doesn't want sane people getting complacent because of Nate Silver.

As such, I think his models "aggressively" favor Trump.

 

Are you a data scientist?

 

#objectivejournalism

 

This. A hundred times, this.

I'm not sure Clinton has ever actually enjoyed any part of this election cycle and think all the debating with Sanders took some toll, both personally and poll-wise, at certain points. But I think she actually is looking forward more to this than anything else so far. It started with her nomination acceptance speech, with which I think she probably won the election, and she might be positively salivating now.

When it comes to a substantive debate with Clinton, Trump should be very afraid. He won't be, in a bombastic, and very negative and personal kind of way. But he has too much catching up to do in terms of knowledge and experience to not be worried about really facing off with her on the issues.

 

I may regret this ... But what the fuck is a "data scientist"?

 

This may seem like one Disney employee defending another, but I don't think that's true at all. He's made it pretty clear that he sets his "model" well in advance, and the poll numbers are the poll numbers. When he tweaks the model, he talks about why he's tweaking it, and why he starts giving more weight to certain economic projections or polls or approval ratings than others.

I think if anything, as a data guy, he was mortified that he whiffed on Trump during the primaries, and its being cautious as a result. And I do think Trump has a real chance. But every election now comes down to turnout, and it's really hard to predict turnout, even for the best polling firms.

Tell me who is showing up and I'll tell you who is winning Ohio and Florida. How will Trump get people out to vote? Through his Twitter account? Through sheer fear of brown people?

Romney won white women by 14 percent. Hillary (in the last data I saw) was leading women by like 3 points, and among college educated white women, by like 30 points.

How does Trump make up that difference? Especially when he is likely to lose Hispanic/Latino voters by a historic margin. Even if no additional Hispanic/Latino voters come to the polls, Romney won like 27 percent of those votes in 2012. Trump is currently polling around 16 percent.

Romney got 6 percent of the African American vote. Trump is currently getting 2 percent.

Where does he make up the differences?

11 percent of women (53 percent of the electorate in 2012) is a huge number. Now add 11 percent of Hispanic/Latino votes (10 percent in 2012, certain to be more this time). And 4 percent of African American voters (13 percent of the electorate in 2012).

White men made up 47 percent of the voters in 2012. Trump is killing her there, like 66-30. Is that enough to make up the gap? Maybe! It might be in Ohio and Florida, but as we talked about yesterday, Pennsylvania is going to be the hardest mountain to climb.

 

And even if she doesn't mop the floor she will have an echo chamber lead by national media saying she did.

 

If the polling holds in Pennsylvania, I don't see Trump's path to victory. He'll need to flip some trends that were already in place for Obama's victories. I know it's only August, but some of those gaps are big, so he's running out of time.

The rest of your post highlights what has me scratching my head about the Republican Party. They already knew they had problems in those demographics. So how does it end up that they present a nominee who not only doesn't appeal to those voters but aggressivle repels them?

This was their chance to take the presidency with literally anyone who could take a moderate stance on civil rights without pandering to the theocracy-inclined. They blew it.

 

Oh, and besides, I was up with this first!

 

They tried really hard not to but they are philosophically ill-equipped to deal with collective action problems.

 

This sounds like a semi-calculated effort by wingnut radio to gin up yet another "they did it too!" response when Trump declines.

Forgive if this is a DB, I've been away ... but did we hear about the NFL calling bullshit on Trump's first debate excuse?

Trump says NFL complained to him about debate schedule; NFL says it didn't