Presidential Debate

I literally showed you how the polling was a 6% difference in 2016. You then repeat over and over and over that it was 10. Even though your own stats disprove your point.

There were isolated cases that were further off than 2%. I said 2% was the general trend. But why would I engage with you on a break down of statistics when you can look at a 6% difference and straight up lie that it was 10%? You are deluding yourself and will say and believe whatever reinforces your worldview. You want to believe that trump will win, so even though he is losing pretty much everywhere that matters, you insist that all the available evidence is wrong and your own extremely biased opinions are the only things that matter.

#152

ILikePie5

Debates: 3

Posts: 15,159

ILikePie5

10.10.2020 04:23PM

-->

@HistoryBuff

I literally showed you how the polling was a 6% difference in 2016. You then repeat over and over and over that it was 10. Even though your own stats disprove your point.

No you haven’t. Your link shows November numbers. Click on your own link dude.

There were isolated cases that were further off than 2%. I said 2% was the general trend.

Which cases are you talking about? The critical states were the ones I mentioned in my post especially the Rust Belt.

But why would I engage with you on a break down of statistics when you can look at a 6% difference and straight up lie that it was 10%? You are deluding yourself and will say and believe whatever reinforces your worldview. You want to believe that trump will win, so even though he is losing pretty much everywhere that matters, you insist that all the available evidence is wrong and your own extremely biased opinions are the only things that matter.

I know he’ll win lol. You rely on polls at your own peril. They didn’t improve in 2018 and won’t improve now. I unlike you know how to read polls. I know the systematic biases that arise in the polls. You don’t. There’s a reason why NYT/Siena polls showed that they didn’t reach Trump supporters in his strongest regions in PA and OH.

#153

HistoryBuff

Debates: 0

Posts: 4,222

HistoryBuff

10.10.2020 04:33PM

-->

@ILikePie5

No you haven’t. Your link shows November numbers. Click on your own link dude.

alright, i give up. The top is a chart that shows numbers for months.

Which cases are you talking about? The critical states were the ones I mentioned in my post especially the Rust Belt.

there were cases that were more off, that is true. But i'm not getting into the nitty gritty of polling with someone who straight up lies that 6% is the same as 10%

I know he’ll win lol. You rely on polls at your own peril.

whatever. Feel free to be surprised as trump goes down in flames. Don't say you weren't warned. But I'm sure you will scream and whine that it was rigged after trump loses.

#154

ILikePie5

Debates: 3

Posts: 15,159

ILikePie5

10.10.2020 04:38PM

-->

@HistoryBuff

alright, i give up. The top is a chart that shows numbers for months.

Why don’t you give actual numbers lol. Can’t find em?

there were cases that were more off, that is true. But i'm not getting into the nitty gritty of polling with someone who straight up lies that 6% is the same as 10%

Glad we agree that the critical rust belt states had insane margins of error. You know they were wrong. They were also wrong in 2018. You choose to believe that they’re right in 2020. I choose to look at fundamentals and questions that avoid social desirability bias.

whatever. Feel free to be surprised as trump goes down in flames. Don't say you weren't warned. But I'm sure you will scream and whine that it was rigged after trump loses.

Wasn’t me screaming rigged for the past 4 years

#155

HistoryBuff

Debates: 0

Posts: 4,222

HistoryBuff

10.10.2020 04:56PM

-->

@ILikePie5

Why don’t you give actual numbers lol. Can’t find em?

I gave you sources. Hell, I used stats from your own source. I won't continue this line of discussion when you lie about what my sources and your own sources say.

Glad we agree that the critical rust belt states had insane margins of error

well you seem to not understand what I'm saying, probably intentionally. But lets give this a shot.

Some of the polling was wrong. but alot of it was quite accurate. The general trend was trump did 2% better than his polls. In Michigan he did 4% better. Which is certainly higher, but definitely not an "insane margin of error". In Pennsylvania he did about 3% better than his polling, definitely not an "insane margin of error".

But I will also acknowledge that there were isolated cases where the polling was further off. For example in Wisconsin where he overperformed by about 7%. But these were the exceptions, not the rule. Most of the polling was pretty accurate. But because the race was so close (4% nationally) small margins of error were enough to carry him over the line in a few critical states.

The race is very different this time. He isn't looking at being down by 4%. He is down by 10%. The polls would have to be much further off now than they were in 2016. If the polls had the same margin of error as they did in 2016, trump would get absolutely slaughtered.

#156

Danielle

Debates: 3

Posts: 2,049

Danielle

10.13.2020 02:35PM

-->

@Greyparrot

"I never said people are being paid to protest, they are looking to cash in on lawsuits."

You "never"said that? You absolutely did say that. Your exact words were: "Unless of course I am being paid to take tear gas to the face for a photo op with CNN to show how bad the Orangeman is."

So to be clear you absolutely did say people were being paid to protest (don't gaslight me) which is a completely different thing than cashing in on lawsuits. You failed to prove with a single one of those links that anyone was being paid to protest because they're not. Stop repeating dumb ass conspiracy theories.

I don't think there are enough lawsuits won against the police. If police wore body cameras all the time and footage captured other people violently antagonizing them, they wouldn't lose or have to settle those lawsuits so often now would they? There would be proof they acted accordingly or in a way most citizens would agree with. Police unions are the ones who aggressively lobby to limit the use of body cams and other recordings, and when legislatures force them to wear it they mysteriously "malfunction" in the midst of a violent altercation. So that's on them.

I also find it funny that in order to prove your "Orange man bad" point mocking leftists and CNN that you chose to cite several links about The Sovereign Citizens movement, known for being right-wing extremists lol. That's good stuff.

#157