No he didn't.
Senate On Verge Of Blocking Trump Emergency Declaration With Latest GOP Defection
- Thread starter gwb-trading
- Start date
No he didn't.
Really? As I am aware, his issue was with gerrymandering limiting the number of seats Dems win, not poll data - as you claim. And just like in 2016, in 2018 polling was accurate.
I understand gerrymandering, like the electoral college, is a complexity right wingers on this board have a hard time with but it is not lost on Stark.
Ok, but you referenced polling data, not forecast. Is there a third person involved in this conversation I am not aware of or are just unable to stay on topic?
You lying ass troll. I saw jem disabuse of that bullshit but I am sure you will take quotes out of context so here is the context.
For instance the entire thrust of the 350 something page Romney thread for jem was to argue the polls needed to follow responsible templates....not predict winners. Winner predictions were either unimportant or lighthearted...jests...
Not only did JEM call the 2016 election template and turnout perfectly... One of the few in the country to do so explaining that the pools showed hillary was inside the margin of error and might win by 2 percent but if she did so Trump had a great chance of winning...
Here is what he said the Romney thread's capstone...
For instance the entire thrust of the 350 something page Romney thread for jem was to argue the polls needed to follow responsible templates....not predict winners. Winner predictions were either unimportant or lighthearted...jests...
Not only did JEM call the 2016 election template and turnout perfectly... One of the few in the country to do so explaining that the pools showed hillary was inside the margin of error and might win by 2 percent but if she did so Trump had a great chance of winning...
Here is what he said the Romney thread's capstone...
Last edited:
"jem will then return home, grab a beer and watch as the the media explains this surprise Romney victory..."-jem aka TJustice
"When Obama can't qualify for the ballot in a bunch of states - it will be hillary vs palin."-jem aka TJustice
No third person, but one of the two in the conversation simply isn't able to grasp basic English dialogue (and it isn't me).
Tony is telling us how future elections will go. His track record on telling us how past elections would go isn't the greatest. You can go on and on about why this is (and I'm sure you will) but using him as a forecaster for the future is, well, rather worthless.
Except to you, I'm sure as he's pushing your narrative. Hopefully that is clear. Given how you have selective hearing (reading) it might not be.
Maybe, maybe not. Stark is pretty on point with staying up to date with quality polling. Now trying to analyze that within the conditions of a gerrymandered congress and the electoral college is extremely difficult in today’s era of moneyball politics.
What I will say is Stark does not use garbage sources for polling data and he is certainly a lot more thoughtful than most.
I will go on why this is, thank you. We all live in the wake of Trump’s election and that upset traditional forecasting models. Truthfully Trump got creamed in the popular vote but picked the locked in 3 states by hook or by crook yet tbd. And within that now lies a lot of statistical doubt but don’t think somehow trump supporters had a better analysis of an election- they simply get very, Very lucky. And I will take Stark’s quality polls and thoughtfulness over luck every time.
Of course you'll take Stark's "quality polls". They always go in your direction and make you feel good.
If it is indeed "luck" that won Trump the Presidency (it wasn't, and this shows you folks haven't learned your lesson) then I'll take luck every day of the week if it keeps you loons out of office.
Even Phonysnark's "quality polls" show Donald Trump's favorability over 6 percent higher than when he was elected in 2016.