Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Gothmog

(145,558 posts)
71. Because according to Nate Silver these numbers are worthless
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 08:17 PM
Jan 2016

Hypothetical match up polls are worthless in part because the margin of error for these polls are so high and in part because the candidate has not been vetted. http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/donald-trump-is-really-unpopular-with-general-election-voters/


Head-to-head polls of hypothetical general election matchups have almost no predictive power at this stage of the campaign, but for what it’s worth, Trump tends to fare relatively poorly in those too. On average,2 in polls since Nov. 1, Trump trails Clinton by 5 percentage points, while Clinton and Marco Rubio are tied.

See also http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/harrys-guide-to-2016-election-polls/

Ignore hypothetical matchups in primary season – they also measure nothing. General election polls before and during the primary season have a very wide margin of error. That’s especially the case for candidates who aren’t even in the race and therefore haven’t been treated to the onslaught of skeptical media coverage usually associated with being the candidate.

Sanders supporters have to rely on these worthless polls because it is clear that Sanders is not viable in a general election where the Kochs will be spending $887 million and the RNC candidate may spend an additional billion dollars.

No one should rely on hypo match up type polls in selecting a nominee at this stage of the race.
Pragmatic means submit to republicans during every negotiation. JRLeft Jan 2016 #1
Yes it does. It admits defeat right out of the gate. Punkingal Jan 2016 #3
"Pragmatic" is dog-whistle code for "Status Quo" Ferd Berfel Jan 2016 #52
it's another dog-whistle for "making tough choices' Karma13612 Jan 2016 #81
So Obama was Pragmatic when he put Social Secutiry on teh chopping block? Ferd Berfel Jan 2016 #82
yes. and he compromises instead of fighting from a much higher starting point. Karma13612 Jan 2016 #85
We were talking about Pragmatism. HIllary will be a continuation of Obama's Pragmatism. Ferd Berfel Jan 2016 #88
Yes. We must not fight a Republican House Deny and Shred Jan 2016 #79
And how will you get the gop to go along with this vision? hrmjustin Jan 2016 #2
Do they fucking own us? Punkingal Jan 2016 #6
To fight them the party needs money and Sanders refused to raise a dime for the party. hrmjustin Jan 2016 #9
Screw that stupid argument. He fights with the truth and people want to hear it. Punkingal Jan 2016 #11
Your debating skills leave me in utter awe! hrmjustin Jan 2016 #15
Your parroting the same old lines is awe-inspiring by contrast. Punkingal Jan 2016 #17
No my point is Sanders has shown no desire for party building. hrmjustin Jan 2016 #19
Long since been proven false sonofspy777 Jan 2016 #38
Yes - this was proven false a couple of weeks back. yet some here keep repeating it over and over kath Jan 2016 #75
Then WE need to raise it...the rank and file progressives... JimDandy Jan 2016 #57
Thank you! Punkingal Jan 2016 #58
If you have weak ideas, you need a lot of money to convince people their great ideas. aikoaiko Jan 2016 #37
The Party that fights him at every step? tazkcmo Jan 2016 #102
That is a nice excuse you are making but it is just an excuse. hrmjustin Jan 2016 #104
Your opnion. tazkcmo Jan 2016 #105
What poll shows me wrong? hrmjustin Jan 2016 #106
You don't START with a compromise, you start with the ideal situation, jkbRN Jan 2016 #10
Ok but if they control the house they won't vote for Sanders bill. hrmjustin Jan 2016 #12
Work on a primary challenger for all of them, get the house back, jkbRN Jan 2016 #16
Then why did Sanders fail to raise money for the party? hrmjustin Jan 2016 #18
Sanders, as the only career politician running on our side, NCTraveler Jan 2016 #70
Ummmnnnhhhhh.,.,Can't do anythiong,. No how no way. We're all Doomed! Armstead Jan 2016 #78
The thing is gollygee Jan 2016 #98
If pragmatism is starting off with a compromise jkbRN Jan 2016 #4
It's not a compromise Cassiopeia Jan 2016 #8
Its just a huge compromise (I agree with you) jkbRN Jan 2016 #13
No, it's capitulation. nt haikugal Jan 2016 #29
+1 Punkingal Jan 2016 #34
If pragmatic means letting Repugs pull us further and further right TDale313 Jan 2016 #5
The people using that word Cassiopeia Jan 2016 #7
Oldie but goodie whatchamacallit Jan 2016 #14
I suppose I should laugh, but it's not funny, it's tragic. Punkingal Jan 2016 #20
Ideologues always do hate pragmatism. So much easier to fantasize and throw stones. KittyWampus Jan 2016 #21
Fantasize and throw stones? What exactly do you mean? Punkingal Jan 2016 #22
I think you're confusing with "idealist" with "ideologue." Either way, it's inaccurate. senz Jan 2016 #24
Mo Dowd refers to Hillary as "expedient." senz Jan 2016 #23
That bitter woman can go and rot. Beacool Jan 2016 #39
Is that the bus you're throwing her under? Ed Suspicious Jan 2016 #77
I've always found pragmatic to be code for selling out. Skwmom Jan 2016 #25
Bingo! Punkingal Jan 2016 #26
+1000 GoneFishin Jan 2016 #30
Pragmatiic is the word you hear Kelvin Mace Jan 2016 #27
We have to have a candidate who is viable Gothmog Jan 2016 #28
Exactly, that's why I'm so happy to have a real liberal to vote for. He works for us not against us. haikugal Jan 2016 #32
Good answer! Punkingal Jan 2016 #40
How is Sanders going to win? Gothmog Jan 2016 #45
Voters who believe...in their power, and that they deserve something better. Punkingal Jan 2016 #47
Deserving something better is not the same as winning an election Gothmog Jan 2016 #49
We can disagree...I don't think Hillary is viable. Punkingal Jan 2016 #51
Only if you believe that the Kochs will not run $300 million of negative ads against Sanders Gothmog Jan 2016 #53
buy into the $15 trillion lie if you want. Punkingal Jan 2016 #55
That number is a good number Gothmog Jan 2016 #63
I wouldn't need to if people would look at things instead of accepting whatever they are told. Sad. Punkingal Jan 2016 #64
add +1 to the "Bernie is unelectable" meme counter. nt antigop Jan 2016 #46
How high is this counter now? Gothmog Jan 2016 #48
just keep repeating the "Bernie is unelectable" meme. nt antigop Jan 2016 #65
I keeping asking a question that is not being answered Gothmog Jan 2016 #68
Why don't you check out the national head to head match-ups with Bernie and the Republicans? Punkingal Jan 2016 #69
Because according to Nate Silver these numbers are worthless Gothmog Jan 2016 #71
Matchups have no predictive power on who will win the general election, but they may JonLeibowitz Jan 2016 #76
Read the original Eaton article that Nate cites Gothmog Jan 2016 #84
I don't believe Enten makes a single comment about comparative analysis, only about predictions JonLeibowitz Jan 2016 #86
Feel free to ignore the polls and the facts Gothmog Jan 2016 #90
Your post is excessively rude. I wasn't advocating ignoring polls or facts. JonLeibowitz Jan 2016 #91
add +1 to the "Bernie is unelectable" meme counter. nt antigop Jan 2016 #73
Talk to DWS. Say "hi" and tell her "thanks" for her moment of candor re: Bernie. nt antigop Jan 2016 #74
and, gee, if there were only a way to find out. Hehehe. nt antigop Jan 2016 #66
How is Hillary viable? Still In Wisconsin Jan 2016 #56
Do you have any doubt that she can raise sufficient funds to compete? Gothmog Jan 2016 #62
Funds are necessary for competing but not necessarily sufficient for victory Fumesucker Jan 2016 #87
Third Wayers have been using the word for years as a way to describe their Zorra Jan 2016 #31
Yep... haikugal Jan 2016 #33
Pragmatism boils down to doing what works HereSince1628 Jan 2016 #35
+100000000 CharlotteVale Jan 2016 #43
Straight up useless! Ed Suspicious Jan 2016 #80
These days, "pragmatic" is most often used as a euphemism for "disappointing" demwing Jan 2016 #36
Pragmatic Democrats = Surrender Monkeys 99Forever Jan 2016 #41
beginning? PowerToThePeople Jan 2016 #42
"Pragmatic" is just another way of saying "sell out." CharlotteVale Jan 2016 #44
Yup. The rightward drift continues farleftlib Jan 2016 #50
Name me one major election a Democrat has won by moving to the right... Still In Wisconsin Jan 2016 #54
I'm fine with pragmatic LWolf Jan 2016 #59
Your definition is fine...I'm afraid the Clinton people don't define it that way. Punkingal Jan 2016 #60
It's one of the many terms LWolf Jan 2016 #72
It's defeatism. earthside Jan 2016 #61
How fitting with Hillary invoking the name of Truman and tying it to the ACA. Something about Ed Suspicious Jan 2016 #83
There's a superiority with pragmatism, which says I'm the grown up, the realist. EndElectoral Jan 2016 #67
The way HRC is using the term, "pragmatic" means "Settling for less than nothing". Ken Burch Jan 2016 #89
Here’s One Big Problem With The Bernie Sanders Plan For Health Care Utopia Gothmog Jan 2016 #92
Hillary has no vision. Punkingal Jan 2016 #93
Vision is nothing without being pragmatic KingFlorez Jan 2016 #94
And being pragmatic is nothing without vision. Now, with the bromides dispensed with... Romulox Jan 2016 #95
Bernie Sanders's fiction-filled campaign Gothmog Jan 2016 #96
This is an opinion piece. Punkingal Jan 2016 #97
Where are the supposed cost savings? Gothmog Jan 2016 #99
Well I don't believe that. Punkingal Jan 2016 #100
pragmatic = cowardly. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Jan 2016 #101
Bingo...they are cowards, all of them, including Pelosi. Punkingal Jan 2016 #107
Why some Dems think people prefer ""Pragmatism"... when is not done Honestly? Yupy Jan 2016 #103
How do you feel about "sensible woodchuck?" merrily Jan 2016 #108
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»I am beginning to hate th...»Reply #71