I don't know what 538 you're referencing but the one here http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/ shows the opposite.

Do you rightards really thing lying will win you votes and favor?

538. too funny. If you go with their 'polls plus their own forecast model, Hillary is up 54 - 46, but only if you take all of the third party votes and give them to Hillary. If you check out their 'if the election were held today', it a total dead heat with Hillary up by 1 point (50.6 - 49.4). How can anyone believe this is anything but a wild guess at this point?

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/#now

The fact that Trump has any chance at all is a real statement. No experience other than reality tv and bankruptcy. Thrice married rich kid who couldnt id syria from Jordan. Remarkable really.

Remarkable really. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The fact that Trump has any chance at all is a
> real statement. No experience other than reality
> tv and bankruptcy. Thrice married rich kid who
> couldnt id syria from Jordan. Remarkable really.


This is how bad your precious establishment globalists have fucked things up. A schmuck like Trump is going to win because the Bushs, Clintons and Obama have screwed the pooch. Don't blame us. Blame the shitheads who have screwed us over for the past 30 years.

Trump 4 the Win Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Trump now at 54.9% chance of winning.

Um... No.

Trump-tards!

LoLz!

Attachments:

Didn't she say she should be winning by 50 points? Wa happn?

.
Attachments:

Did he say he'd be winning? Wa happn?

CNBC's poll puts Trump at 67% based on over 900K votes:

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/26/vote-who-won-the-first-presidential-debate.html

(Click on one of their pics to see the results)

Take a Look Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> CNBC's poll puts Trump at 67% based on over 900K
> votes:
>
> http://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/26/vote-who-won-the-fi
> rst-presidential-debate.html

Touting internet poll results?

How desperate are you 'tards?

Trump-tards!

LoLz!

Trump-tards! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Take a Look Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > CNBC's poll puts Trump at 67% based on over
> 900K
> > votes:
> >
> >
> http://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/26/vote-who-won-the-fi
>
> > rst-presidential-debate.html
>
> Touting internet poll results?
>
> How desperate are you 'tards?
>
> Trump-tards!
>
> LoLz!


How old are you, about 10? You sure sound like it. I only discuss politics with adults, so direct your dumb, childish comments to someone else.

Take a Look Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How old are you, about 10? You sure sound like
> it. I only discuss politics with adults, so
> direct your dumb, childish comments to someone
> else.

And yet here you are, responding to my post.

Immature? Childish?

Look in the mirror, 'tard.

That Trump-tards are motivated to click answers to internet polls means absolutely nothing. Well, not to anyone who is rational.

Trump-tards!

LoLz!

Gerry has no job. He is a freeloading hobo; a drain on society. Don't even waste time talking to him. He would leave if everyone just ignored him, like they do most street bums.

Trump-tards! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Take a Look Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > How old are you, about 10? You sure sound like
> > it. I only discuss politics with adults, so
> > direct your dumb, childish comments to someone
> > else.
>
> And yet here you are, responding to my post.
>
> Immature? Childish?
>
> Look in the mirror, 'tard.
>
> That Trump-tards are motivated to click answers to
> internet polls means absolutely nothing. Well, not
> to anyone who is rational.
>
> Trump-tards!
>
> LoLz!

It means that Hillary supporters aren't and/or there aren't many of them.

kde4h Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Trump-tards! Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Take a Look Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > How old are you, about 10? You sure sound
> like
> > > it. I only discuss politics with adults, so
> > > direct your dumb, childish comments to
> someone
> > > else.
> >
> > And yet here you are, responding to my post.
> >
> > Immature? Childish?
> >
> > Look in the mirror, 'tard.
> >
> > That Trump-tards are motivated to click answers
> to
> > internet polls means absolutely nothing. Well,
> not
> > to anyone who is rational.
> >
> > Trump-tards!
> >
> > LoLz!
>
> It means that Hillary supporters aren't and/or
> there aren't many of them.

Clicking isn't voting.

Realitist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> kde4h Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Trump-tards! Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Take a Look Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > How old are you, about 10? You sure sound
> > like
> > > > it. I only discuss politics with adults,
> so
> > > > direct your dumb, childish comments to
> > someone
> > > > else.
> > >
> > > And yet here you are, responding to my post.
> > >
> > > Immature? Childish?
> > >
> > > Look in the mirror, 'tard.
> > >
> > > That Trump-tards are motivated to click
> answers
> > to
> > > internet polls means absolutely nothing.
> Well,
> > not
> > > to anyone who is rational.
> > >
> > > Trump-tards!
> > >
> > > LoLz!
> >
> > It means that Hillary supporters aren't and/or
> > there aren't many of them.
>
> Clicking isn't voting.


If they aren't motivated enough to click, then they're not likely to be motivated enough to vote.

Enthusiasm Gap Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Realitist Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > kde4h Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Trump-tards! Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > Take a Look Wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > >
> > > > -----
> > > > > How old are you, about 10? You sure
> sound
> > > like
> > > > > it. I only discuss politics with adults,
> > so
> > > > > direct your dumb, childish comments to
> > > someone
> > > > > else.
> > > >
> > > > And yet here you are, responding to my
> post.
> > > >
> > > > Immature? Childish?
> > > >
> > > > Look in the mirror, 'tard.
> > > >
> > > > That Trump-tards are motivated to click
> > answers
> > > to
> > > > internet polls means absolutely nothing.
> > Well,
> > > not
> > > > to anyone who is rational.
> > > >
> > > > Trump-tards!
> > > >
> > > > LoLz!
> > >
> > > It means that Hillary supporters aren't
> and/or
> > > there aren't many of them.
> >
> > Clicking isn't voting.
>
> If they aren't motivated enough to click, then
> they're not likely to be motivated enough to vote.

So silly.

Clicking is pointless, voting is not.

Hillary supporters know the difference, trumptards do not.

Realitist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Enthusiasm Gap Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Realitist Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > kde4h Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > > -----
> > > > Trump-tards! Wrote:
> > > >
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > >
> > > > -----
> > > > > Take a Look Wrote:
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > -----
> > > > > > How old are you, about 10? You sure
> > sound
> > > > like
> > > > > > it. I only discuss politics with
> adults,
> > > so
> > > > > > direct your dumb, childish comments to
> > > > someone
> > > > > > else.
> > > > >
> > > > > And yet here you are, responding to my
> > post.
> > > > >
> > > > > Immature? Childish?
> > > > >
> > > > > Look in the mirror, 'tard.
> > > > >
> > > > > That Trump-tards are motivated to click
> > > answers
> > > > to
> > > > > internet polls means absolutely nothing.
> > > Well,
> > > > not
> > > > > to anyone who is rational.
> > > > >
> > > > > Trump-tards!
> > > > >
> > > > > LoLz!
> > > >
> > > > It means that Hillary supporters aren't
> > and/or
> > > > there aren't many of them.
> > >
> > > Clicking isn't voting.
> >
> > If they aren't motivated enough to click, then
> > they're not likely to be motivated enough to
> vote.
>
> So silly.
>
> Clicking is pointless, voting is not.
>
> Hillary supporters know the difference, trumptards
> do not.


Hillary supporters are much less likely to vote. The campaign even concedes that it has a problem as far as enthusiasm among key groups (younger voters, minorities) and getting them to turn out.

This is a presidential election not a midterm. The only party that is going to suffer an enthusiasm and cross voting problem is the GOP.

Enthusiasm Gap Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hillary supporters are much less likely to vote.
> The campaign even concedes that it has a problem
> as far as enthusiasm among key groups (younger
> voters, minorities) and getting them to turn out.

The polling simply does not agree:

"Trump’s purported base of support, white working-class men, are less likely to vote than other demographic groups.

In the new Washington Post/ABC News poll, 62 percent of white men without a college degree said that they were “absolutely certain” to vote this year. By comparison, 90 percent of white women with a college degree said they were absolutely certain to do so."

Attachments:

Right now it looks like Wisconsin and Michigan will go for Hillary Clinton. If Hillary wins Colorado, Virginia and Pennsylvania as well, the likelihood of Trump winning is near zero. Trump would have to win every other disputed state, including New Hampshire, plus the two district votes in Nebraska and Maine. That would also give Trump the closest electoral college win ever, beating out 2000.

OTOH if Hillary wants to claim a mandate, 272 electoral votes doesn't cut it. She would need at a minimum to win in Ohio, Florida and Nevada as well.

Realitist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Enthusiasm Gap Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Hillary supporters are much less likely to vote.
>
> > The campaign even concedes that it has a
> problem
> > as far as enthusiasm among key groups (younger
> > voters, minorities) and getting them to turn
> out.
>
> The polling simply does not agree:
>
> "Trump’s purported base of support, white
> working-class men, are less likely to vote than
> other demographic groups.
>
> In the new Washington Post/ABC News poll, 62
> percent of white men without a college degree said
> that they were “absolutely certain” to vote
> this year. By comparison, 90 percent of white
> women with a college degree said they were
> absolutely certain to do so."
>


Uh, yes, it does. And you don't have to pull some third-level derivative measure to show it as you did. Most likely because everything else you found when look said the opposite. lol But if you want to go that way we can. e.g.

Quote

By race. Seventy-three percent of white men said they were certain to vote, compared with 70 percent of whites overall. Among non-whites, the rates were much lower, with 55 percent saying the same. That's a much lower rate than in 2012 for non-white voters, which was itself down from 2008. Bear in mind, there are more non-white people eligible to vote now than there were eight years ago. As we've pointed out before, the electorate in 2014 was as diverse as it was in 2008.

Most alarming to Clinton supporters may be that only 44 percent of Hispanics said they were certain to vote in November. (Without data for that group from 2008 and 2012, it isn't shown on the chart above.)

By age. Here we can see the pattern above. Voters ages 30 to 39 have become much less likely to say they're certain to vote, while only half of those younger than 30 said in the most recent poll that they were certain to do so. Older voters are more likely to be committed to turning out in November.

By education and income. These two groups overlap to some extent (which is to say that income and education levels are correlated). Those who earn more and are more educated are much more likely to be committed to voting in November.

But let's dive into why this is a problem for Clinton, in case it wasn't already obvious: The groups that are less likely to say they're certain to vote are also groups among which Clinton does better.

Overall, slightly more Donald Trump supporters say they're certain to vote than are backers of Clinton. Seventy-six percent of Clinton backers say they're certainly or probably going to vote in November; 84 percent of Trump backers say the same.

^^^^^ Your data is from June.

Mine is from August.

I'm gonna go with mine, thanks. lol.

Realitist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ^^^^^ Your data is from June.
>
> Mine is from August.
>
> I'm gonna go with mine, thanks. lol.


Makes no difference. It's actually gotten worse since after the polls have switched more to likely voters. As I said, you don't have to go to some third-level breakdown. You can look at the polls of certainty of voting by candidate directly. You know... the ones that you found when you searched for that but didn't post because they didn't say what you wanted. lol

November 9th suicide rates in the south.

Gerrymanderer2 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This is a presidential election not a midterm. The
> only party that is going to suffer an enthusiasm
> and cross voting problem is the GOP.
Attachments:

Let's start learning lessons here instead of repeatedly making the same arrogant mistakes. Your retarded biases are getting old.

Bill.N. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Right now it looks like Wisconsin and Michigan
> will go for Hillary Clinton. If Hillary wins
> Colorado, Virginia and Pennsylvania as well, the
> likelihood of Trump winning is near zero. Trump
> would have to win every other disputed state,
> including New Hampshire, plus the two district
> votes in Nebraska and Maine. That would also give
> Trump the closest electoral college win ever,
> beating out 2000.
>
> OTOH if Hillary wants to claim a mandate, 272
> electoral votes doesn't cut it. She would need at
> a minimum to win in Ohio, Florida and Nevada as
> well.


It warms the cockles of my heart to see you were wrong again Billy. Always enjoy reading these old threads where you're old ass gets proven wrong.