Rex Sinquefeld's endorsement of Donald Trump

[Gordon Ritchie]

Re: Rex Sinquefeld's endorsement of Donald Trump

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/30...s-in-disbelief

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: Rex Sinquefeld's endorsement of Donald Trump

Most polls now strongly favor Clinton, but Trump fans continue to claim they are winning.
One poll that Sid alerted us to is the IBD/TIPP tracking poll, which has stubbornly kept Trump in the lead while polls from the "corrupt mainstream media" show Clinton's lead growing.

Well, guess what. The IBD/TIPP tracking poll is now tied.
ABC News tracking poll has Clinton with a 12 point lead.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: Rex Sinquefeld's endorsement of Donald Trump

The U.S. voters are between a rock and a hard place. They have the choice between someone who has been behaving like a dolt or the inauguration of a new kleptocracy. Its almost enough to make us feel warm and fuzzy about Canadian politics until we recall the disaster of Ontario and Katherine Wynn.

[Gordon Ritchie]

Re: Rex Sinquefeld's endorsement of Donald Trump

If Sid and Vlad really believe Trump is ahead, they can make a fortune as the live betting odds are 84% Clinton v. 16 % Trump.
For support of their position, see http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...se_watch_oct24
Personally, I believe and hope they are quite wrong and the betting odds are correct.

[Sid Belzberg]

Re: Rex Sinquefeld's endorsement of Donald Trump

If Sid and Vlad really believe Trump is ahead, they can make a fortune as the live betting odds are 84% Clinton v. 16 % Trump.
For support of their position, see http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...se_watch_oct24
Personally, I believe and hope they are quite wrong and the betting odds are correct.

You are incorrect that I use Rasmussen only to support my position.
The betting markets were very wrong with Brexit. The reason being that the lions share of the stay bets were concentrated with a small amount of bettors. The leaves bets were scattered among many millions of very small bettors. Here are a few links about the predictions of a Stony Brook Professor of Political Science who has correctly predicted every election since 1996 and using his statistical methodology has correctly predicted every election going back to 1912 with the exception of the 1960 election that was stolen from Nixon after the battleground state of Illinois stuffed the ballot boxes with deceased voters.
He gives an 87%(!) probability of Trump winning and indeed is putting his own money down in the betting markets. The most accurate poll historically is IBD that puts the two as a dead heat in addition to Rasmussen. The interesting point is that these two polling firms are not controlled by the mainstream media where wikileaks has uncovered collusion including skewing the polls towards the democrats by using improper sampling (i.e. polling in democrat rich areas).Furthermore these two firms poll cell phone users and not just landlines that these days is mostly elderly suburban women. Finally most folks are embarrassed to tell a poster that they support Trump even though they plan to vote for him
i personally would go with IBD that shows a coin flip, unpredictable and therefore would not want to place a bet although the payout makes it very tempting to gamble a small amount!
http://www.investors.com/politics/tr...-ibdtipp-poll/
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...se_watch_oct24
http://ijr.com/2016/10/719775-why-a-...trump-victory/
http://primarymodel.com

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Rex Sinquefeld's endorsement of Donald Trump

You are incorrect that I use Rasmussen only to support my position.
The betting markets were very wrong with Brexit. The reason being that the lions share of the stay bets were concentrated with a small amount of bettors the leaves bets were scattered among many millions of very small bettors. Here are few links about the predictions of a Stony Brook Professor of Political Science who has correctly predicted every election since 1996 and using his statistical methodology has has correctly predicted every election going back to 1912 with the exception of the 1960 election that was stolen from Nixon after the battleground state of Illinois stuffed the ballot boxes with deceased voters.
He gives an 87%(!) probability of Trump winning and indeed is putting his own money down in the betting markets. The most accurate poll historically is IBD that puts the two as a dead heat in addition to Rasmussen. The interesting point is that these two polling firms are not control by the mainstream media where wikileaks has uncovered collusion including skewing the polls towards the democrats by using improper sampling (i.e. polling in democrat rich areas).Furthermore these two firms poll cell phone users and not just landlines that these days is mostly elderly suburban women. Finally most folks are embarrassed to tell a poster that they support Trump even though they plan to vote for him
i personally would go with IBD that shows a coin flip, unpredictable and therefore would not want to place a bet although the payout makes it very tempting to gamble small amount!
http://www.investors.com/politics/tr...-ibdtipp-poll/
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...se_watch_oct24
http://ijr.com/2016/10/719775-why-a-...trump-victory/
http://primarymodel.com

Trump is claiming that the polls are rigged by the mainstream media. Then he blows it by saying that the goal of all this rigged polling is to get voters to stay at home.

Duh..... all the experts agree that a low voter turnout would boost Trump's chances. It is the Democrats who are trying to ensure that the vote gets out. Trumps supporters are already enthusiastic (because they think we are going back to pre-civil rights era)... it is Hillary's supporters who are reportedly less enthusiastic, especially the massive number of Sanders supporters.

I'm shocked that nobody on Trump's team pointed out his gaffe in time to prevent it.

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: Rex Sinquefeld's endorsement of Donald Trump

Most polls now strongly favor Clinton, but Trump fans continue to claim they are winning.
One poll that Sid alerted us to is the IBD/TIPP tracking poll, which has stubbornly kept Trump in the lead while polls from the "corrupt mainstream media" show Clinton's lead growing.

Well, guess what. The IBD/TIPP tracking poll is now tied.
ABC News tracking poll has Clinton with a 12 point lead.

Well, guess what. The IBD/TIPP tracking poll now has Clinton ahead by 1 point.
Yippee!!

[Peter McKillop]

Re: Rex Sinquefeld's endorsement of Donald Trump

I have watched for the last few weeks as the Democrats bitterly complain that the wikileaks Podesta emails was probably obtained by the Russians who stole them and used Wikileaks as their conduit to publish them. Assuming this is true does not mean that the content has been altered as has been put forward as an argument by the democrats.
In fact no proof has been offered that even a single email out of thousands published has been a forgery. A single counter example would suffice! It really is not hard to have an independent technical auditor look at a date stamped email in the "sent file" area of a server that for the users are immutable and compare it to the emails that have ben published.

This leads to the exchanges below between the chairwoman of the DNC and a reporter asking her about an email she sent where it shows she gave a question in advance to Hillary Clinton in one of the primary debates on CNN.
The DNC chairwoman's defense that the email is a forgery without offering any substantiation is an insult to the intelligence of the American people.
Here is one journalist's reporting of the whole thing. I agree with this journalist entirely.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BveshV9zKIw

Thanks for that link, Sid. It was discouraging watching Donna Brazile twist and turn and try to bullshit her way through persistent, to-the-point questioning. Who does she think she's kidding? She would have been smarter if she had just side-stepped the questions with a 'no/ comment.' She still would have come across as evasive but perhaps not as a liar and an asshole. The really sad thing is that the Democrats have no monopoly on people like Brazile. Democrats, Republucans, Liberals, Conservatives - they all have their share of dishonest scumbags.

Earlier in this thread, you made this comment:

I am definitely for massive tax cuts for corporations that create jobs.

This fits in with my thinking. My own opinion is that the bulk of job creation takes place in businesses that would be classified as small business and mid-market and that these are the enterprises that are deserving of tax relief. Large corporations often have other things on their minds; things which aren't always conducive to the health and prosperity of the overall economy. The link below is to a 2014 article from the Harvard Business Review. The author attempts to make the case that many large American corporations, over the last two or three decades, have been primarily focused on concentrating wealth in the hands of their shareholders and senior executives, thus effectively damaging the U.S. economy. Do you think the author does a good job of making his case?

https://hbr.org/2014/09/profits-without-prosperity

[Gordon Ritchie]

Re: Rex Sinquefeld's endorsement of Donald Trump

You are incorrect that I use Rasmussen only to support my position.

I did not say that, Sid. I referred viewers to one poll that supports your view. Others include the IBD/TIPP and the LA Times poll.
See http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign...-against-trump
More to the point, all these polls are based on a degree of continuity and this election bears very little resemblance to anything that has gone before.
As I said before, I believe and hope that Clinton will win but anything is possible.

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: Rex Sinquefeld's endorsement of Donald Trump

Well, guess what. The IBD/TIPP tracking poll now has Clinton ahead by 1 point.
Yippee!!

And now the latest Rasmussen Report has Clinton ahead by 1 point. Yippee!
But now a new pollster is showing up on the Real Clear Politics list, Remington Research.
I wonder who these guys are?
Anyway, it look like they do state polls. So here's what they have:

Ohio = Trump +4
Pennsylvania = Clinton +3
Wisconsin = Clinton +5
North Carolina = Trump +3
Virginia = Clinton +5
Colorado = Clinton +2
Nevada = Trump +3

Hmmm..interesting

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: Rex Sinquefeld's endorsement of Donald Trump

LA Times/USC Tracking poll has been showing the election is very close in recent days,
today they flipped: yesterday, Clinton +1, today, Trump +1

Not good news.

[Neil Frarey]

Re: Rex Sinquefeld's endorsement of Donald Trump

ObamaCare premium hikes.

Blunder!

[Peter McKillop]

Re: Rex Sinquefeld's endorsement of Donald Trump

LA Times/USC Tracking poll has been showing the election is very close in recent days,
today they flipped: yesterday, Clinton +1, today, Trump +1

Not good news.

You're letting these polls get you depressed, Bob. The trick is to follow sunnier polls my friend, sunnier polls! Let me be very clear - very, very, very clear: there is no one who has more respect for people whose surnames start with the letter G than the Donald. And if that doesn't lighten your mood then try this (if you haven't seen it already):

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/20...p-a-short-play

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: Rex Sinquefeld's endorsement of Donald Trump

You're letting these polls get you depressed, Bob.

Depressed at times, but bewildered is more accurate. I'm too smart to just look at the sunny polls, if I can't understand why the gloomy polls are what they are, I just keep wondering why. No peace of mind.

But today, the polls are moving in the right direction.

IBD/TIPP Tracking is now Clinton +2.
LA Times/USC Tracking; yesterday; Trump +1, today: Tie.

Sunnier polls:

ABC News Tracking = Clinton +6
FOX News = Clinton +3
Reuters/Ipsos = Clinton +4
USA Today/Suffolk = Clinton +9

Ah, that's better!

[Vlad Dobrich]

Re: Rex Sinquefeld's endorsement of Donald Trump

but today, the polls are moving in the right direction.

there is no right direction!