Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Proof Trump has already lost


Varelse

Recommended Posts

There's no hope for Trump. You can't spin this. .  

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo 

Or These scenarios.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo#scenarios

Math has no bias, it's answers are bound by laws like 1+1=2...  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Varelse, .

Is this the same Nate Silver who gave Donald Trump a 5% chance of winning the GOP nomination, now gives him a 25% chance of defeating Hillary Clinton. This is a stark contrast from his last look at the race in November, when he gave a generic Republican a 50/50 chance against the likely Democratic nominee.

https://www.peoplespunditdaily.com/news/elections/2016/05/18/why-nate-silver-wrong-on-trump/

HA ! I !

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Ellapennella said:

Hi Varelse, .

Is this the same Nate Silver who gave Donald Trump a 5% chance of winning the GOP nomination, now gives him a 25% chance of defeating Hillary Clinton. This is a stark contrast from his last look at the race in November, when he gave a generic Republican a 50/50 chance against the likely Democratic nominee.

https://www.peoplespunditdaily.com/news/elections/2016/05/18/why-nate-silver-wrong-on-trump/

HA ! I !

Math has no bias, it's answers are bound by laws like 1+1=2...  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Varelse said:

Math has no bias, it's answers are bound by laws like 1+1=2...  

well if that's so why was he wrong already ? there's another man that predicted  every election since I don't remember which president, and you know what  he was never wrong not once since ...I'll find it for ya later  oh , yeah he predicted Trump to win this one too. I hadn't paid attention to it but since you started this topic I'll post soon...I promise !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

A professor of political science at Stony Brook University has forecasted that Donald Trump has a minimum 97 percent chance of winning the general election as the Republican nominee.

Professor Helmut Norpoth’s forecast presentation took place Monday evening in the SUNY Global Center in Manhattan, which was organized by the Stony Brook Alumni Association.

Norpoth created a statistical model of presidential elections that uses a candidate’s performance in their party’s primary and patterns in the electoral cycle as predictors of the presidential vote in the general election.

Donald Trump has a 97 percent chance of defeating Hillary Clinton and a 99 percent chance of defeating Bernie Sanders in the general election, according to Norpoth’s formula.

“The bottom line is that the primary model, using also the cyclical movement, makes it almost certain that Donald Trump will be the next president,” Norpoth said, “if he’s a nominee of the [Republican] party.”

Norpoth’s primary model works for every presidential election since 1912, with the notable exception of the 1960 election. These results give the model an accuracy of 96.1 percent.

https://www.sbstatesman.com/2016/02/23/political-science-professor-forecasts-trump-as-general-election-winner/

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just think BREXIT.  Actually, Trump may very well lose but by the time of the debates and the October Surprise, the polls will be forced to represent actual results and they will be so close that it will literally be a toss-up.  I wouldn't doubt that several recounts will be in order.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mentioned Libby Cantrill in another thread, while I was looking her up online, I noticed she has an article on this too:

 

LINK - Unless she does a Dewey, Hillary Clinton will be US president

With about a 6 percentage point lead in the polls and less than 80 days left before the general election, the Democratic Party's Hillary Clinton should be a shoo-in to win the presidency over Republican Party dark horse, Donald Trump.

In fact, you need to go back to Truman's win almost 60 years ago to find an instance where the polls have been proved wrong this late in the campaign.

"If you look at history going back to 1948, the person who is leading the election cycle at this point has gone on to win the White House," PIMCO head of public policy Libby Cantrill says. And that's just one of three factors that suggests Trump's chances of a surprise victory are thin.

"In 19 of the past 22 electoral cycles positive stock market returns have led to the party in power staying in power," the New York-based Cantrill says.

 

What do you locals think? Does she have a point, or is this just media filling in spaces? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

"If you look at history going back to 1948, the person who is leading the election cycle at this point has gone on to win the White House," PIMCO head of public policy Libby Cantrill says. And that's just one of three factors that suggests Trump's chances of a surprise victory are thin.

I’m pretty sure that the MSM is tweaking the polling.  And as far as I know, there has not been a candidate such as Hilary with all of that criminal baggage that she has.  She is so blatant that she is no longer trying to cover anything up.

"In 19 of the past 22 electoral cycles positive stock market returns have led to the party in power staying in power," the New York-based Cantrill says.

I think that QE throws this stat right out the window.

What do you locals think? Does she have a point, or is this just media filling in spaces?

It’s the media trying to paint her in a good light.  They are grabbing at every little thing to discourage the other side, but as I’ve mentioned before, Trump is America’s Brexit.  The same movement that rejected the Establishment in England is here as well and it’s not going away.  We are just at the beginning of this movement.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not breathing a sigh of relief until it's over. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

I mentioned Libby Cantrill in another thread, while I was looking her up online, I noticed she has an article on this too:

 

LINK - Unless she does a Dewey, Hillary Clinton will be US president

With about a 6 percentage point lead in the polls and less than 80 days left before the general election, the Democratic Party's Hillary Clinton should be a shoo-in to win the presidency over Republican Party dark horse, Donald Trump.

In fact, you need to go back to Truman's win almost 60 years ago to find an instance where the polls have been proved wrong this late in the campaign.

"If you look at history going back to 1948, the person who is leading the election cycle at this point has gone on to win the White House," PIMCO head of public policy Libby Cantrill says. And that's just one of three factors that suggests Trump's chances of a surprise victory are thin.

"In 19 of the past 22 electoral cycles positive stock market returns have led to the party in power staying in power," the New York-based Cantrill says.

 

What do you locals think? Does she have a point, or is this just media filling in spaces? 

 I'm not interested in that firm or their EU connections.. they have not stimulated any growth here in America but all of a sudden they have something to say . Thanks but no thanks ...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Poof.... your proof is going to be poof... you got poof ! not proof... poof !  I like your thread though..it's fun. actually made me smile when I seen it ...you know why right? you'll find out...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, barring any major developments, old Hills will be CIC.

However, we still have time for major developments.  It's like a Hail Mary play in football...Long odds, but once in a great while it pays off.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

I’m pretty sure that the MSM is tweaking the polling.  And as far as I know, there has not been a candidate such as Hilary with all of that criminal baggage that she has.  She is so blatant that she is no longer trying to cover anything up.

That should be very easy to show should it not? We have some great statistics people here, DieChecker probably one of the best, I do not think public record can be altered, that would just be a silly CT, surely this sort of thing does not have to be guessed? Is there good reason to doubt the figures? 

23 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

I think that QE throws this stat right out the window.

May I ask, who are you referring to, and would you mind providing a link please? 

23 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

It’s the media trying to paint her in a good light.  They are grabbing at every little thing to discourage the other side, but as I’ve mentioned before, Trump is America’s Brexit. 

Yes, they do seem to favour her, but I am not entirely sure why, I just do not believe the CT's and I do not see any advantage to the media as an industry, Trump is going to be even better for media as there is no doubt whatsoever that he will give them more work by generating controversial headlines on a regular basis. There just seems to be more confidence in Ms Clinton's abilities all round, and I have to say, that is certainly the impression one gets when Trump is often making headlines with very silly statements and Clinton is just keeping her head down flying under the Radar. 

To my experience, the louder you yell, the less you are heard, and the quiet achievers are the ones who get things done. I am sure you could see how that would translate in this situation. We do not hear about Ms Clinton's seemingly aggressive ambitions with regards to international conflict, which is working for her, if that was the focus from the media, I honestly doubt she would be seen as the prefered candidate to the many that she is. Nobody wants more war, and it would be a very notable black mark against her if that was better illustrated. 

Although as I mentioned in another thread, the latest article I saw stated that neither candidate has the confidence of the majority of US people, which is a shift from "Trump Bad, Clinton Good". And after reading pretty much that here on these boards from the US posters, it seems comforting to see that is what the media is reporting. 

23 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

The same movement that rejected the Establishment in England is here as well and it’s not going away.  We are just at the beginning of this movement.

Sorry, not following, are you referring to historical record or a modern event? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Ellapennella said:

 I'm not interested in that firm or their EU connections.. they have not stimulated any growth here in America but all of a sudden they have something to say . Thanks but no thanks ...

That is fine, and thanks for stepping out rather than going on a rant or something, Libby Cantrill just seems to be one of the people the new POTUS would have to work "with" and as such, these are perhaps the matters that offer Ms Clinton the confidence she is getting that it seems she may not deserve. It is just an opinion we saw down under from what seems to be a very reliable source. What she did say about both candidates working with reducing Globalisation no matter who is elected and having to work these campaign promises through Congress do seem very pertinent issues though. I might be wrong, we are speaking US after all, and I am not from the US, but with regards to Australian politics, they would be notable issues. 

Again. no dog in this race, reporting from the world stage so you guys might be able to see some things that you may not realise is going on. 

Carry on.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

That is fine, and thanks for stepping out rather than going on a rant or something, Libby Cantrill just seems to be one of the people the new POTUS would have to work "with" and as such, these are perhaps the matters that offer Ms Clinton the confidence she is getting that it seems she may not deserve. It is just an opinion we saw down under from what seems to be a very reliable source. What she did say about both candidates working with reducing Globalisation no matter who is elected and having to work these campaign promises through Congress do seem very pertinent issues though. I might be wrong, we are speaking US after all, and I am not from the US, but with regards to Australian politics, they would be notable issues. 

Again. no dog in this race, reporting from the world stage so you guys might be able to see some things that you may not realise is going on. 

Carry on.....

I looked her up..had nothing to do with anything personal towards you so don't take it that way.o.k

it's just no one has done anything for how long and all of a sudden , now??? they want to give suggestions as to how to what? stimulate the economy? give me a break. again not meant at you..but their B.S

 

adding ..that's my opinion. who are all these investors and such.. and their connections and all ...I'm not asking you i can find that out myself but what i see is a whole lot of people getting very nervous because Trump is really doing very well and the media are jokes clown liars...not all just most of them...the good ones get fired sooner or later..

 

ETA ..So many of us here only want the very best for everyone and that includes world peace, for everyone..but what people continue to forget is that let's just say Hillary wanted to do good..hypothetically speaking of her in that regards...she can't do anything ..she is owned by so many that will never do any good..Isis will continue to grow war will continue on and nothing will get better..why can't people understand that simplest thing? she can't do good even if she wanted to do good, it's that simple...she is owned and by very horrible bad people...Trump is not owned this is our once in a life time to finally break free. This is what the entire election is ridding on. This is why I'm on in for Trump.

Edited by Ellapennella
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's Hilary's to loose. Despite all the scandals she's still way ahead in the polls. I think she will do fine in debates so you have to wonder what it's gonna take for Trump, or any other canditate to defeat her? It will take something major like a mediatic bombshell.

Edited by TruthSeeker_
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

Just think BREXIT.  Actually, Trump may very well lose but by the time of the debates and the October Surprise, the polls will be forced to represent actual results and they will be so close that it will literally be a toss-up.  I wouldn't doubt that several recounts will be in order.

The massive voter fraud on the left will definitely make it an uphill battle for Trump.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

Just think BREXIT.  Actually, Trump may very well lose but by the time of the debates and the October Surprise, the polls will be forced to represent actual results and they will be so close that it will literally be a toss-up.  I wouldn't doubt that several recounts will be in order.

True, but that was always close. The silent, uncounted or non traditional voters being called "underground" by that dingaling campaign manager do exist but not nearly in enough quantity to push him over the top. Not unless Hillary turns into a vampire on live tv and even then...

This is like watching a professional football team that talked a bunch of smack slowly get ground into the grass and mud for three quarters straight..they're 21 points down, the defense has been on the filed all day, the other team is running the clock down slowly at will and the die hard fans are still hoping for a miracle. Anything's possible but not likely. Besides, the world's real power brokers got **** to keep doing. They won't let a wildcard screw up any big plans or ongoing cash troughs. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I take back calling his campaign manager a dingaling. When initially no one they wanted could be talked into being Trump's campaign manager she realized that there was nowhere to go but up. She'd either be seen as the hero who pulled him out of a hole or the spirited team leader trying to get the star player back on the field. Damn. I did it again. Yes, I'm sick. Happens about every time this year. Won't be over until Jan. (Go Seahawks)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Thorvir Hrothgaard said:

The massive voter fraud on the left will definitely make it an uphill battle for Trump.

It's excuses like this, before the election has even happened that furthers the image he has already lost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ellapennella said:

I looked her up..had nothing to do with anything personal towards you so don't take it that way.o.k

All good here Ella :tu: I was hoping that posters might look her up, I do not really know much more than what I have said of her, never heard of her before the other night, so I was wondering how she is seen and if what she represents is genuine, or just more fluff. 

1 hour ago, Ellapennella said:

it's just no one has done anything for how long and all of a sudden , now??? they want to give suggestions as to how to what? stimulate the economy? give me a break. again not meant at you..but their B.S

I only expected Trump would have to work with her, and the people she represents, so I figured that might have a significant effect on promises made and put them into perspective. 

1 hour ago, Ellapennella said:

adding ..that's my opinion. who are all these investors and such.. and their connections and all ...I'm not asking you i can find that out myself but what i see is a whole lot of people getting very nervous because Trump is really doing very well and the media are jokes clown liars...not all just most of them...the good ones get fired sooner or later..

Same, thanks for the discussion, nice to be on a amicable note. I cannot even offer a proper opinion, as I say, I can only report to the US what the "outside" is seeing. 

1 hour ago, Ellapennella said:

ETA ..So many of us here only want the very best for everyone and that includes world peace, for everyone..but what people continue to forget is that let's just say Hillary wanted to do good..hypothetically speaking of her in that regards...she can't do anything ..she is owned by so many that will never do any good..Isis will continue to grow war will continue on and nothing will get better..why can't people understand that simplest thing? she can't do good even if she wanted to do good, it's that simple...she is owned and by very horrible bad people...Trump is not owned this is our once in a life time to finally break free. This is what the entire election is ridding on. This is why I'm on in for Trump.

Well yes, I have to agree that the posters have outlined war orientated ideals which is just something nobody wants. It would be good to make sure the rest of the world is seeing that too for a more balanced view. Like I keep saying we hear a lot about Mr Trump, but little about Ms Clinton. Because of her more violent associations, flying below the Radar is her best chance right now, and these articles would indicate that the tactic is working. But the world stage is not seeing that aspect. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many of the 'experts' only gave Trump a 5% chance of winning the GOP nomination. I would say that (right now anyway) it does appear that Clinton will win. However, we don't know what Julian Assange still has on Mrs Clinton (the so-called 'October Surprise'). Also, the debates are important as there are still many voters who've yet to decide. This whole thing could turn on a dime if the right (or wrong) stuff comes into light.  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Thorvir Hrothgaard said:

The massive voter fraud on the left will definitely make it an uphill battle for Trump.

My niece that's in college told me one of her friends voted 4 times for Obama in the last election. I don't think these kids realize how much trouble they can be in if they are caught.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol, no they wont be in any troubles, unless they admit it. there is no way to prove otherwise, ballots have no names on them. but there is a bright side, all 4 of her votes do not matter really. her friend may vote 1000 times, and it wont make 1 bit of difference. 

Edited by aztek
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.