| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Rep. Amash: Clinton's attack on Gabbard will 'drive many people into the arms' of Trump |
| 2019-10-20 |
| [The Hill] Rep. Justin Amash (I-Mich.) knocked Hillary Clinton for suggesting that 2020 Democratic hopeful Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) was being groomed by Russia to run as a third-party candidate, arguing the attack only helps President Trump's reelection efforts. "The thing we know for sure is that Hillary Clinton is a Donald Trump asset," Amash, a vocal Trump critic, tweeted late Friday. "Hillary does ‐ and did ‐ drive many people into the arms of Donald Trump. Her attack on Tulsi does likewise." Clinton on Friday warned during a podcast interview that Russia was poised to meddle in the next U.S. presidential election through online disinformation efforts, and she said Moscow could attempt to sow chaos by encouraging a third-party candidate. "She’s the favorite of the Russians. They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her so far," Clinton said in an apparent reference to Gabbard, who has faced unfounded speculation that her campaign is being amplified by bots and online trolls. Gabbard later Friday unleashed an attack on the former secretary of State and 2016 Democratic presidential nominee, calling her the "queen of warmongers" and the "personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party." "From the day I announced my candidacy, there has been a concerted campaign to destroy my reputation. We wondered who was behind it and why. Now we know ‐ it was always you," she said, challenging Clinton to join the primary instead of "cowardly hid[ing] behind your proxies." |
| Posted by:Besoeker |
| #21 Most polls are not honest attempts to capture a representive sampling of public opinion but instead an attempt at shaping public opinion. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2019-10-20 19:20 |
| #20 The people whose votes matter the most - in this country, that's a) low-turnout African-American voters and b) older white swing district voters - are the least likely to participate politically and make their voices heard. And yet a small change in their turnout and their overall preference can quite literally sway a presidential election: the first group a) put Obama over the top in 2012, and the second group b) put Trump over the top in 2016. In neither case did the pollsters predict these outcomes because both of these groups are notoriously difficult to reach. Polls = shadows on the wall of the cave |
| Posted by: Lex 2019-10-20 14:46 |
| #19 ...cause if you know you are going to be slaughtered in the election, you choose to stage a coup before hand. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2019-10-20 14:35 |
| #18 There are polls and then there are polls. The ones that CBS and other MSM outlets use are designed to demoralize Republicans. The internal polls the DNC and Democrat candidates see explain why they are so worried about 2020. |
| Posted by: Abu Uluque 2019-10-20 14:13 |
| #17 European Conservative: do you not remember the poll numbers from the last election? |
| Posted by: chris 2019-10-20 13:13 |
| #16 Among many reasons that the polls suck: they're based entirely on individuals' stated responses to questions. Individuals lie. You get the wrong sample. Or the right individuals, who tell the truth as they see it today, but then change their opinions. Or they tell you the truth, but they're opinions are based on underlying causal forces which you the pollster don't understand. So when those underlying causal factors shift, your poll data's predictive value goes to zero. Cf the real driver of voting behavior in the Trump-Brexit era, which is the colossal failure of globalism and the global elites to address the most basic need of the citizenry, which is that their citizenship MATTER. Etc etc |
| Posted by: Lex 2019-10-20 12:22 |
| #15 There was a 97% chance that Illary would win in 2016 and she'd sweep most states... Those polls? |
| Posted by: Bright Pebbles 2019-10-20 11:53 |
| #14 Pollsters stay in business for the same reason that investment fund managers stay in business: institutional inertia. They both suck. The pollsters' predictions are shit; active fund managers underform indices and robo-advisors. They're only used because their clients are not aware of the alternatives. |
| Posted by: Lex 2019-10-20 10:29 |
| #13 Personally, I'm of the opinion that running against Hilly is the only reason Trump is president; there's just so many people who won't vote for her inevitableness. |
| Posted by: ed in texas 2019-10-20 10:16 |
| #12 Cell phones block calls from unfamiliar numbers. Todays technology that prevents pollsters from actually reaching many, many people. Therefore, 100% of polls are a lie and the people "conducting polls" know that but they hope you don't picked up on that fact yet. |
| Posted by: Varmint Splat1454 2019-10-20 10:05 |
| #11 I've seen 50% just a few weeks ago, but whatever... |
| Posted by: Raj 2019-10-20 09:45 |
| #10 Ah ok. But 42% is the average of many different pollsters. You don't stay in business if you are wrong all the time. |
| Posted by: European Conservative 2019-10-20 09:27 |
| #9 I don't worry about Romney running. I'm worried about Romney & other senate RINOs voting with Democrats on impeachment. |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2019-10-20 09:19 |
| #8 US polls have consistently oversampled Democrats as long as I've been alive. With that in mind, that phrase was born from the occasional tendency for the guy at the deli counter to put his thumb on the scale so as to artificially increase the weight (and hence the price) of the deli meat one's buying. |
| Posted by: Raj 2019-10-20 09:16 |
| #7 I'm afraid I don't understand the remark? |
| Posted by: European Conservative 2019-10-20 08:58 |
| #6 Deli thumbs, EC; deli thumbs. |
| Posted by: Raj 2019-10-20 08:55 |
| #5 "an immensely popular President" at 42%. My definition of "immensely popular" seems to differ. |
| Posted by: European Conservative 2019-10-20 08:49 |
| #4 1) There are lots of things the Dems are doing to lose support - this is only one of them. 2) I'm with Frank G. on this one - there's no way Romney runs for President again, and there are a number of reasons why he won't. He already ran once and lost, so I don't see why anyone would want to make that effort a second time, and there's only a handful of people who've decided to abuse themselves multiple times on that campaign trail. Even if he was completely delusional, his advisers would be advising him 'you don't have a snowball's chance in hell' of beating an immensely popular President, and that's if he can even get on the ballot in all fifty (seven) states. It ain't happening. |
| Posted by: Raj 2019-10-20 08:45 |
| #3 Pfffft. Romney? Riiiigghht |
| Posted by: Frank G 2019-10-20 08:22 |
| #2 Shows what Hillary is afraid of. A third-party candidate to split the Democrat vote. The only third-party candidate is going to be Romney who will split the establishment GOP from the pro-America conservatives and put whoever the Democrats rig their primary for in office. Then it's back to eternal war. |
| Posted by: Herb McCoy 2019-10-20 07:39 |
| #1 Post-election prediction: Pompeo and Pence meet privately with Rep. Tulsi Gabbard at St. Regis Princeville, HI. Asks Tulsi to consider French Ambassadorship or Deputy Secretary of State. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2019-10-20 04:48 |