What went wrong?
http://predictwise.com/politics/2016-president-winner/
read this and weep you dumb shit:
www.primarymodel.com
>>70774115
Was electing Hillary part of your plan?
>>70774115
Well? Was it?
>>70774332
>combination of "national" polls with a few hundred people when trump has had 2-9 times as much competition at any given point
this is what you're comparing to an actual model that has been tested for every election since 1912 and has 96% accuracy, only being wrong ONCE in 1960.
stay scared and delusional you fucking idiot.
>>70774332
What went wrong.
>National polls before nominees are chosen
Might as well ask a Magic 8 Ball.
>>70775427
Polls in '12 correctly demonstrated that Obama was always the favorite against Romney
>>70775630
I know, right?
>>70775358
>surveymonkey
>legitimate
wow you guys aren't even trying anymore
>>70775916
>2014 poll
Reverse image search is a beautiful thing
>>70777848
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/poll-voters-split-between-clinton-trump-hypothetical-november-matchup-n554306
Its NBc's polling company you fucking twat
![politifact_photos_98477[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/hcOefh1.jpg "politifact_photos_98477[1].jpg")
because both republishit clowns will get landslided by the First Woman President of United States, Hillary Rodham Clinton
>>70778078
>muh web poll outlier
Low energy! Sad!
>>70774027
Silver realized he couldn't keep making wrong polls and predictions with his name attached.
>>70774751
Electionbettingodds.com
>>70778165
12,692 sample size Trump and Clinton are neck and neck. How mad are you https://www.scribd.com/doc/307975245/Clinton-s-national-lead-over-Sanders-dips
>>70778318
>some random no name "betting" website
>not knowing the house always makes the odds to get them the most money
>comparing general election "odds" before anyone i even nominated
>ignoring a model with 96% accuracy that has been tested for an entire century
0/10 moron
enjoy the 0.02 USD that was deposited into your account you glue eating retard
>>70778165
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-general-election-trump-vs-clinton
Ipsos/Reuters 4/6
Clinton 39 Trump 34
NBC/Survey monkey
Clinton 38 Trump 36
Stay completely buttblasted and mad
Stump isn't going to be the republican nominee, so I don't understand why you fagots keep obsessing over Clinton vs. Stump polls.
NONE OF THESE POLLS MEANS SHIT
ITS THE TAIL TRYING TO WAG THE DOG, IMPOTENT MSM TRYING TO CONTROL PERCEPTIONS AND INFLUENCE REALITY
>LOOK TRUMP IS DOWN BECAUSE I SAID SO, NOW REALITY WILL CONFORM TO MY DELUSION, BTW MARGIN OF ERROR IS 20PTS AND WE MASSAGED THE SHIT OUT OF THE SAMPLE WITH ALL KINDS OF CAVEATS
HES GONNA WIN LIBKUCKS, GET READY TO BUILD WALL FAGGOTS
>>70778572
You should put massive amounts of money on trump and become a millionaire then m808
>>70778414
>>70778993
HEY GUYS LET ME PICK THE OUTLIERS AND PRETEND THEY ARE THE NEW AVERAGES. ISNT DISINFORMATION FUN?
stay off /pol/, Corey.
>>70778572
>muh debunked primary model
You do know betting markets ARE Vegas right?
Maybe check the OP again, with more reading comprehension this time.
>>70774027
>>70774027
>Repubes not crossed even once
HA!
>>70778572
https://augur.net/markets/-7e2b2e9ecc6df8aa56faabb7aa2bcb7a4f85958ea3880a982f6ff94bda64d6b
>>70781329
strong cognitive dissonance detected. history likes to repeat itself you moron. in addition to the model having 96% accuracy over an entire century, republican voters broke the super tuesday voter turnout record set in 2008.
by democrat voters.
who would go onto to nominate their front runner at the time.
who would win the general election in a landslide.
stay delusional, squirt.
>>70781099
>implying i don't invest my money in something i can control as opposed to something i have no control over
this is what morons who are shit with money actually believe. with that said, i would gladly put the mortgage, a car note and a business loan on trump winning the election in a landslide just as soon as the odds look even better.
assuming i could make more money off of it. which i couldn't.
keep on whining, you ignorant bitch.
>>70781795
>links to something that has been in beta for months
>thinks this means shit against something that has been proven effective for a century
>the state of these low rent shills
>augur
>>70782108
Whatever helps you cope bruh
>>70774027
Trump was a little bigoted.
And his supporters were very bigoted (see, e.g., /pol/)
Retards couldn't understand that being un-PC and anti-SJW doesn't mean you have to be a white supremacist xenophobe. He went too far the other way and now he can't win enough votes in a general.
The sad thing is, so many people are anti-Hillary and so many Bernie Bros are sick of the DNC and PC culture, that if he had run a slightly different campaign he could've won. There's still time to turn it around but it'll be tough, especially since his most vocal supporters are racist as fuck (again, see /pol/) and that drives undecideds away
>>70782852
>user generated map
you have resorted to literally *making shit up*.
but just for fun, and since i know you're too stupid to even realize this, WI, MI, OH and NH have all had more way more REPUBLICAN voters in their primaries than democrat voters.
and just for more fun, out of all the primary/caucuses that have held votes so far, NV, IA, WI, MI, OH, FL, NC, VA and NH have ALL had way more REPUBLICAN voters than democrat voters.
this is significant because all of those states voted DEMOCRAT in 2012.
no state that voted republican in 2012 has been turned democrat btw.
it's time for you to fuck off, idiot. you're done. you have lost. you can refute nothing.
>>70784429
That means literally nothing. Everyone knows that Democrats tend to vote more in general elections, man. C'mon, this is basic stuff.
>>70784839
so. much. cognitive. dissonance.
this has gone from funny to cringe inducing. you're embarrassing yourself, kid. you can refute nothing.
>>70782852
OH is not going Dem.
>>70786173
why? They certainly have no love for Trump there.
Betfair odds are the most accurate indicator *possible* right now.
http://electionbettingodds.com
They say that Hillary has a 66% chance to win the election - not the end of the world.
That % takes into account that either Trump or Cruz (or others) could win the Republican Primary.
If Trump wins the Republican Primary (only ~50% chance - our biggest concern atm), Hillary's chances will drop. The reason for this is that if they stole the Republican nomination from Trump (50% chance), it would effectively hand the Presidency to Hillary. If this *doesn't* happen, Hillary's % will drop dramatically.
>>70784429
>but just for fun, and since i know you're too stupid to even realize this, WI, MI, OH and NH have all had more way more REPUBLICAN voters in their primaries than democrat voters.
Yet all those states seem to have been blue for a couple decades with the exception of Ohio.
PredictWise is run wholly by David Rothschild who is an economist at Microsoft Research in New York City, but should in no way be construed as representing the views or predictions of Microsoft or any of its entities.
>>70781197
>polls that don't conform to my worldview are outliers
That poll has the largest sample size I've seen and was conducted very recently. Do you have a better poll?
>>70782852
make NM UT CO and NV blue
>>70787595
Right, this is just something I downloaded from another anon here. I haven't done it myself. You can also add Hawaii to the list.
But the point is pretty clear. Unless Trump can turn at least a few of these core blue states red then he was dead before he even started. As is the Republican Party for the general Presidency.
