March 22, 2017

Only 1% of Trump voters now wish they'd voted for Hillary Clinton (and another 2% wish they'd voted for some other candidate).

According to a new McCourtney Institute of Democracy poll conducted by YouGov and reported by WaPo.

142 comments:

madAsHell said...

One percent?? That's in the statistical noise. This is really an admission that no one regrets voting for Trump.

.....or does this lead us to "We are the 99%!!" chant?

David said...

Deplorable. Just deplorable.

Brando said...

This is why the polls of low approval don't mean anything now--among those who identify GOP, he's still in the 80s. That's the number Republican lawmakers are looking at.

Angel-Dyne said...

Exactly the same percentage of people who didn't regret voting for Hitler after he'd been in office for 2 months.

Danno said...

I'd bet they didn't ask the same question about Hillary.

Todd said...

I wonder how many non-Trump voters now wish they had voted for Trump...

AprilApple said...

She desperately wants to run again. The grifter machine needs funding. Favors need re-paying.

damikesc said...

I doubt many have buyer's remorse that badly. Even though Bush was decidedly meh, I never regretted voting for him (Gore and Kerry were far worse). Don't regret not voting for McCain either.

I have fewer and fewer regrets about my vote for Trump simply because the "resistance" are such unmitigated assholes. Take away them and I'd likely be quite bitchy about some of his personnel decisions.

AprilApple said...

Who killed Seth Rich?

Snark said...

This is unsurprising. In addition to people being satisfied with his presidency for their own rational reasons, it is incredibly hard to change the human mind once a view or opinion sets in. This is going to be a lot more about psychology and human behaviour than it is about a positive or negative performance by Trump.

exiledonmainstreet said...

The unhinged words and behavior of the Dems since the election have only served to further convince me that I chose correctly when I voted for Trump. I suspect I'm not the only one who feels that way either.

I think they believe they can bully and shame us into turning against Trump, but what they are actually doing is hardening the opposition to their authoritarian tactics.

Humperdink said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Michael K said...

I regret voting for Johnson in 1964. I thought Goldwater was such a poor candidate that he would be an incompetent President.

Boy was I wrong ! We are still living with the consequences of Johnson.

Trump has pleasantly surprised a lot of reluctant voters for him. I would not expect WaPo to ask about "Are you happy you voted for him more than you were on election day ?"

Unknown said...

Oh, the trend is going in the right direction. Reminds me:

NIXON: "I'm not a crook"
November 17, 1973

TRUMP: "I'm not a crook"
Coming soon to a White House near you.

Mike Sylwester said...

The Democrats have a political strategy for persuading people who voted for Trump in 2016 to vote for the Democrat candidate in 2020.

The strategy is to advocate the establishment of "sanctuary cities" for illegal aliens. Such "sanctuary cities" are a noble cause that will inspire former Trump voters to regret their previous votes.

Especially in the Rust Belt states, the sanctuary-offering Democrats are counting on big victories in 2020.

David Begley said...

Can the Clintons just please go away? Forever.

Darrell said...

Just got done baking my Wednesday "Hillary Clinton will never be President of the United States" cake. They always hit the spot.

Darrell said...

HILLARY: I am a crook. So?

Left Bank of the Charles said...

1% would flip Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.

tcrosse said...

I don't regret voting for Trump, although I'm not entirely pleased by his performance, either. In any case, my state sent its electoral votes to Hillary, so at this point what difference does it make ? Meanwhile, the Resistance has hardened my heart against the Democrats.

Matthew Sablan said...

Methodology:

"The YouGov panel includes over 1.8 million individuals who agree to complete occasional surveys."

"In theory, in 19 cases out of 20, overall results based on such samples will differ by no more than 4.4% percentage points in either direction from what would have been obtained by taking the average result after repeating the study over and over and over again with many thousands of respondents. This margin of sampling error takes into account the increase in uncertainty that is due to weighting (the Design Effect )."

"For smaller subgroups, the margin of sampling error is larger. For example, when restricting analyses to all Republicans or Independents, it is plus or minus 9 points."

9 points! That's yuuuge.

Snark said...

Blogger Unknown said...
Oh, the trend is going in the right direction. Reminds me:

NIXON: "I'm not a crook"
November 17, 1973

TRUMP: "I'm not a crook"
Coming soon to a White House near you.

3/22/17, 9:14 AM


Don Lemon had Carl Bernstein and John Dean on last night. It was interesting. And awkward. LOL.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Keep hope alive, Inga! Hang on to your delusions tight, like they're a big fluffy teddy bear and never let them go! Otherwise, you'd have to face up to what a silly dim bulb you are and that would be painful.

Unknown said...

WSJ Editorial today:

"... the President clings to his assertion (the Obama wiretap) like a drunk to an empty gin bottle"

"Two months into his Presidency, Gallup has Mr. Trump’s approval rating at 39%. No doubt Mr. Trump considers that fake news, but if he doesn’t show more respect for the truth most Americans may conclude he’s a fake President."

Btw, the WSJ like Fox News is owned by Rupert Murdoch. Tee hee ...

Matthew Sablan said...

"On the next screen, we asked everyone, “Suppose you could go back in time and vote again in the November election. What would you do?”"

-- ... that's a terrible question. "Vote again" and "Change your vote" are two different things. Voting again is to cast a second vote, while changing one's vote is different.

"Only three individuals (fewer than 1 percent of Trump voters) said that, could they go back in time, they would cast their vote for Clinton. Seven said they would vote for one of the minor-party candidates.

When we asked why, most regretful Trump voters pointed specifically to his performance as president. (Misspellings are original.)"

-- "Most regretful" Trump voters... so... more than 5 people said this? How is that significant when your own poll's margin of error drops so badly as the sub groups get smaller? This is an interesting insight into these four or five people's thought processes. Then, let's look at some of their quotes from "Trump voters."

"I would ask him to get off his high NY horse and get down to basics and stop lying, cheating, stealing, blowing his horn and get with the proper Cabinet and get this country back on its feet. We don’t need a wall, but we do need to stop immigration."

-- Really? Does this sound like a Republican, let alone Trump voter? Notice the deliberate melding of "immigration" with "illegal immigration." It MAY be a Trump voter, but I wouldn't believe someone who said this was a Trump voter or Republican because the entire tone and diction is that of a non-Trump voter and Democrat.

Unknown said...

A few Trumpism's to cheer up the Trumpies:

“Korea. Great peninsula. Most people don’t even know it’s divided into two countries.”

“Great Britain. Great island. Most people don’t even know it’s divided into many countries.”

“CIA. Great spying. Most people don’t even know what they do.”

tcrosse said...

None of this is going to make Hillary President. Ever.

SukieTawdry said...

Have they done a poll of people who didn't vote for Trump and now wish they had (I didn't and am still waiting to see if I wish I had)?

SukieTawdry said...

Gee, Unknown, that was actually funny. What's up?

Matthew Sablan said...

"Have they done a poll of people who didn't vote for Trump and now wish they had (I didn't and am still waiting to see if I wish I had)?"

-- Theoretically, given the questions asked and their methodology, if they provided us the data, we could figure that out for ourselves. That they didn't is a bit surprising, but I may have just missed the link to the data.

Matthew Sablan said...

[Well, figure it out with the caveat that it would be using data from their rather high MoE methodology of self-selected individuals who, may or may not, actually be American voters.]

SukieTawdry said...

Michael K said...Boy was I wrong ! We are still living with the consequences of Johnson.

I can never quite decide who was the most destructive president of the 20th century, but LBJ sure is a strong contender.

Darrell said...

1% would flip Guam. The extent of Democrat "science."

President-Mom-Jeans said...

Ginsberg has a life expectancy of less than 6 years, at best, tee hee.

Bryer is 78, tee hee.

You are a slip in the bathtub away from Trump cementing the Surpreme Court for well beyond your booze soaked miserable life expectancy, Inga.

Tee hee.

AJ Lynch said...

Snark:

I bet Don Lemon did not know who John Dean was until he was, I assume, briefed before his show.

Unknown said...

I'm not surprised. It took/takes a special sort of person to vote for him in the first place. Usually they are the unwavering adherent types. It's probably easier for them to translate his antics and words into something that is easier for them to accept in their own minds, so he never appears to them as he is in reality.

Birkel said...

This Unknown is #14.
That is distinct from UnknownInga #55.

The point of using Unknown is to appear as legion.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Ha, right back at ya, Unknown.

Here's Waters' justification for impeaching Trump: "He [Trump] is wrapping his arms around Putin while Putin is continuing to invade Korea."

And who can forget Obama's assertion that they speak Austrian in Austria and his reference to "corpsesmen?"

Or this? "When I meet with world leaders, what's striking -- whether it's in Europe or here in Asia..." That's Obama mistakenly referring to Hawaii as Asia while holding a press conference outside Honolulu.

"The Middle East is obviously an issue that has plagued the region for centuries."

Ten thousand people died -- an entire town destroyed." --on a Kansas tornado that killed 12 people.

I could go on - and on.

You do realize that there are entire webpages filled with the stupid things your Lord God Obama said, right?

Birkel said...

9:48 AM is UnknownInga #55.

Shift just starting?

exiledonmainstreet said...

Unknown said...
I'm not surprised. It took/takes a special sort of person to vote for him in the first place."

They are people who look at people like you and decide they don't want to be anything like you because you are mentally incompetent.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Birkel said...
This Unknown is #14.
That is distinct from UnknownInga #55.

The point of using Unknown is to appear as legion.

3/22/17, 9:49 AM

So it looks like there are more leftist asshats on this site than there actually are.

Either that, or it's possession by demons.

Drago said...

Unknown: "I'm not surprised. It took/takes a special sort of person to vote for him in the first place."

Someone who doesn't want to give Russia more of our uranium and doesn't want to give the Iranian terrorist funders pallets of more cash?

I guess from a democrat perspective that does seem strange.

Drago said...

exiledonmainstreet: "Ha, right back at ya, Unknown.

Here's Waters' justification for impeaching Trump: "He [Trump] is wrapping his arms around Putin while Putin is continuing to invade Korea."

We are fortunate indeed that "Korea" is not an island because by now the number of people "on it" would surely have made it capsize.

#LeftyScience

Henry said...

Is it too much to ask for all the results? Any Clinton voters with second thoughts?

Birkel said...

@ exiledonmainstreet

Embrace the healing power of and.

Drago said...

SukieTawdry: "Gee, Unknown, that was actually funny. What's up?"

Infinite monkeys.

Drago said...

Henry: "Is it too much to ask for all the results?"

Tsk tsk.

Come now Henry. You already know the answer to that.

Henry said...

I regret voting for George W Bush. But that is totally hindsight bias. I'm pretty sure that if I had voted for Al Gore, I would regret that vote. I don't regret voting for Hillary Clinton or John McCain. I only regret voting for Candidates who actually win.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Someone who doesn't want to give Russia more of our uranium and doesn't want to give the Iranian terrorist funders pallets of more cash?

I guess from a democrat perspective that does seem strange.

3/22/17, 9:53 AM

Someone who objects to letting 18 year old illegal aliens enroll in high schools as "freshmen" so they can rape and sodomize 14 year old classmates in school bathroom stalls?

That's strange from a democrat perspective too.

Angel-Dyne said...

exiledonmainstreet: The unhinged words and behavior of the Dems since the election have only served to further convince me that I chose correctly when I voted for Trump. I suspect I'm not the only one who feels that way either.

But remember, even though you voted for Trump with many reservations and the normal dissatisfactions felt by a rational citizen voting after due consideration, *you* are the blind bigoted rube, *you* are the gullible true-believer. Not the people parading their naked insanity in the streets and all over every form of media, day in, day out. Not the people screaming "Nazi", and sometimes physically attacking, people who disagree with them about...anything. *You*. When, oh when, are you dumb violent Trump voters going to get a grip?

W.B. Picklesworth said...

I wasn't planning on voting for Trump. I finally did so because the media was trying so hard to convince me not to.

Since then, they've been trying like made to get me to hate him. Heck, I don't even question him anymore. I'll crawl over broken glass to vote for him because he stands up to people who hate me and my family.

I'd love to be entirely apolitical. I certainly don't "believe" in politicians to solve my problems. But I do get motivated to rebuke the cancer that is the Leftist media/bureaucracy/education/entertainment establishment. So long as they are abusing power I'll happily vote for anyone who stands against them. They are the forces of fascism in our time.

Drago said...

Left Bank of the Charles: "1% would flip Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania"

A 1% shift of votes could also flip New Hampshire and Minnesota.

Minnesota is actually the most interesting of the non-flipped states given the shift in the State House as well as the vote tallies of the Libertarian as well as Egg McMuffin.

khesanh0802 said...

@Michael K 1964 was my first presidential vote. I thought that Johnson was a lying SOB and we would be in VN in no time if he was elected. I was right and arrived in-country in June of '67. It's all your fault!

EDH said...

I'd be interested to know how many people didn't vote for either candidate, and how they would vote now.

I think a good number of people otherwise predisposed to Trump (center-right or Republican) refrained from casting a presidential vote.

hombre said...

I'm merely hopeful that my vote for Trump will produce some positive results.

If I ever had any doubts about the wisdom of voting against the Democrats they have been put to rest by the despicable conduct of their sick machine since the election.

Mike Sylwester said...

Unknown at 9:48 AM

It took/takes a special sort of person to vote for him in the first place.

About 60 million persons of a special sort.

exiledonmainstreet said...

OT but:

"Armed Police have opened fire and shot an intruder inside the grounds of the Houses of Parliament amid reports a car drove into pedestrians on Westminster Bridge.

An intruder with a knife managed to break into the grounds of Parliament and stabbed a police officer before he was shot, reports suggest"

Gee, what could the motive possibly be? We may never know.


hombre said...

Unknown: "I'm not surprised. It took/takes a special sort of person to vote for him in the first place. Usually they are the unwavering adherent types...."

We can now expect regularly to be "patronized by our inferiors." Peggy Noonan

Matthew Sablan said...

"I only regret voting for Candidates who actually win."

-- So you're the guy who is tired of winning.

Unknown said...

"I'd be interested to know how many people didn't vote for either candidate, and how they would vote now."

I didn't vote for either Clinton or Trump. If I had to do it over again, I'd have voted for Clinton. Every allegation of corruption that was aimed at Clinton has been surpassed by the possible corruption of the Trump Family. I recall rightists arguing that someone who is under an FBI criminal investigation should not to be running for president. Trump Campaign was under investigation by the FBI since July 2016.

Drago said...

Unknown: "Trump Campaign was under investigation by the FBI since July 2016."

Yes, the politicization of the Federal Govt by the left was just about complete.

Hope you are enjoying the Gorsuch hearings.

Henry said...

So you're the guy who is tired of winning.

In politics, I'd rather lose battles and win wars.

Drago said...

Mike Sylvester: "About 60 million persons of a special sort"

Leftists like referring to them as "kulaks" or something similar.

Drago said...

Henry: "In politics, I'd rather lose battles and win wars."

I'd rather win battles and win wars, but hey, to each his own.

Matthew Sablan said...

"Every allegation of corruption that was aimed at Clinton has been surpassed by the possible corruption of the Trump Family."

-- Really? You realize Trump fired Manafort for possibly having dealings with Russia, while Clinton kept Podesta around despite (maybe because of) his ties with Russia, right?

Mike Sylwester said...

Unknown at 10:23 AM

Trump Campaign was under investigation by the FBI since July 2016.

I agree with you about that.

traditionalguy said...

We are two months into the year of living dangerously with DJT attempting to reform the DC swamp and Delusion Circus, much like President Jackson tried doing while the Kentucky folks he needed help from were also selling him out like Henry Clay once did to Jackson.

The idea that Trump is causing the idealist Conservatives of Kentucky a problem is a hoot. He is the only reason they are getting 80% 0f what they claim to want, instead of -200% after a McCain and Romney loss.

Matthew Sablan said...

So, Trump was under investigation since 2016 and they've found nothing.

We learned Clinton had a secret server, lied to authorities and destroyed evidence -- but they're totes the same.

Michael K said...

"Btw, the WSJ like Fox News is owned by Rupert Murdoch. Tee hee ..."

It is being run by his sons who seem to be drifting left as is predicted by Conquest's second law.


Blogger khesanh0802 said...

You have my sincere apology. A friend of mine was a young medical officer in Khe Sanh during the siege.

"Trump Campaign was under investigation by the FBI since July 2016."

That's what Trump said. Comey should be fired.

Henry said...

I'd rather win battles and win wars

Pick one or the other. It's politics.

mockturtle said...

I wonder how many who didn't vote for Trump wish they had.

Drago said...

Mathew Sablan: "-- Really? You realize Trump fired Manafort for possibly having dealings with Russia, while Clinton kept Podesta around despite (maybe because of) his ties with Russia, right?"

Actually, it appears the firing occurred for multiple reasons including a Ukrainian representation issue. The argument now is that the Russians were behind the Ukrainian entity.

Of course, its commonplace for foreign governments to hire American lobbyists to work on the foreign nations behalf.

Matthew Sablan said...

"I wonder how many who didn't vote for Trump wish they had."

-- If the data were released in full, as data in polls ought to be, we'd be able to determine it with roughly the same degree of certainty they did.

"Actually, it appears the firing occurred for multiple reasons including a Ukrainian representation issue."

-- True enough. The point stands: Manafort got the boot; Podesta effectively made Clinton's concession speech the night of the election.

Drago said...

Henry: "Pick one or the other. It's politics"

Give us a current example of what you are getting at.

Drago said...

Mathew Sablan: "Podesta effectively made Clinton's concession speech the night of the election."

Well, in Hillary's defense, she had already melted down, had a screaming and flailing fit which included hurling of objects (an old old habit of hers), was drunk and drugged up so she was in no position to come out and continue her fake "sincerity" act in a concession speech.

Unknown said...

"So, Trump was under investigation since 2016 and they've found nothing."

The investigation is ongoing and it's particulars are classified. So we of course don't know what they have found, or not found. Shouldn't you have watched the House Intelligence Committee Hearing, or even read transcripts before opining on what they've "found"?

Drago said...

I also see that Unknown's beloved islamists have been quite busy in London this morning with another attack.

I wonder if it's time for more "common sense" Vehicle/Knife laws in Britain?

MikeR said...

This poll corresponds to my experiences with people around me. Only my experiences go much further. Conservatives are excited how things are going. Several who supported him only as the lesser of two evils, and a couple who couldn't bring themselves to do even that - now see Trump as the _only_ one who could be pulling this off against fierce opposition from all sides.

Matthew Sablan said...

"So we of course don't know what they have found, or not found. Shouldn't you have watched the House Intelligence Committee Hearing, or even read transcripts before opining on what they've "found"?"

-- Clapper and others said they found nothing; if they're wrong, that's on them for speaking out of turn.

Drago said...

Unknown: "The investigation is ongoing and it's particulars are classified. So we of course don't know what they have found, or not found."

LOL

If there was the slightest thing it would already have leaked.

Unknown: "Shouldn't you have watched the House Intelligence Committee Hearing, or even read transcripts before opining on what they've "found"?"

Oh, so since you watched it, why don't you tell us what they "found"?

We'll wait........


.....and wait....

.....and wait.....

Unknown said...

Disinformation Troll Drago on duty again today, I see. How many comments so far in this thread? I used to think he was just an unemployed guy who had nothing better to do with his time, now I am pretty sure he is more than just some random weirdo.

Unknown said...

I am ECSTATIC with our new kick ass POTUS. It will be great watching democrats heads explode as he continues to do the work. I do fear for his safety however. The democrat party is the most dangerous organization in the country right now.

mockturtle said...

Drago proposes: Well, in Hillary's defense, she had already melted down, had a screaming and flailing fit which included hurling of objects (an old old habit of hers), was drunk and drugged up so she was in no position to come out and continue her fake "sincerity" act in a concession speech.

But, damn! It would have been highly entertaining!

Henry said...

@Drago -- It's totally off-topic, but I have long thought that an Al Gore win in 2000 would have given us far better prospects in the GWOT than the Bush win. It would have forced a Democratic administration into seriousness on the issue, and may have kept us out of Iraq. Instead we had a Bush administration react with extreme efforts confounded by a Democratic party that was never serious.

We treat politics as a zero-sum struggle when in fact many political solutions arise when one party is forced into seriousness on an issue they previously dismissed.

Drago said...

Unknown: "Disinformation Troll Drago on duty again today,...."

Lets see, "disinformation"...okay, I've got it.

Al Franken is extremely effective on the Judiciary Committee!

Henry said...

My comment also referenced the famous quote about the British Empire, for what that's worth.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Al Franken is extremely effective on the Judiciary Committee!

3/22/17, 11:07 AM

He's funnier now than he ever was on SNL.

Drago said...

Henry, there is no disagreement with what you wrote. In fact, that very specific assertion regarding the 2000 election/dems/GWOT point has been made on these threads many times in the past.

However, a Gore victory would also have meant quite alot of other changed outcomes as well involving legislation, Judge appointments, etc.

Overall a Gore victory would have meant many more lost battles and perhaps a "political war" that would also already have been permanently "lost".

Drago said...

Henry: "My comment also referenced the famous quote about the British Empire, for what that's worth."

Yes, I know. I am somewhat versed in military history/strategy (which is simply an extension of politics).

Drago said...

"He's funnier now than he ever was on SNL"

Low bar my friend. A very low bar indeed.

Brando said...

"I doubt many have buyer's remorse that badly. Even though Bush was decidedly meh, I never regretted voting for him (Gore and Kerry were far worse). Don't regret not voting for McCain either."

An interesting distinction--"regret" vs. simply not being thrilled. "Regret" suggests you'd change your vote if you could go back in time and make the choice again, but you also could be not happy with your choice but know you would make the same choice again. Like being at a restaurant with awful options, so you go with the BLT made with rotted tomatoes and turkey bacon, and while you're not happy with the sandwich you still wouldn't have gone back in time for the rotting bug infested hot dog.

Also, it is still too early to tell. We haven't seen yet how this health care mess will turn out (and in fairness to Trump, this is mostly Congress' doing, not his) or the final budget. Nor have we seen how this White House handles an international crisis. Ask us again in a few years.

mockturtle said...

Well, I never regretted voting for Ron Paul in 2008 and 2012.

Achilles said...

3/22/17, 9:27 AM
Blogger Unknown said...
WSJ Editorial today:

"... the President clings to his assertion (the Obama wiretap) like a drunk to a cheap gin bottle..."

Projection in pure form. Drunks think everyone else is a drunken loser like they are too.

"Btw, the WSJ like Fox News is owned by Rupert Murdoch. Tee hee ..."

Murdoch is on your side. You are just too stupid to figure it out.

Michael K said...

I have long thought that an Al Gore win in 2000 would have given us far better prospects in the GWOT than the Bush win. It would have forced a Democratic administration into seriousness on the issue, and may have kept us out of Iraq.

I was not a Bush fan in 2000. I supported and was a volunteer for McCain. I was not concerned because, at that time, I thought Gore was the adult in the Clinton White House.

However, I think Gore would not have gone to war in Afghanistan, let alone Iraq. The result would have been more attacks and serious trouble even worse than we have had.

On the other hand, I think Gore went crazy over losing in 2000 so maybe he would have been better.

clint said...

FAKE NEWS.

All polls have a margin of error.

They asked 1000 randomly chosen individuals. Found 339 who said they voted for Trump. Of whom 3 would now vote for Hillary.

Does anyone want to guess on the margin of error on those 3 poll-respondents?

Hint: The margin of error is larger than the effect being "reported" as a result.

And that's just the statistical error -- before you take into account things like respondents accidentally hitting the wrong button or lying to the pollsters for fun.

Drago said...

clint: "They asked 1000 randomly chosen individuals. Found 339 who said they voted for Trump. Of whom 3 would now vote for Hillary."

Well, they claimed they found 3 who would now vote for Hillary. We have no evidence that is true.

So it's simply Fake News on top of Fake News.

Basically, it's turtles and Fake News all the way down.

Achilles said...

Blogger SukieTawdry said...
"Have they done a poll of people who didn't vote for Trump and now wish they had (I didn't and am still waiting to see if I wish I had)?"

That's the real kicker right there. The primary break trump had was nobody thought he was serious about what he said during the campaign and wasn't going to do what he said so they voted for mcmuffin. A lot of real people fell for the NRO/George will Vichy traitors and they will be enthusiastic supporters in 2018 and 2020.

Drago said...

Since the lefty purveyors of #LeftyScience have told us that all the discussion regarding AGW is "settled science" AND insist that AGW drives terrorism, we must ask the obvious question: how much cooler would it need to have been to stop today's leftist-islamist attack from happening?

Todd said...

Drago said...

Well, in Hillary's defense, she had already melted down, had a screaming and flailing fit which included hurling of objects (an old old habit of hers), was drunk and drugged up so she was in no position to come out and continue her fake "sincerity" act in a concession speech.

3/22/17, 10:52 AM


Sure but talk about "must see" TV!

Static Ping said...

Actually, margin of error is a hazy thing when it comes to measuring such rare events. Statisticians stop using normal distribution and go to other models. It does not make the poll any more useful other than to tell us that someone out there has regrets and, unlike Frankie, does want to mention them.

Matthew Sablan said...

"They asked 1000 randomly chosen individuals."

-- Not even that; YouGov has a database of something like nearly 2 million people who have elected to be polled when YouGov needs to be polled, and then YouGov went in with some math to make sure to pull a "representative" sample across education, gender, racial, political and other qualities. At least, if I'm reading their methodology right.

So, useful data, but not truly random.

Henry said...

On the other hand, I think Gore went crazy over losing in 2000 so maybe he would have been better.

I think losing radicalized him weirdly. But this is all hypothetical, so we'll never know.

Henry said...

@Drago -- On certain political issues we probably don't agree.

Matthew Sablan said...

I think the fact that Gore lost by so little is what did it. If he'd lost by a lot, I think he'd have been fine. It was that Florida dragged out -- and I think that the election was literally called for him at one point by some people, essentially by calling Florida for him, contributed to that. But, who knows?

Bruce Hayden said...

"So, useful data, but not truly random."

Which means any margins of error probably somewhere between bogus and worthless.

Brando said...

"I think the fact that Gore lost by so little is what did it. If he'd lost by a lot, I think he'd have been fine. It was that Florida dragged out -- and I think that the election was literally called for him at one point by some people, essentially by calling Florida for him, contributed to that. But, who knows?"

It's hard to figure what might have happened if Gore won--might have gone with a centrist path, and done a lot of what Bush did in the war on terror, or possibly veered more to the left as his party did (taking his "people vs. the powerful" rhetoric seriously). We might have been in the mid-2000s talking about what might have been under a Bush presidency, and Republicans would be infuriated with Gore after the financial meltdown and who knows who their candidate would have been in 2008 (maybe McCain as it was in the real world).

Gore did go pretty wacky after 2000 though. Something about losing a race he should have been able to win, and growing less relevant (except among the swampy set) did that to him.

Birkel said...

@ Henry

Gore went crazy in exactly the way getting paid hundreds of millions of dollars by the Saudi government would make anybody go crazy. He opposed oil and natural gas exploration, shipping and use. He sold imaginary services to people for real money to offset their carbon use.

I should be so crazy.

mockturtle said...

Poll participants can never be truly representative or random because those who choose not to participate in polls are not counted. And I suspect that many, if not most, of us who do not participate are to the right of center.

Todd said...

Brando said...

Gore did go pretty wacky after 2000 though. Something about losing a race he should have been able to win, and growing less relevant (except among the swampy set) did that to him.

3/22/17, 12:24 PM


Hillary did go pretty wacky after 2016 though. Something about losing a race ze should have been able to win, and growing less relevant (except among the swampy set) did that to zim.

See what I did there?

Brando said...

"See what I did there?"

Wasn't she already pretty wacky? Or do you think she has more wackiness to go? Maybe she'll grow a beard (no, not Bill Clinton) and produce some BS science documentary that'll get her an Oscar.

Of course, she has reason to be even more pissed than Gore. She didn't just lose this year, she lost a similarly "in the bag" race to Obama in 2008. That's the universe telling her something.

Todd said...

mockturtle said...
Poll participants can never be truly representative or random because those who choose not to participate in polls are not counted. And I suspect that many, if not most, of us who do not participate are to the right of center.

3/22/17, 12:24 PM


As you say AND as someone that does not hold or support most liberal views, where is the upside to participating in anything that might be able to a) know who you are, b) maintain "documentation" of your choices, and c) either by design or negligence let said information out into the wild.

Generally speaking liberals do not pay any "real" costs for their beliefs where as anyone who does not enthusiastically support liberal causes opens themselves up to all sorts of harassment to include lose of livelihood, cause "fairness".

I do not put stickers on my car. I like my car and can't watch it 24/7. I know it would get vandalized. Happened to a number of my friends in the area. You don't really hear of "mayhem" being caused by conservatives. You don't really hear of liberals having to take responsibility for the mayhem they cause. Unfortunately, the way of the world at this time.

Long story short, most "conservatives" are too busy or too private to partake in things like poles. Besides where is the upside? Most poll wording is also atrocious and designed to get the answers the posters want. The upside (and there is one) is when stuff like election night/next morning happens. Now that was fun to watch!

Matthew Sablan said...

I wish I had the Yes, Prime Minister clip where Sir Humphrey talks to Bernard about polling about National Service.

brylun said...

AprilApple: Not only who killed Seth Rich, but what IT stuff did he do for the DNC and what files did he have access to there?

Michael K said...

The British terror attack today just might give a few Democrats pause about the Trump EOs.

Nah. Couldn't happen here.

Police: 3 people, including a police officer, killed.
Police: At least 20 injured.
Large section of central London in lockdown.
Gates to Buckingham Palace closed.
Social media video shows bodies on Westminster bridge.
Car crashed into Parliament perimeter fence.
Witnesses describe pedestrians mowed down by car.


brylun said...

And why did the DNC turn down FBI assistance when they were hacked, and why did Julian Assange offer a $20,000 reward for information leading to the conviction of Rich's killer?

Kirk Parker said...

"The YouGov panel includes over 1.8 million individuals who agree to complete occasional surveys."

In other words it has no statical validity at all.

Sukie,

Wilson. Hands down. Johnson is just a contender for second place.

Drago said...

And now we know why the MSM was pushing the Manafort thing from years back so vociferously yesterday. As if hired gun lobbyists for foreign entities was some sort of strange thing.

The lefties knew the real stuff about surveillance against the Trump team was coming out today.

Well, well well.

Buy hey, we can ASSURE you it was all just "incidental" surveillance. Nothing like that icky "real" Surveillance.

Nothing like it at all.

mockturtle said...

Kirk, I would have to agree. Not only the most destructive but Wilson was the very epitome of the Democratic Party: An elitist snob and a devout racist.

Best President of the 20th century? TR!

damikesc said...

think the fact that Gore lost by so little is what did it. If he'd lost by a lot, I think he'd have been fine. It was that Florida dragged out -- and I think that the election was literally called for him at one point by some people, essentially by calling Florida for him, contributed to that. But, who knows?

Well, FL being super close was, largely, caused by the state being called for him before the polls closed in the really conservative part of the state. Take away that and it'd have been a moot point.

damikesc said...

FDR was far worse than Wilson. Wilson showed that the government can really, really run your life almost completely --- but FDR was the one who really perfected that machinery.

He was also an economics ignoramus.

mockturtle said...

damikesc, I know my grandparents thought FDR was the Devil incarnate.

SukieTawdry said...

Kirk, Wilson is definitely in the running. So is FDR (who does get some props for his war leadership). LBJ's Great Society and War on Poverty programs were so very destructive. And then there was that war his people fucked up beyond reason. Plus he's the guy who decided to co-mingle payroll and income tax revenues. I'll never forgive him for that one.

Kirk Parker said...

"On the other hand, I think Gore went crazy over losing in 2000 so maybe he would have been better."

Every time I say something like this, some kind person reminds me that Earth In The Balance predates that by nearly a decade.

Michael K said...

"FDR was far worse than Wilson."

Arguable. FDR was an ignoramus on economics but everybody was, except Coolidge and Mellon.

All the smart kids were with FDR. Dorothy Thompson and HL Mencken (now there was a Nazi) and the Algonquin Round Table, all made fun of Coolidge and his naps.

Of course, FDR also had the communists like Harry Dexter White and Alger Hiss making policy for him.

Roosevelt's antipathy to the businessmen may have come from his own background. He hated them and made war on them, which probably prolonged the Depression past 1932. Wilson had a stroke and was helpless so Harding and Coolidge could end the depression of 1920. It was so short that no one remembers it. It was severe, though.

FDR finally had to reach out to the businessmen like Knudson to help him win the war.

In 1940, President Roosevelt, at the recommendation of Bernard Baruch, asked Knudsen to come to Washington to help with war production. Knudsen was appointed as Chairman of the Office of Production Management and member of the National Defense Advisory Commission, for which he received a salary of $1 per year.[8]

In January 1942, Knudsen was commissioned a Lieutenant General in the U.S. Army, the only civilian ever to join the Army at such a high initial rank,[9] and appointed as Director of Production, Office of the Under Secretary of War. In this capacity, he worked as a consultant and a troubleshooter for the War Department.

In both of these positions, Knudsen used his extensive experience in manufacturing and industry respect to facilitate the largest production job in history.


Just imagine if Roosevelt had asked someone like that for advice in 1932 when the worst of the panic was over ?

wildswan said...

"Long story short, most "conservatives" are too busy or too private to partake in things like poles"

Pole dancing is done by media and Democrat (but I repeat myself) operatives.

Brando said...

"Every time I say something like this, some kind person reminds me that Earth In The Balance predates that by nearly a decade."

The pre-2000 craziness was there, it just wasn't as advanced as his post-2000 craziness. Pre-2000 he still had voters to think about.

Michael K said...

I thought Gore was still an adult with a bit of global warming foolishness in 2000.

The real crazy stuff came later and Tipper bailed out.

Bob Loblaw said...

I doubt many have buyer's remorse that badly. Even though Bush was decidedly meh, I never regretted voting for him (Gore and Kerry were far worse). Don't regret not voting for McCain either.

McCain is the only one I regret voting for. One of two people I regret supporting based on things they said later (Robert Bork was the other).

traditionalguy said...

Rewarding hard working, sober and frugal men was the Conservative ideal that worked for middle class Americans, both those with city jobs and Farmers who owned their own land.
And then one day it all quit.And in the middle of it all we actually had two years of Catastrophic Global Warming

How anybody still blames 1933 on FDR requires more that a longing for middle class Conservative ideals. It require a religious faith in a continuous Industrial-Governmental system that never disappears. Except when the Capitalists want to try out investing in something else...like War.

It took WWII to re-focus the world capitalists' minds on America First. But cut FDR some slack. In WWII Roosevelt did a near perfect Commander-in-Chief job for an alliance that won it.That took vision and leadership skill at a level that would make Scott Adams praise him.

Infinite Monkeys said...

“Great Britain. Great island. Most people don’t even know it’s divided into many countries.”

Is three really "many"?

Todd said...

Infinite Monkeys said...

Is three really "many"?


Technically, yes. Wife and I watched a NatGeo show years ago that covered a small tribe in the Amazon that had little to no outside contact (had their polo shirts on though) and their entire number system was 1, 2, many.

We still make the occasional joke about that between ourselves, many being anything greater than two.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Brando said...
"Every time I say something like this, some kind person reminds me that Earth In The Balance predates that by nearly a decade."

When "Earth In the Balance" came out, PJ O'Rourke said Gore was a wannabe totalitarian with the intelligence of a King Charles spaniel.

Lewis Wetzel said...

Trump is okay, but I was hoping for a better VP pick.
Maybe Peter Dinklage? Or Rowdy Roddy Piper (if he were still alive).
Trump's mother was from the Hebrides. It would have been cool to see Trump & Piper campaigning in kilts.

n.n said...

Michael K:

FDR understood smoothing functions (e.g. welfare, entitlements). He did not understand capitalism. The former's role to promote stability in situations of voluntary and involuntary failure, and the latter to reduce catastrophic anthropogenic economic misalignments (e.g. "Mr. Chairman, we do not have a crisis at Freddie Mac, and in particular at Fannie Mae") and to optimally assess the price, and perhaps value, of capital and labor.

Michael K said...

How anybody still blames 1933 on FDR requires more that a longing for middle class Conservative ideals. It require a religious faith in a continuous Industrial-Governmental system that never disappears. Except when the Capitalists want to try out investing in something else...like War.

Lenin could not have said it better. Or Chavez.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Best President of the 20th century? TR!

A trust-busting progressive! Cheers!

damikesc, I know my grandparents thought FDR was the Devil incarnate.

Right. The previous comment naturally and logically must lead to this one. Of course.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

When "Earth In the Balance" came out, PJ O'Rourke said Gore was a wannabe totalitarian with the intelligence of a King Charles spaniel.

And how was it exactly that O'Rourke managed to give himself ass cancer, again?

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

Hmmmm.. O'Rourke endorsed Hillary over Trump.

The Toothless Revolutionary said...

1% is greater than the margin of votes that he won by in the four states that decided the election. And those people are ticked off at him, and will be even moreso once he comes through on his intention to price them out of the insurance market.

mockturtle said...

UK: England, Scotland, N. Ireland, Wales.

Gahrie said...

UK: England, Scotland, N. Ireland, Wales.

Great Britain: England, Scotland and Wales.
U.K.: England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
British Isles: England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic.

Lewis Wetzel said...

The Toothless Revolutionary said...
1% is greater than the margin of votes that he won by in the four states that decided the election.

Meaningless. Hillary believed that she would win those states by a comfortable margin.
Team D's current response to the the loss of those vital states is to . . blame Putin!
Hillary didn't campaign at all in Wisconsin. Instead she sent Chelsea. To UW LaCrosse, where Hillary already had all the votes sewed up.
Hillary's campaign people probably were responsible for that. Write a report showing Chelsea's warm welcome by people who would vote Democrat if Hannibal Lecter was leading the ticket.
Ten miles outside of LaCrosse and you were in Trump territory.
Good luck in 2018, R&B!