Turnout is going to decide this election. Trump's base is more likely to go to the polls this year...

Turnout is going to decide this election. Trump's base is more likely to go to the polls this year, based on primary turnout and voter excitement figures. Voters aren't excited and won't turnout for Hillary Clinton, particularly in the important swing states like Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania. If Trump wins those three states he'll be president.

The polls which have Hillary Clinton winning those three states all over sample Democrats based on the past two voting cycles. Barack Obama was an anomaly, a president who got record voter turnout (suspiciously high turnout, actually) among minority demographics in critical swing states. Those communities aren't going to be flocking to the polls in 2016.


(Pic Related) The General Election polls by the MSM back this up, even if they don't report on the discrepancy between polls with registered vs likely voters. In an election of two unpopular candidates, turnout is always going to be low. The voters who reliably show up year in and year out (older, whiter) become even more important, while voters who need to "get excited" about a candidate to get involved (younger, colored) in the election process are a lost cause.

TL;DR It's hard to motivate young and black voters to vote if they don't like their candidates, those communities in swing states won't show up and polls aren't reflecting that reality. Campaign internal numbers do.

Other urls found in this thread:

nytimes.com/2016/07/19/opinion/the-most-extreme-republican-platform-in-memory.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-left-region®ion=opinion-c-col-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region&_r=0
gallup.com/poll/175442/disapproval-congress-linked-higher-voter-turnout.aspx
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

>An analysis by Nate Silver on FiveThirtyEight ranked Rasmussen 20th out of 23 pollsters for accuracy in the 2012 elections with an average error of 4.2 points.

>Nate Silver

Minorities will still turn out in groves for this cunt because king nigger is endorsing her

My only hope is young white liberals stay home or vote third party

none of them are accurate user

Do you think Clinton news network research is accurate

Except It's the End of Trump's Campaign after Melania Plagiarized Michelle's speech. They won't Nominate him now, it will be Romney or Cruz

IDK if the voter cares about this sort of thing. They definitely didn't like the Muslim Ban or the Mexican judge comment. But if THIS is the best the Media can pull up, "Concrete shoes" Manafort really is doing his job.

Nigger what.

>still unironically using Nate (((Shillver))) as a source

You shills need to update your meme arsenals

>numerical facts aren't a reliable source
stop shitposting

Fuck you're retarded. You type like a 13 year old on myspace.

You're right OP

I keep telling these dumb faggots that what matters the most is turnout, especially in swing states of OH, PA and FL

judging from Trump picking Pence, Kasich voters in OH are more likely to vote Trump, making him very likely to win that state

I don't know about FL and PA though. VA could still flip too

waitasec. Trump has a base?

FL is Trump territory. I haven't seen one yard sign for Hilldawg.

Voters are going to turn out to prevent Trump. The disapproval ratings are at record levels for Trump at the moment. This is what will decide the election result. Trump has gambled on the fearful, white, poorly educated core of "traditional Republicans" being enough to win an election. However, even Paul Ryan and other leading Republicans have agreed that this is a losing strategy. This was the key recommendation of the post-mortem report after Romney's loss -- the party needs to open itself up and sell the appeals of conservatism to non-core voters. Trump is the opposite of this and it's why he's going to lose.
There was a nice article about this problem in today's news too:
"The Most Extreme Republican Platform in Memory"
nytimes.com/2016/07/19/opinion/the-most-extreme-republican-platform-in-memory.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-left-region®ion=opinion-c-col-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region&_r=0

The really funny part is watching the dinosaurs get all excited because they think they might actually have a chance of winning over America with an anti-Muslim, wall-building, plagiarized campaign.

Nate got shit on in this election for being beyond retarded and assumed Trump had 2% chance of winning the primaries

He's literally the real world incarnate of "this will be the end of Trump's campaign says increasingly nervous man"

His only achiemennt was guessing the winner of 2008 and 2012 election+which states would go blue

This isn't hard at all, as only FL, OH, VA and PA mattered those times, with exception of NC

Go be a retard somewhere else

plenty Hillary signs down here in Miami, mate.

>Voters are going to turn out to prevent Trump.

This has literally never happened in a presidential election before. Voters who don't like either candidate don't vote, unless they are old and white.

They vote because they feel a civic responsibility to vote, and they vote Republican.

> Polls show Clinton ahead.
> FUCKIN KIKE SHILLS!

> Polls show Trump ahead.
> HAHA TAKE THAT BASED TRUMP IS GONNA WIN!

???

MSM is just trying to find more fuel for the anti-Trump campaign

Almost all first lady speeches has had basically the same context, and hilldog has plagiarized way more from Bernie
King Nigger did something worse a few years ago as well

>numerical facts aren't a reliable source 2: electric boogaloo

People don't turn out to vote against someone. It straight up doesn't happen. Most people have better shit to do with their time than "anti-vote"

you know, if you quit writing like a moron people may just take you seriously. on second thought, continue with your juvenile, vitriolic nonsense.

OP is trying to highlight RV- registered voters vs LV- likely voters. A lot of people are registered to vote but wont actually vote.

So you're saying that white uneducated voters know what nafta and tpp are?

I'm voting Trump and I know plenty businessmen that are as well.

I don't even give a shit about the wall. Personally I think its a waste. You want to stop drugs, legalize pot to take money away from the cartels and rework the dot because those fuckers let drugs go up and down the highway without batting an eye.

>vitriol
commit suicide

i hate both, but i'm voting Hilary, in hopes of blocking Trump. I voted in the last presidential election, after attending Halo 4's midnight launch and then going to work at 5 AM, better believe I'll be at this one.

No one gives a fuck about you

Disapproval ratings do matter and do make a difference. Approval of Obama is around 50 percent, which means there won't be a strong anti-Obama effect in voter turnout either (since disapproval of the sitting president seems to correlate with voter turnout levels of those on the other side of politics).

Disapproval ratings haven't been kept for long enough for us to know about all their effects, but there has never been a presidential candidate before with as much disapproval as Trump.

"Disapproval of Congress Linked to Higher Voter Turnout"
AUGUST 25, 2014
gallup.com/poll/175442/disapproval-congress-linked-higher-voter-turnout.aspx

Why did you highlight specific polls?

>I'm triggered by the word "nigger" on Sup Forums: The Post

>Reuters polls are 50% democrat, 11% independent
>in 2012, Democrats were 35% and independents were 30%

But Rasmussen is the problem poll.

Legal pot is taxed and way more expensive than street weed. Dumbass. Source I'm a pothead

White adults always show up to vote because we're not lazy fucks. Millenial children and niggers wont show up to vote for Hillary.

But Nate really aren't reliable. If so, Ted would be the Rep candidate in a landslide

And that shit you brought up was from 2012, so just kill yourself

Correction: minorities actually have a higher relative turnout than white people

>there has never been a presidential candidate before with as much disapproval as Trump.
Hillary is pretty close.

>fuck the wall
>legalize degeneracy

Go back to rebbit, kike.

I live in Florida, a luberal part, and I'm very confident this state will be red.

...

With Obama you stupid fuck

Jesus this. It's so blatant.

True, which is why informed political commentators are saying that this should have been the Republicans' year, if only they went with a safe, regular candidate who didn't regular divide the electorate and alienate potential supporters -- someone like Paul Ryan.

Internal party disorganization has been an outsider candidate has become the nominee, even though he doesn't stand a realistic chance of winning and is doing much damage to the party (which is only winning in pols among retired-age voters and is incredibly unpopular among anyone under 30). The Republicans are allowing themselves to die off by not creating a strategy of renewal.

Rasmussen does likely voters and most others don't. It leans republican but if it says Trump is up 7 points you can be sure that with an election held today he'd have a good chance of winning based on turnout. Whereas if they had him up by 2 points, Clinton might have the edge.

Hopefully you live in Alabama or something, or a perma blue state so your vote doesn't matter at all

halo is truly for degenerate tavis

Based on what?

>>mfw voting doesn't matter

Turnout was lower in the Democratic primaries because most people didn't care who won between Hillary and Bernie. The general election is an entirely different matter.

I'm a democrat myself and I voted in the Republican Primary for Trump because he would be the easiest to beat. Everything is going as planned.

For millenials go to reddit. They hate her. Only radical feminists like her even on reddit. For blacks look at her skin color. Blacks are deeply racist they wont turn out to vote for a white. There's a reason dem turnout in primaries was down ~30% even with bernouts showing up.

double doubles. KEK Confirms it. Hillary will win XD

But they'll show up to prevent Trump from winning, since there's so much embarrassment about him among younger voters and Bernie supporters. There simply aren't enough vote conservative voters in play to make appealing to them alone a viable strategy in the US this year or any year in the foreseeable future. This is what the GOP decided after the last election but now Trump has come along and fucked everything up with his celebrity loudmouth, character assassinations and mean tweets.

You are out of your mind if you think he has no chance of winning

So you're basing future general election turnout on primary turnout?

I should rephrase. He has a low chance of winning in a year when a Republican should have won and been a clear favorite.

Samefagging, Kek no longer wills it. Try again, retard.

It's not even a low chance he has everything riding on the debates because he is extremely close or winning in the states that matter. To say it is actually a 50/50 would be accurate for this election which is based on three swing states specifically.

People dont show up to anti-vote that's a myth

Prediction is fun but worthless until October.

>In an election of two unpopular candidates

The thing is, Trump isn't unpopular. He broke the primary Republican popular vote record.

I literally have never voted in my life, and I will vote for the first time for Donald Trump.

Same. I'm 34 and the first vote in my life was for Trump during my state primary.

Do you have a source on that? It's well demonstrated that disapproval of Congress results in high voter turnout.

This is wild optimism. I'm not confident Trump will excel in debating. He's going to be found out for not knowing enough and for making things up. Those three states will only matter if it's not a landslide, which means that states like Arizona or North Carolina are not potential wins for the Democrats (at the moment it seems they could well be).

What states are you living in?

If not NC, PA, FL, OH VA, or other potential swing states, then there's no point in voting

It is not wild optimism it just feels like you use wild pessimism he has all of the tools to destroy Clinton based on all of her fuck ups and he has something Clinton does not have that caused her to lose to Obama and that is a spark that makes people follow. It will be close in which it will all come down to Florida and right now he is ahead here.

Yeah. He saved the party. That's why he's so well loved despite the establishment.

People will pay more for legal weed.

I never tried to say it would be cheaper.

I said it would take money away from the cartel, which it would.

Implying kikes don't love bullshit big government like the dot.

>0.50 cents has been deposited in your account

> The Republicans are allowing themselves to die off by not creating a strategy of renewal.
Their strategy of renewal is the repudiation of neoconservatism and Bushism, and a return to nationalist populism.

Republicans were guaranteed to die off simply due to demographic reasons. No matter how far they pandered to the left, blacks will never vote for them, and neither will most hispanics. That's the truth of multicultural democracy.

No matter how much you want to believe the meme that "hispanics are natural conservatives", they aren't. And even if they were natural conservatives, they wouldn't necessarily become Republicans. Blacks are much more socially conservative than whites, but they're overwhelmingly Democrats.

You can't say any of this in public. Multicultural democracy leads to secret oligarchy, since each racial voting block is guaranteed votes. Just look at how the Democrats use blacks for votes while doing little to nothing for them in congress. Republicans do the same to Christians.

>a return to nationalist populism
That's what Trump is trying, but so far this is only catching on with older white voters (on a large scale). What could Trump possibly do to energize and inspire the majority of voters under 30? He seems a million miles away from being able to do this.

Nice observation on the voting blocks who get exploited. This is the great political problem of why people act against their own self-interest. Personally I'd like to see the US abandon first-past-the-post voting and develop a system that allows at least four or five different political parties to flourish.

I'll add also that racial voting blocks also encourage parties to try to redistribute people into states and districts. Call it reverse-gerrymandering. Instead of changing the district boundaries to fit the people, change the people to fit the districts.

This is why HUD is trying to expand Chicago's Section 8 area into Dubuque, Iowa. If Iowa had more niggers, it'd be more likely to vote Democrat in presidential elections.

This is why Democrats encourage amnesty for illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants are largely gibs voters who'll vote Democrat.

Republicans don't even work in the interests of white people anymore, because they'd be called out as racists if they did.

>it's a "Sup Forums thinks it understands how to interpret statistics" episode

So it actually depends on whether we can make the pokey-man go to the polls?

>Personally I'd like to see the US abandon first-past-the-post voting and develop a system that allows at least four or five different political parties to flourish.

That would literally kill The US. What you should want is to reduce the power of the feds and allow local parties to make local decisions. At the federal level elections shouldn't be an event that can make or break the country and the choice should be pretty obvious who fills the executive. The solution is not dividing more federal power up almond different factions, it's dividing power up among the people, by state and locale.

We could start by repealing the 17th amendment and further reducing the power of the president

>Dubya is going to lose! Everyone will come out to vote against him!
>Dubya wins re-election by even greater margins than 2000

Voting for the purpose of voting against someone is a fucking meme and has never worked you dumb millennial.

Reminder that turnout was responsible for Brexit, the average of most polls put remain ahead at 52%/48% on the 22nd of June. However that trend was reversed due to the higher turnout among old people and working-class whites.

Turnout is always higher among those who wish to change something. The status-quo position (i.e Clinton) will always suffer as a result.

I'm not sure if this will be enough to win it for Trump, but this is proof that elections can be swung on turnout.

Trump will win PA because working class people, and FL because old people

Reuters does have it in with Hillary

No, it's real you faggot

The only states that matters are those
The rest is perma-red/blue regardless

...

>TL;DR It's hard to motivate young and black voters to vote if they don't like their candidates, those communities in swing states won't show up and polls aren't reflecting that reality. Campaign internal numbers do.

This is exactly why the Democrats are pushing #blacklivesmatter

They have an old white woman and Wall Street crony as their candidate, somehow they need to get black people to turn out

FLbro here. The state is not in doubt, and that's backed up by primary turnout and just the general feel you get driving around and seeing support .

Massive voter fraud will be required to beat Trump, which admittedly is a legit concern

How much of a shitshow will the dem national convention be

Aren't those old people almost exclusively Jew Yorkers?

How many words per minute can he type?