Trump

[ShockTalk]

Interesting questions in this poll! Can you post the results of question 6 and 7? They won't load in my phone for some reason, while the others do. I'm only interested in registered voter results.

Are these the 2 you needed?

Q: (AMONG REGISTERED VOTERS WHO DO NOT SUPPORT CLINTON) Is it possible that you would consider voting for Clinton or would you never vote for her?

Would consider Clinton 12%


Would never vote for her 86%


Q: (AMONG REGISTERED VOTERS WHO DO NOT SUPPORT TRUMP) Is it possible that you would consider voting for Trump, or would you never vote for him?

Would consider Trump 13%


Would never vote for him 86%

[Kung Wu]

Are these the 2 you needed?

Q: (AMONG REGISTERED VOTERS WHO DO NOT SUPPORT CLINTON) Is it possible that you would consider voting for Clinton or would you never vote for her?

Would consider Clinton 12%


Would never vote for her 86%


Q: (AMONG REGISTERED VOTERS WHO DO NOT SUPPORT TRUMP) Is it possible that you would consider voting for Trump, or would you never vote for him?

Would consider Trump 13%


Would never vote for him 86%

Yes, thanks.

[Play Angry]

Donald Trump receives general election endorsement from North Korea.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/31/politics/north-korea-donald-trump-wise-hillary-clinton-dull/index.html

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Yes, that's exactly right. The question is, "Are Republicans divided because of Trump?" The answer is a resounding, "No." Asking independents does nothing to further that question.

I'm not talking about "asking independents". I'm talking about R's who will vote independent or write-in. Any polling question that doesn't offer a choice other than Clinton/Trump is going to fail to show this demographic accurately. You previously posted GOP support for Trump numbers that were based on polling that gave R's only the Clinton/Trump choice. My point is that we need to see what R's say when given Clinton/Trump/Other, because that is the real choice they will be offered in November.

Which specific result from the polls @ShockTalk provided are you referencing when you say the "answer is a resounding no"?

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Interesting...

Non Gore/Bush Votes in 2000: 3.8%
Non Kerry/Bush Votes in 2004: 1.0%
Non Obama/McCain Votes in 2008: 1.4%
Non Obama/Romney Votes in 2012: 1.7%
Non Clinton/Trump Votes in 2016: Current polling shows this in double digits

If that double digits turns out to be accurate (as of right now) and doesn't go away before November, it won't be purely Independent voters filling that role. Both Clinton and Trump are hurting with their own parties (registered D's and R's).

Like I asked in the previous post, what polling results are there to suggest Trump will do well with registered R's?

[shock]

Well he did win a primary that had near record turnouts. And he won convincingly. I'd say that's better than any poll because it was wider spread than the polls. What you are seeing is a very vocal minority.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Well he did win a primary that had near record turnouts. And he won convincingly. I'd say that's better than any poll because it was wider spread than the polls. What you are seeing is a very vocal minority.

Less convincingly than Romney and McCain did.

[Kung Wu]

Less convincingly than Romney and McCain did.

Only on a percentage basis, and only then because both McCain and Romney had twice as many uncontested states.

On a total votes basis Trump is easily killing them both.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

On a total votes basis Trump is easily killing them both.

That's irrelevant to the topic.

You already conceded that primary turnout doesn't predict general turnout. If there is no dependable correlation, and we are trying to analyze Trump's support amongst Republicans, then percentages are more important to look at.

Regarding %'s, I already showed you that the first 3 states Trump faced unopposed (OR/WV/NE), he did worse than Romney, despire Romney still having Ron Paul actively campaigning at the time.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

What you are seeing is a very vocal minority.

Anti-Trump people are indeed a minority. That is true. That takes nothing away from my argument that the anti-Trump minority among Republicans will be larger than any of the Republican presidential candidates of the last 20 years have faced.

[Kung Wu]

That's irrelevant to the topic.

You already conceded that primary turnout doesn't predict general turnout. If there is no correlation, and we are trying to analyze Trump's support amongst Republicans, then percentages are more important to look at.

I didn't concede anything, because there's nothing to concede. You have to actually be arguing a point in order to concede it.

We aren't talking about the general election, so why do you keep bringing it up ad nauseum? Nobody has mentioned it but you. Yet now you are telling ME that it's irrelevant to this discussion. Weird.

In the primary, Trump has way more voters than Romney ever sniffed. Let alone McCain. Even though a lot of his turnout is due to the highly contested race, he is STILL killing it even though it's now uncontested.

If 15 skinheads write in Hitler, and only 10 did last election cycle, then you could conclude that -- OMG THERE WAS A 50% INCREASE IN WHITE SUPREMISTS THIS YEAR!! Dumb.

Cruz, Rubio, Kasich, et. al getting a larger percent increase over Trump is irrelevant when the raw numbers are overwhelmingly demolishing them.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

We aren't talking about the general election

I asked what the primary results might imply about the upcoming general election. @shock responded to me. I responded back to him. Then you (@Kung Wu) jumped in.

How can you possibly say we weren't talking about the general election when predicting Republican support for Trump in the general election is precisely what was being discussed? You are seriously becoming impossible to converse with.

Also, yes, you absolutely conceded earlier that primary turnout is not very correlated to general turnout. Don't lie.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

If 15 skinheads write in Hitler, and only 10 did last election cycle, then you could conclude that -- OMG THERE WAS A 50% INCREASE IN WHITE SUPREMISTS THIS YEAR!! Dumb.

Sample sizes of 15 out of 300 million are obviously pretty useless.

Sample sizes of hundreds of thousands, or even millions, are a totally different animal.

Quit playing dumb.

[Kung Wu]

... you absolutely conceded earlier that primary turnout is not very correlated to general turnout. Don't lie.

Stop lying and quote where I argued this point with you. From recollection all I did was agree with you on this point. Stop lying.

[Kung Wu]

I asked what the primary results might imply about the upcoming general election. @shock responded to me. I responded back to him. Then you (@Kung Wu) jumped in.

How can you possibly say we weren't talking about the general election when predicting Republican support for Trump in the general election is precisely what was being discussed? You are seriously becoming impossible to converse with.

Geez. I specifically quoted you and that framed the discussion -- which had nothing to do with the general election. Your singular comment has only to do with performance in the primary and nothing else.