Trump Disaster Watch 2016 - Making America Great Again, one controversy at a time

[Zenreon]

[QUOTE=vizard38;51177467]You guys think this election is going to lead to major realignment for the GOP?[/QUOTE]

The GOP as it was no longer exists. Most of their major front runners have been humiliated publicly.

[Thelurker1234]

[QUOTE=vizard38;51177467]You guys think this election is going to lead to major realignment for the GOP?[/QUOTE]

I think the formation of the tea party and the loss of Romney were what really started that. The tea party began the fracturing of the GOP, and Romney's loss really created an opening for it to tear itself apart. Romney was super moderate so him losing against Obama (who had pretty bad approval ratings and high unemployment) I feel pretty much showed their constituents that the GOP had no idea what it should be doing.

[phaedon]

Women <3 Donald, apparently.

[img_thumb]https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CuVK_lCXYAAo1tR.jpg[/img_thumb]

That calligraphic font tho.

Only one poll ([url=http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/politico-morning-consult-poll-229394]Morning Consult/Politico[/url]) has come out with updated data since the pussy-grabbing saga, and his support has just decreased by one point (39% to 38%). Obviously you need to poll people more than one day after the story broke in order to get proper results, but by the time more polls are released, it will be hard to tell apart the effect of this whole ordeal and that of his second debate performance.

[person12]

It's crazy how some people are talking about what the GOP nomination process for 2020 will look like already. Even crazier is that they are bringing out Rubio, Cruz, Kasich, Pence, and Ryan as potential candidates.

While I could see Kasich doing well due to never having supported Trump, pretty much every other major republican has at some point supported Trump. Even if they revoke their support over the latest controversy now, it's too late. They are toxic.

It's actually a damned if you do damned if you don't scenario, because the 'new' Republican party will either be like it used to be, or just Trump-like. Candidates can be hurt for either being too much like Trump, or not enough like him.

[Magikoopa24]

Didn't expect this to show up in my inbox today

[video=youtube;MFHNHqVWUhA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFHNHqVWUhA[/video]

[patq911]

I'll say this for Donald Trump, he's made Hillary Clinton look good.

That is impressive.

[-Chief-]

[QUOTE=person11;51178254]It's crazy how some people are talking about what the GOP nomination process for 2020 will look like already. Even crazier is that they are bringing out Rubio, Cruz, Kasich, Pence, and Ryan as potential candidates.

While I could see Kasich doing well due to never having supported Trump, pretty much every other major republican has at some point supported Trump. Even if they revoke their support over the latest controversy now, it's too late. They are toxic.

It's actually a damned if you do damned if you don't scenario, because the 'new' Republican party will either be like it used to be, or just Trump-like. Candidates can be hurt for either being too much like Trump, or not enough like him.[/QUOTE]

But will they be able to compete with Yeezus 2020.

[Daniel Smith]

[QUOTE=thelurker1234;51175943]Google "sexual predator" in image search and look at the first and seventh result[/QUOTE]

[IMG]http://1.media.collegehumor.cvcdn.com/59/73/d5f47e0f92103d10907ba32d437d528e-cutest-sexual-predator-ever.jpg[/IMG]

[phaedon]

[QUOTE=Daniel Smith;51178598][IMG]http://1.media.collegehumor.cvcdn.com/59/73/d5f47e0f92103d10907ba32d437d528e-cutest-sexual-predator-ever.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/2h3hbqS.jpg?1[/IMG]

[URL=http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/glenn-beck-if-not-electing-trump-means-electing-clinton-so-be-it/article/2604044]Glenn Beck: If not electing Trump means electing Clinton, 'so be it'[/URL]

[quote]"It is not acceptable to ask a moral, dignified man to cast his vote to help elect an immoral man who is absent decency or dignity," he wrote. "If the consequence of standing against Trump and for principles is indeed the election of Hillary Clinton, so be it. At least it is a moral, ethical choice."[/quote]

I am agreeing with Glenn Beck, send help pls

[BuffaloHops]

[QUOTE]Coming soon: 'The Apprentice' White House Edition if Trump is elected
[url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1531923[/url]
[QUOTE]Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump reportedly discussed with an NBC executive continuing “The Apprentice” reality show from the White House if he were elected president, long before he launched his bid.

The anecdote was reported in June by Vanity Fair contributing editor Sarah Ellison but appeared to go largely unnoticed until she was interviewed on "The Takeaway" podcast over the weekend.
“[NBCUniversal Chief Executive Steve Burke and Trump] outlined, presumably fantastically, that Trump should run for president; and on the off chance that he won, he would continue to star in ‘The Apprentice’ from within the White House,” Ellison wrote about a 2011 conversation between the two.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

I give up. This election isn't in reality anymore, we're all clearly suffering from the effects of a gas leak.

Also, here's another one for the list:

[media]https://twitter.com/billpruitt/status/784872190587998209[/media]

[QUOTE]I don't have the tapes. I've signed a Burnett contract & know leak fee is 5 mill. Hearing from producers/crew N word is the "much worse".
— Chris Nee (@chrisdocnee) [B][Tweet has since been deleted][/B][/QUOTE]

[media]https://twitter.com/chrisdocnee/status/785156663946858497[/media]

[person12]

Kickstarter?

I'd give 10 bucks to a "penalty fee fund"

[splenda]

[QUOTE=person11;51178800]Kickstarter?

I'd give 10 bucks to a "penalty fee fund"[/QUOTE]

[url=https://www.gofundme.com/sunlightfund]Gofundme link if you are feeling brave/a bastion of press freedom.[/url]

[BuffaloHops]

[QUOTE=person11;51178800]Kickstarter?

I'd give 10 bucks to a "penalty fee fund"[/QUOTE]

Looks like there may be no need afterall.

[url]http://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/10/david-brock-i-will-pay-for-apprentice-tapes-229432[/url]

[QUOTE][B]David Brock: I will pay for 'Apprentice' tapes[/B]

David Brock is volunteering to pay for the legal fees of any "Apprentice" producer or staff member who may have their hands on potentially damaging tapes of Donald Trump.

Mark Burnett, the television producer behind the reality series who is considered to be a friend of Trump, has warned staff he would not hesitate to sue them if they leaked footage from The Apprentice, according to BuzzFeed News.
[/QUOTE]

[Saxon]

I wanna get off Mr. Trumps wild ride

Hes basically bringing in Clinton's rape accusers to the debate, lmao

[URL]http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/09/politics/trump-clinton-sex-then-vs-now/index.html[/URL]

[Magikoopa24]

[QUOTE=Saxon;51178955]I wanna get off Mr. Trumps wild ride

Hes basically bringing in Clinton's rape accusers to the debate, lmao

[URL]http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/09/politics/trump-clinton-sex-then-vs-now/index.html[/URL][/QUOTE]

Not Hilary's accusers, by the way, Bill's. Because that's relevant.

[Saxon]

[QUOTE=Magikoopa24;51179011]Not Hilary's accusers, by the way, Bill's. Because that's relevant.[/QUOTE]

Yeah I forgot to mention Bill, but this is so fucked up its hilarious and most people believe this move is going to be a disaster :v:

[person12]

He threatened to do that last time, so I am sure Hillary is ready for that.

[gman003-main]

Wonder if Hillary brought a bunch of Trump rape accusers with her. I'm sure he's got some, with the way he apparently acts.

[myon]

Rumors of Pence leaving the campaign seems to be greatly exaggerated

[media]https://twitter.com/mike_pence/status/785310165327151104[/media]

[Thelurker1234]

"Romney choked" Trump said

[IMG]https://i.imgur.com/L5v83q5.jpg[/IMG]

[Col. Buggernuts]

[QUOTE=phaedon;51178704][URL=http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/glenn-beck-if-not-electing-trump-means-electing-clinton-so-be-it/article/2604044]Glenn Beck: If not electing Trump means electing Clinton, 'so be it'[/URL]

I am agreeing with Glenn Beck, send help pls[/QUOTE]Quite an odd day it is when people who normally strongly disagree with Beck agree with him, and his followers are vehemently disagreeing. Either that, or it's the Trumpet Brigade bringing those comments to the top.

[Zero-Point]

I realized earlier today that many of the same people cheering Trump for challenging Hillary (with the jail comments) are the same people who are perpetuating the theory that Hillary bumps off those who challenge her...

[AnnieOakley]

I have a question. How come it seems so much of his vocal voter base on forums will call out fundamentalism in Islam, yet lack the sight to see the company he keeps of fundamentals in Christianity that looms with similarly twisted ideals with only a change of coat to differentiate them?

[BuffaloBill]

[QUOTE=AnnieOakley;51194115]I have a question. How come it seems so much of his vocal voter base on forums will call out fundamentalism in Islam, yet lack the sight to see the company he keeps of fundamentals in Christianity that looms with similarly twisted ideals with only a change of coat to differentiate them?[/QUOTE]

Because to them islam is evil personified, while christianity can do no wrong.

[Missing User]

Now cast of 538 has him in single digits to win the election

[BuffaloBill]

[QUOTE=Code3Response;51194277]Now cast of 538 has him in single digits to win the election[/QUOTE]

Says 13,7% for me, unless I'm looking at the wrong one?

[gman003-main]

[QUOTE=BuffaloBill;51194346]Says 13,7% for me, unless I'm looking at the wrong one?[/QUOTE]

That's the polls-only forecast. Code3Response was talking about the nowcast, which is for the hypothetical scenario where today is election day. 538 currently shows a Nowcast of 90.7% to 9.3%, compared to a Polls-Only forecast of 86.5% to 13.4%, and a Polls-Plus (which factors in stuff like the economy) of 83.4% to 16.6%.

All three generally converge on election day, but the Nowcast is the least predictive. However, it responds extremely rapidly to polling shifts, so it's useful when gauging the impact of a news event.

[Mythman]

[QUOTE=gman003-main;51194426]That's the polls-only forecast. Code3Response was talking about the nowcast, which is for the hypothetical scenario where today is election day. 538 currently shows a Nowcast of 90.7% to 9.3%, compared to a Polls-Only forecast of 86.5% to 13.4%, and a Polls-Plus (which factors in stuff like the economy) of 83.4% to 16.6%.

All three generally converge on election day, but the Nowcast is the least predictive. However, it responds extremely rapidly to polling shifts, so it's useful when gauging the impact of a news event.[/QUOTE]

That's the most informative post I've seen in a while, I was wondering what the difference between the models was. Thanks!

[Zillamaster55]

Polls plus is arguably the most accurate

[gman003-main]

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;51194480]Polls plus is arguably the most accurate[/QUOTE]

Yes, but at the cost of being the least responsive to new developments.

Let's say Trump did something that would completely alienate his voter base. Most of my normal examples turn out to be things he's already done, so let's go with "releases his tax records, turns out he's been giving all his money to ISIS". His support drops to literally zero.

The Nowcast will catch on the fastest. As soon as polls start coming out showing "clinton 70%, johnson 25%, stein 4%, vermin supreme 1%, trump 0", it will rapidly tick the odds up. Even if there's a brief period of a slide, where some of his ex-supporters write it off as a fake until Trump confirms it's true, the Nowcast will even anticipate the trend and assume more of his supporters will drop. This will be just days after the event - most short polls take 2-3 days to perform, so the polls for the first few days will have some old data left.

The Polls-Only will catch up next. By the time there's enough polls that you can't write them off the results as outliers, Polls-Only will be showing Trump at 0% odds. This might take a week or so. Actually, in a case like that I'd expect there to be a lot of suddenly "undecided" ex-GOP voters, which Polls-Plus would split evenly between the two main parties, so Trump would still show some support, but not nearly enough to get even a 1% chance of winning.

Polls-Plus wouldn't fully catch up until it [I]becomes[/I] Polls-Only. 538's polls-plus is programmed to pay attention to demographics and the economy less and less as election day draws nearer. On election day, it is literally identical to polls-only. But even a month before the election, Polls-Plus would show a zero-support Trump having a 10% chance to win, "because the economy isn't bad but isn't great either, so it's about 50/50 for any democrat versus any republican".

And now that I see what I just wrote, I realize just how bad Trump's doing. He's not even doing twice as well as a theoretical Republican with zero supporters would be doing in the Polls-Plus. That actually takes some amount of talent.