AJC Poll Clinton leading Trump in Georgia

[gpatt0n]

A state-wide poll conducted by the AJC and published today shows Clinton leading Trump both in a two-way and four-way race that includes Libertarian Gary Johnson.

 

Trump trails Clinton 40 to 44 percent in a headsup contest and with Johnson and (Jill) Stein siphoning off 11 percent and two percent respectively, Ms. Clinton still leads Trump 41 - 38.

 

According to the AJC article, the poll was conducted by ABT SRBI between Aug. 1-4 and included 847 registered voters. The margin of error was about 4 percentage points.

 

If Clinton is able to retain the lead, it would be the first time Georgia will have voted for a Democrat for President since 1992.

 

 

 

 

[Guard dad]

That's an outlier, Trump still has a small lead.

But it's too close for comfort.

[gpatt0n]

Let me guess GD ... you're drawing upon your apriori knowledge base?

 

Personally, I prefer numbers and demographics show that Trumps best group were Evangelicals where Trump was leading 75-15. Those of us who live in the exurbs of Atlanta, Trumps lead was 51-33.

 

However among those with incomes above $100,000/yr, he trailed 41% to Clinton's 44%. Indeed, among those with a college degree, he trailed Ms. Clinton by 11 points, 47% for Clinton 36% for Trump with about nine-percent saying neither, three percent another candidate and 5% answer they don't know.

 

Among college graduates, if you throw Johnson and Stein into the mix, the break out is Clinton 43%, Trump 32%, Johnson 13% and Stein 3% - don't knows were 6%.

 

Notably, when dealing with cross tabulations the margin of error also increases as the sample size decreases.

 

pubby

[CitizenCain]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXiK9xas7KU

[Guard dad]

Let me guess GD ... you're drawing upon your apriori knowledge base?

 

Personally, I prefer numbers and demographics show that Trumps best group were Evangelicals where Trump was leading 75-15. Those of us who live in the exurbs of Atlanta, Trumps lead was 51-33.

 

However among those with incomes above $100,000/yr, he trailed 41% to Clinton's 44%. Indeed, among those with a college degree, he trailed Ms. Clinton by 11 points, 47% for Clinton 36% for Trump with about nine-percent saying neither, three percent another candidate and 5% answer they don't know.

 

Among college graduates, if you throw Johnson and Stein into the mix, the break out is Clinton 43%, Trump 32%, Johnson 13% and Stein 3% - don't knows were 6%.

 

Notably, when dealing with cross tabulations the margin of error also increases as the sample size decreases.

 

pubby

I was referencing other polls.

[gpatt0n]

When were they conducted? What was the sample size? Who conducted the poll? Am I to assume you have special access or are these publicly published?

 

pubby

[Guard dad]

Sorry, pubs, I don't have the time for it right now.

 

Just relish in it.

[vslade]

They didn't ask us. I hope you all don't believe everything you hear.

[vslade]

I guess you Hillary supporters are ready for the tax increase, that us middle class are going to pay Obamas debt down.

 

I said OH HELL NO>

[CitizenCain]

I guess you Hillary supporters are ready for the tax increase, that us middle class are going to pay Obamas debt down.

 

I said OH HELL NO>

 

The biggest tax on the middle class will come when Trump destroys America's economy with the trade wars and import tariffs he has promised. With the 10 trillion dollar deficits his tax cuts for the rich will bring. Donald Trump is trickle down on steroids.

[NewsJunky]

I think having Trump at the head of the ticket has put the Senate at risk for turnover. I am not shocked to hear that the race is tighter in Georgia now. The Senate is really where the battle for the Supreme Court is fought. Let that sink in folks.

[Guard dad]

You left out the option of Guard Dad for president.

[gpatt0n]

I guess you Hillary supporters are ready for the tax increase, that us middle class are going to pay Obamas debt down.

 

I said OH HELL NO>

 

The transcript of the speech said she said "aren't" going to raise taxes on the middle class, not 'are" ... If you listen closely, you can also hear the n't but admittedly it is subdued. Her public stance is that she will not increase income taxes on the middle class and snopes and everyone says that at worst it is a case of garbled words.

 

However, if you listen to those republicans who paint the picture that Hillary is the greatest liar the world has ever known, you'd realize that it had to be aren't because Hillary is too good a liar to make a mistake like that.

 

Of course it could be that she is not that good a liar and what she said was what was exactly as it was in the script on the teleprompter and that if elected she isn't going to raise taxes on the middle class.

 

Having seen a few of her 'lawyerly' answers that skirt the truth, I actually think it is last reading that is true ... i.e. she is just not that good at lying despite the republican propaganda to the contrary. Her lackluster ability to lie convincingly is one of the reasons she is not a great politician.

 

pubby

[mrshoward]

 

The biggest tax on the middle class will come when Trump destroys America's economy with the trade wars and import tariffs he has promised. With the 10 trillion dollar deficits his tax cuts for the rich will bring. Donald Trump is trickle down on steroids.

 

 

Obamacare is a massive tax increase on the middle class...

 

[Guard dad]

 

The biggest tax on the middle class will come when Trump destroys America's economy with the trade wars and import tariffs he has promised. With the 10 trillion dollar deficits his tax cuts for the rich will bring. Donald Trump is trickle down on steroids.

Let's go back to that static vs dynamic thing for a moment.

 

Would there be any other results of import tariffs? If so, what would they be and what would they do?

 

EX: Would they affect domestic manufacturing, jobs, incomes, etc?

 

I don't have all those answers without getting specifics and running projections; just making a point that we should always look at the big picture.

[vslade]

 

The transcript of the speech said she said "aren't" going to raise taxes on the middle class, not 'are" ... If you listen closely, you can also hear the n't but admittedly it is subdued. Her public stance is that she will not increase income taxes on the middle class and snopes and everyone says that at worst it is a case of garbled words.

 

However, if you listen to those republicans who paint the picture that Hillary is the greatest liar the world has ever known, you'd realize that it had to be aren't because Hillary is too good a liar to make a mistake like that.

 

Of course it could be that she is not that good a liar and what she said was what was exactly as it was in the script on the teleprompter and that if elected she isn't going to raise taxes on the middle class.

 

Having seen a few of her 'lawyerly' answers that skirt the truth, I actually think it is last reading that is true ... i.e. she is just not that good at lying despite the republican propaganda to the contrary. Her lackluster ability to lie convincingly is one of the reasons she is not a great politician.

 

pubby

 

 

Boy she has you snowed.

 

[CitizenCain]

Let's go back to that static vs dynamic thing for a moment.

 

Would there be any other results of import tariffs? If so, what would they be and what would they do?

 

EX: Would they affect domestic manufacturing, jobs, incomes, etc?

 

I don't have all those answers without getting specifics and running projections; just making a point that we should always look at the big picture.

 

Then you should definitely get that crack 'staff' of economic experts of yours bussy. Here's what others say;

 

An economic model of Trump's proposals, prepared by Moody's Analytics at the request of The Washington Post, suggests Trump is half-right about his plans. They would, in fact, sock it to China and Mexico. Both would fall into recession, the model suggests, if Trump levied his proposed tariffs and those countries retaliated with tariffs of their own.

Unfortunately, the United States would fall into recession, too. Up to 4 million American workers would lose their jobs. Another 3 million jobs would not be created that otherwise would have been, had the country not fallen into a trade-induced downturn.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/03/25/donald-trumps-trade-war-could-kill-millions-of-u-s-jobs/

Just how many jobs could be lost in a Trump-inspired trade war? “Up to 4 million American workers would lose their jobs,” the Post notes, while “another 3 million jobs would not be created that otherwise would have been, had the country not fallen into a trade-induced downturn.” Seven million jobs. Gone.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-much-a-trump-trade-war-could-cost-you-2016-05-26

Experts Warn of Backlash in Donald Trump’s China Trade Policies

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/03/us/politics/donald-trump-trade-policy-china.html

 

Trump's tariff plan could boomerang, spark trade wars with China, Mexico

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-trade-idUSKCN0WQ0WG

Edited August 7, 2016 by CitizenCain

[Guard dad]

 

Then you should definitely get that crack 'staff' of economic experts of yours bussy. Here's what others say;

 

An economic model of Trump's proposals, prepared by Moody's Analytics at the request of The Washington Post, suggests Trump is half-right about his plans. They would, in fact, sock it to China and Mexico. Both would fall into recession, the model suggests, if Trump levied his proposed tariffs and those countries retaliated with tariffs of their own.

Unfortunately, the United States would fall into recession, too. Up to 4 million American workers would lose their jobs. Another 3 million jobs would not be created that otherwise would have been, had the country not fallen into a trade-induced downturn.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/03/25/donald-trumps-trade-war-could-kill-millions-of-u-s-jobs/

Just how many jobs could be lost in a Trump-inspired trade war? “Up to 4 million American workers would lose their jobs,” the Post notes, while “another 3 million jobs would not be created that otherwise would have been, had the country not fallen into a trade-induced downturn.” Seven million jobs. Gone.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-much-a-trump-trade-war-could-cost-you-2016-05-26

Experts Warn of Backlash in Donald Trump’s China Trade Policies

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/03/us/politics/donald-trump-trade-policy-china.html

 

Trump's tariff plan could boomerang, spark trade wars with China, Mexico

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-trump-trade-idUSKCN0WQ0WG

Now where did I claim to have a crack staff of economic experts? I wonder if you're even capable of actually discussing a topic; it seems all you're interested in doing is defending the Democrat's positions.

 

What I'm suggesting is that you forget about all the articles rhetoric for a moment, and think this through with your own noggin. What will be the pros? What will the cons be? How will it affect all the various factors?

[CitizenCain]

Now where did I claim to have a crack staff of economic experts? I wonder if you're even capable of actually discussing a topic; it seems all you're interested in doing is defending the Democrat's positions.

 

What I'm suggesting is that you forget about all the articles rhetoric for a moment, and think this through with your own noggin. What will be the pros? What will the cons be? How will it affect all the various factors?

 

Here you go.

 

Pros: None

 

Cons: Run away inflation, another Republican created recession and millions of job's lost. Not to mention that future U.S. agreements will no longer be worth the paper they are written on.

[Guard dad]

 

Here you go.

 

Pros: None

 

Cons: Run away inflation, another Republican created recession and millions of job's lost. Not to mention that future U.S. agreements will no longer be worth the paper they are written on.

Well, I see how long you dwelled on that one.

Maybe I was right all along when I said you aren't capable of independent thought.