Easily googled. Add and subtract the filters you want. I did Republican and likely primary voter. Mid range for Trump is 42% and for Carson is 23%. Cruz and Rubio both dropping some.
I’m guessing that you’ve heard about this. I can’t vouch for its authenticity, obviously, but it’s probably what was being referred to when you said “I hear”.
Oh. The Reuters poll is an ongoing online survey, no cell or landlines used. Take their claim of the method’s high accuracy as you will.
No, it was a well known female journalist who was being interviewed in the immediate aftermath and she mentioned it. It was apparently an old tweet about guns and the Hebdo killings and I’m not sure if I misheard her or if she thought it was a new tweet.
I should have researched it better before posting about it. I was so anxious to believe the story and rushed to tell you guys about it, because I hate the idea of a Trump Presidency.
I have worked with and consider myself friends with a lot of people who were young children when they were brought here from Mexico by their parents. His ideas about what to do with these people are repugnant to me.
Sorry for the bad information.
I did Google it, and all I turned up was (a) more articles, and (b) a link to Ipsos’ main polling page, and this one wasn’t included among their U.S. polls. So I’m glad your Google-fu was better than mine.
Yeah, I’ll note that they have an earlier peak for Trump of 40% on October 17. There are four polls in the RCP tally that were in the field for periods including October 17 (ABC, NBC, CNN, and Monmouth), and Trump’s average in those four polls is 28%. So my guess is that, at best, this poll can show movement, but I wouldn’t trust it one bit on levels. And of course, it might overstate, understate, or totally miss change, depending on who’s overrepresented, underrepresented, or simply not represented in their online survey.
On the whole, I’m still extremely skeptical about online surveys. I’m open to the possibility that they are right where traditional surveys are wrong; Lord knows I’m familiar with the problems that traditional surveys face these days. But maybe if someone does an online survey like this of NH and SC voters in the weeks leading up to their primaries, we can have a good test of one method versus the other.
The other thing is, it simply makes no sense that Trump’s support should have skyrocketed so dramatically (from 25% to 42% in the Reuters/Ipsos poll) between the 5 days ending November 6, and the 5 days ending November 13. What would have caused his support to increase so dramatically over that period? I’ve seen that sort of change happening in the last few days before an election or primary, when people are making up their minds (e.g. Kerry in IA and NH in 2004), but now? Really? This one’s pinging my bullshit meter.
Well, speaking for myself, I attributed it to other candidate supporters suddenly flocking to Trump after having decided their guy was out of it.
People move en masse sometimes for no discernible reason. Burt Reynolds was the number one male box office star in the country at one time and had been for five years in a row. In year number six he dropped to number thirty five. He was utterly mystified. I remember him saying such a drop had never happened to anyone in the history of film.
Could be, I suppose, but why now? There’s been a ton of candidates in the <3.5% range for an eon now. Looking at the RCP graph from the last week of September until now, the only thing that’s changed in the under-5% group is Fiorina dropping back into it.
True, but sometimes it’s just statistical noise, or movement being grossly overstated by a bad statistical design, which is what my WAG is. It’s been a week and a half since any major polls have released results; we ought to be getting some confirmation pretty soon if Trump’s support really has shot up lately.
But right now, I’m not placing much stock in this poll until I see confirmation. Call me a skeptic - hell, I am a skeptic - but when I see one poll that is giving very different results from the others, I am going to wait to see if it’s an outlier or the first indicator of a trend.
Real Clear Politics hasn’t recognized any national GOP polls for a few days yet. They obviously don’t think that one’s kosher.
I went over to Huffpo/Pollster just for comparison’s sake. Excluding other Internet polls (YouGov, Morning Consult), the only new one they’ve got is a Rasmussen poll on 11/11-12, which I’m surprised isn’t at RCP, because they don’t exclude Ras.
Anyway, the Rasmussen poll had Trump 27, Carson 20, Rubio 16, Cruz 13, Bush 8, Fiorina 4, and goose eggs for everyone else. Seems ‘off’ to me - someone besides those six should have had >0.5% support, and I’ve got other doubts that are more speculative - and so again, I’d like to see another poll.
This is a good example of the respect the repulsive twat commands outside of the US, he’s got a real presidential aura:
Got anything more recent than January?
I think he’s a dick.
I do, too.
But a more recent quote is in order.
Maybe not. Ambassador Araud’s tweet was from Friday. While it was deleted once the Ambassador realized it was a Trump tweet from January, it could still be viewed as an example of what low esteem The Donald is held in by many outside the US. That does seem to be the point up_the_junction was making. If it was a post by a different candidate I would expect a bit more credulity on the part of the Ambassador before he jumped on it like that.
Of course, YMMV.
Yesterday Trump reiterated his keen analysis of the situation.
[Quote=The Goddamn Republican Front Runner!]
You can say what you want, but if they had guns – if our people had guns, if they were allowed to carry – it would have been a much, much different situation.
When you look at Paris, you know, the toughest gun laws in the world, nobody had guns except for the bad guys, nobody. Nobody had guns, and they were just shooting them one by one.
[/quote]
He went in to say that the Paris attack showed why the US shouldn’t allow Syrian refugees in. He claimed the Obama administration was going to allow 250,000 Syrian refugees to enter the country. The admin has actually committed to allowing 10,000 refugees over the next fiscal year.
Looks like the Ambassador deleted his post in vain. Vulture indeed.
As others have said, Trump repeated his comments yesterday.
Why would a serious politician demean their office by even meeting this smug clown.
I, for one, would adore being a fly on the wall in a presidential meeting between Putin and Trump.
The problem with Trump is that he’s too easily distracted, e.g.:
Trump’s Focus on Muslims Distracting Him from Campaign Against Mexicans, Supporters Fear