So I gave this some more thought, and looking back at what was said, I'm actually not sure that I agree with all the outrage.
I think this is yet another example of Trump intentionally making a statement that could be taken in multiple contexts as an attempt to pander to his base while also leaving himself plausible deniability.
"I'm not actually sure that I agree with all the outrage. Oh by the way, the outrage is completely justified."
... Really?
The outrage isn't justified, it's a result of interpretation. That's the point. He didn't actually say the thing you're mad about, he intentionally said something that leads to you THINKING he said that in an attempt to manipulate the media, like he has been doing for the past year.
Wait, people are still seriously using the 3D chess argument? Dear lord.
Yeah, its going to be like this from now until November 8 until his kids can inherit his money.
Some right-wing interviewer tried to lead Trump back to the sane path of suggesting that he meant Obama's foreign policy lost the peace and set up the condition that led to ISIS.
And Trump goes, "Nope. Obama is literally the founder of ISIS."
Although I don't think he's said anything worse than the nuclear weapon stuff, he somehow manages to keep saying absurd things that are difficult to believe. I can't fathom how anyone would legitimately vote for him. I'm just worried that he will continue to be a threat in future elections, really dislike the way he is forcing the election.
I doubt Trump will be a problem in future elections. It's generally difficult to oust the incumbent president unless they really screw up and Hillary's approval rating is always higher when she's in office than when she's running (which is quite interesting imo). Remember that Trump is old and if we have 8 years of Clinton, he's going to be too old to run for president.
I'd be much more worried about the people he's given voice too. Racists and authoritarians are in love with him and not shy to show up. I sincerely hope that this particular demographic becomes irrelevant again once he's thrashed in November.
Note that this is all based on the (very likely, let's be honest) chance that Clinton wins.
I'd agree, though without a strong figure to unite around they'll much less of a threat. If the GOP can get hold of itself (or collapse, though that's very unlikely) and get a "regular" candidate in the future, it should neuter them.
I'm not positive about that. 4 years is a fairly long time for the GOP to regroup and 8 years is more than enough. If Trump gets sufficiently destroyed come November, I doubt that any large base will rally around the white supremacist vote when it becomes clear that it does not win elections.
You're assuming that dominating the airwaves is a good thing. His poll numbers resoundingly demonstrate that the media continually focusing on him is not a good thing for him. He has never been a favorite in this election and each of his gaffes only cements Clinton's formidable lead.
Besides, it's easy to realize the underlying pattern here: he's a narcissist that needs to be the center of attention at all times. This is not some brilliant strategic move.
Trump's base is not all white supremacists, I did not mean to imply that. However, he continually panders to them and to other elements of the alt-right and it is not working out for him. I doubt the GOP is going to let their next candidate so blatantly pander to such unsavory groups. Antiestablishment movements are nothing new and tend not to pan out.
You're assuming that dominating the airwaves is a good thing. His poll numbers resoundingly demonstrate that the media continually focusing on him is not a good thing for him. He has never been a favorite in this election and each of his gaffes only cements Clinton's formidable lead.
Besides, it's easy to realize the underlying pattern here: he's a narcissist that needs to be the center of attention at all times. This is not some brilliant strategic move.
Trump's base is not all white supremacists, I did not mean to imply that. However, he continually panders to them and to other elements of the alt-right and it is not working out for him. I doubt the GOP is going to let their next candidate so blatantly pander to such unsavory groups. Antiestablishment movements are nothing new and tend not to pan out.
They can significantly influence and reshape the party even if they don't win elections. Barry Goldwater and William Jennings Bryan were "anti-establishment" candidates and both were responsible for shaping the Republican and Democratic parties largely as they are today.
You're assuming that dominating the airwaves is a good thing. His poll numbers resoundingly demonstrate that the media continually focusing on him is not a good thing for him. He has never been a favorite in this election and each of his gaffes only cements Clinton's formidable lead.
Besides, it's easy to realize the underlying pattern here: he's a narcissist that needs to be the center of attention at all times. This is not some brilliant strategic move.
Trump's base is not all white supremacists, I did not mean to imply that. However, he continually panders to them and to other elements of the alt-right and it is not working out for him. I doubt the GOP is going to let their next candidate so blatantly pander to such unsavory groups. Antiestablishment movements are nothing new and tend not to pan out.
They can significantly influence and reshape the party even if they don't win elections. Barry Goldwater and William Jennings Bryan were "anti-establishment" candidates and both were responsible for shaping the Republican and Democratic parties largely as they are today.
You are exactly right about this. Trump is reshaping the Republican Party in a way that I haven't seen since Ronald Reagan. It remains to be seen if he will have the strength to resist pressure to conform once he wins the presidency.
This election will be an eye opener for many people into the pervasiveness of corruption in Washington and to what extent the mainstream media is an active participant in it. All through the primaries the media under estimated or under reported trumps support and it did no good. Everything he said about his poling and the eventual outcome was true. the media will continue to falsely report Trumps numbers, just as they will pump up Hillarie's numbers, down play evidence of her wrong doing and her mental health issues, but it will do no good.
A presidential campaign is essentially a marketing campaign and Donald Trump is a MASTER of marketing. That is how the other republican candidates got their asses handed to them and it is how he will beat Hillary. I think he is only now starting to open up on her. It's going to be very interesting the information Trump exposes about her. The fact that she can't seem to tell the truth even about minor things that are easily fact checked just does Trumps work for him.
Stay tuned kids. They will be talking about this presidential campaign for decades as a turning point in US politics.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
RELAPSED MAFIA JUNKIE
W – 33, L – 19, Broke Games - 9
Calvin & Hobbs Mafia, Mafia MVP
X-Men Mafia Town MVP
Simpson's Mafia - best use of character
Mtgnews Mafia Mafia - Town Madman
Mythos Mafia: the Dunwich Massacre Town MVP
English Literature Mafia Town MVP
Best Role-Playing Sin City Mafia
Werewolf Mafia - Mafia MVP
Doctor Mafia - Mafia MVP
Mafia: Escape from the Cylons - Town MVP
Lost Mafia - Co SK Winner with Kops
Random Mafia 3 - Town MVP
and to what extent the mainstream media is an active participant in it.
What do you mean by "mainstream media?" Are we talking print media? Radio? Television? Internet sources?
All through the primaries the media under estimated or under reported trumps support and it did no good.
That's because Trump consistently underperformed his polling. He obviously had enough support to nab the nomination, but not really an amazing amount (which is currently being proven by his general electorate polling).
the media will continue to falsely report Trumps numbers
#UNSKEWTHEPOLLS amirite? Why don't you ask Romney how well that went for him.
A presidential campaign is essentially a marketing campaign and Donald Trump is a MASTER of marketing.
If he's the master of marketing then why is he hated among almost every group besides white male non-college graduates? Shouldn't he be a little more... appealing?
That is how the other republican candidates got their asses handed to them and it is how he will beat Hillary.
This makes no sense. In a primary among multiple different candidates your #1 goal is to get your image established and to get ahead of the other candidates. Policy stuff can wait as long as you're able to make yourself stand out from the 10+ other people in the race (and especially in the debates).
This tactic does not work once you get into a general election. You're matched up against one other person (sorry, Johnson and Stein) and you're both known quantities at this point. Shouting, insulting the other candidates and *****posting on twitter isn't going to work when you're already behind in the polls and your opponent is using your own words against you (to great effect, I might add. Traditionally Republican states are swinging Blue in the polls).
And that's Trumps greatest downfall. People thought he was pandering to extremists to win the primaries and then pivot to the center, but no pivot came and it's pulling his campaign down into the abyss. He's the most hated candidate in history and 538 puts his chances of winning at very low so far (for those who don't know, 538 is one of the most respected names in political forecasting and called the 2008 election within one state and correctly called all 50 states in the 2012 election).
The fact that she can't seem to tell the truth even about minor things that are easily fact checked just does Trumps work for him.
Am I in bizarro land? Because if you swapped "she" with "he" and "Trump's" with "Clinton's" you would actually have truth. He literally today just said that Obama is the literal founder of ISIS. Anyone with half a brain knows that this is pure bull*****.
Many of Clinton's attack ads against Trump are formed entirely from his own words and they seem to be working, with almost all swing states firmly in her grasp and many traditionally Red states becoming contested.
This whole post, quite frankly, does not seem grounded in reality at all. The "unskew the polls" thing kinda tipped me off and the rest just confirmed it.
Take a look at those numbers. 70% of what Trump says is mostly false, outright false, or absurdly pants-on-fire false. Meanwhile, 72% of what Clinton says is true, mostly true, or about half true. There just isn't a contest.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vorthos Cartography - Check out my completed maps of Zendikar and Innistrad!
"You say 'learn from history,' but that does not mean 'learn the same bull***** the people in history learned alongside phrenology and alchemy.'" - The Blinking Spirit
Yeah, its going to be like this from now until November 8 until his kids can inherit his money.
Some right-wing interviewer tried to lead Trump back to the sane path of suggesting that he meant Obama's foreign policy lost the peace and set up the condition that led to ISIS.
And Trump goes, "Nope. Obama is literally the founder of ISIS."
Well he has now decided that he was being Sarcastic.
The Monkey running Hartlepool had a better campaign than him.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag and start slitting throats.
- H.L Mencken
I Became insane with long Intervals of horrible Sanity
All Religion, my friend is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination and poetry.
- Edgar Allan Poe
Take a look at those numbers. 70% of what Trump says is mostly false, outright false, or absurdly pants-on-fire false. Meanwhile, 72% of what Clinton says is true, mostly true, or about half true. There just isn't a contest.
I’m not disputing your numbers and perhaps I did not make my point clear. This issue is not fazing Trump, while Hilary has a well-documented reputation for evading the truth and telling half truths many, many people will say out and out, lying. As we have seen each time The Donald says something that is false and someone calls him on it rolls off his back like water off a duck. Every time Hilary has a brain short circuit it is about something like whether or not the FBI investigation of her found she told the truth or not. And it does stick. Look at the numbers of Americans and even self-proclaimed Democrats that think perceive her as untrustworthy. Every single time she misspeaks, refuses to be forthcoming or lies she does herself damage and the Donald will take advantage of that.
That is the point I was trying to make.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
RELAPSED MAFIA JUNKIE
W – 33, L – 19, Broke Games - 9
Calvin & Hobbs Mafia, Mafia MVP
X-Men Mafia Town MVP
Simpson's Mafia - best use of character
Mtgnews Mafia Mafia - Town Madman
Mythos Mafia: the Dunwich Massacre Town MVP
English Literature Mafia Town MVP
Best Role-Playing Sin City Mafia
Werewolf Mafia - Mafia MVP
Doctor Mafia - Mafia MVP
Mafia: Escape from the Cylons - Town MVP
Lost Mafia - Co SK Winner with Kops
Random Mafia 3 - Town MVP
I’m not disputing your numbers and perhaps I did not make my point clear. This issue is not fazing Trump, while Hilary has a well-documented reputation for evading the truth and telling half truths many, many people will say out and out, lying. As we have seen each time The Donald says something that is false and someone calls him on it rolls off his back like water off a duck. Every time Hilary has a brain short circuit it is about something like whether or not the FBI investigation of her found she told the truth or not. And it does stick. Look at the numbers of Americans and even self-proclaimed Democrats that think perceive her as untrustworthy. Every single time she misspeaks, refuses to be forthcoming or lies she does herself damage and the Donald will take advantage of that.
That is the point I was trying to make.
Let's look at recent polls and see whether this is true.
Using the list on realclearpolitics, we have:
Bloomberg, 8/8, the question was:
I’m going to read some phrases people often use to describe candidates. For each, please indicate whether you think the phrase better describes [Hillary Clinton] or [Donald Trump].
For the phrase "is trustworthy", 41% picked Clinton and 39% picked Trump.
In Washington Post/ABC, 8/4, the question was:
Do you think Hillary Clinton/Donald Trump is honest and trustworthy?
38% said Clinton is honest and trustworthy, while 36% said Trump is honest and trustworthy.
The other polls on RCP's current list don't ask the question.
It seems to simply be false that the perception of untrustworthiness rolls off Donald Trump - he's actually viewed as more dishonest than Hillary Clinton. Many people perceive her to be dishonest, but even more people perceive Trump to be dishonest.
The thing is that "the Donald" is not taking advantage of that. As a matter of fact, he's not taking advantage of abything. His campaign strat seems to be comprised purely of firing off his mouth in interviews and on twitter and seeing if anything sticks.
The problem is that it is sticking. To him, that is. Every time he lies (blatantly lying about basic stuff all the while with a smile on his face) he tanks his numbers just a bit more. People hate him. A majority of people hate him.
and to what extent the mainstream media is an active participant in it.
What do you mean by "mainstream media?" Are we talking print media? Radio? Television? Internet sources?
the major Newspapers, Radio companies, Television networks and the internet sources tied to them such as CNN, MSNBC, FOX news, Yes those are the mainstream media outlets I am referring to.
Since the internet has so many independent sources and sites it is much easier to find fresh perspectives and independent thought.
All through the primaries the media under estimated or under reported trumps support and it did no good.
That's because Trump consistently underperformed his polling. He obviously had enough support to nab the nomination, but not really an amazing amount (which is currently being proven by his general electorate polling).
That is one interpretation or it is also possible that the poling numbers were deliberately underreported in order to create the illusion that Trump had less support then he really does, it could also simply be a case of multiple, repeated failures to obtain a true random sample. Either way this type of public opinion manipulation has been a part of politics as long as there has been politics. http://race42016.com/2012/04/26/polling-101-weighting-the-sample/
the media will continue to falsely report Trumps numbers
#UNSKEWTHEPOLLS amirite? Why don't you ask Romney how well that went for him.
? Are you agreeing with me? Yes Romney complained of this type of media bias and he lost. Was the Media Bias a contributing factor to his losing, I think it is obvious the answer is yes. Was it the sole reason, no absolutely not. He ran a terrible campaign and was a terrible candidate.
A presidential campaign is essentially a marketing campaign and Donald Trump is a MASTER of marketing.
If he's the master of marketing then why is he hated among almost every group besides white male non-college graduates? Shouldn't he be a little more... appealing?
First, I do not agree that he is “Hated among almost every group besides white male non-college graduates?” That is such a grossly broad and incorrect exaggeration that it doesn’t warrant a reply.
I’ve been very interested in finding out what poling numbers are being seem in areas not controlled by the mainstream and the numbers and summaries I have been able to find are interesting to say the least. There are few such summaries but they are interesting. The fact that the Democrats haven’t immediately posted Data and facts to discredit this is also telling. The response has been to ignore it as though it did not exist and that is usually an indication of them wanting people to take no notice if this in hopes it will not get legs in other outlets.
In social media sites Trump is ahead, in some cases handily so. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pXLGdVlxqk
“Published on Aug 6, 2016
Good afternoon, I’m still reporting on fake polls.
Hats off to Addison Riddleberger columns for assembling this social media data.
The 2016 elections will be the elections social scientists will look back on as the turning point year – the year where an analysis of social media will prove more predictive than paid polling.
Assuming that is a correct prediction, what does that mean for the future of the Trump-Clinton presidential race. All of these stats are as of Aug. 4th, 2016.
Let’s go to the data – Facebook Likes:
Trump: 10,174,358 – 65.4%
Clinton: 5,385,959 – 34.6%
----
Facebook live stream posts (latest):
Trump: 135,000 likes, 18,167 shares, 1,500,000 views = 1,653,167 total = 83.0%
Clinton: 11,000 likes, 0 shares, 321,000 views = 332,000 total = 17.0%
*note: almost half of Clinton FB posts, the top comments are from Trump supporters. However, top comments on Trump’s page are hardcore Trump supporters only.
----
Twitter :
Trump: 10.6 million followers = 56.7%
Clinton: 8.1 million followers = 43.3%
-----
Youtube Live Stream (averages):
Trump: 30,000 live viewers per stream = 98.4%
Clinton: 500 live viewers per stream = 1.6%
-----
Instagram:
Trump: 2.2 million followers = 55.0%
Clinton: 1.8 million followers = 45.0%
-------
Reddit subscribers:
Trump: 197,696 = 71.3%
Clinton: 24,429 = 8.8%
Hillary for Prison: 55,228 = 19.9%
Bottom line: more than twice as many Reddit users think Clinton should be in jail as should become the next President of the United States.
I’m still reporting from Washington. Good day.”
This is a fascinating election year.
I think that I may have given the wrong impression of being a Trump supported. I’m a Libertarian and will be voting Libertarian in the election. I think this is a rare opportunity for a third party candidate to make real progress in breaking the death grip the Democrats and Republicans, along with their mouth pieces in the mainstream media, have on this country. I do however think Trump will win the Presidency. As the election draws near Republicans will begin to support Trump. Not all, and many may hold their noses while doing it, but they will see Trump as better then another Democrat and they will try to tap into the protectionist, anti-globalist sentiment that Trump has built his base on.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
RELAPSED MAFIA JUNKIE
W – 33, L – 19, Broke Games - 9
Calvin & Hobbs Mafia, Mafia MVP
X-Men Mafia Town MVP
Simpson's Mafia - best use of character
Mtgnews Mafia Mafia - Town Madman
Mythos Mafia: the Dunwich Massacre Town MVP
English Literature Mafia Town MVP
Best Role-Playing Sin City Mafia
Werewolf Mafia - Mafia MVP
Doctor Mafia - Mafia MVP
Mafia: Escape from the Cylons - Town MVP
Lost Mafia - Co SK Winner with Kops
Random Mafia 3 - Town MVP
I’ve been very interested in finding out what poling numbers are being seem in areas not controlled by the mainstream and the numbers and summaries I have been able to find are interesting to say the least. There are few such summaries but they are interesting. The fact that the Democrats haven’t immediately posted Data and facts to discredit this is also telling. The response has been to ignore it as though it did not exist and that is usually an indication of them wanting people to take no notice if this in hopes it will not get legs in other outlets.
Democrats haven't immediately posted data to discredit that because looking at Facebook likes as a barometer for the election is stupid. It's completely delusional to think that means anything. Bernie Sanders had many more Facebook likes than Hillary Clinton (and led her in likes by a huge margin compared to Trump) - how'd that work out for him?
I’ve been very interested in finding out what poling numbers are being seem in areas not controlled by the mainstream and the numbers and summaries I have been able to find are interesting to say the least. There are few such summaries but they are interesting. The fact that the Democrats haven’t immediately posted Data and facts to discredit this is also telling. The response has been to ignore it as though it did not exist and that is usually an indication of them wanting people to take no notice if this in hopes it will not get legs in other outlets.
Democrats haven't immediately posted data to discredit that because looking at Facebook likes as a barometer for the election is stupid. It's completely delusional to think that means anything. Bernie Sanders had many more Facebook likes than Hillary Clinton (and led her in likes by a huge margin compared to Trump) - how'd that work out for him?
True, but this is not simply Facebook likes. The point I am making is that Trump is exposing an ugly truth about American politics and the media. All through the primaries the media dismissed him as a demagogue and predicted that he would be defeated. Polls were sited and a great deal of time and effort was put into showing how Trump could not realistically defeat a seasoned servant of the people like Christy, Bush, Cruz one after the other after the other. All that happened was that Trump Trumped each one and all of them at the same time. That is not how the media called it or how their data showed it until after he had slain several of the giants. If you look at how he was doing in the social media arena however you would have seen he was winning. I think that will happen again. Actions speak louder then words and what a person actually does on line is very telling as to how they will act in the future. Many people will say one thing when someone asks them for their opinion but whether that opinion actually reflects how they act or vote is not always in synch.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
RELAPSED MAFIA JUNKIE
W – 33, L – 19, Broke Games - 9
Calvin & Hobbs Mafia, Mafia MVP
X-Men Mafia Town MVP
Simpson's Mafia - best use of character
Mtgnews Mafia Mafia - Town Madman
Mythos Mafia: the Dunwich Massacre Town MVP
English Literature Mafia Town MVP
Best Role-Playing Sin City Mafia
Werewolf Mafia - Mafia MVP
Doctor Mafia - Mafia MVP
Mafia: Escape from the Cylons - Town MVP
Lost Mafia - Co SK Winner with Kops
Random Mafia 3 - Town MVP
True, but this is not simply Facebook likes. The point I am making is that Trump is exposing an ugly truth about American politics and the media. All through the primaries the media dismissed him as a demagogue and predicted that he would be defeated. Polls were sited and a great deal of time and effort was put into showing how Trump could not realistically defeat a seasoned servant of the people like Christy, Bush, Cruz one after the other after the other. All that happened was that Trump Trumped each one and all of them at the same time. That is not how the media called it or how their data showed it until after he had slain several of the giants. If you look at how he was doing in the social media arena however you would have seen he was winning. I think that will happen again. Actions speak louder then words and what a person actually does on line is very telling as to how they will act in the future. Many people will say one thing when someone asks them for their opinion but whether that opinion actually reflects how they act or vote is not always in synch.
What are you talking about? Trump took the lead in the polls in July 2015, only a few weeks after he announced his candidacy, and then never lost that lead.
Reviewing the news from the campaign this morning, and based on what I’m seeing, people still aren’t taking the threat of a Trump presidency seriously. Categories from most frequently appearing to least:
1) News that Trump said Obama is the “founder” of ISIS, Hillary the “co-founder”. This is the briefest excerpt I could find of the discussion between Trump and a right-leaning radio news outlet:
Last night you said the president was the founder of ISIS," Hewitt said. "I know what you meant. You meant that he created the vacuum, he lost the peace."
"No, I meant he's the founder of ISIS," Trump replied. "I do. He was the most valuable player. I give him the most valuable player award. I give her, too, by the way, Hillary Clinton."
Hewitt pressed Trump, explaining that Obama has not been "sympathetic" to the terrorist organization, "hates them," and is "trying to kill them."
"I don't care," Trump said. "He was the founder. His — the way he got out of Iraq was that — that was the founding of ISIS, OK?"
The New York businessman added again that he would characterize Clinton, the Democratic presidential nominee, as the "cofounder." He had previously referred to her as the founder of the group.
"Let me ask you, do you like that?" Trump asked Hewitt.
Hewitt, not amused, replied: "I don't."
"I think I would say they created, they lost the peace. They created the Libyan vacuum, they created the vacuum into which ISIS came, but they didn't create ISIS," the radio host said. "That's what I would say."
"Well, I disagree," Trump said.
The Republican presidential nominee, mirroring Hewitt's argument, contended that Obama's policies allowed ISIS to form.
"Therefore, he was the founder of ISIS," Trump said.
An exasperated Hewitt responded by saying he'd "just use different language to communicate" the message.
Ok, so the case here could be nothing worse than Trump is stupid. He doesn’t know the meaning of the word “founder”, and he doesn’t know that he doesn’t know. Or, maybe that he is knowingly and willfully straining the limits of language to inflame negative opinion of the Left. But clear from the context, he’s saying that the power vacuum from US military mismanagement created ISIS, not that he believes Obama literally went around the Middle East organizing a militant group in support of an Islamic State. So, Trump is unethical and stupid? News?
2) More opinion on results from polls showing Clinton is in the lead, and how the Trump camp is trying to deny it.
So the case against Trump here, he is a bad candidate because he is a loser? Sound familiar? At best, this is discussion outside of the issues of this race. At worst, it’s ad hominem. I mean, I understand the newsworthiness of the polls themselves, but it doesn’t explain why the sheer volume of this back and forth far exceeds the volume on actual issues.
3) Politically slanted news related to the Olympics
Such and such local newspaper failed to mention the name of African American swimmer Simone Manuel who won Gold. More about how the sports casting of the Olympics contain “micro-aggressions” against women. Again, I’m not debating the newsworthiness of the Olympics. I’m just shocked that it’s getting more volume of coverage than the below statement by Trump:
The case against Trump here is nothing short of the fact that he is a dictator. He is a modern day Mao, Mussolini, Napoleon, Hilter, who intends to make unrestrained use of the powers of the state against its citizens, at the sole discretion of his cabinet. And, this ranks 4th in overall importance?
As I’ve said before, detracting from these points and many, many other similar instances from Trump just makes this seem like any other election, and not the threat to free society in the US that it actually is.
True, but this is not simply Facebook likes. The point I am making is that Trump is exposing an ugly truth about American politics and the media. All through the primaries the media dismissed him as a demagogue and predicted that he would be defeated. Polls were sited and a great deal of time and effort was put into showing how Trump could not realistically defeat a seasoned servant of the people like Christy, Bush, Cruz one after the other after the other. All that happened was that Trump Trumped each one and all of them at the same time. That is not how the media called it or how their data showed it until after he had slain several of the giants. If you look at how he was doing in the social media arena however you would have seen he was winning. I think that will happen again. Actions speak louder then words and what a person actually does on line is very telling as to how they will act in the future. Many people will say one thing when someone asks them for their opinion but whether that opinion actually reflects how they act or vote is not always in synch.
What are you talking about? Trump took the lead in the polls in July 2015, only a few weeks after he announced his candidacy, and then never lost that lead.
??? I’m talking about how Trumps campaign has been covered and the predictions of his chances since the time he was first floated as a candidate to now. Judging from your signature and the link you provided I would guess you have been watching this election cycle as more than just a disinterested citizen. Do you think that Trump has not been dismissed as a serious candidate or his chances against the former Republican candidate field downplayed by the mainstream media at any time during the primary campaign?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
RELAPSED MAFIA JUNKIE
W – 33, L – 19, Broke Games - 9
Calvin & Hobbs Mafia, Mafia MVP
X-Men Mafia Town MVP
Simpson's Mafia - best use of character
Mtgnews Mafia Mafia - Town Madman
Mythos Mafia: the Dunwich Massacre Town MVP
English Literature Mafia Town MVP
Best Role-Playing Sin City Mafia
Werewolf Mafia - Mafia MVP
Doctor Mafia - Mafia MVP
Mafia: Escape from the Cylons - Town MVP
Lost Mafia - Co SK Winner with Kops
Random Mafia 3 - Town MVP
??? I’m talking about how Trumps campaign has been covered and the predictions of his chances since the time he was first floated as a candidate to now. Judging from your signature and the link you provided I would guess you have been watching this election cycle as more than just a disinterested citizen. Do you think that Trump has not been dismissed as a serious candidate or his chances against the former Republican candidate field downplayed by the mainstream media at any time during the primary campaign?
You said that polls were cited to show that Trump would lose. You said that the "data" showed that he was losing, but that social media showed that he was winning. But the fact of the matter is that polls did show him leading, and leading handily. You didn't need to look at social media. You didn't need to measure facebook likes, or speculate that people might not be answering honestly in polls - Trump was leading every poll. All you had to do to see how Trump was performing was look at the polls.
Now that Trump is bombing in the polls, you want to pretend that polls and data misled us during the primaries, and that social media behavior was the accurate indiciator. But that's not what happened. To the extent that Trump defied expectations, he was defying analyst predictions, not polling numbers. The data was very clear on how he was doing, just as it's very clear now.
the major Newspapers, Radio companies, Television networks and the internet sources tied to them such as CNN, MSNBC, FOX news, Yes those are the mainstream media outlets I am referring to.
I find it interesting that you believe all these companies to be the larger part of some nefarious data manipulation plot instead of looking at the much simpler explanation: that Trump is doing badly.
First, I do not agree that he is “Hated among almost every group besides white male non-college graduates?” That is such a grossly broad and incorrect exaggeration that it doesn’t warrant a reply.
I also find it interesting that you replied saying that it doesn't warrant a reply. The most condescending of rebuttals.
Face the facts: Trump is not winning a single demographic. He's losing women, African Americans, Hispanics, Asians, the 18-29 age range, college educated voters and the LGBT community. He's not even winning white males. His favorability ratings are in the dumpster. Perhaps "hate" is a bit strong of a word where "strong dislike and aversion" would do.
I’ve been very interested in finding out what poling numbers are being seem in areas not controlled by the mainstream
"I've been searching for polling that confirms my world view."
There are few such summaries but they are interesting...
This is not interesting. It's statistical nonsense and utter lunacy. Judging a candidate by their social media outreach (which can be gamed in so many ways by literally anyone) is so far beyond ridiculous that I'm flabbergasted at the fact that anyone is taking this remotely seriously.
??? I’m talking about how Trumps campaign has been covered and the predictions of his chances since the time he was first floated as a candidate to now. Judging from your signature and the link you provided I would guess you have been watching this election cycle as more than just a disinterested citizen. Do you think that Trump has not been dismissed as a serious candidate or his chances against the former Republican candidate field downplayed by the mainstream media at any time during the primary campaign?
You said that polls were cited to show that Trump would lose. You said that the "data" showed that he was losing, but that social media showed that he was winning. But the fact of the matter is that polls did show him leading, and leading handily. You didn't need to look at social media. You didn't need to measure facebook likes, or speculate that people might not be answering honestly in polls - Trump was leading every poll. All you had to do to see how Trump was performing was look at the polls.
Now that Trump is bombing in the polls, you want to pretend that polls and data misled us during the primaries, and that social media behavior was the accurate indiciator. But that's not what happened. To the extent that Trump defied expectations, he was defying analyst predictions, not polling numbers. The data was very clear on how he was doing, just as it's very clear now.
I apologize for the delay in responding, it is difficult to reply in a timely manner while I’m at work.
So you won’t answer my question, ok. You are fixating on poles because you have found a graph on the Huffington Post site that you think proves me wrong, that’s ok too. You are still not addressing the actual point I was making regarding how Trump was portrayed and what his chances were. The fact that he was dismissed and downplayed as a candidate is undenial. Poles were only a small part of the overall media coverage dismissing and marginalizing his chances, and there were poles at that time, early on, showing Trump behind other candidates. Just as there are poles now that are being shown to support that he is behind.
I personally do not think that these recent poles are completely accurate. I have seen a report I am trying to verify right now regarding the veracity of recent poles. There is a claim that the poling sample group was not random but that it was intentionally selected with a higher proportion of Democratic respondents. In the example I saw approximately 1200 registered voters were contacted. Rather than a random selection of voters a group of 550 Republicans had been contacted and 650 Democrats. This obviously will generate false data. I was hoping to have had time today to research the validity of these reports. If this is actually the case it is an egregious violation of the public trust at the least.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
RELAPSED MAFIA JUNKIE
W – 33, L – 19, Broke Games - 9
Calvin & Hobbs Mafia, Mafia MVP
X-Men Mafia Town MVP
Simpson's Mafia - best use of character
Mtgnews Mafia Mafia - Town Madman
Mythos Mafia: the Dunwich Massacre Town MVP
English Literature Mafia Town MVP
Best Role-Playing Sin City Mafia
Werewolf Mafia - Mafia MVP
Doctor Mafia - Mafia MVP
Mafia: Escape from the Cylons - Town MVP
Lost Mafia - Co SK Winner with Kops
Random Mafia 3 - Town MVP
For the record, 538 did a podcast just this week about this very topic, which you can find here. They do a fairly thorough takedown of the idea of skewed polling.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern URW Control WBG Abzan GRW Burn
EDH GR Rosheen Meanderer
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Wait, people are still seriously using the 3D chess argument? Dear lord.
URW Control
WBG Abzan
GRW Burn
EDH
GR Rosheen Meanderer
Some right-wing interviewer tried to lead Trump back to the sane path of suggesting that he meant Obama's foreign policy lost the peace and set up the condition that led to ISIS.
And Trump goes, "Nope. Obama is literally the founder of ISIS."
I'd be much more worried about the people he's given voice too. Racists and authoritarians are in love with him and not shy to show up. I sincerely hope that this particular demographic becomes irrelevant again once he's thrashed in November.
Note that this is all based on the (very likely, let's be honest) chance that Clinton wins.
URW Control
WBG Abzan
GRW Burn
EDH
GR Rosheen Meanderer
URW Control
WBG Abzan
GRW Burn
EDH
GR Rosheen Meanderer
URW Control
WBG Abzan
GRW Burn
EDH
GR Rosheen Meanderer
Besides, it's easy to realize the underlying pattern here: he's a narcissist that needs to be the center of attention at all times. This is not some brilliant strategic move.
Trump's base is not all white supremacists, I did not mean to imply that. However, he continually panders to them and to other elements of the alt-right and it is not working out for him. I doubt the GOP is going to let their next candidate so blatantly pander to such unsavory groups. Antiestablishment movements are nothing new and tend not to pan out.
URW Control
WBG Abzan
GRW Burn
EDH
GR Rosheen Meanderer
They can significantly influence and reshape the party even if they don't win elections. Barry Goldwater and William Jennings Bryan were "anti-establishment" candidates and both were responsible for shaping the Republican and Democratic parties largely as they are today.
You are exactly right about this. Trump is reshaping the Republican Party in a way that I haven't seen since Ronald Reagan. It remains to be seen if he will have the strength to resist pressure to conform once he wins the presidency.
This election will be an eye opener for many people into the pervasiveness of corruption in Washington and to what extent the mainstream media is an active participant in it. All through the primaries the media under estimated or under reported trumps support and it did no good. Everything he said about his poling and the eventual outcome was true. the media will continue to falsely report Trumps numbers, just as they will pump up Hillarie's numbers, down play evidence of her wrong doing and her mental health issues, but it will do no good.
A presidential campaign is essentially a marketing campaign and Donald Trump is a MASTER of marketing. That is how the other republican candidates got their asses handed to them and it is how he will beat Hillary. I think he is only now starting to open up on her. It's going to be very interesting the information Trump exposes about her. The fact that she can't seem to tell the truth even about minor things that are easily fact checked just does Trumps work for him.
Stay tuned kids. They will be talking about this presidential campaign for decades as a turning point in US politics.
Calvin & Hobbs Mafia, Mafia MVP
X-Men Mafia Town MVP
Simpson's Mafia - best use of character
Mtgnews Mafia Mafia - Town Madman
Mythos Mafia: the Dunwich Massacre Town MVP
English Literature Mafia Town MVP
Best Role-Playing Sin City Mafia
Werewolf Mafia - Mafia MVP
Doctor Mafia - Mafia MVP
Mafia: Escape from the Cylons - Town MVP
Lost Mafia - Co SK Winner with Kops
Random Mafia 3 - Town MVP
What do you mean by "mainstream media?" Are we talking print media? Radio? Television? Internet sources?
That's because Trump consistently underperformed his polling. He obviously had enough support to nab the nomination, but not really an amazing amount (which is currently being proven by his general electorate polling).
#UNSKEWTHEPOLLS amirite? Why don't you ask Romney how well that went for him.
If he's the master of marketing then why is he hated among almost every group besides white male non-college graduates? Shouldn't he be a little more... appealing?
This makes no sense. In a primary among multiple different candidates your #1 goal is to get your image established and to get ahead of the other candidates. Policy stuff can wait as long as you're able to make yourself stand out from the 10+ other people in the race (and especially in the debates).
This tactic does not work once you get into a general election. You're matched up against one other person (sorry, Johnson and Stein) and you're both known quantities at this point. Shouting, insulting the other candidates and *****posting on twitter isn't going to work when you're already behind in the polls and your opponent is using your own words against you (to great effect, I might add. Traditionally Republican states are swinging Blue in the polls).
And that's Trumps greatest downfall. People thought he was pandering to extremists to win the primaries and then pivot to the center, but no pivot came and it's pulling his campaign down into the abyss. He's the most hated candidate in history and 538 puts his chances of winning at very low so far (for those who don't know, 538 is one of the most respected names in political forecasting and called the 2008 election within one state and correctly called all 50 states in the 2012 election).
Am I in bizarro land? Because if you swapped "she" with "he" and "Trump's" with "Clinton's" you would actually have truth. He literally today just said that Obama is the literal founder of ISIS. Anyone with half a brain knows that this is pure bull*****.
Many of Clinton's attack ads against Trump are formed entirely from his own words and they seem to be working, with almost all swing states firmly in her grasp and many traditionally Red states becoming contested.
This whole post, quite frankly, does not seem grounded in reality at all. The "unskew the polls" thing kinda tipped me off and the rest just confirmed it.
URW Control
WBG Abzan
GRW Burn
EDH
GR Rosheen Meanderer
This statement is so perfectly backwards, it's hilarious.
Donald Trump's Politifact profile.
Hillary Clinton's Politifact profile.
Take a look at those numbers. 70% of what Trump says is mostly false, outright false, or absurdly pants-on-fire false. Meanwhile, 72% of what Clinton says is true, mostly true, or about half true. There just isn't a contest.
"You say 'learn from history,' but that does not mean 'learn the same bull***** the people in history learned alongside phrenology and alchemy.'" - The Blinking Spirit
Well he has now decided that he was being Sarcastic.
The Monkey running Hartlepool had a better campaign than him.
- H.L Mencken
I Became insane with long Intervals of horrible Sanity
All Religion, my friend is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination and poetry.
- Edgar Allan Poe
The Crafters' Rules Guru
I’m not disputing your numbers and perhaps I did not make my point clear. This issue is not fazing Trump, while Hilary has a well-documented reputation for evading the truth and telling half truths many, many people will say out and out, lying. As we have seen each time The Donald says something that is false and someone calls him on it rolls off his back like water off a duck. Every time Hilary has a brain short circuit it is about something like whether or not the FBI investigation of her found she told the truth or not. And it does stick. Look at the numbers of Americans and even self-proclaimed Democrats that think perceive her as untrustworthy. Every single time she misspeaks, refuses to be forthcoming or lies she does herself damage and the Donald will take advantage of that.
That is the point I was trying to make.
Calvin & Hobbs Mafia, Mafia MVP
X-Men Mafia Town MVP
Simpson's Mafia - best use of character
Mtgnews Mafia Mafia - Town Madman
Mythos Mafia: the Dunwich Massacre Town MVP
English Literature Mafia Town MVP
Best Role-Playing Sin City Mafia
Werewolf Mafia - Mafia MVP
Doctor Mafia - Mafia MVP
Mafia: Escape from the Cylons - Town MVP
Lost Mafia - Co SK Winner with Kops
Random Mafia 3 - Town MVP
Let's look at recent polls and see whether this is true.
Using the list on realclearpolitics, we have:
Bloomberg, 8/8, the question was:
For the phrase "is trustworthy", 41% picked Clinton and 39% picked Trump.
In Washington Post/ABC, 8/4, the question was:
38% said Clinton is honest and trustworthy, while 36% said Trump is honest and trustworthy.
The other polls on RCP's current list don't ask the question.
It seems to simply be false that the perception of untrustworthiness rolls off Donald Trump - he's actually viewed as more dishonest than Hillary Clinton. Many people perceive her to be dishonest, but even more people perceive Trump to be dishonest.
The problem is that it is sticking. To him, that is. Every time he lies (blatantly lying about basic stuff all the while with a smile on his face) he tanks his numbers just a bit more. People hate him. A majority of people hate him.
URW Control
WBG Abzan
GRW Burn
EDH
GR Rosheen Meanderer
Since the internet has so many independent sources and sites it is much easier to find fresh perspectives and independent thought.
That is one interpretation or it is also possible that the poling numbers were deliberately underreported in order to create the illusion that Trump had less support then he really does, it could also simply be a case of multiple, repeated failures to obtain a true random sample. Either way this type of public opinion manipulation has been a part of politics as long as there has been politics.
http://race42016.com/2012/04/26/polling-101-weighting-the-sample/
? Are you agreeing with me? Yes Romney complained of this type of media bias and he lost. Was the Media Bias a contributing factor to his losing, I think it is obvious the answer is yes. Was it the sole reason, no absolutely not. He ran a terrible campaign and was a terrible candidate.
First, I do not agree that he is “Hated among almost every group besides white male non-college graduates?” That is such a grossly broad and incorrect exaggeration that it doesn’t warrant a reply.
I’ve been very interested in finding out what poling numbers are being seem in areas not controlled by the mainstream and the numbers and summaries I have been able to find are interesting to say the least. There are few such summaries but they are interesting. The fact that the Democrats haven’t immediately posted Data and facts to discredit this is also telling. The response has been to ignore it as though it did not exist and that is usually an indication of them wanting people to take no notice if this in hopes it will not get legs in other outlets.
In social media sites Trump is ahead, in some cases handily so.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pXLGdVlxqk
“Published on Aug 6, 2016
Good afternoon, I’m still reporting on fake polls.
Hats off to Addison Riddleberger columns for assembling this social media data.
The 2016 elections will be the elections social scientists will look back on as the turning point year – the year where an analysis of social media will prove more predictive than paid polling.
Assuming that is a correct prediction, what does that mean for the future of the Trump-Clinton presidential race. All of these stats are as of Aug. 4th, 2016.
Let’s go to the data – Facebook Likes:
Trump: 10,174,358 – 65.4%
Clinton: 5,385,959 – 34.6%
----
Facebook live stream posts (latest):
Trump: 135,000 likes, 18,167 shares, 1,500,000 views = 1,653,167 total = 83.0%
Clinton: 11,000 likes, 0 shares, 321,000 views = 332,000 total = 17.0%
*note: almost half of Clinton FB posts, the top comments are from Trump supporters. However, top comments on Trump’s page are hardcore Trump supporters only.
----
Twitter :
Trump: 10.6 million followers = 56.7%
Clinton: 8.1 million followers = 43.3%
-----
Youtube Live Stream (averages):
Trump: 30,000 live viewers per stream = 98.4%
Clinton: 500 live viewers per stream = 1.6%
-----
Instagram:
Trump: 2.2 million followers = 55.0%
Clinton: 1.8 million followers = 45.0%
-------
Reddit subscribers:
Trump: 197,696 = 71.3%
Clinton: 24,429 = 8.8%
Hillary for Prison: 55,228 = 19.9%
Bottom line: more than twice as many Reddit users think Clinton should be in jail as should become the next President of the United States.
I’m still reporting from Washington. Good day.”
This is a fascinating election year.
I think that I may have given the wrong impression of being a Trump supported. I’m a Libertarian and will be voting Libertarian in the election. I think this is a rare opportunity for a third party candidate to make real progress in breaking the death grip the Democrats and Republicans, along with their mouth pieces in the mainstream media, have on this country. I do however think Trump will win the Presidency. As the election draws near Republicans will begin to support Trump. Not all, and many may hold their noses while doing it, but they will see Trump as better then another Democrat and they will try to tap into the protectionist, anti-globalist sentiment that Trump has built his base on.
Calvin & Hobbs Mafia, Mafia MVP
X-Men Mafia Town MVP
Simpson's Mafia - best use of character
Mtgnews Mafia Mafia - Town Madman
Mythos Mafia: the Dunwich Massacre Town MVP
English Literature Mafia Town MVP
Best Role-Playing Sin City Mafia
Werewolf Mafia - Mafia MVP
Doctor Mafia - Mafia MVP
Mafia: Escape from the Cylons - Town MVP
Lost Mafia - Co SK Winner with Kops
Random Mafia 3 - Town MVP
Democrats haven't immediately posted data to discredit that because looking at Facebook likes as a barometer for the election is stupid. It's completely delusional to think that means anything. Bernie Sanders had many more Facebook likes than Hillary Clinton (and led her in likes by a huge margin compared to Trump) - how'd that work out for him?
Calvin & Hobbs Mafia, Mafia MVP
X-Men Mafia Town MVP
Simpson's Mafia - best use of character
Mtgnews Mafia Mafia - Town Madman
Mythos Mafia: the Dunwich Massacre Town MVP
English Literature Mafia Town MVP
Best Role-Playing Sin City Mafia
Werewolf Mafia - Mafia MVP
Doctor Mafia - Mafia MVP
Mafia: Escape from the Cylons - Town MVP
Lost Mafia - Co SK Winner with Kops
Random Mafia 3 - Town MVP
What are you talking about? Trump took the lead in the polls in July 2015, only a few weeks after he announced his candidacy, and then never lost that lead.
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-national-gop-primary
1) News that Trump said Obama is the “founder” of ISIS, Hillary the “co-founder”. This is the briefest excerpt I could find of the discussion between Trump and a right-leaning radio news outlet:
Ok, so the case here could be nothing worse than Trump is stupid. He doesn’t know the meaning of the word “founder”, and he doesn’t know that he doesn’t know. Or, maybe that he is knowingly and willfully straining the limits of language to inflame negative opinion of the Left. But clear from the context, he’s saying that the power vacuum from US military mismanagement created ISIS, not that he believes Obama literally went around the Middle East organizing a militant group in support of an Islamic State. So, Trump is unethical and stupid? News?
2) More opinion on results from polls showing Clinton is in the lead, and how the Trump camp is trying to deny it.
So the case against Trump here, he is a bad candidate because he is a loser? Sound familiar? At best, this is discussion outside of the issues of this race. At worst, it’s ad hominem. I mean, I understand the newsworthiness of the polls themselves, but it doesn’t explain why the sheer volume of this back and forth far exceeds the volume on actual issues.
3) Politically slanted news related to the Olympics
Such and such local newspaper failed to mention the name of African American swimmer Simone Manuel who won Gold. More about how the sports casting of the Olympics contain “micro-aggressions” against women. Again, I’m not debating the newsworthiness of the Olympics. I’m just shocked that it’s getting more volume of coverage than the below statement by Trump:
4) Trump says that under his administration US Citizens suspected of terrorism will be tried in military tribunals at GitMo. (http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/291208-trump-says-hed-prosecute-us-citizens-in-guantanamo)
The case against Trump here is nothing short of the fact that he is a dictator. He is a modern day Mao, Mussolini, Napoleon, Hilter, who intends to make unrestrained use of the powers of the state against its citizens, at the sole discretion of his cabinet. And, this ranks 4th in overall importance?
As I’ve said before, detracting from these points and many, many other similar instances from Trump just makes this seem like any other election, and not the threat to free society in the US that it actually is.
Calvin & Hobbs Mafia, Mafia MVP
X-Men Mafia Town MVP
Simpson's Mafia - best use of character
Mtgnews Mafia Mafia - Town Madman
Mythos Mafia: the Dunwich Massacre Town MVP
English Literature Mafia Town MVP
Best Role-Playing Sin City Mafia
Werewolf Mafia - Mafia MVP
Doctor Mafia - Mafia MVP
Mafia: Escape from the Cylons - Town MVP
Lost Mafia - Co SK Winner with Kops
Random Mafia 3 - Town MVP
You said that polls were cited to show that Trump would lose. You said that the "data" showed that he was losing, but that social media showed that he was winning. But the fact of the matter is that polls did show him leading, and leading handily. You didn't need to look at social media. You didn't need to measure facebook likes, or speculate that people might not be answering honestly in polls - Trump was leading every poll. All you had to do to see how Trump was performing was look at the polls.
Now that Trump is bombing in the polls, you want to pretend that polls and data misled us during the primaries, and that social media behavior was the accurate indiciator. But that's not what happened. To the extent that Trump defied expectations, he was defying analyst predictions, not polling numbers. The data was very clear on how he was doing, just as it's very clear now.
I find it interesting that you believe all these companies to be the larger part of some nefarious data manipulation plot instead of looking at the much simpler explanation: that Trump is doing badly.
I also find it interesting that you replied saying that it doesn't warrant a reply. The most condescending of rebuttals.
Face the facts: Trump is not winning a single demographic. He's losing women, African Americans, Hispanics, Asians, the 18-29 age range, college educated voters and the LGBT community. He's not even winning white males. His favorability ratings are in the dumpster. Perhaps "hate" is a bit strong of a word where "strong dislike and aversion" would do.
"I've been searching for polling that confirms my world view."
This is not interesting. It's statistical nonsense and utter lunacy. Judging a candidate by their social media outreach (which can be gamed in so many ways by literally anyone) is so far beyond ridiculous that I'm flabbergasted at the fact that anyone is taking this remotely seriously.
URW Control
WBG Abzan
GRW Burn
EDH
GR Rosheen Meanderer
I apologize for the delay in responding, it is difficult to reply in a timely manner while I’m at work.
So you won’t answer my question, ok. You are fixating on poles because you have found a graph on the Huffington Post site that you think proves me wrong, that’s ok too. You are still not addressing the actual point I was making regarding how Trump was portrayed and what his chances were. The fact that he was dismissed and downplayed as a candidate is undenial. Poles were only a small part of the overall media coverage dismissing and marginalizing his chances, and there were poles at that time, early on, showing Trump behind other candidates. Just as there are poles now that are being shown to support that he is behind.
I personally do not think that these recent poles are completely accurate. I have seen a report I am trying to verify right now regarding the veracity of recent poles. There is a claim that the poling sample group was not random but that it was intentionally selected with a higher proportion of Democratic respondents. In the example I saw approximately 1200 registered voters were contacted. Rather than a random selection of voters a group of 550 Republicans had been contacted and 650 Democrats. This obviously will generate false data. I was hoping to have had time today to research the validity of these reports. If this is actually the case it is an egregious violation of the public trust at the least.
Calvin & Hobbs Mafia, Mafia MVP
X-Men Mafia Town MVP
Simpson's Mafia - best use of character
Mtgnews Mafia Mafia - Town Madman
Mythos Mafia: the Dunwich Massacre Town MVP
English Literature Mafia Town MVP
Best Role-Playing Sin City Mafia
Werewolf Mafia - Mafia MVP
Doctor Mafia - Mafia MVP
Mafia: Escape from the Cylons - Town MVP
Lost Mafia - Co SK Winner with Kops
Random Mafia 3 - Town MVP
URW Control
WBG Abzan
GRW Burn
EDH
GR Rosheen Meanderer