Trump has a 97 percent chance of beating Hillary Clinton in the general election

C

cancel2 2022

Canceled
  • Professor Helmut Norpoth’s statistical modeling gives Trump a 97 percent chance of beating Clinton in November - if he's the GOP nominee
  • He'd have an even better shot against Bernie Sanders - 99 percent
  • Norpoth's model has accurately predicted the winner of every national election since 1912, The Statesman reports, except the election of 1960
  • If either Rubio or Cruz were the GOP nominee, the model shows them losing to Clinton but winning against Sanders
If a professor at Stony Brook University is correct, Donald J Trump will be the next President of the United States. Professor Helmut Norpoth’s statistical modeling gives Trump with a 97 percent chance of beating Hillary Clinton in the general election. He'd have an even better shot against Bernie Sanders - 99 percent.


'The bottom line is that the primary model, using also the cyclical movement, makes it almost certain that Donald Trump will be the next president,' Norpoth told Stony Brook's school newspaper, The Statesman, 'if he’s a nominee of the [Republican] party.'

318D9E4600000578-3463915-image-a-2_1456412408073.jpg

Professor Helmut Norpoth’s statistical modeling shows that Trump has a 97 percent chance of beating Hillary Clinton in the general election

 
I'd call this just another sandwich-board dollop of journalistic plagiarism- but now I nowd yoos just a-tryin' to cetch me out !

village-idiot-o.gif
 
Rune said:
Any kind of nuance eludes you.
No sense of humor, sarcasm or irony whatsoever.
You are a black or white, all or nothing concrete thinking judgemental child.
Click to expand...
You, by contrast, are a fucking idiot that is rightly treated with utter contempt by all salient beings.
 
Rune said:
Any kind of nuance eludes you.
No sense of humor, sarcasm or irony whatsoever.
You are a black or white, all or nothing concrete thinking judgemental child.
Click to expand...

When you cite a news story to a blog or messageboard and give the link, it is not any kind of plagiarism you ignorant tool. It is called fair use.

Did you graduate high school?
 
Konono said:
How is it plagiarism if he gave the link and didn't take credit for the story?
Click to expand...

It's convention to signify other people's comments by means of quotation marks or the use of the ' quote ' box. Not doing so implies that the OP is the author of the text- and he ain't. His own comments don't exist.
 
Last edited:
Konono said:
When you cite a news story to a blog or messageboard and give the link, it is not any kind of plagiarism you ignorant tool. It is called fair use.

Did you graduate high school?
Click to expand...
He passed a welding course once and Darla sent him to feminazi re-education classes.
 
moon2012 said:
It's convention to signify other people's comments by means of quotations marks or the use of the ' quote ' box. Not doing so implies that the OP is the author of the text- and he ain't. His own comments don't exist.
Click to expand...

:palm:

Copying the text and citing link is what constitutes fair use. His comments do not need to exist if he is sharing the story with a link to the original story.
 
moon2012 said:
It's convention to signify other people's comments by means of quotations marks or the use of the ' quote ' box. Not doing so implies that the OP is the author of the text- and he ain't. His own comments don't exist.
Click to expand...
Only to numbnuts like you, I doubt that you will be surprised to know that you are the first to say that in over a decade of my posting to boards. So kindly shut the fuck up, there's a good boy!
 
Borboletta said:
Only to numbnuts like you, I doubt that you will be surprised to know that you are the first to say that in over a decade of my posting to boards. So kindly shut the fuck up, there's a good boy!
Click to expand...

As I said- " It's convention to signify other people's comments by means of quotation marks or the use of the ' quote ' box. Not doing so implies that the OP is the author of the text- and he ain't. His own comments don't exist. "

As things stand , readers, in passing. might think that the text accompanying your frequent Daily Mail links is penned by you- and therefore be misled as to your actual level of intelligence. It's an annoyance- so I'll continue to draw your attention to it.
 
Konono said:
:palm:

Copying the text and citing link is what constitutes fair use. His comments do not need to exist if he is sharing the story with a link to the original story.
Click to expand...

As I said- and I'll say it again for the slower ships of the convoy- there is no visible differentiation between the writings of the journalist and any comment that our resident Daily Mail sandwich-board twazzock might have added.
In short you have no way of knowing what the twat has written or what the twat has copied-and-pasted- unless you assume that he doesn't have an opinion and has therefore posted naff-all- or that he is so tightly in lock-step with the journalist quoted that his own mind is rendered redundant.
This is a debate forum after all- not a Daily Mail Internet outlet.
 
those are ridiculous numbers and flies in the face of what almost every other head to head match up poll that is out there right now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top