Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Based on big data analysis over the last 30 days as of June 1st, Trump reports 37 percent of Hispanic positive sentiment versus 41 percent for Clinton. Surprisingly, the candidates tie in negative sentiment across Hispanics at 38 percent, discounting the fact that Latinos default as Democrats or are completely turned off by Trump’s off-color comments. After all, over 50 percent of Latinos identify as political independents.

SuperHornet wrote:What belonging to a Latino is warming up to Trump?

CAA Flagship wrote:

DSUrocks07 wrote:

SuperHornet wrote:What belonging to a Latino is warming up to Trump?

I expect Mr. Latino to soon accept the VP nod from Trump.

93henfan wrote:The damage has been done.

White men need to get out and vote for Trump. We are the only group who it's legal to discriminate against and we need to stand up for ourselves and stop allowing the country that people like us fought for and built to be eroded away by lesser idiots and freeloaders.

93henfan wrote:The damage has been done.

White men need to get out and vote for Trump. We are the only group who it's legal to discriminate against and we need to stand up for ourselves and stop allowing the country that people like us fought for and built to be eroded away by lesser idiots and freeloaders.

SeattleGriz wrote:

93henfan wrote:The damage has been done.

White men need to get out and vote for Trump. We are the only group who it's legal to discriminate against and we need to stand up for ourselves and stop allowing the country that people like us fought for and built to be eroded away by lesser idiots and freeloaders.

Amen! I was just talking about this same sentiment today. Pisses me off how many groups want equal treatment, only to cry racism or sexism when they are treated like white men!

Buck up fuckers! Us white men have been battling it out with each other since the beginning and you don't see us cry.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

SDHornet wrote:

93henfan wrote:The damage has been done.

White men need to get out and vote for Trump. We are the only group who it's legal to discriminate against and we need to stand up for ourselves and stop allowing the country that people like us fought for and built to be eroded away by lesser idiots and freeloaders.

Yup, only whites built this country over the years...good call there buddy...

The NBC News Online Poll was conducted online by SurveyMonkey October 13-15, 2015 among a national sample of 4,898 adults aged 18 and over. Respondents for this non-probability survey were selected using an algorithm from among the nearly three million people who take surveys on the SurveyMonkey platform each day

JohnStOnge wrote:I think this article gives a good assessment of information available for support level for Trump among Hispanics:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/d ... ers-223845

There's a table of recent poll results at the bottom and the results in it have the percentage of Hispanics who would vote for Trump ranging from 18 to 32 percent. And I'd say the 32 percent is kind of an outlier. There are five poll results and four of them are in the 18 through 23 percent range.

To me Survey Monkey polls shouldn't even be referenced. Totally unscientific. The way in which the sample is collected is more important than the sample size. For instance: A true random sample of 500 provides a much more reliable effort than a haphazard sample of a million does. And Survey Monkey sampling is haphazard sampling.

Example of methodology description at https://www.scribd.com/doc/285352517/NB ... ethodology

The NBC News Online Poll was conducted online by SurveyMonkey October 13-15, 2015 among a national sample of 4,898 adults aged 18 and over. Respondents for this non-probability survey were selected using an algorithm from among the nearly three million people who take surveys on the SurveyMonkey platform each day

As soon as you see the underlined language you should think, "unreliable." Case closed. If it's not some reasonable attempt at probability sampling you shouldn't even be presenting it as though it's meaningful.

Actually it's not "haphazard" sampling though. It's another type that involves using judgement to sample. I forgot the term for it but I have materials from my survey sampling course at work that include that terminology. I'll look it up when I get to work tomorrow.

But the bottom line will be the same: It's not reliable.

JohnStOnge wrote: Example of methodology description at https://www.scribd.com/doc/285352517/NB ... ethodology

The NBC News Online Poll was conducted online by SurveyMonkey October 13-15, 2015 among a national sample of 4,898 adults aged 18 and over. Respondents for this non-probability survey were selected using an algorithm from among the nearly three million people who take surveys on the SurveyMonkey platform each day

Ibanez wrote:

Based on big data analysis over the last 30 days as of June 1st, Trump reports 37 percent of Hispanic positive sentiment versus 41 percent for Clinton. Surprisingly, the candidates tie in negative sentiment across Hispanics at 38 percent, discounting the fact that Latinos default as Democrats or are completely turned off by Trump’s off-color comments. After all, over 50 percent of Latinos identify as political independents.

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/opinio ... ise-at-37/

Very interesting.

Cluck U wrote:Trump should hit Hillary on her handling of Central American Hispanics.

Warmongering...killing of Hispanic women leaders...killing of poor Hispanics.

Jesus...put a list of all of the Black, Muslin, and Hispanic people, especially women and children, that Hillary helped kill as a zealot in the State Department.

And list the support she gave to, and the money she got from, the whack job leaders all over the world who have ruthlessly killed gays, women, and children.

Hillary lies, innocent people die.

"If you want to understand who the real power behind the [Honduran] coup is," says Robert White, president of the Washington-based Center for International Policy, during a recent interview, "you need to find out who's paying Lanny Davis."

Davis, an ally of the Clinton family who is best known as the lawyer who defended Bill during the presidential impeachment proceedings, was recently on Capitol Hill lobbying members of Congress and testifying against exiled President Manuel Zelaya before the House Foreign Relations Committee. White, who previously served as the United States ambassador to El Salvador, thought that such information about Davis' clients would be "very difficult to find."

But the answer proved easy to find. Davis, a partner at the law firm Orrick, Herrington, & Sutcliffe, openly named them -- and his clients are the same powerful Hondurans behind the military coup.

"My clients represent the CEAL, the [Honduras Chapter of] Business Council of Latin America," Davis said when reached at his office last Thursday. "I do not represent the government and do not talk to President [Roberto] Micheletti. My main contacts are Camilo Atala and Jorge Canahuati. I'm proud to represent businessmen who are committed to the rule of law." Atala, Canahuati, and other families that own the corporate interests represented by Davis and the CEAL are at the top of an economic pyramid in which 62 percent of the population lives in poverty, according to the World Bank.

For many Hondurans and Honduras watchers, the confirmation that Davis is working with powerful, old Honduran families like the Atalas and Canahuatis is telling: To them, it proves that Davis serves the powerful business interests that ran, repressed, and ruined Honduras during the decades prior to the leftward turn of the Zelaya presidency..............

Asked if he had qualms about representing businesspeople linked to a coup government denounced and unrecognized by the United Nations, the Organization of American States, and many countries across the globe (including the United States), Davis responded, "There are facts about Mr. Zelaya that the world community may not be aware of. I'm proud to represent clients who support the decision of Secretary of State [Hillary] Clinton to back the mediation of President Arias in the conflict [between Zelaya and coup leaders]. But my biggest concern is safety and security of the Honduran people."

93henfan wrote:

SDHornet wrote: Yup, only whites built this country over the years...good call there buddy...

I said "like us". If you came here legally, worked hard, assimilated, learned english, were a good father, didn't find every way you can to leach off the government and not work, etc... Then I'd consider you "like us". Basically if you consider yourself American and not predominantly something else.

dbackjon wrote:

93henfan wrote:
I said "like us". If you came here legally, worked hard, assimilated, learned english, were a good father, didn't find every way you can to leach off the government and not work, etc... Then I'd consider you "like us". Basically if you consider yourself American and not predominantly something else.

So no Italian-Americans like Flaggy or Irish-Americans like Ibanez.

Just real Americans like you, me and Alex

dbackjon wrote:

93henfan wrote:
I said "like us". If you came here legally, worked hard, assimilated, learned english, were a good father, didn't find every way you can to leach off the government and not work, etc... Then I'd consider you "like us". Basically if you consider yourself American and not predominantly something else.

So no Italian-Americans like Flaggy or Irish-Americans like Ibanez.

Just real Americans like you, me and Alex

93henfan wrote:

dbackjon wrote:

So no Italian-Americans like Flaggy or Irish-Americans like Ibanez.

Just real Americans like you, me and Alex

My DNA is predominantly Irish, yet I don't refer to myself as Irish-American. That's ridiculous. I have no ties at all to Ireland in probably at least five generations. And my ancestors who did come from there probably came here as indentured servants to escape famine and unspeakable cruelty from England, so cry me a river about slavery.

kalm wrote:(Psst...Baldy. Here's another progtard media source eating its own )

93henfan wrote:

dbackjon wrote:

So no Italian-Americans like Flaggy or Irish-Americans like Ibanez.

Just real Americans like you, me and Alex

My DNA is predominantly Irish, yet I don't refer to myself as Irish-American. That's ridiculous. I have no ties at all to Ireland in probably at least five generations. And my ancestors who did come from there probably came here as indentured servants to escape famine and unspeakable cruelty from England, so cry me a river about slavery.