Author Topic: US Politics Thread |OT| THE DARKEST TIMELINE  (Read 2656028 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21540 on: October 30, 2016, 04:59:09 PM »
Well, I am operating on the assumption that there would be no private server scandals associated with Biden. Or being married to a sexual predator. I'm not saying it's justified baggage, just shit for republicans to latch on to.

That's the point!

There is no candidate or potential candidate so pure and angelic that they would not be subjected to Republican FUD, or that the FUD wouldn't stick to them.  You think someone who's been in public service as long as Biden, with such close ties to banks, with a tendency to speak very frankly, who's been VP in an administration Republicans loathe, wouldn't be subjected to attacks, or that the same people who believe shit about Hillary wouldn't believe it about Biden?

I remember when a lot of Dems thought that nominating combat veteran, war hero John Kerry would act as a shield against that stuff.  It doesn't work that way.

Well, I disagree. I mean, yeah, they will try to dig up whatever dirt they can on anyone. But Hillary had the perfect storm of fodder for them to use.

John Kerry didn't lose the election because of switftboat veterans. He lost because he had the personality of a wet mop. He would've lost against Trump handily, I think.

brawndolicious

  • Nylonhilist
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21541 on: October 30, 2016, 05:12:06 PM »
Truckload of manure dumped at Ohio Democratic Party office
http://theweek.com/speedreads/658558/truckload-manure-dumped-ohio-democratic-party-office

Well they certainly got some dirt on her now.

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21542 on: October 30, 2016, 06:55:38 PM »

Human Snorenado

  • Stay out of Malibu, Lebowski
  • Icon
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21543 on: October 30, 2016, 08:10:29 PM »
Mandark is both right and wrong.

Yes, anyone (including Uncle Joe) would be subject to the FUD cannon. The difference with Hillary is that she's ALREADY BEEN IN THE PUBLIC EYE for 24 years. She's a very known quantity. Are most of the "scandals" attached to her baseless? Sure. Does it matter? No, because people are stupid. Quit trying to pretend like we don't live in America, Mandark. There's literally no one feasibly worse that the Dems could have nominated in this respect.

Perception absolutely matters. Probably more than fact, in a lot of cases. The right has spent 24 years painting Hillary as Maleficent of the Ozarks. A lot of people reflexively hate her, even if they can't quantify it. That hate matters.
yar

Mupepe

  • Icon
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21544 on: October 30, 2016, 08:21:33 PM »
I can quantify it. It's her neck. That goddamn neck.

Olivia Wilde Homo

  • Proud Kinkshamer
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21545 on: October 30, 2016, 10:32:27 PM »
🍆🍆

Great Rumbler

  • Dab on the sinners
  • Global Moderator
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21546 on: October 30, 2016, 10:35:57 PM »
Comey's in kind of a lose/lose situation, and has been pretty much from the start of this whole thing, though he's arguably made it worse by volunteering information that he wasn't obligated to.
dog

Van Cruncheon

  • live mas or die trying
  • Banned
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21547 on: October 30, 2016, 10:41:03 PM »
will that happen though? seems to be a whole generation of warriors who are now engaged in mortal combat with all her detractors due to the apocalyptic nature of the alternative, paladins who have sworn their virginity to her.

presidential personality cults weren't really a thing for liberal america until obama. did it become a coping mechanism to deal with the disparity between his likable personality and same old same old corporatism?

mental to think of how popular he is still despite the whole NSA thing coming out under his watch. not only that, the organisation that broke that story are now widely despised in liberal circles.

point is, i can't see these people who have personally invested every fibre of their being in getting this person elected suddenly reactivate their faculties for critical thought in a few months time.

there're no presidential cults. the nominees are banners for opposing sides in a culture war. the goal is to piss on the other side's flag while waving yours, and revel in the butthurt.
duc


curly

  • cultural maoist
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21549 on: October 30, 2016, 11:16:01 PM »
The Hillary thing is really not that complicated. She's disliked to a historic degree for a presidential candidate, and it's not like she's the first nominee to be subjected to a 24/7 fud campaign.

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21550 on: October 30, 2016, 11:48:53 PM »
Prob because she's corny, doesn't seem authentic, and constantly makes unforced errors that baffle the mind. Plus republicans won't let 90s shit die so people associate her with the past.

Still gonna trounce Trump tho.
:umad
010

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21551 on: October 31, 2016, 12:31:16 AM »
Seeing agra regurgitate Fox News talking points and faux-scandals is pretty sad confirmation that HRC was right about the "vast right-wing conspiracy."

Compared to Biden and most Dem's who've been on Capital Hill since the 90's, Hillary's only "weakness" is that she was in the public light enough for the right wing hit-squad to notice her. Along with, of course, being a woman (which likely fed into that last point, too.)

I'm not regurgitating anything. For fucks sake there's an ongoing FBI investigation on her that's been hanging over her head for the duration of the campaign. How the fuck are you going to compare that to some bills Diamond Joe helped pass some 30 odd years ago?

And it's almost like you're purposely misreading what I wrote. I repeatedly said that it's besides the point if all these attacks  against her are valid or not. The point is that she has way more fodder they can use against her than any other Dem candidate. And yes, a lot of it is her own doing. She and her whole team completely mishandled the email situation. Now she is reaping the seeds he has sown. Some of the leaked emails DO make her look like a two-faced career politician, whether you like it or not. And that is, as they say, bad optics.

But you want to accuse me of reposting FOX News talking points, really? Fox News talking points are that she is a criminal that should have been indited for deting over 9000 emails, tried for treason, and jailed for murdering the US consulate in Benghazi. At no point did I come even remotely close to saying anything of the sort. You went full GAF son, never go full GAF.

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21552 on: October 31, 2016, 12:35:15 AM »
1) The effectiveness of attacks on Hillary Clinton's reputation is independent of the substance of these attacks.

2) Hillary Clinton is a bad choice as nominee because of the things in her past which could be used against her.



Y'all can't claim to believe both of these things at once.

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21553 on: October 31, 2016, 12:45:04 AM »
Because those two points are not mutually exclusive and there's miles of gray area in between?

Human Snorenado

  • Stay out of Malibu, Lebowski
  • Icon
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21554 on: October 31, 2016, 12:46:04 AM »
1) The effectiveness of attacks on Hillary Clinton's reputation is independent of the substance of these attacks.

2) Hillary Clinton is a bad choice as nominee because of the things in her past which could be used against her.



Y'all can't claim to believe both of these things at once.

Sure you can, just remember to always apply Triumph's Razor: assume people are both stupid and awful. Which, you know. Have you met people? They are.
yar

curly

  • cultural maoist
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21555 on: October 31, 2016, 12:48:55 AM »
Hillary's biggest baggage is she perfectly fits the public's image of a career politician

1) The effectiveness of attacks on Hillary Clinton's reputation is independent of the substance of these attacks.

2) Hillary Clinton is a bad choice as nominee because of the things in her past which could be used against her.



Y'all can't claim to believe both of these things at once.
:comeon You're deliberately misreading other people's points here
« Last Edit: October 31, 2016, 12:53:07 AM by curly »

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21556 on: October 31, 2016, 12:55:11 AM »
aggie, how are they not mutually exclusive?

If the effectiveness of a negative PR campaign doesn't depend on the underlying facts, then trying to preempt such a campaign by picking a "clean" nominee is futile, no?  I feel like this is a pretty simple and straightforward point to understand.


Triumph: okay but what the fuck does that have to do with anything I said?  "People are stupid and awful" is pretty compatible with large amounts of people quickly turning against Biden, Sanders, whoever.

TakingBackSunday

  • Banana Grabber
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21557 on: October 31, 2016, 12:57:14 AM »
is it a good time to get off this planet

.
püp

curly

  • cultural maoist
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21558 on: October 31, 2016, 01:22:26 AM »
aggie, how are they not mutually exclusive?

If the effectiveness of a negative PR campaign doesn't depend on the underlying facts, then trying to preempt such a campaign by picking a "clean" nominee is futile, no?  I feel like this is a pretty simple and straightforward point to understand.


Triumph: okay but what the fuck does that have to do with anything I said?  "People are stupid and awful" is pretty compatible with large amounts of people quickly turning against Biden, Sanders, whoever.

Your dumb construction is mutually exclusive, but it doesn't apply to what anyone actually said. You turned "Hillary is uniquely vulnerable to negative press, much of which is unwarranted" into  "the effectiveness of attacks on Hillary Clinton's reputation is independent of the substance of these attacks" which is obviously nonsense and then expected everyone to play along.

Like, you don't have to go beyond a Nate Silver-level of analysis to realize that Hillary is a historically disliked candidate by the public (excluding her opponent, of course).

« Last Edit: October 31, 2016, 01:28:33 AM by curly »

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21559 on: October 31, 2016, 01:32:39 AM »
Because it's not black and white. That she set up a private servet and then didn't hand over all of the emails to the investigators looks suspect af in its own right. And the guys on the right exaggerated the shit out of that.

They can manufacture attacks out of nothing, but f there is something actually to it makes it that much harder to handwave it away. Sorry, but thats just the nature of political warfare.

What's funny to me is that both the Trump and Clinton talking heads use the same exact languagr to handwave shit their candidate did that is sticking and not going away. For Hillary it's  "yeah she deleted some emails but she's sorry and she learned from her mistake." For Trump is "yeah he grabbed some nonconsensual puss, but he's really sorry and he learned from his mistake"  :lol
« Last Edit: October 31, 2016, 01:37:30 AM by agrajag »

Mandark

  • Icon
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21560 on: October 31, 2016, 02:05:09 AM »
Fair cop, curly, though you're rather retconning the argument.

It was that Clinton would be outperformed by Biden in the general, because he wouldn't be burdened by baggage like the Iraq war.

To me, agrajag being unaware of Biden's vote on the war (which is something I've seen surprisingly often, so not to single him out) pretty well illustrates how contextual approval/favorability ratings are, since his vote would have been rehashed ad nauseum had he been a credible candidate. So I still think it's naive to expect to plug another name into a counterfactual and expect their current numbers to translate to an electoral margin.

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21561 on: October 31, 2016, 02:54:27 AM »
Like I said, Clinton has an ongoing FBI investigation of mishandled classified emails. That's pretty unprecedented, and Biden certainly has no skeleton in his closet that the Republicans nearly the same mileage out of.

So yeah, I don't think she's a criminal, but the ammunition to be used against her is just more abundant than against most other candidates.

Trent Dole

  • the sharpest tool in the shed
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21562 on: October 31, 2016, 04:10:26 AM »


Hi

Cerveza mas fina

  • I don't care for Islam tbqh
  • filler
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21563 on: October 31, 2016, 04:19:45 AM »
Like look both candidates are not clean, but Trump is clearly not up to the job by any standards while Hillary is so it's a an easy choice, even for republicans.

If you have to choose a person to lead team USA you might as well pick a capable person who you don't agree with completely IMHO, especially when the other option is such a farce.


Raist

  • Winner of the Baited Award 2018
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21564 on: October 31, 2016, 04:24:29 AM »
Like look both candidates are not clean, but Trump is clearly not up to the job by any standards while Hillary is so it's a an easy choice, even for republicans.

If you have to choose a person to lead team USA you might as well pick a capable person who you don't agree with completely IMHO, especially when the other option is such a farce.

How? She's done a few baffling mistakes. And that's only the stuff we know about. Other than having been in the game for a couple of decades, I don't see how she's fit in any way.

Cerveza mas fina

  • I don't care for Islam tbqh
  • filler
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21565 on: October 31, 2016, 04:36:54 AM »
Being in the game a couple of decades is exactly the kind of pedigree you want for your president because as they say the proof is in the pudding, and the ability to finish a coherent sentence without jumping to another topic is also a bonus.

Anyway it doesn't matter how good she really is because all that is moot now, there are two candidates left to choose from and if you compare them there is no contest really.

Raist

  • Winner of the Baited Award 2018
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21566 on: October 31, 2016, 04:49:54 AM »
Dunno bruvs, seems like a plague or cholera situation to me.

Cerveza mas fina

  • I don't care for Islam tbqh
  • filler
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21567 on: October 31, 2016, 05:05:51 AM »
That's pretty harsh, Hillary is more like the common flu. Yeah it's bullshit but at least you know how it will go and you take some rest maybe and everything will be all right.

Trump is more like trying to treat the common flu by injecting new strain of face aids into your veins.

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21568 on: October 31, 2016, 10:20:16 AM »
Raist, is not even close.

I've been vaguely accused of false equivalency and being a Fox News mouthpiece here for some reason  :lol but false equivalency is what you are doing.

Sam Harris said it best. I'll try to paraphrase "The lesser of two evils approach is the only valid approach when you have no good options. Sometimes the lesser of two evils is the only thing that stands between you and true evil. It's like a life preserver. It doesn't matter if it's dirty."

Trump is a dangerous, unhinged nincompoop. Hillary is a deeply flawed candidate (no matter how many times Andrex and Mandark insist she isn't), but she is qualified for the job and overall seems to have decent values and her head screwed on straight. Trump has no values. He changes his mind every other day, and will use aggressive doublethink to convince you that he always believed what he is saying today, even though he was saying the exact opposite yesterday. I have dealt with malignant narcissists in my life, and I believe that's exactly what he is. With a dash of psychopathy. His only mission is to feed his enormous ego. His thought process appears lacking. He constantly says dumb things, like we should've taken all the oil from Iraq during the war, that he is going to build a giant wall across the Mexican border, that more countries should have nukes and that using nukes is an option he would keep open, that he is going to extort money from his NATO allies, that he is going to have a 'deportation force' to remove millions of illegal immigrants from the country, etc. Completely baffling, ludicrous things that don't make sense theoretically, logistically, or ethically. He constantly says things without thinking them through. To defer to Harris once again, Trump is a "child in a man's body."

That is a little harsh to children, however. The idea is the younger the children are, the more narcissistic and self-centered they are, which they grow out of. But children aren't sexual predators, which Trump clearly is. That alone should disqualify him from running. In my estimates that is much worse than whatever vaguely nefarious speeches she gave to the fat cats in Wallstreet.

We haven't even gotten to the countless discrimination lawsuit against his businesses, him not paying his employees, etc. If Hillary has a troubled past, Trump is a downright piece of shit.

The most upsetting thing I hear people say is that Trump is such a great businessman and that he would run the country like one of his businesses. If Trump ran the country like one of his businesses, it would be bankrupt. He has an awful track record, with four of his companies filing for bankruptcy, and himself being very close to being personally bankrupt. Not to mention, with his history of stiffing his own employees and discriminating against others, I sure wouldn't want to live in a country that's run like a Trump corporation. Not a good precedent.

headwalk

  • brutal deluxe
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21569 on: October 31, 2016, 10:55:34 AM »
i wouldn't vote for hillary, but then i'm fairly irresponsible. it's a bit like if blair took the reins of the labour party and was the sure fire bet to get the tories out, i still couldn't stomach voting for him.

i say this with the total acknowledgement that if everyone thought like this we'd likely be absolutely fucked atleast in the short term as whoever whipped up the biggest cult frenzy would get in every time.

CatsCatsCats

  • 🤷‍♀️
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21570 on: October 31, 2016, 11:06:37 AM »
I'm not voting for Hillary.


Because my ballot got lost in the mail and I'm too lazy to go down to the elections office to get a new one when there's no way in hell Oregon goes red

Great Rumbler

  • Dab on the sinners
  • Global Moderator
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21571 on: October 31, 2016, 11:13:44 AM »
Because my ballot got lost in the mail

:drudge TRUMP WAS RIGHT :drudge
dog

Brehvolution

  • Until at last, I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin upon the mountainside.
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21572 on: October 31, 2016, 11:39:38 AM »
It will be a joy to see trump tv put fox news out of business, then shortly thereafter, go bankrupt itself.
©ZH

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21573 on: October 31, 2016, 12:35:50 PM »
Quote
@mitchellvii

I'm less offended by someone saying the N word than I am by the entire Democrat Party treating black voters like slaves.
https://twitter.com/mitchellvii/status/793128747469791232

:doge
010

brawndolicious

  • Nylonhilist
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21574 on: October 31, 2016, 01:12:28 PM »
I still haven't sent in my mail in ballot yet but the only reason to vote in California is we have a dozen propositions ranging from recreational weed to death penalty. A few of them are just the weirdest shit no one could understand without researching tho.

I justify voting for Hillary because my mom really wants to and she told me to send pictures of my ballot for her to copy.  :doge

Syph

  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21575 on: October 31, 2016, 02:22:22 PM »
I still haven't sent in my mail in ballot yet but the only reason to vote in California is we have a dozen propositions ranging from recreational weed to death penalty. A few of them are just the weirdest shit no one could understand without researching tho.

I justify voting for Hillary because my mom really wants to and she told me to send pictures of my ballot for her to copy.  :doge
props 66 and 62 yo
Just so you know, if both pass, the one with more votes actually gets enacted since they oppose each other.
XO

El Babua

  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21576 on: October 31, 2016, 02:39:16 PM »
When you see a commercial for a state amendment in Florida, you know it's bad.

Amendment 1, "For the Sun" :doge

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member

Joe Molotov

  • I'm much more humble than you would understand.
  • Administrator
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21578 on: October 31, 2016, 03:16:53 PM »
(Image removed from quote.)
(Image removed from quote.)

Oh, the same Donna Brazile was forced to resign in disgrace after giving Crooked Hillary the debate questions?  :smug

http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/31/media/donna-brazile-cnn-resignation/index.html

Checkmate, LIEberals. Your dominos are falling like a house of cards.
©@©™

Brehvolution

  • Until at last, I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin upon the mountainside.
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21579 on: October 31, 2016, 03:25:05 PM »
No wonder trump sounded like a moron. He didn't get to prepare his answers ahead of time.  :maf
©ZH

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21580 on: October 31, 2016, 04:02:41 PM »
Early Voting Numbers Show The Donald on Warpath to Victory
Quote
Trump communications advisor Jason Miller said on Breitbart News Sunday that Donald Trump has thousands of more early votes racked up than Mitt Romney did during this point in the 2012 election, giving them more momentum heading into the final week of the 2016 presidential election.

“I want to give you a couple of early voting, absentee voting successes we’ve seen,” Miller told SiriusXM host Matthew Boyle. “We can talk about polls… But let me tell you about real votes coming in now in Florida. Republican numbers at this point are a combination of absentee voting and early voting. Republican numbers are up seven percent, and Democrat numbers are down ten percent. So, what does that mean?”

“Usually, the Democrats will come out of early voting, pre-election voting ahead, but right now, we’re at a pace to be 100,000 votes closer than where Mitt Romney was four years ago,” Miller said.

“Bounce up to North Carolina, where we just had our best day,” he said. “We had 79,000 people that showed up and voted on Friday for Mr. Trump, which is the best single day—well, Republicans showing up and voting, which I’ll assume are for Mr. Trump. Single individual best day of voting, even going back to 2012. We’ve narrowed the gap to where we’re 35,000 votes ahead of where the Republican ticket was four years ago.”

“You look at Iowa. We’re 17,000 votes ahead” of where the Republican party was in 2012, Miller continued. “And even in Nevada, which the Democrats have been trying to say, with the unions and other things, they’ve done a great job, we’re about even where we were four years ago, so if these patterns hold, and we go into Election Day, we feel really, really good about our chances. Think about that: 100,000 votes better at this stage of the game, five days into the early voting in Florida. Thirty-five thousand votes better in North Carolina.”

“Even keep in mind that a lot of these polls were taken before the FBI news on Friday,” he added. “That’s certainly going to impact things. But look: We have the energy, we have the momentum. As long as Republicans and conservatives show up and vote, and say not only do we have a voice but we have a vote. This is our chance to make it count. Mr. Trump’s going to win on November 8.”

Brehvolution

  • Until at last, I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin upon the mountainside.
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21581 on: October 31, 2016, 04:29:22 PM »
Early Voting Numbers Show The Donald on Warpath to Victory
Quote
Trump communications advisor Jason Miller said on Breitbart News Sunday that Donald Trump has thousands of more early votes racked up than Mitt Romney did during this point in the 2012 election, giving them more momentum heading into the final week of the 2016 presidential election.

“I want to give you a couple of early voting, absentee voting successes we’ve seen,” Miller told SiriusXM host Matthew Boyle. “We can talk about polls… But let me tell you about real votes coming in now in Florida. Republican numbers at this point are a combination of absentee voting and early voting. Republican numbers are up seven percent, and Democrat numbers are down ten percent. So, what does that mean?”

“Usually, the Democrats will come out of early voting, pre-election voting ahead, but right now, we’re at a pace to be 100,000 votes closer than where Mitt Romney was four years ago,” Miller said.

“Bounce up to North Carolina, where we just had our best day,” he said. “We had 79,000 people that showed up and voted on Friday for Mr. Trump, which is the best single day—well, Republicans showing up and voting, which I’ll assume are for Mr. Trump. Single individual best day of voting, even going back to 2012. We’ve narrowed the gap to where we’re 35,000 votes ahead of where the Republican ticket was four years ago.”

“You look at Iowa. We’re 17,000 votes ahead” of where the Republican party was in 2012, Miller continued. “And even in Nevada, which the Democrats have been trying to say, with the unions and other things, they’ve done a great job, we’re about even where we were four years ago, so if these patterns hold, and we go into Election Day, we feel really, really good about our chances. Think about that: 100,000 votes better at this stage of the game, five days into the early voting in Florida. Thirty-five thousand votes better in North Carolina.”

“Even keep in mind that a lot of these polls were taken before the FBI news on Friday,” he added. “That’s certainly going to impact things. But look: We have the energy, we have the momentum. As long as Republicans and conservatives show up and vote, and say not only do we have a voice but we have a vote. This is our chance to make it count. Mr. Trump’s going to win on November 8.”

©ZH

TakingBackSunday

  • Banana Grabber
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21582 on: October 31, 2016, 04:31:30 PM »
god fucking dammit benji
püp

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21583 on: October 31, 2016, 04:45:18 PM »
the best part is that his entire theory hinges on one thing:
Quote
well, [registered] Republicans showing up and voting, which I’ll assume are for Mr. Trump

Great Rumbler

  • Dab on the sinners
  • Global Moderator
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21584 on: October 31, 2016, 05:00:39 PM »
please god just let this election cycle end
dog

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21585 on: October 31, 2016, 05:04:50 PM »


spoiler (click to show/hide)
i'll assume this is made by some conservative blogger
[close]

Olivia Wilde Homo

  • Proud Kinkshamer
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21586 on: October 31, 2016, 06:27:35 PM »
Now that Hillary's campaign is turning into a dumpster fire combined with a train wreck, Nate Silver is trying to cover his ass:

🍆🍆

Steve Contra

  • Bought a lemon tree straight cash
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21587 on: October 31, 2016, 06:31:28 PM »
How is he covering his ass?
vin

Olivia Wilde Homo

  • Proud Kinkshamer
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21588 on: October 31, 2016, 06:59:27 PM »
How is he covering his ass?

For the past few weeks there were numerous polls that had Hillary up eight points, 10 points, etc. that should have been treated as red flags by the likes of Nate Silver.  Instead of doing any critical analysis on the polls whatsoever, he applied his "algorithm" that skewed the polls further in Hillary's favor instead.  Now that the polls are "swinging", he is unable to explain why Trump is able to close the gap by as much as 10 points in a matter of a few days such as in the ABC/Washington Post poll.  So if those polls were legitimate, what exactly did Trump do that went from being behind by 12 points to being behind by two in a matter of just one week?  It must have been fucking amazing yet I don't recall seeing anything.  This should have been Nate Silver's job, not just skewing things further for the sake of Hillary's supporters.  So now he is pretending that things are really volatile, instead of doing his job in the first place which is finding out why Hillary was ahead by 12 points in a highly charged, highly partisan election.  This country is way too partisan to have those types of margins in the first place.  The only exception we got is in 2008 when the economy was about ready to go tits up, nobody wanted anything to do with neoconservatism and in spite of that, it was just 7.2% gap between Obama and McCain.

tl;dr he is covering his ass because he didn't do his job in the first place and now can't explain the significant changes without looking like he didn't do proper and critical research to begin with.
🍆🍆

TakingBackSunday

  • Banana Grabber
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21589 on: October 31, 2016, 07:16:06 PM »
Quote
Now that Hillary's campaign is turning into a dumpster fire combined with a train wreck

oh just shut the fuck up already.  You clearly have no idea what you're talking about and you never have.  The media isn't even really focusing on Clinton's involvement with this email thing anymore – most are now shifting focus to Comey's incompetence.  And it looks like it's going to turn to Trump's ties with Russia.

Which all that to say, won't mean dick in either direction.  Silver, Wang, and other polling aggregates have been consistent with their predictions since July.  Meaning – Clinton victory by way of North Carolina and Florida.

Silver is a terrible pundit and his model is designed to appear on the website as constantly fluctuating.  But if you actually check his state-to-state projections, and compare them with Wang's, its been consistent.

Basically, stop trolling.
püp

Steve Contra

  • Bought a lemon tree straight cash
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21590 on: October 31, 2016, 07:22:38 PM »
Yeah Sam Wang (who is more respected in stats circles) has had Clinton winning consistently.  Not sure what you are talking about.
vin

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
010

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21592 on: October 31, 2016, 07:46:45 PM »
How is he covering his ass?

For the past few weeks there were numerous polls that had Hillary up eight points, 10 points, etc. that should have been treated as red flags by the likes of Nate Silver.  Instead of doing any critical analysis on the polls whatsoever, he applied his "algorithm" that skewed the polls further in Hillary's favor instead.  Now that the polls are "swinging", he is unable to explain why Trump is able to close the gap by as much as 10 points in a matter of a few days such as in the ABC/Washington Post poll.  So if those polls were legitimate, what exactly did Trump do that went from being behind by 12 points to being behind by two in a matter of just one week?  It must have been fucking amazing yet I don't recall seeing anything.  This should have been Nate Silver's job, not just skewing things further for the sake of Hillary's supporters.  So now he is pretending that things are really volatile, instead of doing his job in the first place which is finding out why Hillary was ahead by 12 points in a highly charged, highly partisan election.  This country is way too partisan to have those types of margins in the first place.  The only exception we got is in 2008 when the economy was about ready to go tits up, nobody wanted anything to do with neoconservatism and in spite of that, it was just 7.2% gap between Obama and McCain.

tl;dr he is covering his ass because he didn't do his job in the first place and now can't explain the significant changes without looking like he didn't do proper and critical research to begin with.

You're comparing a standalone ABC poll to their daily tracking poll. Why?

BTW I'd love to get you on record: who is going to win? Because I'm seeing a 7-8% Hillary win. Trump is still down 5-7 points in recent polls. He's down in the states he needs to win in order to put up a fight. So...what are you saying. The polls are skewed?

010

agrajag

  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21593 on: October 31, 2016, 07:58:02 PM »
MTW, you do realize that it's shitpolls that are swinging his model in the other direction now?

Tasty

  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21594 on: October 31, 2016, 08:03:42 PM »
http://www.vox.com/2016/10/31/13477150/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-fbi-emails-justin-shur-investigation-2016-election

I still respect Comey a lot but this looks like a pretty big fuck-up in terms of precedent and FBI policy.

Great Rumbler

  • Dab on the sinners
  • Global Moderator
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21595 on: October 31, 2016, 08:19:18 PM »
http://www.vox.com/2016/10/31/13477150/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-fbi-emails-justin-shur-investigation-2016-election

I still respect Comey a lot but this looks like a pretty big fuck-up in terms of precedent and FBI policy.

Basically, the same as TPM's take on the whole thing: Comey's not a partisan hack, but he's gotten spooked by GOP pressure, so he felt like he had to get out in front of the story rather than having it come out through leaks. Even so, he still ends up looking bad, because he went against the advice of other FBI/DOJ senior officials and long-standing precedence. It's really a no-win situation for him, but he should have realized that a long time ago.
dog

Steve Contra

  • Bought a lemon tree straight cash
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21596 on: October 31, 2016, 08:26:15 PM »
There really was no excuse for the vagueness of the letter though.  If he was worried about a leak he still should have clarified several things.
vin

Olivia Wilde Homo

  • Proud Kinkshamer
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21597 on: October 31, 2016, 08:32:59 PM »
eh, nm
« Last Edit: October 31, 2016, 08:38:08 PM by (((Mary Tyler Whore))) »
🍆🍆

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21598 on: October 31, 2016, 08:39:15 PM »
Nah I'm curious MTW. What are your thoughts, not "check this thing out from the internet"? Is Trump winning, is it a close election, etc?
010

curly

  • cultural maoist
  • Senior Member
Re: US Politics Thread |OT| What a nasty woman!
« Reply #21599 on: October 31, 2016, 08:44:14 PM »
How is he covering his ass?

For the past few weeks there were numerous polls that had Hillary up eight points, 10 points, etc. that should have been treated as red flags by the likes of Nate Silver.  Instead of doing any critical analysis on the polls whatsoever, he applied his "algorithm" that skewed the polls further in Hillary's favor instead.  Now that the polls are "swinging", he is unable to explain why Trump is able to close the gap by as much as 10 points in a matter of a few days such as in the ABC/Washington Post poll.  So if those polls were legitimate, what exactly did Trump do that went from being behind by 12 points to being behind by two in a matter of just one week?  It must have been fucking amazing yet I don't recall seeing anything.  This should have been Nate Silver's job, not just skewing things further for the sake of Hillary's supporters.  So now he is pretending that things are really volatile, instead of doing his job in the first place which is finding out why Hillary was ahead by 12 points in a highly charged, highly partisan election.  This country is way too partisan to have those types of margins in the first place.  The only exception we got is in 2008 when the economy was about ready to go tits up, nobody wanted anything to do with neoconservatism and in spite of that, it was just 7.2% gap between Obama and McCain.

tl;dr he is covering his ass because he didn't do his job in the first place and now can't explain the significant changes without looking like he didn't do proper and critical research to begin with.

lol wut