Page 501 of 994 FirstFirst ... 401451491499500501502503511551601 ... LastLast
Results 8,001 to 8,016 of 15898

Thread: Politics Thread

  1. #8001
    DONOR BigCecil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Posts
    7,089
    Thanks
    2,137
    Thanked 3,012 Times in 1,906 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Boxcar View Post
    You need to remember that political bias of that magnitude does alter one's view of reality. He'd be mocking Trump had he asked for a recount, but in a bunch of states where Clinton lost decisively it's apparently worth wasting time and money to recount votes. Because any shred of hope to avoid a Trump presidency, I guess.
    Dumb Boxy. The bias and partisanship under some silly guise of objectivity from you ITT has been laughable. I agreed with Trump's view eventually expressed in the campaign that he would support the outcome but reserve all his legitimate rights to challenge recounts and voter fraud. That was a completely sensible defensible position.

  2. #8002
    Hall of Famer Jonn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Courtice, Ontario
    Posts
    14,406
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1,865 Times in 1,303 Posts
    They should do a revote instead in which Hillary Clinton can't participate! Everybody wins!

  3. #8003
    DONOR BigCecil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Posts
    7,089
    Thanks
    2,137
    Thanked 3,012 Times in 1,906 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by NJH View Post
    If there was any type of hacking or tampering with the electronic voting then it would show up as a trend. There would be a detectable correlation with Trump support and electronic voting districts (when controlling for all of the obfuscating factors). Apparently, there is no trend.

    If they think the results were fraudulent then they need an intelligence investigation, not a recount.

    It's pretty clear that Russia had some hand in the election but it likely all happened at the pre-vote stage - helping influence public perception through propaganda, supporting the leaking of stories, hacking into information, blah blah.
    It sucks but it's not clear that it flipped the result AND a recount is just not the right outlet of frustration.

    For the correct political response - see what Bernie Sanders is doing right now. He's tabling legislation that curbs outsourcing and attacks corporate greed, hopefully forcing Trump to put his money where his mouth is and possibly make big concessions.

    Hillary Clinton is going for lots of hikes, staging fake photo-ops in the woods, and piggy-backing on pipe dream money pit recount movements.
    Fair enough. It was over Nov.8th. Good luck to Bernie and others. The Dems will need to chip away at the narrative Trump successfully drove home with a lot of the blue collar vote. As far as forecasting and stats, I freely concede you are light years ahead of me in your understanding.

    FWIW, my understanding of the recount issue is that Jill Stein (who has been no fan of Clinton) led the push and the Clinton campaign is piling on what will happen anyway. I have no issue with them doing so.

  4. #8004
    MVP Jimcanuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    7,909
    Thanks
    360
    Thanked 996 Times in 756 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Boxcar View Post
    Zero chance Jim or anyone who believes the US went into Libya as superheroes will address this.
    So there were a bunch of concerns that prompted France's action including the concern Qaddafi will use $7B in precious metals to supplant the Franc as the dominant African french speaking nation currency? I don't think the US will give a flying fuck about that, but they certainly relished the opportunity to eliminate a thorn in their side.

  5. #8005
    Orioles Hangout Admin Boxcar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    22,556
    Thanks
    2,178
    Thanked 8,041 Times in 5,016 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimcanuck View Post
    So there were a bunch of concerns that prompted France's action including the concern Qaddafi will use $7B in precious metals to supplant the Franc as the dominant African french speaking nation currency? I don't think the US will give a flying fuck about that, but they certainly relished the opportunity to eliminate a thorn in their side.
    Oh yes, Libya was such a thorn in America's side. A serious threat, even.

    Are you aware of how political favours work?
    Quote Originally Posted by Spanky99 View Post
    Frag are you alive?
    Quote Originally Posted by Spanky99 View Post
    I know King isn't... little prick.

  6. #8006
    DONOR BTS's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    24,894
    Thanks
    3,677
    Thanked 12,841 Times in 7,667 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by NJH View Post
    Do you know how percentages work? They gave Trump a 30% chance to win. Most other pollsters had Clinton at like 97% - the fact that the 538 gave him a legitimate percentage chance is extremely supportive of their methodology.
    This is one of the most annoying parts of the entire election. 538 says that the best data they can access has Trump at a 30% chance of winning. Trump wins and nobody can shut up about THE POLLS BEING WRONG. 538's model could have been brilliant in this case but nobody seems to understand how this kind of thing works. And most of the polls predicted a small Clinton win in terms of popular vote, which is exactly what happened. Those polls did what they were designed to do. Now we have a bunch of 'lol at idiots trusting polls' morons acting like there's a better alternative to trusting the best available data.
    Last edited by BTS; 11-27-2016 at 12:40 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Boxcar View Post
    Unfortunately, they really skimped out on the crickets on mine because they add a pretty flavourful crunch element on top of the coleslaw.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to BTS For This Useful Post:

    Abomination (11-27-2016)

  8. #8007
    Top 100 Prospect Smokey's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    538
    Thanks
    371
    Thanked 327 Times in 172 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimcanuck View Post
    So there were a bunch of concerns that prompted France's action including the concern Qaddafi will use $7B in precious metals to supplant the Franc as the dominant African french speaking nation currency? I don't think the US will give a flying fuck about that, but they certainly relished the opportunity to eliminate a thorn in their side.
    Give it a rest, Jimmy Boy!

    https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/23898
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimcanuck View Post
    i've accidentally dated trannies

  9. #8008
    All Star AdamGreenwood's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    5,734
    Thanks
    319
    Thanked 1,990 Times in 1,161 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by BTS View Post
    This is one of the most annoying parts of the entire election. 538 says that the best data they can access has Trump at a 30% chance of winning. Trump wins and nobody can shut up about THE POLLS BEING WRONG. 538's model could have been brilliant in this case but nobody seems to understand how this kind of thing works. And most of the polls predicted a small Clinton win in terms of popular vote, which is exactly what happened. Those polls did what they were designed to do. Now we have a bunch of 'lol at idiots trusting polls' morons acting like there's a better alternative to trusting the best available data.
    The polls were wrong. They gave big leads to Clinton in many states, where she in fact lost. This could be due to a few things:

    1) A drastic turnaround in the days between when the last polls were taken, and the day of the election.
    2) Silent Trump supporters who secretly wanted Trump to win, but wouldn't reveal it publicly, given the animosity towards Trump supporters.
    3) Disengaged Clinton supporters, that supported Hillary in principal, but couldn't be bothered to go out and vote on the day.

    Now, the prediction models that calculate the percentages based on the polls, were better. 538 gave Trump a 30% chance of winning which suggests they saw it as a strong possibility. Other models fared much worse, with very low percentage chances given to Trump.

    It's actually a good thing that the predictions were wrong, because maybe people won't take the outcome for granted so much on election day going forward.

  10. #8009
    All Star Dick_Pole's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    3,761
    Thanks
    317
    Thanked 1,368 Times in 834 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Jimcanuck View Post
    So there were a bunch of concerns that prompted France's action including the concern Qaddafi will use $7B in precious metals to supplant the Franc as the dominant African french speaking nation currency? I don't think the US will give a flying fuck about that, but they certainly relished the opportunity to eliminate a thorn in their side.
    Nah certainly the U.S. wouldn't give a flying fuck about a country pushing for gold-backed currency and a shift away from fiat currency, of which the U.S. Dollar is the global incumbent....just like they certainly wouldn't give a fuck that some small country on the other side of the world like Vietnam would become communist....

  11. #8010
    DONOR BTS's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    24,894
    Thanks
    3,677
    Thanked 12,841 Times in 7,667 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by AdamGreenwood View Post
    The polls were wrong. They gave big leads to Clinton in many states, where she in fact lost. This could be due to a few things:

    1) A drastic turnaround in the days between when the last polls were taken, and the day of the election.
    2) Silent Trump supporters who secretly wanted Trump to win, but wouldn't reveal it publicly, given the animosity towards Trump supporters.
    3) Disengaged Clinton supporters, that supported Hillary in principal, but couldn't be bothered to go out and vote on the day.

    Now, the prediction models that calculate the percentages based on the polls, were better. 538 gave Trump a 30% chance of winning which suggests they saw it as a strong possibility. Other models fared much worse, with very low percentage chances given to Trump.

    It's actually a good thing that the predictions were wrong, because maybe people won't take the outcome for granted so much on election day going forward.
    National polls nailed the popular vote outcome, for the most part. I didn't pay much attention to the state-specific polls. And I still think that criticism of the polls is unfair in all three cases you present. There's nothing pollsters can do about people saying they're going to vote for a candidate, and then not doing it. As you say, if anything it should just make people aware that statistical probability of an outcome shouldn't be treated as a certainty.
    Quote Originally Posted by Boxcar View Post
    Unfortunately, they really skimped out on the crickets on mine because they add a pretty flavourful crunch element on top of the coleslaw.

  12. #8011
    Top 100 Prospect Dr Negative's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    751
    Thanks
    50
    Thanked 198 Times in 130 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Frenchsoup View Post
    The recount is just to distract us from what's going on in Syria...
    Syria is not a priority for most people.

  13. #8012
    MVP Jimcanuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    7,909
    Thanks
    360
    Thanked 996 Times in 756 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Dick_Pole View Post
    Nah certainly the U.S. wouldn't give a flying fuck about a country pushing for gold-backed currency and a shift away from fiat currency, of which the U.S. Dollar is the global incumbent....just like they certainly wouldn't give a fuck that some small country on the other side of the world like Vietnam would become communist....
    http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/...g-arrests.html

    Here's another one for you

  14. #8013
    MVP jaysblue's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    7,436
    Thanks
    1,663
    Thanked 1,424 Times in 1,089 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by AdamGreenwood View Post
    The polls were wrong. They gave big leads to Clinton in many states, where she in fact lost. This could be due to a few things:

    1) A drastic turnaround in the days between when the last polls were taken, and the day of the election.
    2) Silent Trump supporters who secretly wanted Trump to win, but wouldn't reveal it publicly, given the animosity towards Trump supporters.
    3) Disengaged Clinton supporters, that supported Hillary in principal, but couldn't be bothered to go out and vote on the day.

    Now, the prediction models that calculate the percentages based on the polls, were better. 538 gave Trump a 30% chance of winning which suggests they saw it as a strong possibility. Other models fared much worse, with very low percentage chances given to Trump.

    It's actually a good thing that the predictions were wrong, because maybe people won't take the outcome for granted so much on election day going forward.
    I think you had to account for a silent Trump vote, similar to what happened with Brexit a couple of months before, which many major mainstream news outlets dismissed. I said this before the election. Many people who would vote Trump wouldn't reveal publicly like you said. Lets say even for example at work: if I said I'm voting for Trump, everyone in my department would probably view me differently and probably hate me afterwards.

    I definitely think there were disengaged Hillary supporters who probably figured that she would win in a landslide. And you probably had people who would usually vote democrat not bother to vote period since they were lazy etc. There wasn't as much enthusiasm surrounding Hillary supporters in comparison to Trump, which you could easily see based on the number of people showing up at rallies, etc.

    As for election night, when Trump was leading Virginia with 90% of the vote in, I was saying to myself we could be in for surprises later on in the night. Hillary ended up winning VA, though it was super close. Me and my friend said based on how close that state was, it could foreshadow what could happen in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.

  15. #8014
    Top 100 Prospect
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    344
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 50 Times in 37 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by BTS View Post
    This is one of the most annoying parts of the entire election. 538 says that the best data they can access has Trump at a 30% chance of winning. Trump wins and nobody can shut up about THE POLLS BEING WRONG. 538's model could have been brilliant in this case but nobody seems to understand how this kind of thing works. And most of the polls predicted a small Clinton win in terms of popular vote, which is exactly what happened. Those polls did what they were designed to do. Now we have a bunch of 'lol at idiots trusting polls' morons acting like there's a better alternative to trusting the best available data.
    You apparently don't know "how this kind of thing works."

    First, if a poll was designed to estimate the nationwide popular vote, it's a virtually worthless poll, as there is no "popular vote" election. You don't get credit for designing something that estimates something that is virtually meaningless. Proper polls would sample each state, individually, and determine likelihood of a majority vote for each candidate in that state.

    Second, 538's model considered state-wide probable voting outcomes and, thus, probable electoral college results (i.e, they were trying to estimate relevant information). And they still got it REALLY wrong.

    Third, apparently calling people "morons" simply for thinking differently than you (in this case, those "morons" are actually correct and the person attacking others' intelligence with insults was actually factually incorrect ... but that's not the point) is part of your anti-bullying campaign? Same ole BTS.
    Last edited by NotThatGuy; 11-27-2016 at 06:33 PM.
    You have been banned for the following reason:
    BTS isn't why the blog failed. Stop being so mean

  16. #8015
    DONOR BigCecil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Posts
    7,089
    Thanks
    2,137
    Thanked 3,012 Times in 1,906 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by BTS View Post
    This is one of the most annoying parts of the entire election. 538 says that the best data they can access has Trump at a 30% chance of winning. Trump wins and nobody can shut up about THE POLLS BEING WRONG. 538's model could have been brilliant in this case but nobody seems to understand how this kind of thing works. And most of the polls predicted a small Clinton win in terms of popular vote, which is exactly what happened. Those polls did what they were designed to do. Now we have a bunch of 'lol at idiots trusting polls' morons acting like there's a better alternative to trusting the best available data.
    Huh? You might want to do some homework on that. You are wrong. The NY times was tracking all state polls in their forecast arriving at their 84% HRC. It wasn't just evaluating nation wide polls. I don't think you are right about 538 either. Nation wide numbers are almost useless for forecasting a favourable % chance of victory obviously. I paid no attn to pop vote forecasts.

  17. #8016
    All Star AdamGreenwood's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    5,734
    Thanks
    319
    Thanked 1,990 Times in 1,161 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by NotThatGuy View Post
    You apparently don't know "how this kind of thing works."

    First, if a poll was designed to estimate the nationwide popular vote, it's a virtually worthless poll, as there is no "popular vote" election. You don't get credit for designing something that estimates something that is virtually meaningless. Proper polls would sample each state, individually, and determine likelihood of a majority vote for each candidate in that state.

    Second, 538's model considered state-wide probable voting outcomes and, thus, probable electoral college results (i.e, they were trying to estimate relevant information). And they still got it REALLY wrong.

    Third, apparently calling people "morons" simply for thinking differently than you (even though, in this case, they're actually correct, and you're talking out of your ass, that's not the point) is part of your anti-bullying campaign? Same ole BTS.
    You don't seem to understand how probability works.

    If I say, there's a less than one percent chance of Rajai Davis hitting a home run off Chapman to tie the game.
    And then it happens.

    That does not mean, that I was REALLY wrong.

  18. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to AdamGreenwood For This Useful Post:

    Boxcar (11-28-2016),BTS (11-27-2016),jays4life19 (11-28-2016),King (11-27-2016),KingKat (11-27-2016)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •