|
Now they just need Trump to say it.
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 09:11 |
|
|
I dunno, that way of going into that doesn't really get rid of the birther poo poo. At all.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:43
|
|
|
Jason Miller looks extremely like one of those guys that calls themselves as an author because they self published a book about how islam is actually homosexuality and their women want american badboys and blogs about alpha playbooks and calls anyone that disagrees with them c ucks
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:43
|
|
|
straight up brolic posted:The EC system may actually wind up benefitting Trump though It absolutely will. If HRC loses (which she would if the election were held tomorrow stop looking at the nowcast it doesn't believe jarring shifts and so it's still giving consideration to pre-weekend stuff. In fact stop looking at 538 at all) it'll be by like 2% in a SHITLOAD of states where if she'd only won ONE of them it'd be different. Meanwhile she'll run up a PV total in NY and CA. She'll win both those states by twice as many points as Trump will take TX. I can't see any scenario where she loses the PV. But alas, that's not how it works or we'd have seen President Gore (and VP Lieberman lmao)
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:43
|
|
|
Oh my lord, the balls. The sheer, massive balls. I hope the media doesn't let them get away with this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:44
|
|
|
 the face of a man that pretends to know where the clitoris is
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:44
|
|
|
Also isn't that statement from a week or two ago?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:45
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:Also isn't that statement from a week or two ago? The "HRC spawns birtherism in 2008" line isn't new, at least.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:46
|
|
|
538 has been pretty persuasively arguing that the electoral college favors Trump for awhile now, that was the point of that article awhile back about how "the Electoral College won't save Hillary" whose headline people were too angry about to read. Because of the way Clinton's voters are concentrated in non electorally significant states, it's easier for Trump to win the electoral college but lose the popular vote than the opposite. There's a newer article that reiterates some of those points: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-trump-could-win-the-white-house-while-losing-the-popular-vote/ She's still winning obviously, but the idea that the electoral college favors Clinton if she starts losing the popular vote seems incorrect. She's looking good on the electoral college maps precisely because she has an overall lead, but if that lead goes away, so do those swing states.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:47
|
|
|
By the way, don't forget to note that Trump's campaign manages to fit in another lie about HRC in his victory lap about getting a birth certificate.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:47
|
|
|
the EC assumptions don't/can't factor in the baked in GOTV differences in battlegrounds between the campaigns
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:48
|
|
|
Zeeman posted:By the way, don't forget to note that Trump's campaign manages to fit in another lie about HRC in his victory lap about getting a birth certificate. Where DID birtherism come from, anyway? It wasn't Trump. It wasn't Clinton, either (though some dipshits affiliated with her campaign DID do the "Muslim Garb" thing.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:49
|
|
|
Periodiko posted:538 has been pretty persuasively arguing that the electoral college favors Trump for awhile now, that was the point of that article awhile back about how "the Electoral College won't save Hillary" whose headline people were too angry about to read. Because of the way Clinton's voters are concentrated in non electorally significant states, it's easier for Trump to win the electoral college but lose the popular vote than the opposite. There's a newer article that reiterates some of those points: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-trump-could-win-the-white-house-while-losing-the-popular-vote/ Trump does terrible with whites w/ college degrees. This group is not concentrated in a few safe states. Also lol at "Hispanics are woefully underrepresented in swing states" when one of them is FLORIDA.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:50
|
|
|
FairGame posted:Where DID birtherism come from, anyway? It wasn't Trump. It wasn't Clinton, either (though some dipshits affiliated with her campaign DID do the "Muslim Garb" thing.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:51
|
|
|
Hmm, that must have been a pretty short colonoscopy https://twitter.com/mckaycoppins/status/776553378725949444
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:51
|
|
|
CelestialScribe posted:Since when did this thread go from "swing states only matter" to "she's up two in the national polls everything is fine"? What is it that you want?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:52
|
|
|
In all states where anyone can just challenge anyone, we need a rule. If you get challenged, if at all possible, park your rear end at the polling station and challenge the ballot of every white male who looks over 30.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:52
|
|
|
Periodiko posted:538 has been pretty persuasively arguing that the electoral college favors Trump for awhile now, that was the point of that article awhile back about how "the Electoral College won't save Hillary" whose headline people were too angry about to read. Because of the way Clinton's voters are concentrated in non electorally significant states, it's easier for Trump to win the electoral college but lose the popular vote than the opposite. There's a newer article that reiterates some of those points: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-trump-could-win-the-white-house-while-losing-the-popular-vote/ Once PA and MI go blue on election night you can pretty much start popping the champagne. Thing is we're no longer looking at a generational landslide like the polls were showing a few weeks ago. Sad, but as people like Sam Wang have argued this election is very structurally similar to 2008/2012.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:53
|
|
|
MrSmokes posted:What is it that you want? Attention, which people ITT keep giving him.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:53
|
|
|
Zeno-25 posted:Once PA and MI go blue on election night you can pretty much start popping the champagne. Thing is we're no longer looking at a generational landslide like the polls were showing a few weeks ago. Sad, but as people like Sam Wang have argued this election is very structurally similar to 2008/2012. As much as the rural idiots in my state (PA) want to burn the world with Trumpism, the two bastions of civilization here will keep it blue.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:54
|
|
|
If they get Barack to debunk this in an address or something, that would be the funniest poo poo.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:57
|
|
|
Zeno-25 posted:Once PA and MI go blue on election night you can pretty much start popping the champagne. Pretty sure I'm going to be boozing it up on election night either way.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:57
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Trump does terrible with whites w/ college degrees. This group is not concentrated in a few safe states. Uh, it's a little more complicated than that, dude. It takes a bit more to unpack than "hispanics live in Florida".
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:58
|
|
|
FairGame posted:Where DID birtherism come from, anyway? It wasn't Trump. It wasn't Clinton, either (though some dipshits affiliated with her campaign DID do the "Muslim Garb" thing.) A Black man named Barack Husein Obama ran for President. There was no way that birtherism wasn't going to rear it's head, especially since his dad was Kenyan and he spend time in Indonesia. The country has been consumed with birtherism before and it will be again, because we're a nation overflowing with loudmouthed idiots. quote:The family's frequent moves later spawned accusations that Chester Arthur was not a native-born citizen of the United States. When Arthur was nominated for vice president in 1880, a New York attorney and political opponent, Arthur P. Hinman, initially speculated that Arthur was born in Ireland and did not come to the United States until he was fourteen years old. Had that been true, opponents might have argued that Arthur was constitutionally ineligible for the vice presidency under the United States Constitution's natural-born-citizen clause. When Hinman's original story did not take root, he spread a new rumor that Arthur was born in Canada. This claim, too, failed to gain credence.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 03:59
|
|
|
Crystal Head Vodka is what I'm going to be drinking.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 04:01
|
|
|
Periodiko posted:Uh, it's a little more complicated than that, dude. It takes a bit more to unpack than "hispanics live in Florida". Hillary's Hispanic support is lower than average in Florida, but it's still very good for her.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 04:01
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Trump does terrible with whites w/ college degrees. This group is not concentrated in a few safe states. Clinton is losing FL at the moment. Speaking of states, let's look at this map:  1) I'd say this is pretty reflective of current polling for the 'battleground' states. I flipped Nevada because most polls put Clinton only at +1 or at the most, +2. 2) What state does Trump have the closest chance to flip to win?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 04:01
|
|
|
FairGame posted:Where DID birtherism come from, anyway? It wasn't Trump. It wasn't Clinton, either (though some dipshits affiliated with her campaign DID do the "Muslim Garb" thing.) National Review was the first published claim.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 04:01
|
|
|
Periodiko posted:Uh, it's a little more complicated than that, dude. It takes a bit more to unpack than "hispanics live in Florida". It's really not. The article is very inconsistent about which points count or not. Oh actually, the funniest part is that it relies on all minorities gaining in voter share except African Americans, who fall for ???Reasons???
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 04:03
|
|
|
there's one Maine vote that's absolutely going to Trump, but other than that, it's a good worst case scenario map. Everything that I know about politics suggests that she'll pick up at least one of the swing states because of GOTV
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 04:03
|
|
|
BetterToRuleInHell posted:Clinton is losing FL at the moment. Maybe New Hampshire?
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 04:04
|
|
|
BetterToRuleInHell posted:Clinton is losing FL at the moment. NH is theoretically the most flippable of the bunch but there's been some horrific polling out of CO lately
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 04:04
|
|
|
BetterToRuleInHell posted:Clinton is losing FL at the moment. Show me a poll that's outside MOE.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 04:05
|
|
|
btw polling on landlines/local area code cellphones will consistently miss a larger and larger number of liberal voters. For instance, my family has lived in Austin for five years, all have 314 cell phones, and doesn't have a landline. We're not particularly unique or interesting. Changing cellphone numbers is annoying and land lines are a pointless cost.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 04:06
|
|
|
Also many polls are English only.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 04:07
|
|
|
straight up brolic posted:btw polling on landlines/local area code cellphones will consistently miss a larger and larger number of liberal voters. This is something that has bothered me about polling. Aren't they missing an enormous sample this way? I can think of maybe 5 people that I know with landlines, and they're over 50.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 04:08
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Also many polls are English only.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 04:08
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Hillary's Hispanic support is lower than average in Florida, but it's still very good for her. I'm not arguing that Clinton will lose (or win) Florida, I'm talking about what happens if the race tightens into a virtual tie. Clinton's strong in Florida because of the concentration of latinos, but that's offset by a huge number of whites without a college degree. When you talk about the electoral college, you're talking about the slim possibility that someone will lose the popular vote but win the EC. That's more likely to happen for Trump than it is for Clinton. As long as Clinton has a meaningful lead in the popular vote than she'll win, but the electoral college doesn't actually favor her. Voters favor her overall, nationally, which gives her the swing states as a consequence. The electoral college can't be a safety blanket for Democrats, it's at least as likely to hurt Clinton as help her in an extreme scenario, and it might be worse.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 04:08
|
|
|
Cthulhumatic posted:This is something that has bothered me about polling. Aren't they missing an enormous sample this way? I can think of maybe 5 people that I know with landlines, and they're over 50. It wouldn't be the first time. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 04:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 09:11 |
|
|
Yeah flip New Hampshire and that's a tie. Give trump the one district in Maine and that's a win. And NH has had some bad polling lately.
|
|
#
?
Sep 16, 2016 04:08
|
|