Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 09, 2016, 05:00:42 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Cast your Ballot in the 2016 Mock Election

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 44
1  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: We're winning in Florida. We're winning in Ohio. on: November 20, 2016, 11:13:35 pm
In all these Bannon articles, he claims that he "called" the win in all these states. 

You should look at a combination of:
1) Bannon's strategy
2) Trump's intuitive ability to communicate the message
3) Kellyane is a good pollster and kept saying that other pollsters were getting it wrong.

I was on this board a week before the election saying "Trump is up in Florida, NC, and Ohio... WI, MI and PA are tight...  everyone said I was wrong, but you could see it if you were looking.   The media and dems  were really messed up is the bottom line.       
2  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Based on IQ, have we moved from the dumbest president ever, to the smartest? on: November 20, 2016, 11:03:24 pm

to predicting a terrorist attack in Brussels Belgium, etc etc etc. 

Again, Trump is almost a prophet in how prescient he is. 


Who could ever predict an attack on Brussels, the Capital of Europe, the seat of of the European Commission, Council of the European Union, European Council, and European Parliament.?
Lets list all of the people who said the Muslim population living in Brussels would be responsible for a terrorist attack in the month prior to it happening.   
o yea that was Trump alone.
Let's think about all of the people that said he was crazy, racist, xenophobic, "unfit, un-presidential, ill-tempered, etc for saying it... O yea everyone said that. 
3  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Can't imagine how this failed to resonate in the Rust Belt... on: November 20, 2016, 09:45:16 pm
1) Did everyone of those people cry when Hillary lost?
2) Are they still crying?
3) Are they "afraid"
4) do they think they are entitled to other people caring about their feelings? 

answer:
yes, yes, yes (to the extent they understand what fear is), yes
4  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Can't imagine how this failed to resonate in the Rust Belt... on: November 20, 2016, 09:27:23 pm
LOL,
That isn't just representative of how bad the HRC campaign is. 
It also is a good representation of how messed up the democrat party is.   
Can one person in the party make an important, logical, priority top 5 point ?   

answer: no
5  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Based on IQ, have we moved from the dumbest president ever, to the smartest? on: November 20, 2016, 09:15:53 pm
We can probably all agree Trump is a Self-actualized person and Obama is not.  Or Trump is much more so than Obama. 

6  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Based on IQ, have we moved from the dumbest president ever, to the smartest? on: November 20, 2016, 08:25:06 pm
I don't like the op's set up of this, but
when you look at the brain power required in figuring out important things, predicting events / outcomes, etc.  Than Donald Trump has already surpassed (by a wide margin) Obama in a very short time. 
Not sure what this should be called.  Perhaps "Critical Thinking" instead of IQ ? ? ?

The guy has been so unbelievably prescient, from the Kate Steinle murder, to predicting a terrorist attack in Brussels Belgium, etc etc etc. 

Again, Trump is almost a prophet in how prescient he is. 

Obama has never really predicted anything, identified an important problem, solved anything, etc. 

So, I guess in this sense the OP may be correct. 
We'll see. 
7  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Hard Choices: Why Trump won and how the Dems must change (Lyin' Steve's autopsy) on: November 15, 2016, 10:30:11 pm
The EC intent was similar to, but not "protect all points of view".  
It was to encourage a diversity of interests and regions pick the winner... and also prevent mob rule
It just did that, so I don't understand the point.
Dems need to get broader and more diverse than a small footprint of urban interests in a minimum number of states, basically on the coasts.      
You are trying not to understand, but I'm also not explaining it well. 
Trying to steer us back to productive discourse and to better explain the point, I give you my "2 Americas".  

Someone comment on this map, it explains so much of the democrats problem. 
8  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Early Predictions: How many of the 10 red-state Democratic Senators survive 2018 on: November 15, 2016, 10:18:48 pm
So the fundamentals:
Tammy Baldwin (WI): See OH and PA. Might be a bit harder for her as queer woman in a midterm, but also Wisconsin has better D turnout in midterms sooooo LEANS D
What?  You mean Wisconsin has better Republican turnout in midterms so leans R?

But it is not going to be a midterm with a Democrat as president.

Granted 2018 could end up like 98 and 02 with modest gains for the party with the Presidency. But people are now acting like Wisconsin is a solid GOP state. It is not.
Republicans have won everything since 2010 except Baldwin and Obama in 12.  I mean everything.  An incumbent Supreme Court justice (democrat) won reelection last year (incumbents have lost twice in 50 years)... that's it.  You have to go back to the 1920's to find this kind of Republican domination.       
9  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Early Predictions: How many of the 10 red-state Democratic Senators survive 2018 on: November 15, 2016, 09:53:42 pm
So the fundamentals:
Tammy Baldwin (WI): See OH and PA. Might be a bit harder for her as queer woman in a midterm, but also Wisconsin has better D turnout in midterms sooooo LEANS D
What?  You mean Wisconsin has better Republican turnout in midterms so leans R?
10  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: Wisconsin (Marquette): Feingold +1 on: November 15, 2016, 09:45:06 pm
Wisconsin has really turned to the dark side as of late. Ron Johnson is a vile slimeball who doesn't deserve to represent a pile of dirt.
Cry moar. Loved to see Feingold go down. My absolute favorite upset of the night.

This. If McCaskill can represent MO in the Senate, then Johnson sure as hell can represent WI.

So, you'd have no problem with her getting re-elected as well, then? Great. Smiley

Well, WI is at least a swing state and already has a very liberal Senator. Smiley Anyway, at least Johnson is not a fake moderate, unlike so many other Senators. You have to give him credit for that.

So... you're okay with Baldwin winning, then? Look, I don't hate Johnson because of which state he's from, I hate him because he goes against pretty much everything I stand for. I'll take a fake moderate over a far right slimeball. Conservatives can do better than him.
You keep saying "slimeball" about a squeaky clean earnest boy scout who just defeated (for the 2nd time) possibly the biggest phony, smug, a-hole in the country. 
Where do you get slimeball from?   
11  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Process / Re: Which State is Most Likely to Start Using the Mainebraska EV Allocation Method? on: November 15, 2016, 09:29:37 pm
It was being considered for states like WI and MI... that were voting for republicans all the time except in presidential elections.  Now that that frustration is gone from actually delivering electoral votes... it has no chance.   

California and possibly New York are states that should do it for the good of the country and the democrat party...

California is the only plausible state because of the inherent reasons to do it and the path of ballot initiative being somewhat plausible. 
12  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Districts where Trump coattails almost took out Democrats on: November 15, 2016, 09:22:22 pm
I bet Ron Kind in WI-03 would have had the race of his life too if he faced an opponent.
Do you think Kapanke could have won?  He is getting kind of old. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Kapanke
13  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Early Predictions: How many of the 10 red-state Democratic Senators survive 2018 on: November 15, 2016, 07:06:18 pm
The last democrat to win anything during a midterm in this state was 2006!
Wrong, Doug La Follette.
...The secretary of state in wisconsin does next to nothing... I defined "anything" to be offices with some power not a relic that has been eliminated in all but name.  SOS is legally powerless and probably should be eliminated by constitutional amendment. 
Good catch tho.     
14  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Hard Choices: Why Trump won and how the Dems must change (Lyin' Steve's autopsy) on: November 15, 2016, 06:46:29 pm
The EC intent was similar to, but not "protect all points of view".  
It was to encourage a diversity of interests and regions pick the winner... and also prevent mob rule
It just did that, so I don't understand the point.
Dems need to get broader and more diverse than a small footprint of urban interests in a minimum number of states, basically on the coasts.      
You are trying not to understand, but I'm also not explaining it well. 
Trying to steer us back to productive discourse and to better explain the point, I give you my "2 Americas".  
15  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Early Predictions: How many of the 10 red-state Democratic Senators survive 2018 on: November 15, 2016, 02:00:35 pm
I think Baldwin is in serious trouble.  I'm shocked people think she has a chance.  The last democrat to win anything during a midterm in this state was 2006!  I'm guessing a large number of republicans are going to look at running because they know how "easy" a pick up it is and their are so many talented people on the GOP bench.  Probably anyone popular in the WOW counties can win statewide in a midterm.  Thus, it is almost irrelevant how Trump is doing.  A majority of people who voted for Trump don't really like him here, they will vote for someone they chose in a primary.
16  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: Wisconsin (Marquette): Feingold +1 on: November 15, 2016, 01:39:57 pm
I called this months ago. *pats self on back* *also High fives TN Volunteer for doing the same*
LET'S GO RON JON!!!
I called it,
pat on back
high fives to other smart people. 
17  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Hard Choices: Why Trump won and how the Dems must change (Lyin' Steve's autopsy) on: November 15, 2016, 01:18:40 pm
The idea that either major party represents 'a diversity of interests' at this point is silly; certainly it's silly to claim that the Republicans somehow represent substantially more of such a diversity or that that's why they won the EV. The political story of this election is both parties doubling down on the base they developed during the Obama years and only minimally if at all trying to reach anyone on the other side, leading to the most geographically polarized electorate in at least a century.
Sounds good, but you bring nothing to the table.

I'd say a guy working on an oil rig in Louisiana vs a dairy farmer in Wisconsin vs a lumberjack in Idaho is quantitatively more diverse than a barista in Seattle vs a barista in Boston.     


Sounds good, but you bring nothing to the table.

I'd say a guy working at an elemtary school in Manhattan vs a nurse in Los Angeles vs a culinary worker in Las Vegas is quantitatively more diverse than a coal miner in West Virginia vs a coal miner in Wyoming. 

See what I did there?   
omg,
public employees, politicized union members, over educated - under skilled baristas 
vs
EVERYONE ELSE

...you fail to realize that the coal miner in Wyoming vs the coal miner in West Virginia IS MORE diverse than the democrat examples.   
18  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: If Trump is not a racist and misogynist... on: November 15, 2016, 10:04:29 am
I sort of agree, but
when a political party uses the words to control all speech and thought it becomes 'sooo important'

i think even if you believe, that some democrats or some media outlets are overplaying that card all the time, trump is the most explicit exception of all.

afaik, if criticizing trump's actions (i won't say convictions) is off the radar, than only white skinhead thugs with swastika tattoos are possibly guilty of speading racist activity.

and there must be even better fitting words: trump's campaign strategy was ultimate division and singling out some sub-groups of the electorate as scapegoats...how such behaviour is called doesn't matter to me at all.
That is a healthy attitude.  I get hung up on people running around bludgeoning the population with inaccurate use of words.   
19  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Hard Choices: Why Trump won and how the Dems must change (Lyin' Steve's autopsy) on: November 15, 2016, 09:48:40 am
The idea that either major party represents 'a diversity of interests' at this point is silly; certainly it's silly to claim that the Republicans somehow represent substantially more of such a diversity or that that's why they won the EV. The political story of this election is both parties doubling down on the base they developed during the Obama years and only minimally if at all trying to reach anyone on the other side, leading to the most geographically polarized electorate in at least a century.
Sounds good, but you bring nothing to the table.

I'd say a guy working on an oil rig in Louisiana vs a dairy farmer in Wisconsin vs a lumberjack in Idaho is quantitatively more diverse than a barista in Seattle vs a barista in Boston.     
20  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: If Trump is not a racist and misogynist... on: November 15, 2016, 08:55:59 am
it doesn't effing matter if someone is a racist - i have never understood why this is sooo important to prove or disprove for many people.

if his actions are sexist and his statements are racist, isn't that offending and problematic on its own?

why raise it to a level of mental black-boxiness, which is practical not proveable or necessary at all?
I sort of agree, but
when a political party uses the words to control all speech and thought it becomes 'sooo important'
21  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: If Trump is not a racist and misogynist... on: November 14, 2016, 11:40:27 pm
...then why has he spent his entire career saying deeply and shamelessly racist and misogynistic things?

Lest we forget, this is the guy who made Birtherism mainstream. And all of these things that he has said as a matter of campaign strategy he has said in public, on a national stage, as part of a successful major-party presidential campaign. And he doesn't have a problem with all of this - quite the contrary. He actively embraces it.

I absolutely believe Trump and his supporters when they say he's "authentic." He's not bulls****ting; this is what he really believes. And he will be the next President of the United States of America. Think about that for a moment.


Yes, of course, challenging the legitimacy of someone's presidency makes one a racist.  That's probably one of the most foolish claims I've yet heard!
Show me ANYONE challenging the legitimacy of Bush's presidency based on birthplace. Or Clinton's. Or  Reagan's. I'll wait.
Was there any reason to?  
I mean
Connecticut, Texas, Andover, Yale, Alabama, Harvard , Texas - son of a US President
and
Arkansas, Yale, Oxford, Arkansas, - Son of town drunk
isn't
Hawaii, Indonesia, Hawaii, occidental, Columbia, Harvard - son of a Kenyan

...Hillary really shouldn't have started that mess and Barack probably should have cleared it up in an early speech like he did with his racist pastor.  

Seriously? C'mon you don't mean that...Obama was the one in the wrong during the birther movement not the birther movement itself?! Your nuts.

Barrack was so weirdly slow to respond to pretty simple questions that many other candidates answer  because he probably lied on numerous forms throughout his life similar to the liz warren situation.  He stalled and delt with it as late as he could in his second term to minimize any possible damage.  That is the only theory that makes sense other than he is such a divisive demagogue that he purposely fueled the thing so he had "an example of racism" to club people with.  

When I'm asked where I was born, I answer honestly.  
If, an employer asks for documentation, I provide it.  I  don't scream racism.  

you guys are so nuts!

...I'll wait for an example of me calling employers racist because they asked for paperwork.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/04/27/president-obamas-long-form-birth-certificate
Yeah, Obama waited "as long as possible" Roll Eyes He was born in Hawaii, as he had been saying since Day 1.
right 2011 is day 1 of 2007. 
22  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Should democrats focus on the South instead of Upper Midwest going forward? on: November 14, 2016, 11:06:17 pm
Definitely double down on identity politics, protection of rioters, and free marijuana
lol
Don't forget increases to the minimum wage... it's popular!
23  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: If Trump is not a racist and misogynist... on: November 14, 2016, 10:58:10 pm
...then why has he spent his entire career saying deeply and shamelessly racist and misogynistic things?

Lest we forget, this is the guy who made Birtherism mainstream. And all of these things that he has said as a matter of campaign strategy he has said in public, on a national stage, as part of a successful major-party presidential campaign. And he doesn't have a problem with all of this - quite the contrary. He actively embraces it.

I absolutely believe Trump and his supporters when they say he's "authentic." He's not bulls****ting; this is what he really believes. And he will be the next President of the United States of America. Think about that for a moment.


Yes, of course, challenging the legitimacy of someone's presidency makes one a racist.  That's probably one of the most foolish claims I've yet heard!
Show me ANYONE challenging the legitimacy of Bush's presidency based on birthplace. Or Clinton's. Or  Reagan's. I'll wait.
Was there any reason to?  
I mean
Connecticut, Texas, Andover, Yale, Alabama, Harvard , Texas - son of a US President
and
Arkansas, Yale, Oxford, Arkansas, - Son of town drunk
isn't
Hawaii, Indonesia, Hawaii, occidental, Columbia, Harvard - son of a Kenyan

...Hillary really shouldn't have started that mess and Barack probably should have cleared it up in an early speech like he did with his racist pastor.  

Seriously? C'mon you don't mean that...Obama was the one in the wrong during the birther movement not the birther movement itself?! Your nuts.

Barrack was so weirdly slow to respond to pretty simple questions that many other candidates answer  because he probably lied on numerous forms throughout his life similar to the liz warren situation.  He stalled and delt with it as late as he could in his second term to minimize any possible damage.  That is the only theory that makes sense other than he is such a divisive demagogue that he purposely fueled the thing so he had "an example of racism" to club people with.  

When I'm asked where I was born, I answer honestly.  
If, an employer asks for documentation, I provide it.  I  don't scream racism.  

you guys are so nuts!

...I'll wait for an example of me calling employers racist because they asked for paperwork.
24  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: If Trump is not a racist and misogynist... on: November 14, 2016, 10:50:52 pm
...then why has he spent his entire career saying deeply and shamelessly racist and misogynistic things?

Lest we forget, this is the guy who made Birtherism mainstream. And all of these things that he has said as a matter of campaign strategy he has said in public, on a national stage, as part of a successful major-party presidential campaign. And he doesn't have a problem with all of this - quite the contrary. He actively embraces it.

I absolutely believe Trump and his supporters when they say he's "authentic." He's not bulls****ting; this is what he really believes. And he will be the next President of the United States of America. Think about that for a moment.


Yes, of course, challenging the legitimacy of someone's presidency makes one a racist.  That's probably one of the most foolish claims I've yet heard!
Show me ANYONE challenging the legitimacy of Bush's presidency based on birthplace. Or Clinton's. Or  Reagan's. I'll wait.

Yep, all those folks that questioned Chester A, Arthur's legitimacy were racists.
.
You know you're winning the argument when you have to go back more than a century to find an example to support your case!
Ted Cruz and John McCain were questioned.  They answered, it ended. 
Obama was questioned he didn't answer for about 6 years, than it ended. 

obviously a pattern of racism against Irish sons of admirals. 
25  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Hard Choices: Why Trump won and how the Dems must change (Lyin' Steve's autopsy) on: November 14, 2016, 10:12:53 pm
The problem with so much of this well-thought out analysis comes down to this:

"The Dems won the most votes, and therefore they must change."

"The Dems policies are more popular than the Republicans policies, and therefore they must change them"

The logic is totally screwed, because the EC and house districting are totally screwed. It ends up with the Dems having to appeal to different people, rather than more people, which effectively means some kinds of people are more important than others.

Which isn't a nice conclusion
While you layout a cohearent thought... it isn't correct.  
1) The popular vote is next to irrelevant.
2) Trump didn't try to win the popular vote, Clinton didn't try to win it either.
3) Trying to downplay a loss because you are in the margin of error of a nearly irrelevant stat isn't a good way to go.  
4) This is the "United States of America", not the "Mass of Americans in a single entity", so this naive abolish the electoral college stuff needs to stop (thats in general not in response)    
This ignores his main point, which is that the EC values some people's interests above others'. This is anathema to its original intent, which was to protect all points of view.
The EC intent was similar to, but not "protect all points of view".  
It was to encourage a diversity of interests and regions pick the winner... and also prevent mob rule
It just did that, so I don't understand the point.
Dems need to get broader and more diverse than a small footprint of urban interests in a minimum number of states, basically on the coasts.  

    
Trump lost every race but whites, every income group but 50k-100k, and most of his supporters were not "strongly favorable" towards him. He does not reflect the needs of interests of Americans at large. Also, which candidate was "mob"-supported again? I seem to remember some crowd sizes saying otherwise... Wink
I'm going to say the people currently rioting in the streets tonight for no reason are more of a mob than the family men wearing work boots. 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 44


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines