Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
December 04, 2016, 07:21:13 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Election 2016 predictions are now open!.

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 1097
1  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Washington '15: The Calm Before the Drizzle on: Today at 02:21:56 am
Clinton ran up the numbers so much in eastern King County. I doubt there will ever again be so much polarization between King County and the rest of the state. Also, did Johnson win a few precincts in the Yakima Valley?

He won three small precincts in Benton County -- two of them 2-0, and one of them 2-1 over Trump.  "Write-in" also won two precincts, one in Benton County (4-1 over Trump) and a one-vote precinct in Yakima County.  A lot of them are coincidentally clustered in same general part of the middle of nowhere.
2  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Nevada potentially could recount on: December 03, 2016, 01:46:41 pm
both, actually. i strongly believe the election results were tampered with (both quasi-legally by the surge in voter-disenfranchisement laws and more shadily),

Really?  Why do you believe that?

Also, do you think that the existence of disenfranchising election laws (passed through legislative processes) is sufficient to consider every election under them (or at least those that could have had different outcomes with other laws) null and void?

but even if they weren't, a presidency that fundamentally violates the principles of civilisation and humanity cannot be legitimised (delegitimising one election < allowing the permanent delegitimisation of america as a whole)

this article summarizes some good reasons for the latter:
TWO: As fascism, the legitimacy of Trump’s presidency must be challenged on all levels

First, we must be clear that Trump’s election is not the will of the people. Far from it: after the popular vote was counted Hillary Clinton beat Trump by nearly two million votes, and indeed won more popular votes than any presidential candidate in U.S. history other than President Obama. This is a large part of the rationale behind the movement demanding the Electoral College elect Hillary Clinton when they meet on December 19. Still, some political theorists have argued against this, suggesting that it would undermine the legitimacy of the, already severely weakened, democratic processes. […] Beyond this, however, we also have to face the reality that we are up against a President-Elect who intends to implement a fascist agenda, which is itself a direct challenge to the very legitimacy of democracy. A tepid defense of democratic norms is not nearly enough against a man whose policies and appointees show no regard for those very norms or the rule of law. Finally, we must recognize that movements of students, indigenous peoples, climate activists, and those living in the cities—primarily in the global South—most imminently endangered by climate change are calling upon a legitimacy higher than the norms of U.S. democracy: that of the planet and the life of all its inhabitants, human and non. Given that many climate scientists have designated 2020 a critical year in whether or not the effects of climate change can be slowed down, let alone reversed, we simply do not have the luxury of waiting until the next election. Considering, alone, Trump’s clear program to eliminate all steps taken to protect the environment and his support for coal mining and drilling in protected lands, young people can rightfully claim that Trump is “not our President” because they literally will have no possibility of a life as an effect of his administration.

can continue this argument when i get home if you want

Appreciate it!  I get the sense that you and DeadFlag are making about the same argument, so let me hold off until I see his next reply (you can just address the part above until then if you want).  I also have a bunch of work stuff stacked up, so it may take me a few anyway.
3  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Nevada potentially could recount on: December 03, 2016, 01:32:05 pm
Since evergreen doesn't want to engage, I will: I don't post on Bad Atlas very often but I lurk and I find this new take of yours to be very irritating because it's totally disingenuous. Considering that Trump is a fascist who has shown little regard for the Constitution, human rights and racial minorities, is it really a mystery that Democrats would want to delegitimize his election?

I'm not sure what "logic" or "reason" would dictate here. Am I supposed to say "ah yes, democracy worked as intended because the interests of the public were made clear at the ballot box,"? The public voted against me in a very personal manner and also voted for a scumbag who is a threat to democracy, liberalism, freedom, tolerance etc. This is what Trump hath wrought and he could mend these attitudes but you cannot run a campaign like he ran over the past two years and expect anyone to respect him. He has destroyed democratic mechanisms which were already crumbling and there's no turning back now. The Rubicon has been crossed and the goal is to resist this Fascist.

To be blunt, no, I don't particularly care whether or not the public legitimately or illegitimately elected a fascist to be President of the United States. Intellectually, the outcome appears to be legitimate to me but my reaction would be the same: do everything in my power to ensure that Trump fails and fails miserably in his quest to plunder, loot and pillage from the American people, and in his quest to turn America into a disturbing Apartheid state. "Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice".

How does any of that mean my argument disingenuous?

Even assuming that I was doing more than getting Evergreen to specify whether she actually thought it was a sham election, or is just arguing that it's OK to be disingenuous about the results for political purposes...how would that make my argument disingenuous?  Do you think my argument is somehow predicated on me feigning belief that Donald Trump isn't toxic to democratic institutions, and at heart an authoritarian bully jerk?  Let me be clear: I absolutely think he is both of those things.  If you think otherwise, you haven't been paying attention to my posts over the last few months.

What is disingenuous is your apparent belief that my argument is based on "respecting" Trump, or opposing efforts to "resist" him, or that "extremism" is inherently wrong.  I have never made any of those arguments.  If you are addressing bad arguments that other people made -- I'm not going to defend those.  The "let's give Trump a chance!" school of thought is pollyannaish idiocy.  I am prepared to argue that democratic institutions and pluralism aren't so utterly destroyed it's a good idea to subject chaotic attempts at power-plays and mass-lying.  If you want to have a conversation about why we disagree about this, fine, but calling my argument "disingenuous" when you really just mean "I disagree" is...well...super disingenuous.

I don't totally get your "logic" and "reason" comments.   Maybe I'm wrong, but I get the impression that you're still annoyed from the time I argued that it wasn't sufficient to dismiss an argument or truth proposition just because it's often posed by people you feel are hostile to your personal identity or set of values.  If that's the case, I think you're failing to see why I think that's so important.  It's not because I think logic and truth are some ultimate ideal, and we should blare socially problematic truths from loudspeakers because THE TRUTH!11.  It's because I think tribalistic moralism can be extremely goddamn dangerous, and is a big part of why the vast majority of human history has involved more homicide, suffering, and oppression than the current day.  I'm willing to discuss why I believe that, but don't call my argument "disingenuous" on the presumption that I don't think about this stuff.

And, finally, if you were arguing it was disingenuous because I knew Evergreen doesn't actually believe there was systemic tampering: apparently she does.
4  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Only Twitter says it would refuse to help build Muslim registry on: December 03, 2016, 12:52:07 pm
It's pretty standard practice for companies to not comment on things that could get them dragged into political fights.  When companies do comment on this sort of thing, it's generally a concerted and planned response that multiple people sign off on (as an ongoing policy), not an off-the-cuff response to a random email inquiry.  You could complain that they should respond this time because it's an "easy" response, but consider that this would mean that every time they don't comment, they're saying it's not an easy response.
5  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Nevada potentially could recount on: December 02, 2016, 10:18:50 pm
the more recounts, the better, imho

It doesn’t change anything. The Trumpster will be prez. Another recount would only drive him nuts on twitter. LOL.

the important thing is to delegitimise the "results" as much as possible

Don't put "results" in square quotes.  You want to delegitimize actual, legitimate election results.  Call it what it is.

nah

OK, so a while back, I left a debate with you frustrated, because I felt you have a frequent tendency to do hit-and-run argumentation where you assert a strong opinion, and then refuse to actually justify it in detail when someone calls you on the logic.  Basically, you seem more interested in expressing opinions than defending them.  You thought this was an unfair read of the situation, and I conceded I might have been reading too much into the interchange.

From the last few exchanges I've seen you in, I'm starting to think you were BSing me.  But here's a chance to prove me wrong:

How are these results not legitimate election results?  And, if they are, are you conceding that you're OK with being disingenuous about the legitimacy of a democratic elections because it politically damages someone you think is dangerous?
6  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Thomas E Clintnon on: December 02, 2016, 10:08:47 pm
Hillarious and original!

Thank you.

I couldn't resist the comparison.

he was being facetious, friend

Yes, thank you.

He said it was hilarious and original, so I prefer to be positive.  There is far too much negativity on this thread already.

And I still think it is hilarious and original in spite of whoever says what.

i liked you more when you drank less, dad
7  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Washington '15: The Calm Before the Drizzle on: December 02, 2016, 08:32:13 pm
so sexy
8  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Thomas E Clintnon on: December 02, 2016, 05:34:36 pm
Hillarious and original!

Thank you.

I couldn't resist the comparison.

he was being facetious, friend
9  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Washington '15: The Calm Before the Drizzle on: December 02, 2016, 05:30:44 pm
^ That is fantastic.  Possible to post zooms in on the Seattle metro, Vancouver, Spokane, and the Tri-Cities?
10  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Washington '15: The Calm Before the Drizzle on: December 01, 2016, 08:38:34 pm
Lowest % Trump by town
1. Nespelem - 8.06%
2. Mattawa - 8.39%*
3. Seattle - 8.44%
4. Langley - 12.20%
5. Mabton - 13.46%
6. Wapato - 13.61%
7. Port Townsend - 14.25%
8. Bainbridge Island - 14.36%
9. Lake Forest Park - 16.73%
10. Shoreline - 17.99%
11. Bellingham - 18.80%
12. Toppenish - 20.55%
13. Tukwila - 20.83%
14. Olympia - 20.94%*
15. Redmond - 21.14%
16. Mercer Island - 21.54%
17. Mountlake Terrace - 22.52%
18. Kenmore - 22.92%
19. Pullman - 23.42%*
20. Kirkland - 23.99%
21. Burien - 24.05%
22. Granger - 24.29%
23. Bellevue - 24.58%
24. Issaquah - 25.35%
25. Renton - 25.51%

Areas in (*) I still don't have write-in totals for, so I'll update as I do.

The Clinton list is mostly a bunch of tiny places you've barely heard of, but the very lowest showing was tiny Hatton in Adams County (2/28, not including write-ins).  The largest of any real size was Lynden, which was 65.65%-23.50% Trump (actually not an amazing performance for him).
11  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: Counties w/ Detailed Write-Ins on: December 01, 2016, 04:23:06 pm
The named write-ins?  I'm not trying for those.  I've just gotten a few of them incidentally.  I doubt many counties bother to keep them.  They're not required.
12  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: Counties w/ Detailed Write-Ins on: December 01, 2016, 03:57:09 pm
Okanogan County, WA:

Bernie Sanders 173 (5 with Elizabeth Sanders, 4 with Tim Kaine, 3 with Tulsi Gabbard)
Evan McMullin 75 (16 with Mindy Finn, 11 with Nathan Johnson)
Doug McKinley 27 (Congressional candidate)
Joe Pakootas 17 (Congressional candidate)
Ben Carson 15
John Kasich 14
Paul Ryan 14
Jennifer Ferguson 10
Ted Cruz 9
Patrick Plumb 7
General James Mattis 3
Mike Pence 3
Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers 3
Jeb Bush 2
Michele Obama 2

Other vote-getters include "2 Chronicles 7:14", "Dolphins", "Grandma Patty", "My neighbor's yellow dog", "Nacho Grande", "your butt", "Nasty Woman" (2 votes), and "Turd Sandwich" (4 votes).

Where did you find the write in results for WA broken down? I tried some of the counties, but they just took me to the state website that doesn't break things down (or even include write ins).

Okanogan just sent it along when I requested precinct results.  Douglas did too, although their format is a mess.
13  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: What caused PA to slighly tighten just now? Trump margin fell 6k. on: December 01, 2016, 01:34:55 pm
Sounds fishy to me

1. Actually read the thread before replying.

2. Actually understand election law before replying.

3. Stop complaining when people make allegations about the electoral system "with no basis in fact" if you're going to turn around and do it yourself.
14  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: Counties w/ Detailed Write-Ins on: November 30, 2016, 05:51:09 pm
Okanogan County, WA:

Bernie Sanders 173 (5 with Elizabeth Sanders, 4 with Tim Kaine, 3 with Tulsi Gabbard)
Evan McMullin 75 (16 with Mindy Finn, 11 with Nathan Johnson)
Doug McKinley 27 (Congressional candidate)
Joe Pakootas 17 (Congressional candidate)
Ben Carson 15
John Kasich 14
Paul Ryan 14
Jennifer Ferguson 10
Ted Cruz 9
Patrick Plumb 7
General James Mattis 3
Mike Pence 3
Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers 3
Jeb Bush 2
Michele Obama 2

Other vote-getters include "2 Chronicles 7:14", "Dolphins", "Grandma Patty", "My neighbor's yellow dog", "Nacho Grande", "your butt", "Nasty Woman" (2 votes), and "Turd Sandwich" (4 votes).
15  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Latino vote in Michigan- the hell happened? 38% trump according to cnn on: November 30, 2016, 03:25:43 pm
Sample size of 151, and that's assuming the exit poll is a random, representative sample of Michigan Latinos, which is unlikely.
16  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Nevada potentially could recount on: November 30, 2016, 02:15:04 pm
the more recounts, the better, imho

It doesn’t change anything. The Trumpster will be prez. Another recount would only drive him nuts on twitter. LOL.

the important thing is to delegitimise the "results" as much as possible

Don't put "results" in square quotes.  You want to delegitimize actual, legitimate election results.  Call it what it is.
17  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: What caused PA to slighly tighten just now? Trump margin fell 6k. on: November 30, 2016, 12:04:18 pm
Funny, you'd think they'd count all the votes before the state's recount request deadlines (the last of which was yesterday). Seems suspicious. Doesn't matter since the state's winner is unchanged, but still.

Stop.  That's not how Pennsylvania election law works.  Unofficial results must be delivered to the state by 5 PM on the 15th, but military absentees can also arrive until 5 PM on the 15th, and additional ballots can still be counted for a couple of weeks after that point.  Please at least read local election law before you call something "suspicious."  Otherwise you're just recklessly fueling nonsense.
18  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Do you feel sorry for the 145 Trump voters in my precinct? on: November 29, 2016, 07:07:52 am
10:1 is actually kind of underwhelming for a young/urban/renter neighborhood.  The entire city of Seattle was about 10:1.  The rich suburban neighborhood full of olds I moved out of was more than 10:1.  It must be tough to find Minnesota election results to brag about this year.

It was actually quite more than 10:1, I just went with an easy round number.

Republican      Donald J. Trump and Michael R. Pence   145   7.13%
Democratic-Farmer-Labor      Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine   1673   82.25%   
Constitution Party      Darrell Castle and Scott Bradley   2   0.10%
Legal Marijuana Now      Dan R. Vacek and Mark Elworth, Jr.   14   0.69%   
Socialist Workers Party      Alyson Kennedy and Osborne Hart   6   0.30%   
Green Party      Jill Stein and Howie Hawkins   98   4.82%   
American Delta Party      "Rocky" Roque De La Fuente and Michael Steinberg   0   0.00%   
Independence      Evan McMullin and Nathan Johnson   21   1.03%   
Libertarian Party      Gary Johnson and William Weld   51   2.51%   
Write-In      WRITE-IN**   24   1.18%
11:1 or 12:1 is still pretty mediocre for a neighborhood like yours, though, even if it has some Vietnamese population.  The young, hip renter neighborhood here was over 25:1.
19  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Do you feel sorry for the 145 Trump voters in my precinct? on: November 28, 2016, 08:51:53 pm
10:1 is actually kind of underwhelming for a young/urban/renter neighborhood.  The entire city of Seattle was about 10:1.  The rich suburban neighborhood full of olds I moved out of was more than 10:1.  It must be tough to find Minnesota election results to brag about this year.
20  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: County or Precincts where Trump or Clinton finished in third place on: November 28, 2016, 04:07:56 pm
The NW areas of Alaska loved Castle:

Precinct 38-802 Akiak: Clinton 47.9, Castle 21.9, Trump 15.6
Precinct 38-832 Lower Kalskag: Clinton 53.9, Castle 14.1, Johnson/Stein: 10.3, Trump/Write-ins: 5.2
Precinct 39-930 Pilot Station: Clinton 63.8, Castle 13.4, Trump 8.7
Precinct 39-932 Savoonga: Clinton 67.2, Castle 13.8, Trump 9.1
Precinct 40-022 Kobuk: Clinton 35.7, Castle 26.2, Write-ins 14.3, Trump 11.9, Johnson 9.5
Precinct 40-034 Point Lay: Clinton 37.5, Castle 21.9, Trump 18.8, Write-ins 14.1
Precinct 40-330 Hughes: Clinton 56.8, Castle 18.9, Trump/Johnson 8.11

I'm not surprised that Alaska Natives aren't Trump fans...but any explanation for why Castle picked up so much support?  That can't just be people randomly voting for him on the ballot as an alternative.  Way too much support for it to not be concerted somehow.
21  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump claims "millions of people" voted illegally. on: November 27, 2016, 04:43:19 pm
I think Trump is probably right about this.  It is well known that there has been systematic voter fraud in Democratic strongholds going back to the 19th century; the big city machines in New York City, Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit, etc.  Wherever organized crime or "community organizers" have a heavy presence.  Or, millions of illegal aliens.  Trump may be stirring up a hornets nest on this one, but if he wants to drain the swamp...

As someone who regularly uses voter databases for work across multiple states (which are PUBLIC RECORD), this is totally nonsense.  Dude, 1-in-30 Clinton votes would have to be illegal (assuming that no illegal votes are for Trump).  That's incredibly ridiculous and you're ridiculous for claiming he's "probably right."  I get that not everyone has close familiarity with the registration and voting systems...but if you don't understand how our electoral system works, please, please research and discuss it before making claims like this.
22  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Trump claims "millions of people" voted illegally. on: November 27, 2016, 03:52:13 pm
Just to emphasize how completely and utterly insane this is, Trump is alleging that a minimum of about 1-in-30 Clinton votes was illegally cast.  This guy is unreal.
23  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Clinton Campaign Counsel: "We'll participate in recount" on: November 27, 2016, 03:16:10 pm
I don't see anyone here shouting "Crooked Donny rigged it! Hillary is the righteous winner in Wisconsin! If the recount doesn't show her ahead, it was HACKED!"

Um....you don't? Where exactly do you live, in a "van down by the river" (thanks Chris Farley)? And....BULLsh**t DETECTED!!!

"Warning, warning, take cover....this is not a drill" LOL

eh?  I've been arguing in virtually all of the recount threads, and I don't think I've seen anyone (not counting Bandit, who's...a special case) make that argument.

also you're being a little too amused by yourself fyi
24  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Clinton Campaign Counsel: "We'll participate in recount" on: November 27, 2016, 02:56:45 pm
In what sense would going whole-hog on this recount be seen as "playing hardball" in a way that's endearing to swing voters?  Delegitimizing and blocking the President's agenda on something like Obamacare, sure, I get that tactically.  That helps to poison public perception of Obama's policies and try to move the starting point of compromise -- I get why that's effective hardball.  How is aggressively challenging the election results effective hardball, though?  It's hardball, sure, but what does it do

I just don't get what strategy y'all are seeing here, beyond it being a primal scream that Democrats probably want to let out right now.
25  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: Washington '15: The Calm Before the Drizzle on: November 27, 2016, 09:30:32 am
The Pierce County swing map is a lot of fun.

Democrats surged not only in North End and West Tacoma, but also UP, Fircrest, in and around Gig Harbor, DuPont, Lakeland Hills, and some scattered upscale subdevelopments.  In working-class exurban and rural areas, quite a few precincts swung 20-30% toward the Republicans.




Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 1097


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines