Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 30, 2016, 12:02:47 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 660
76  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Who is less neocon'ish on foreign policy? TRUMP or Hillary? on: March 21, 2016, 08:30:21 pm
Hawkishness does not equal neocon, unless Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, FDR and Harry Truman were neocons.

Hillary made a reasonable call in Libya -- a humanitarian intervention that prevented thousands of people from being slaughtered in Benghazi. There are certainly many, many people who are alive today who would be dead if not for the intervention. And the fact remains that Libya is in far better shape than Syria, where the United States held itself off at a distance. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant_in_Libya

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant
77  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Who is a more lackluster candidate? on: March 21, 2016, 08:09:48 pm
Hillary's beating a guy who's raising $43 million a month and draws rallies of 30,000. What are the comparable numbers for Bill Bradley/ Dubya circa 2000?
78  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Who is less neocon'ish on foreign policy? TRUMP or Hillary? on: March 21, 2016, 08:02:45 pm
Hawkishness does not equal neocon, unless Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, FDR and Harry Truman were neocons.

Hillary made a reasonable call in Libya -- a humanitarian intervention that prevented thousands of people from being slaughtered in Benghazi. There are certainly many, many people who are alive today who would be dead if not for the intervention. And the fact remains that Libya is in far better shape than Syria, where the United States held itself off at a distance. 
79  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Why is America so angry? on: March 21, 2016, 02:42:20 am
The US had a period of unparalleled prosperity caused by low trade barriers and low competition following World War II. We hit a bump in the 70's and 80's, but otherwise, things were generally pretty great economically from 1946-2007. Now we all have to adapt to a world in which the economy isn't constantly growing, and it kinda sucks. We got used to expecting better lives than the ones that we have.

Well we just had the worst financial crisis in American history, which Ben Bernanke said was even worse than the Great Depression. Since then, every metric has been trending in the right direction. Now that the labor force is finally tight, with the highest job openings, hires, and quits in 15 years, labor force participation and median income is finally going up.
80  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: China: Trump's rise is scary, it's why we'll never become a democracy on: March 20, 2016, 04:10:14 pm
They're claiming democracy is scary because Trump is "racist", even though we elected Obama and there has never been a non-Han Chinese member of the Politburo Standing Committee?
81  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Will Hillary be indicted? on: March 18, 2016, 01:50:28 pm
Anyone have access to the Judicial Watch documents?

These revelations show a few things

- Hillary wanted a government-issued device. There was no original intention to evade regulations by using a personal device. A personal device was not her first choice.

- Hillary respected government rules prohibiting personal devices from being brought into secure areas, even though it was very inconvenient for her. That was the genesis of the request to begin with. This is inconsistent with a cavalier attitude.

- Hillary's e-mail device situation was no secret at State or with the NSA. There was no conspiracy to hide the fact that she was using a personal BB. (Millions of people saw it, in fact.)

- Hillary's predecessor Rice and many of Rice's aides received waivers to bring personal devices into secured areas, implying they also used personal devices for work-related business (as we separately know is true for the aides' e-mails).
82  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Jewish leaders plan boycott of trump at AIPAC for his Hatred on: March 17, 2016, 06:12:57 pm
tears for AIPAC
83  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Will Hillary be indicted? on: March 17, 2016, 06:05:40 pm
No, she won't be indicted, but those of you counting on "Obama's DOJ" to cover her ass know nothing about AG Loretta Lynch. She is extremely objective, tough and professional, and is keeping the investigation a black box from the WH. She rebuked Josh Earnest for even making a glittering generality about the case. She has prosecuted Democratic and Republican politicians before; being in high places doesn't protect you from her. If the merits warrant an indictment I have no doubt it will happen.
84  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Is Trump the kind of person the Tea Party was looking for in 2009/2010? on: March 17, 2016, 01:45:46 am
No, because the Tea Party was all about being ultra anti-government as a way to oppose bailouts, and because of an unspoken understanding that undermining the government would undermine the economy and hopefully wreck Obama. But they lost their nerve and agreed to the Budget Control Act instead, and after Obama's re-election the whole rationale for it sort of died away.

Trump is a reaction to the more long term structural issues raised by the financial crisis, which suggest the opposite of a small government direction, and in this sense he's more akin to Occupy Wall Street than the Tea Party.
85  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Who is running the most optimistic campaign? on: March 17, 2016, 01:40:10 am
Depends on how you define "optimistic."
86  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Elizabeth Warren? on: March 17, 2016, 01:22:23 am
Let's say Clinton ends up with a bare majority of delegates, but soon afterwards her health suddenly takes a turn for the worse and, by mid summer, it is clear that she will not have the stamina to wage a GE campaign. However, the Democratic establishment has a strong aversion to giving Sanders the nomination, and he lacks the delegates to force the issue. What are the chances that Elizabeth Warren is brought in, in this scenario? The argument is quite simple- she is the most prominent Democrat in the country who arguably appeals to both the Clinton and Sanders wings of the party. Unlike most Democratic officials, she has studiously avoided taking sides in the primary. Thoughts?
87  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Is Hillary over if Sanders wins North Carolina? on: March 15, 2016, 10:26:16 pm
I feel ashamed of myself. I mean, Bernie did cut NC to 15 points versus 29 points for VA and 47 points for SC, but I clearly overreacted to Michigan. Michigan really threw me for a loop. There were people online talking all this trash, talking about rallies and phone banking, and I dismissed it, trusting 538. Michigan shattered my faith in 538, or more accurately, the polls it relies on. Then today, there were all these people trash talking again, but about NC. So I created this thread. Unfortunately, I allowed it to cloud my judgement and over-adjusted. But we're definitely getting some trash polls this year, like the We Ask America poll. Things are just weird.

EDIT: That being said, I never predicted Bernie would win NC. My predictions were posted here. I actually did much better than the 538 polls-only model with my Google trends/538 hybrid model.
88  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Democratic Ides of March Tuesday results thread (first polls close at 7pm ET) on: March 15, 2016, 04:50:13 pm
Well I'm glad the Clinton people are finally getting some backbone.
89  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Most likely neither Hillary nor Trump will be their party's nominee. on: March 15, 2016, 04:21:48 pm
I don't understand why people think Bernie's chances are so low. He's outraising her, outspending her, generates more enthusiasm, generates more positive press coverage, and just won a big upset victory in Michigan. He should be favored, not just from some widely-mocked Beet prediction (yeah, I know where I stand here), but by conventional prognosticators like Nate Silver and the majority of the board.
90  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Most likely neither Hillary nor Trump will be their party's nominee. on: March 15, 2016, 01:31:27 pm
The Republican nomination is a complete crapshoot at this point. Trying to predict it would be foolhardy. But if Trump is rejected, the Republicans will have done a good job of setting up a boogeyman on the far right who makes whomever they eventually choose look reasonable and moderate. At that point, if Sanders is the nominee, his revolution becoming a (at least partial) reality may be the only hope for Democrats.

Comparisons to 2008 are problematic because the stasis between Hill and O in that race, was due to the lack of substantive differences between the candidates. It become all about identity politics and demographics. It was trench warfare. If I'm right, this'll be more like World War II than World War I. I'll admit Bernie's message is very strong and it may provide him the "blitz" necessary to win a proportional system.
91  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Most likely neither Hillary nor Trump will be their party's nominee. on: March 15, 2016, 01:19:38 pm
You're saying things that simply aren't true. He can cut her lead by about ~100 delegates between now and New York by blowing out the lily white states, even if he gets nothing out of Arizona and Hawaii. California alone has 475 delegates. There are plenty of delegates to go, and with his superior campaign it's more likely he'll get them or not.
92  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Most likely neither Hillary nor Trump will be their party's nominee. on: March 15, 2016, 01:09:27 pm
Yes, he could blow her out in New York and California.

Her delegate lead is ~210. After tonight, it could be more like ~250 if she gets big margins in FL and NC and loses narrowly in the north. With blowout wins in the upcoming lily white caucus states, he can cut her delegate lead down by about 100. Can he then make up 150 delegates in the remaining states, including New York, Pennsylvania, and California? Certainly.

He has a superior message, superior volunteer effort, superior fundraising -- his campaign in superior in every way (except the candidate, but that's just my personal O). Yet despite this, he still gets to keep the underdog aura due to his delegate deficit. So the longer it goes on, the more he rolls.

Btw, Hillary's wins so far have been based on her name reputation and running out the clock. If you had put these dynamics in Alabama and just let it marinate for 8 months, Bernie could have absolutely flipped the state.
93  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Most likely neither Hillary nor Trump will be their party's nominee. on: March 15, 2016, 12:21:53 pm
Unless the planets align in the wake of a blue moon and Sanders wins North Carolina, it is mathematically impossible for him to win the nomination. You can let go of your pearls, my friend.

Currently the odds of me being right are only 7.7% on PredictIt. Let's see if I'm right Smiley

EDIT: And yes, it is mathematically possible for Elizabeth Warren to jump into the race tomorrow, take every pledged delegate going forward, and go into the convention with more than either Hillary or Bernie. Will it happen? No. But is it possible? Yes. Stop saying my predictions are mathematically impossible because if that was true, Bernie wouldn't be campaigning.
94  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Most likely neither Hillary nor Trump will be their party's nominee. on: March 15, 2016, 11:54:48 am
Before anyone freaks out about me freaking out, I am only about 70% sure of Hillary at this point, but 90% sure of Trump.

For Hillary, it's a matter of probability. There are simply too many things that could go wrong for her, and the dynamics of the race just aren't good. The longer it drags out, the more Bernie's superior fundraising, volunteer and enthusiasm numbers grind her down.

For Trump, it's a matter of him being increasingly unacceptable. His chance in early March was to move towards a more 'presidential' and mainstream style, and reassure establishment Republicans. Instead, he's gone, and been pushed, the other way. He's fading out of the mainstream, and away from viability.

For both candidates, their problem is that there are simply too many people against them. To get a nomination, at some point, one's opponents must accept your victory, and that doesn't happen for either of these two, for differing reasons.
95  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Is Hillary over if Sanders wins North Carolina? on: March 15, 2016, 01:40:19 am
I'm hearing he's getting huge rallies, his supporters made 50,000 calls in one day. What happens to her campaign at that point?

55K in just 1 Phone-banking platform on Monday, we passed 50K on Sunday & over 40K in Saturday - But it is split among all 5 states, so just not NC

Jeez, you guys are crazy. That's at least 145k calls! Do most people do it alone from home, or do you have offices? I try phone banking alone from home some times, but it's just so depressing.
96  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Do Google search results better predict primaries than 538's "polls-plus" model? on: March 15, 2016, 12:29:05 am
Hey guys, it's Beet again.

I decided to do some prediction with this to see how it compares to 538. I'm only doing Democrats because (1) it's just simpler with only two candidates, and (2) it interests me more.



Here the Google Trend column represents the fraction of Hillary's searches to Bernie's searches the day before the primary. The Over/under represents Bernie's over/under performance to his 538 polls-only average. The linear regression is based off these two columns. Basically I am trying to estimate 538 poll error based on Google Trends.

The cells off-chart are the 538 predictions for Hillary's lead over Bernie as of this post. In the highlighted columns I have put the estimate Bernie over/under performance of 538 polls-only according to my model. The R^2 is not super great at 0.54, but there definitely is a pattern.

My rough predictions for tomorrow based off this are-

Florida- Hillary 62% Bernie 37%

Bernie strength in the Gainesville area.

North Carolina- Hillary 57% Bernie 42%

Bernie (slight) strength in Wilmington, Hillary strength elsewhere in eastern NC.

Ohio- Hillary 50% Bernie 49%

Hillary relative strength in Cleveland, Bernie relative strength in Toledo.

Missouri- Bernie 55% Hillary 44%

Hillary relative strength in Kansas City and St. Louis, Bernie relative strength in Columbia/Jefferson City and Springfield.

Illinois- Bernie 50% Hillary 49%

Hillary relative strength in Chicago, Bernie relative strength in Champaign & Springfield.

EDIT: I had to modify this because an earlier version of this graphic was wrong, overstating Bernie's support.
97  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Is Hillary over if Sanders wins North Carolina? on: March 14, 2016, 10:47:51 pm
Goodness gracious, Trump doesn't speak his mind, he just acts like he does.
98  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Is Hillary over if Sanders wins North Carolina? on: March 14, 2016, 10:29:21 pm
Sure, end the enslavement to corporatocracy. But in the meantime, let's nominate Hillary, the best all-around candidate on all issues. The biggest anti-corporate move we can possibly make is win the next GE and appoint Scalia's replacement. The uniformly pro-corporate record of justices Alito and Roberts (including campaign finance cases) is grotesque and flies completely under the radar.

Except Hillary does not represent us.

Speak for yourself! She represents me. Bernie does not represent me.

Quote
Sure, she might appoint a liberal justice. What Democrat wouldn't?

Sure, but the next president won't necessarily be a Democrat.

Quote
I want my president to lead by example. Bernie does this by making waves through small donations and accumulating far less money than Hillary does.

Actually, he has more money than her. And she also accepts small donations and has gotten plenty of them.

Quote
Hillary is playing politics. Bernie is playing solitaire and an incredible game at that.

Bernie is a politician playing politics. Solitaire is for people who were bored at work before the days of the Internet.

What does Hillary represent you on?

Everything, except marijuana legalization. I'm a bit more liberal than her on that one.

Quote
If you want to beat Trump, nominate Bernie. If you want a greater possibility of Trump in the White House, nominate Hillary.

Trump is collapsing. Even Republicans are scared of him. If Hillary loses Ohio tomorrow, a significant factor will be because Democratic-leaning independents crossed over to vote for Kasich in droves.

Quote
Bernie greatly outnumbers Hillary in small donations. Hillary greatly outnumbers Bernie in large ones. Not saying small donations don't exist for the latter, but Bernie is fighting the very system he wishes to end.

Obama outnumbered Hillary in small donations in '08, and he won. Yet here we are, still "fighting the very system." Campaign finance is a systemic issue. But it doesn't really work in presidential elections anyway. If money could buy elections, Jeb Bush would be cruising to 1,200 delegates now.

Quote
Bernie is an elected official, but I would argue he's the least like your typical politician in this race. Hillary comes across as the pandering politician with less principles. Trump may not have experience holding elected office, but his words are that of your regular politician.

Bernie is a very typical politician. Served in the House, served in the Senate, voted on a partisan basis. And he's been pandering hard on trade since ST.
99  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Is Hillary over if Sanders wins North Carolina? on: March 14, 2016, 10:19:24 pm
Sure, end the enslavement to corporatocracy. But in the meantime, let's nominate Hillary, the best all-around candidate on all issues. The biggest anti-corporate move we can possibly make is win the next GE and appoint Scalia's replacement. The uniformly pro-corporate record of justices Alito and Roberts (including campaign finance cases) is grotesque and flies completely under the radar.

Except Hillary does not represent us.

Speak for yourself! She represents me. Bernie does not represent me.

Quote
Sure, she might appoint a liberal justice. What Democrat wouldn't?

Sure, but the next president won't necessarily be a Democrat.

Quote
I want my president to lead by example. Bernie does this by making waves through small donations and accumulating far less money than Hillary does.

Actually, he has more money than her. And she also accepts small donations and has gotten plenty of them.

Quote
Hillary is playing politics. Bernie is playing solitaire and an incredible game at that.

Bernie is a politician playing politics. Solitaire is for people who were bored at work before the days of the Internet.
100  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Does it give you a little pleasure to know that many liberals FEAR Donald Trump? on: March 14, 2016, 10:09:27 pm
I don't fear Trump precisely because so many other people fear him.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 660


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines