Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2017, 08:02:50 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 339
1  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Trump again defends Putin by bashing the US "we aren't innocent" on: February 04, 2017, 11:17:27 pm
I preferred this argument in the original Russian
2  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Tens of Thousands Protesting Trump's Immigration and Refugee Ban on: January 29, 2017, 08:31:36 pm
Protests may become the new normal like they were in the late 60s and early 70s, but we may also see 'counter protests' just like then too. We already saw the March for Life this week and I would not be suprised if we saw repeats of the 1970 'Hard Hat Riot' where construction workers who supported Nixon attacked an anti-war protest. 

And even with all these protests, Nixon of course won big in 1972, so protests aren't necessarily a sign that the President is in political trouble.
3  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Kellyanne Conway says she doesn't "resemble" terrorists on: January 29, 2017, 08:23:49 pm
Some may consider this outfit an act of terror

4  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Bill Introduced to End US Membership to UN (!?) on: January 22, 2017, 06:40:50 pm
Update:

Paul first introduced it in 1997
https://www.congress.gov/bill/105th-congress/house-bill/1146 
It had 14 cosponsors

And it was introduced in the last Congress by Mike Rogers (It had 7 cosponsors)
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1205



The 2017 version has 6 cosponsors (so far)
5  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Congress Looking to End US Membership to UN (!?) on: January 22, 2017, 06:31:32 pm
Ron Paul first introduced "American Sovereignty Restoration Act" in 1999 1997 and I believe it has been reintroduced every year since then. It has never had any real support before.

That being said, in the new Trump era maybe it will have more legs, but it would be an extreme stretch to say "Congress Looking To End Membership". All sorts of extreme bills get introduced all the time
6  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Double-Think: Kelly-Ann Conway calls Spicer lies "alternative facts" on: January 22, 2017, 05:53:06 pm
well most things the government releases is mandated by law anyway, but there is discretion of course. For example there were a number of gimmicks that the Bush Admin used that the Obama Admin stopped (see NYT article from 8 years ago). I suspect we may see those practices and other forms of creative accounting work their way in.

As for the GOP controlled congress, they have already changed rules for the CBO to use rosy scenarios and to hide the worst effects of repealing the ACA, so I'm not so sure they are the place to look right now.
7  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Double-Think: Kelly-Ann Conway calls Spicer lies "alternative facts" on: January 22, 2017, 05:34:09 pm
Fascism is a word that gets thrown around too much. Trump isn't a fascist, but he is a 'showman' (or perhaps a 'con man') and I don't think he is above cooking the books to make himself look better. The government is full of bureaucracy and procedures and it is probably difficult to put out totally bogus stats, but you can be sure that they will push the envelope in this area. I only hope the media and others keep an eye on what gets released on various reports from agencies as they do what comes from the WH press room. That is the bright shiny object but the real work of the government is happening elsewhere.
8  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Double-Think: Kelly-Ann Conway calls Spicer lies "alternative facts" on: January 22, 2017, 05:13:40 pm
Obviously this is all about something that isn't important. But this and past statements show an instinct to say falsehoods. So what about things that really matter moving forward like official statistics coming from the government. Trump himself often accused the Obama admin of 'rigging' jobs numbers.

Should we be concerned that the Trump admin might try some of their own 'alternative facts' for stats on inflation, unemployment, the deficit, immigration, etc. One of the reasons he is so sure to paint the current world with such bleak tones is that in the future he can point to how great things are and how it was all him.
9  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Trump doubles down on nuke comment: "let it be an arms race" on: December 23, 2016, 09:48:06 pm
I wonder if part of the reason for this bellicose cold-war rhetoric is to counter the narrative that he is some kind of Russian puppet.  It's all just for show. 
10  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / MOVED: Will Trump be a better President than Obama? on: December 02, 2016, 07:26:23 pm
This topic has been moved to U.S. General Discussion.

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=253841.0
11  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Exit polls indicate Hillary likely won on: November 18, 2016, 01:06:08 pm
Not sure where those exit numbers are coming from. If you go to CNN for the latest exits and extrapolate from the Male/Female vote you get the following.

FL   
Clinton   46.7%
Trump   48.8%
   
PA   
Clinton   48.0%
Trump   49.1%
   
NC   
Clinton   45.6%
Trump   50.1%
   
WI   
Clinton   46.6%
Trump   48.4%

In all cases the exit winner is the winner and if anything, the final exits overstate Trump's margin by almost 0.7-0.9% in FL, NC and WI.
12  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / MOVED: Trump's cabinet: All white males? on: November 17, 2016, 03:39:10 pm
This topic has been moved to U.S. General Discussion.

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=252832.0
13  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Professor Lichtmann predicts Presidential Race for 2016 on: November 16, 2016, 09:18:28 pm
what's the point of a predictive model if one of the factors cannot be determined until after the election? That kind of voids the whole predictive thing. 
 
Regardless, Lichtman is being proclaimed as the guy that predicted the election of Trump by the media, such as headlines like "Professor predicted Trump win, says he will be impeached".  It seems to me that he incorrectly predicted Trump would win the PV then he retroactively says his model correctly predicted the Clinton PV win but he is happy to take credit for also predicting Trump won the election. It seems that no matter what, his model is correct.
14  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Professor Lichtmann predicts Presidential Race for 2016 on: November 16, 2016, 06:28:18 pm
The media are saying he called the election correctly, but I thought the Lichtmann model was for predicting the PV winner. 
15  About this Site / The Atlas / Re: Petition to ban LittleBigPlanet on: November 16, 2016, 06:05:01 pm

Every report gets careful consideration.

This is an important point for all. If something is a problem then report it so that it goes 'in the system'. You cannot assume a mod reads every post, but every reported post will get considered. Maybe not immediately because mods arent around in every board 24/7 but it will be dealt with. And when someone builds up a record, then that poster gets reviewed.

Case in point, LittleBigPlanet has been permabanned.

The system may not always act as fast as possible but the slow wheels of justice will eventually grind on.
16  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / MOVED: Should democrats focus on the South instead of Upper Midwest going forward? on: November 14, 2016, 11:00:17 am
This topic has been moved to 2020 U.S. Presidential Election.

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=252340.0
17  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / MOVED: The popular vote argument on: November 13, 2016, 08:45:54 pm
This topic has been moved to Presidential Election Process.

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=252430.0
18  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Remaining votes (Update: about 7 million ballots left to count nationwide) on: November 10, 2016, 06:00:40 pm
I was adding the estimated outstanding (minus an estimated discarded) to the Atlas number, which would end up to be around 130-131m.  Maybe that is what electproject.org is doing. If the estimated outstanding is added on top of their 129, then yes 2016 would set a new record. 

Not sure if electproject.org is factoring in the uncounted estimate or not.
19  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Remaining votes (Update: about 7 million ballots left to count nationwide) on: November 10, 2016, 05:39:04 pm
A lot of the remaining ballots are provisional, so up to 1/3 could end up being thrown out.  Still it looks like there will be more total votes than 2012, but not much more and likely not more than 2008. 

It will be interesting to see if in the end Trump ends up with more votes than Romney. He probably will but not a lot more. That could mean that Bush would still have the record for the most votes for a Republican at 62m. That would mean that for four elections in a row the GOP candidate got between 60m-62m, while the Dem candidate varied from 59m-69m.
20  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Did the exit polls discourage late voters? on: November 10, 2016, 05:26:21 pm
How many people are motivated enough to delve into exits to extrapolate a winner but unmotivated enough to be kept from voting because it looked like Clinton was going to win by 3%?  If anything the general feeling that Clinton was going to win due to pre-election polls might have kept some soft Clinton supporters away. Obviously a lot of Americans had a negative view of both Clinton and Trump, but in the end Clinton won that group overwhelmingly, and that was the difference. Perhaps a lot of those who didn't like either but were slightly more inclined for Clinton decided not to vote because they thought she was going to win so they didn't have to 'hold their nose' and vote.
21  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: The polls were not wrong. on: November 10, 2016, 05:21:33 pm
The national polls were off by 3 points, which isn't totally outside the MoE and all that different than previous cycles. And the polls in half of the swing states were off by less than 3 (FL, NM, VA, NV, VA, CO, GA) so those were also within the range, although again were mostly too D.

However the polls in NC plus the polls in the Upper Midwest/Rust Belt/New England (MN, WI, MI, OH, PH, NH, ME) were all off outside the MoE and all off in the same direction (too D). 

So the polls weren't all wrong but the polls in the NE were definitely wrong.
22  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Votes separating Clinton from the presidency on: November 10, 2016, 05:14:42 pm

Michigan + Wisconsin + Pennsylvania = 107,330


MI +PA + ME2 + NE2 gets to 270 and that might be less than 100k.
23  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Why believe the exit polls? on: November 09, 2016, 11:16:19 pm
the first wave of exits were clearly wrong but the final update seems to match up with the results both nationally and at the state level. Surely there will be some error, especially with smaller subsamples, but they are still a useful tool to understand what's happening.
24  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Did James Comey costs Hillary the presidential election? on: November 09, 2016, 09:07:32 pm
well Clinton lost PA, MI and WI by 1% or less so if you think the comey email thing hit her by 1% or more, then you have to conclude yes. The polls were all off but there was certainly a trend down after the Comey letter. Also Trump won late deciders and he significantly won people who had a negative view of both Trump and Clinton.

Perhaps the candidate he one with the more recent 'scandal' was hurt more with this group who didn't like either. 

25  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Sanders would have won on: November 09, 2016, 08:57:04 pm
It is hard to say. We do know that key elements of Sanders-ism didn't do well. In Colorado single-payer healthcare (essentially Sanders-care and something Sanders endorsed and campaigned for) was defeated by 60 points. And in California Sanders campaigned hard for Prop 51 to lower drug pricing (by setting CA prices to US VA pricing) lost by 8 points. California did pass a non-binding law against Citizens United (another signature Sanders issue) but that passed by less than 5% (significantly under-performing Clinton in CA).   

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 339


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines