Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 28, 2017, 07:19:03 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Be sure to enable your "Ultimate Profile" for even more goodies on your profile page!

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 155
1  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Which states will Trump win? on: May 25, 2017, 09:52:40 am
With forty votes, this is how it looks:

Lean Democrat   
Virginia   2
Colorado   3
Michigan   8
Minnesota 8
Nevada 9
New Hampshire 11
Pennsylvania 14
Florida  17

Slightly Democrat   
Wisconsin   18

Tossup    
North Carolina 20

Lean Trump   
Arizona   24
Ohio   28
Georgia   29
Iowa   32
Texas   39
2  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Which states will Trump win? on: May 24, 2017, 03:31:14 pm
At 17 votes (with Florida at 9, slightly over half) it would be a 269-269 tie, although I am
putting Florida as a swing state on the map.

3  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Which states will Trump win? on: May 24, 2017, 01:23:51 pm
None, because he won't be the GOP nominee?
That's certainly a possibility. I could have said something like, "if he is the nominee.."
etc.

Of course, this early, anything is possible. If, for example, Democrats do well in the Congressional elections next year, it could damage him enough that there will be pressure on him not to run (this happened to Johnson in 1968, even though he won in a landslide four years earlier).
4  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Which states will Trump win? on: May 24, 2017, 01:07:40 pm
Based only five votes, this is how the map looks so far:

5  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Which states will Trump win? on: May 24, 2017, 12:46:32 pm
none ( ͡ ͜ʖ ͡)
I should have included that as an option, actually.
6  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Which states will Trump win? on: May 24, 2017, 10:12:03 am
I'm curious, why are we asking what states Trump will win?

Isn't that like asking in early 1973 whether the South would vote for Agnew in 1976?

Check back on November 4th, 2020 and see how close we came.
7  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Which states will Trump win? on: May 24, 2017, 09:53:11 am
Please add other states if you think the results will be different from 2016.
Don't bother with the one district in Maine and the other in Nebraska, as I am only interested
in the states themselves, unless you think that those districts would make a difference as to who wins.
8  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Which states will Trump win? on: May 24, 2017, 09:49:48 am
Correction on Texas: I mean not vote that way.
9  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Which states will Trump win? on: May 24, 2017, 09:48:40 am
It is unlikely that he will lose Texas, but the rest of them could all be swing states or battleground states. There could be others, but these are the critical ones (except for Texas).

I only included Texas, just to see if anyone would vote that way.
10  Forum Community / Off-topic Board / Re: "Vote" for all correct elemental matches on: May 09, 2017, 08:47:36 am
It doesn't hurt to be a particle physicist familiar with certain semiconductors and scintillating materials.
True. Now I know whom to ask if I have any science questions. Smiley
11  Forum Community / Off-topic Board / Re: "Vote" for all correct elemental matches on: May 09, 2017, 08:20:27 am
If this test is too easy, then here's a bonus question:

Can you name all the states with abbreviations that are also symbols on the periodic table,
naming the state and the element represented by the same two letters?
All symbols for elements are either one or two letters, but all state abbreviations are two, so that eliminates chemical symbols like C, N , and O for example.

Also, of course, state symbols are both capitals like NJ, whereas elements are not, (like Pu).
So don't be "case sensitive" in answering the bonus question.
12  Forum Community / Off-topic Board / "Vote" for all correct elemental matches on: May 09, 2017, 08:07:18 am
All options contain an element that exists matched with a symbol that exists, although not necessarily the correct symbol. (for example Arsenic is an element and Ac, Ar, and As are all symbols but obviously at least two of them are not the symbol for Arsenic)

I am just curious how many out there know all the elements and symbols.
13  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Predict 2020 (POTUS election) on: April 28, 2017, 01:36:07 am
Does "very close" mean a 269-269 tie? Because that's the only option ont covered by the other poll options
Good point. The point is that it means it could go either way, the other options are for those who want to predict the outcome and since the election is so far away, "very close" seems a more likely option if one thinks the election is too early to call, although I should have included that option as well.
14  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Have you seen this test? on: April 27, 2017, 06:15:44 pm
It's better than the Political Compass or Nolan chart because there are more dimensions, and they seem to be logical: one could be authoritarian but at the same time progressive (e. g. Jacobins or early Bolsheviks) or traditionalist but supportive of liberal democracy. Also a very nice-looking site, typically political test sites look like they came straight out of 90s.

This test has even more dimensions BTW.
According to that test I am a patriotic Social Democrat.
15  General Discussion / Religion & Philosophy / Re: In your opinion, can a Christian believe in universal salvation? on: April 27, 2017, 05:42:40 pm
That's one of those questions that depends on how you define words. It simply depends on how you define "Christian". "Universalism" has long been considered a heresy by many Christians, of course.

A Unitarian is someone who believes that he or she is to good to be damned, while a Universalist believes that "god" is too good to damn anyone. These days there are many Unitarian Universalists who choose not to call themselves "Christian", although, of course, some still do.
16  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Have you seen this test? on: April 27, 2017, 05:13:50 pm
I prefer it to other tests because the hawk dove continuum is usually ignored in most tests and it is the issue about which I feel the strongest.
17  General Politics / Individual Politics / Have you seen this test? on: April 27, 2017, 05:04:16 pm
https://8values.github.io/index.html

I think this is different from other tests, but I don't know if it has been discussed here.
I strongly favor equality over wealth, peace over might, liberty over authority, and progress over tradition.

Post you results here and your opinion of the usefulness of this test.
18  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Trends / Predict the next three election 2020-2028 on: April 27, 2017, 09:55:01 am
I'll guess DDR.

It would be interesting if this thread is still around in 2028.
19  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2020 U.S. Presidential Election / Predict 2020 (POTUS election) on: April 27, 2017, 08:03:46 am
I vote "very close".
20  General Discussion / Religion & Philosophy / Re: When DID "life" begin? on: February 02, 2017, 09:22:00 am
I think the modern answer to the question in the OP comes by reframing it this way, "When did the last common ancestor of all living humans live?" It defines what biologists call the clade of humans. The dominant view among biologists would place the answer at around 200,000 years ago.

I don't this makes sense on the micro scale, with sexual reproduction involved. The last common ancestor of all living humans lived very recently, considering that they weren't the only ancestor of all iliving humans. Wikipedia says that the last common ancestor of all living humans might have beeen as recently as 3000 years ago, but it would be ridiculous to say that that person was the first human.
I'm not sure I get what you're saying. Do believe that we have ancestors that
were "partially human"? That the difference between us and our nonhuman ancestors
is some sort of continuum? That the term "human" is somewhat arbitrary?
It could be similar to a "human's" life in the womb. "Life" doesn't actually begin
at one point in time, but is gradual and at sometime before birth the fetus becomes fully
human. Many people believe that it begins at birth. An alternate theory is that it happens
gradually. At conception the lifeform doesn't look human. Minutes before birth it does.
This seems very similar to human evolution. The "missing" links would be what you
might call partly human.
21  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Have you ever embodied your ethnic stereotype? on: February 02, 2017, 09:10:25 am
I'm a pretentious asshole who complains about everything, so duh.
Well, I like you, even if you are a pretentious asshole. Smiley
22  General Politics / Political Debate / Argue the opposite - pacifism on: January 27, 2017, 01:44:46 pm
My political philosophy is more than pacifism, in fact, I would rank it #2.

Go...
23  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: How many deaths would have been an acceptable price for abolition of slavery? on: January 27, 2017, 01:21:22 pm
The enslavement of human beings was evil, period.  I have an idealistic view that evil (in the form of institutional slavery, genocide or whatever) must be stopped, and the cost might seem very high but is worth it.
The cost of war is not just very high, it's always too high, and therefore not cost effective. The peace dividend is also very high, and can be used to stop war dead in it's track.
Pacifism is the way. War is the problem. Peace is the result of impeccable logic. War is the result of specious logic. As simple as all this is, most people just can't seem to get it. I don't understand why, but I know it is because people are not logical enough. Why people choose the dark side over the light is a mystery, and doesn't bode well for us as a species.
Ah yes, I'm sure that pacifism would have been quite effective at stopping things like slavery and Nazism! Smiley
Actually, no, but that isn't the point.
24  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: How many deaths would have been an acceptable price for abolition of slavery? on: January 27, 2017, 12:10:47 pm
The enslavement of human beings was evil, period.  I have an idealistic view that evil (in the form of institutional slavery, genocide or whatever) must be stopped, and the cost might seem very high but is worth it.
The cost of war is not just very high, it's always too high, and therefore not cost effective. The peace dividend is also very high, and can be used to stop war dead in it's track.
Pacifism is the way. War is the problem. Peace is the result of impeccable logic. War is the result of specious logic. As simple as all this is, most people just can't seem to get it. I don't understand why, but I know it is because people are not logical enough. Why people choose the dark side over the light is a mystery, and doesn't bode well for us as a species.
25  General Discussion / Religion & Philosophy / Re: The Idea of Life. on: January 27, 2017, 10:42:18 am
42=222, but I don't know if that is a meaningful fact

edit: nor if it has anything to do with this thread, as I don't get Kingpolean's post vis a vis the topic at hand
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 155


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines