Posts that are crazy with hindsight

[ExtremeConservative]

Just found this one when going through the TV character voting thread:

Ebenezer Scrooge Conservative
Grim Reeper Conservative

Jacob Marley Reform/Trump Conservative
Ghost of Past Reform

Ghost of Present Secular
Tiny TimSecular
Fred Secular
Bob C'ratchet Secular

Charles Dickens Secular

[shua]

Just found this one when going through the TV character voting thread:

Ebenezer Scrooge Conservative
Grim Reeper Conservative

Jacob Marley Reform/Trump Conservative
Ghost of Past Reform

Ghost of Present Secular
Tiny TimSecular
Fred Secular
Bob C'ratchet Secular

Charles Dickens Secular

I'm not sure what hindsight adds to this.  That a ghost would be secularist is rather far fetched on the face of it.  Reform sounds right though as that's kind of the whole point of the book.

[CXSmith]

Da-Jon has tended to use "secular" as a synonym for "liberal" in the past.

[Vice President PiT]

Da-Jon has tended to use "secular" as a synonym for "liberal" in the past.

     Looks like that is what he was doing there, which is silly in an altogether different way.

[Kingpoleon]

With or without hindsight, this user's posts are always all crazy.

[White Trash]

With or without hindsight, this user's posts are always all crazy.

Boo! Hiss! Get off the stage!

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

When Naso was allegedly a Trump cultist 12 years before it was cool: http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=13303.msg291676#msg291676

and then he went through the anti-Trump phase



Ahhh, that signature is just a cherry!

[MT Treasurer]

Most posts in these threads:

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=223324.0
http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=233338.0
http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=246151.0
http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=247983.0
http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=247612.0 (even I underestimated Johnson here)

Aaaaand...

So...

NH: D+2 = Safe D, nothing to see here.
AZ: R+4 or less = Safe R, nothing to see here. AZ polls should never be trusted.
NV: D+2 = Toss-Up! Totally winnable for Republicans! NV polls should totally be trusted!
WI: D+7 (or more) = Toss-Up maybe Tilt D at the most! Republicans can totally win here!

Got it.

But you were mostly right regarding NV, so I'll give you that.

Troll

See: context. ("How many terms will Maggie Hassan serve as Senator?")

Mods, I thought we stopped editorializing titles? Leave your (garbage) trolling out of the titles TNVol.

Fixed, but not surprised to see you believing a poll that shows Clinton and Trump basically tied in NH.

Suffolk isn't really that junk. In any case it shows Ayotte overperforming Trump by a considerable margin, which is quite consistent with most polls.

Oops.

B-b-b-but WI must be a toss-up because it was so close in 2000 and 2004 and muh home boy Walker and THREE TIMES IN FOUR YEARS!!!

Just posting this here because you seem to have a weird obsession with WI. Not healthy, man.

But I think this one is hard to top:  

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=220621.0

[xīngkěruì]

Most posts in these threads:

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=223324.0
http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=233338.0
http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=246151.0
http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=247983.0
http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=247612.0 (even I underestimated Johnson here)

Aaaaand...

So...

NH: D+2 = Safe D, nothing to see here.
AZ: R+4 or less = Safe R, nothing to see here. AZ polls should never be trusted.
NV: D+2 = Toss-Up! Totally winnable for Republicans! NV polls should totally be trusted!
WI: D+7 (or more) = Toss-Up maybe Tilt D at the most! Republicans can totally win here!

Got it.

But you were mostly right regarding NV, so I'll give you that.

Troll

See: context. ("How many terms will Maggie Hassan serve as Senator?")

Mods, I thought we stopped editorializing titles? Leave your (garbage) trolling out of the titles TNVol.

Fixed, but not surprised to see you believing a poll that shows Clinton and Trump basically tied in NH.

Suffolk isn't really that junk. In any case it shows Ayotte overperforming Trump by a considerable margin, which is quite consistent with most polls.

Oops.

B-b-b-but WI must be a toss-up because it was so close in 2000 and 2004 and muh home boy Walker and THREE TIMES IN FOUR YEARS!!!

Just posting this here because you seem to have a weird obsession with WI. Not healthy, man.

But I think this one is hard to top:  

http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=220621.0

You're really going to argue that I have unhealthy obsessions, Mr. VA and NH are Titanium D?

Yes, I was wrong about Wisconsin before the election, but it wasn't crazy to think Hillary was favored, given the polling and Obama's performance there. I maintain that had Hillary not taken the state for granted, she probably would have won there, albeit narrowly. Still, I'll acknowledge that it's a swing state now, whereas some people seem convinced that it's suddenly deep red and unwinnable for Democrats, and that's much sillier than anything I said prior to the election. Btw, where are your posts about Hillary winning NH by more than ME, or even VT?

[Vice President PiT]

     The polls were way off on Wisconsin, so I can't criticize someone for thinking Trump wouldn't have a shot there. The odd thing about the election polling is that it was alright on the national level, but it was so wrong in some of the states.

[MT Treasurer]

     The polls were way off on Wisconsin, so I can't criticize someone for thinking Trump wouldn't have a shot there. The odd thing about the election polling is that it was alright on the national level, but it was so wrong in some of the states.

My point was more that it was always clear that NH would vote to the left of WI and that Johnson had a better chance of winning reelection than Ayotte. That's why I posted this here.

And yeah, I was surprised NH ended up being more Republican than ME. ME-02 though...

[CXSmith]

With or without hindsight, this user's posts are always all crazy.

Very true

[Vosem]

With or without hindsight, this user's posts are always all crazy.

...like what

[Clinton1996]

With or without hindsight, this user's posts are always all crazy.

...like what

Lol how

[Confused Democrat]

With or without hindsight, this user's posts are always all crazy.

...like what

I thought you would know about this already.

[Technocracy Timmy]

With or without hindsight, this user's posts are always all crazy.

I cannot believe how incredibly stupid you are. I mean rock-hard stupid. Dehydrated-rock-hard stupid. Stupid so stupid that it goes way beyond the stupid we know into a whole different dimension of stupid. You are trans-stupid stupid. Meta-stupid. Stupid collapsed on itself so far that even the neutrons have collapsed. Stupid gotten so dense that no intellect can escape. Singularity stupid. Blazing hot mid-day sun on Mercury stupid. You emit more stupid in one second than our entire galaxy emits in a year. Quasar stupid. Your writing has to be a troll. Nothing in our universe can really be this stupid. Perhaps this is some primordial fragment from the original big bang of stupid. Some pure essence of a stupid so uncontaminated by anything else as to be beyond the laws of physics that we know. I'm sorry. I can't go on. This is an epiphany of stupid for me. After this, you may not hear from me again for a while. I don't have enough strength left to deride your ignorant assertions about me and half baked comments about unimportant trivia, or any of the rest of this drivel. Duh.

[CXSmith]

This thread was a mistake

[Kingpoleon]

This thread was a mistake

I got a PM from someone asking me how their posts are crazy. I can't even...

[Comrade Funk]

This thread was a mistake

I got a PM from someone asking me how their posts are crazy. I can't even...

At least it wasn't me. Can I have some credit there?

[L.D. Smith, Aggie! It's Real Expenses Again]

This thread was a mistake

No sh*&.

It's far more challenging to find a post that's sane AND works in hindsight.

(A good example of this would be Talleyrand's prediction of Rubio v. Murphy)

[ExtremeConservative]

Yes, he could have won.

Let the flame war begin.

For God's sake, Phil.  You pretty much think that every other state in America is going blue except for PA.  The problem is that your state is going deep blue a la New Hampshire when the other states--CO, VA, FL, etc.--are doing just fine as red states.  Wake up, man!  Santorum is a red state republican in a blue state.  End of story.  He lost because he stopped representing his constituency.  That's all.  Send him here to Colorado and we'll elect him for you.

Context: Could Rick Santorum have won his Senate race in 2006?

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

I believe in majority rules, in free trade, free enterprise, freedom of speech. What always made the United States a great country was that we were the opposite of the rest of the world.

[Senator LouisvilleThunder]

With or without hindsight, this user's posts are always all crazy.

I guess you predicted what that user who didn't post anything yet would become!

[Kamala]

With or without hindsight, this user's posts are always all crazy.

Man, I almost wanted to have beef with Kingpoleon.

[Senator LouisvilleThunder]

With or without hindsight, this user's posts are always all crazy.

Man, I almost wanted to have beef with Kingpoleon.

The funny thing is that Kingpoleon posted that the day before I posted for the first time. (I have been a registered member for a few weeks before that.)