Jump to content

U.S. Elections: Orange is the New Wack


Manhole Eunuchsbane

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Roose Boltons Pet Leech said:

If you walk like a duck and quack like a duck, getting outraged at being called a duck seems a bit silly.

I've seen this same logic applied to transgender people, I don't think its a very polite or even acceptable way to treat people these days.

It's not always our responsibility or even place to define and label people based on what it looks or seems like to us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Roose Boltons Pet Leech said:

If you walk like a duck and quack like a duck, getting outraged at being called a duck seems a bit silly.

In more interesting news, another poll out of Alaska - Trump +1. Along with Utah, Georgia, and Arizona, Alaska might be a state to watch.

Trump would actually have to exert special effort to lose Alaska.  Long as he makes the right noises about oil, he wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, DunderMifflin said:

I've seen this same logic applied to transgender people, I don't think its a very polite or even acceptable way to treat people these days.

It's not always our responsibility or even place to define and label people based on what it looks or seems like to us.

uh what?  honestly have no clue what you're getting at with the bold.. 
Supporting Trump means you are either a bigot or selfish enough not to care about his bigoted policies which makes you just as bad and an enemy of social justice and civil rights. Either way, deplorable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Roose Boltons Pet Leech said:

If you walk like a duck and quack like a duck, getting outraged at being called a duck seems a bit silly.

In more interesting news, another poll out of Alaska - Trump +1. Along with Utah, Georgia, and Arizona, Alaska might be a state to watch.

We are not staying up that late to see what Alaska does.

actually, I am staying up that late because the union contract gets me night premiums so I took a graveyard shift for august to December.

but the prospect of Alaska flipping excites me.

I hereby declare the next thread should be subtitled : "the lesser of four evils"

/johnoliver

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DunderMifflin said:

Also, it's seems calling someone racist can be considered defamation in some states so it's probably not a good idea for a Presidential candidate to do it based on who someone votes for.

Where are you getting that? For someone without a dog in America's fight you are possessed of (and dedicated to) some interesting notions. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, DraculaAD1972 said:

Same goes for Hillary fans. They paper over the fact that she is a proven liar who represents corporate interests rather than the American people. They paper over her husbands shocking sexual history. They ignore that she is funded by the folks who fund Isis. They turn a blind eye to her deletion of emails and the sham investigation that followed. They don't seem bothered by her interventions in the Middle East that destabilised the region. They seem to approve of media collusion against her opponent Trump. They don't talk much about how bernie sanders had the dnc conspiring against him to enable her nomination. 

So, Daniel Plainview, I wouldn't be shocked at you also either being wilfully ignorant, or really fucking naive. 

For you, sir.

http://www.scarymommy.com/hillary-clinton-myths-debunked/

So you can, you know, dig yourself out of that hole of ignorance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must say I get the idea of delusional and wanting your guy to win I just don't get how with 95% of the polls saying the same thing that Hillary is leading, an Trump is struggling with married white women/whites with college degrees/ and doesn't have as many reps as dems supporting Hillary tht Trump supporters seriously think the polls are rigged or lying 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Time to stir up some controversy.

One of the things that bugged me a lot about Sanders extending his run was that towards the end he and his spokespeople were saying over and over how the system was rigged, how there was no shot and it wasn't fair, etc. Which only got more fuel with the DWS shenanigans. Never mind that this got shown again and again to be full of shit - the problem is that we already had 6 months of people on the Dem side claiming that the election was rigged, followed by 6 months more of it being claimed elsewhere.

I'm really starting to believe that this is the biggest crisis in this election at this point - that a fairly large chunk of people from both sides are going to look at the results and believe that they are wrong. 

I also suspect that the results are going to look a lot more different than expected by most pollsters, because while pollsters do a good job of figuring out how someone is going to vote based on demographic info, they cannot predict turnouts in any meaningful way - and this election is likely to be really weird in turnout. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kalbear said:

Time to stir up some controversy.

One of the things that bugged me a lot about Sanders extending his run was that towards the end he and his spokespeople were saying over and over how the system was rigged, how there was no shot and it wasn't fair, etc. Which only got more fuel with the DWS shenanigans. Never mind that this got shown again and again to be full of shit - the problem is that we already had 6 months of people on the Dem side claiming that the election was rigged, followed by 6 months more of it being claimed elsewhere.

I'm really starting to believe that this is the biggest crisis in this election at this point - that a fairly large chunk of people from both sides are going to look at the results and believe that they are wrong. 

I also suspect that the results are going to look a lot more different than expected by most pollsters, because while pollsters do a good job of figuring out how someone is going to vote based on demographic info, they cannot predict turnouts in any meaningful way - and this election is likely to be really weird in turnout. 

I disagree Hillary has a great GOTV ground game and Trump has a rabid cult following I think turnout will be down from 2012 only slightly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Stannis is the man....nis said:

I disagree Hillary has a great GOTV ground game and Trump has a rabid cult following I think turnout will be down from 2012 only slightly. 

That's one possibility.

Another is that the AA vote, which had been turning out in absurdly record numbers for Obama, isn't nearly as motivated. 

Another is that Clinton's GOTV campaign is crazy successful and Trump gets blown away in states no one dreamed Dems could take, getting a result similar to, say, Reagan vs. Mondale. 

Another is that white men come out and vote at almost twice the rate they usually do. And manage to suppress minority vote via Trump poll watchers.

Really, any of these and many other scenarios could happen, and all would make 'sense'. What would be surprising is if the actual turnouts looked anything like 2012, or really any other year. While neither candidate is particularly liked by a lot of the populace I've never seen it dominate news and media to this degree before. It's going to be weird.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heck, here ya go - US should learn the lessons from Brexit.

Quote

Ahead of that contest, the betting markets, pundits and media were united in predicting a comfortable win for the pro-EU side, who wanted the U.K. to remain in the EU. Most of the polls, too, put “Remain” ahead (especially polls conducted by telephone), while the few online polls that suggested a Brexit victory were dismissed as rogue outliers riddled with sampling errors. Pundits pointed to the unfavorable ratings of leading Brexiteers like Nigel Farage who, they argued, were too divisive for Brexit to win. Others pointed to how even most voters accepted there did not seem to be much of a plan for life after Brexit. The Remain camp, we were also told, had the superior ground game—it seemed to be knocking on more doors, had more offices and had a developed strategy for targeting young university towns.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

I would like to point the British public was shockingly uniformed on Brexit with many voting for it not realizing what it was which for all the jokes about how stupid Americans are we won't be. Also Trump is already lagging behind Mitt's early voting in both NC and Florida http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/donald-trump-early-voting-clinton-229835#ixzz4NJu6rB1F

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Stannis is the man....nis said:

I would like to point the British public was shockingly uniformed on Brexit with many voting for it not realizing what it was which for all the jokes about how stupid Americans are we won't be. Also Trump is already lagging behind Mitt's early voting in both NC and Florida http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/donald-trump-early-voting-clinton-229835#ixzz4NJu6rB1F

Oh, I don't think it's going to happen like Brexit - but I do think that it's a possibility, and it's one of the things that makes it a lot harder to predict. In particular I think that Trump is nosediving so much that the press has switched from trying to make everything equivalent and make it a horserace to their other happy tactic - the disaster porn shooting, where they bend over backwards to try and find even more horrible things to talk about with respect to Trump. My gut feeling is that his really gung ho voters will vote for him happily, but a whole lot of rank and file Republicans will see the writing on the wall, understand Trump is going to lose, and simply not vote for him (and possibly not vote at all). 

My point, simply, is that we've had a surprisingly easy time of predicting elections for about 12 years now thanks to a combination of incredibly partisan lines and fairly easy to predict demographics and turnout systems. Whatever happens, I don't think we'll see a 'regular' outcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

This has been my major fear for a while now. I was in London for the Brexit vote...it was a surreal experience the next day, like some kind of brain bomb had gone off. We stayed up all night watching it unfold, so didn't have that 'go to bed country's fine, wake up country's fucked' sensation, but most did and it showed.

Oh, and re: what Manhole was saying, IMO there are definitely some posters in here who, so far as I can see, do in fact refuse to concede any validity to significant criticisms of Clinton. Moreover, they often tend to go ballistic towards any/all criticisms of Clinton. Maybe I've missed said concessions or maybe it was for things so minor or long ago that they might as well not have bothered...but like Manhole, I'm someone who desperately wants Clinton to win yet still has found the often hyper-aggressive reactionism to any serious criticism to be quite noticeable in here...commonly the critics are stupid, juvenile, ignorant, sexist and/or dishonest.

You can post a 6 paragraph post stating how godawful Trump is, how important it is Clinton win, etc. but if that post contains a sentence or 2 that's critical of her, you can expect that to be the point of contention/evidence you or your view is ________. I think maybe they've gotten so pissed at all the people trying to falsely equate Trump and Clinton that they take any criticism as party to that...but that's lazy reactionism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stannis is the man....nis said:

I must say I get the idea of delusional and wanting your guy to win I just don't get how with 95% of the polls saying the same thing that Hillary is leading, an Trump is struggling with married white women/whites with college degrees/ and doesn't have as many reps as dems supporting Hillary tht Trump supporters seriously think the polls are rigged or lying 

IMO, the bedrock for all this is the old 'left-wing media bias' thing. Once you convince your supporters to dismiss any unwelcome information as biased/part of some kind of soft conspiracy, it's a pretty natural step to constant confirmation bias.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, James Arryn said:

This has been my major fear for a while now. I was in London for the Brexit vote...it was a surreal experience the next day, like some kind of brain bomb had gone off. We stayed up all night watching it unfold, so didn't have that 'go to bed country's fine, wake up country's fucked' sensation, but most did and it showed.

Oh, and re: what Manhole was saying, IMO there are definitely some posters in here who, so far as I can see, do in fact refuse to concede any validity to significant criticisms of Clinton. Moreover, they often tend to go ballistic towards any/all criticisms of Clinton. Maybe I've missed said concessions or maybe it was for things so minor or long ago that they might as well not have bothered...but like Manhole, I'm someone who desperately wants Clinton to win yet still has found the often hyper-aggressive reactionism to any serious criticism to be quite noticeable in here...commonly the critics are stupid, juvenile, ignorant, sexist and/or dishonest.

You can post a 6 paragraph post stating how godawful Trump is, how important it is Clinton win, etc. but if that post contains a sentence or 2 that's critical of her, you can expect that to be the point of contention/evidence you or your view is ________. 

I would love to see serious and significant criticisms of her that are not apart of conspiracy theories that have those critics failing to provide proof, or whining about a petty comment and acting like it was the end of the world, or the criticism implying that Trump and Clinton are on equal levels of bad when they clearly are not. 

 But hey, pointing that out means that you see no issue with Clinton yea? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Except he's referring to specific folks who did something deplorable. Don't see an equivalency here.

He's doing a lot more than that. He's suggesting that those people 'represent' his opponent: tying them to her, but in so doing also implying that this is what Clinton supporters are like. There's an equivalency there, for me. But in any case, it's a slimy statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Daniel Plainview said:

John Oliver really showed just how terrible Stein and Johnson are on tonight's show. His jokes were also pretty damn funny regarding the third party candidates. Oh, and Joe Exotic, my fucking god haha. 

John Oliver really offers a fair and unbiased view. lmao. I actually wonder how many liberals have these comics as the only source of their political news(or any news for that matter). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...