Mexal Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 9 minutes ago, Kalbear said: In vague rational news, this in depth piece on how crazy the Putin and Russia links are is pretty incredible. Especially the parts about the gold star family. The look into intelligence in Europe and the US is pretty neat. http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-russia-hillary-clinton-united-states-europe-516895 Hah, I was just coming to post that. Looks like we can expect some faked documents within the caches of documents being released to wikileaks and others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris the Blade Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 This is an awesome fucking ran the that is deadon. Quote I wrote, back in November of 2015 — and being willfully misunderstood or attacked for it about half the time, well, Hillary Clinton’s feminist supporters were proven right. Now, a year later, in October of 2016, there is nary a progressive-aligned person who would not agree that yes, in fact, sexism doesplay a role in this election. A very large, very disturbing role, for that matter. We were right. We were vindicated. We won. And it happened in the worst way possible. Quote it’s confirmation of our darkest suspicions about sexism, that while women are killing ourselves to do better and be smarter and work harder, while we’re building resumes, accumulating qualifications, going to classes, applying for extra credit, the only thing all that excellence does, at the end of the day, is to put us on equal footing with some male idiot who’s done precisely none of the work. http://globalcomment.com/goodbye-to-all-that-im-done-with-election-2016/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 4 hours ago, Altherion said: Interesting. Do you share her neoliberal dream of "a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders"? Also, I missed this comment earlier: I think you underestimate the Democratic party by quite a bit. With the release of the Podesta emails, it has become pretty clear that the main reason Sanders failed is that Democratic primary was massively rigged in Clinton's favor. The very schedule of the state primaries was optimized by Clinton's campaign to be favorable to her back in 2014. Likewise, the number, timing and nature of the debates was coordinated with the Clinton campaign. Further, since that did not appear to be enough, a DNC member (sworn to neutrality!) affiliated with the media leaked debate questions to Clinton. And of course they didn't neglect the local stuff either (like the mysterious party affiliation switching in Arizona). The Democratic primary was designed to nominate Clinton and it served its purpose. In retrospect, it's pretty amazing that Sanders was able to do as well as he did. Holy fuck, Altherion - did you even bother reading those emails? Yes, the DNC absolutely coordinated with clinton on these things because that's what the party does for the main runners. It is not a particularly massive advantage, and as pointed out in the emails themselves the main reason they did it this way was specifically to hurt the Republican run. The idea that Clinton had a MASSIVE advantage because they got to pick debate times that would work best against the planned Republican times- really? This is where you're going with this? I think you misread this entirely. The mails established two things: that they wanted to coordinate to beat the Republican nominee and or manipulate the Republican primary a bit and that the Clinton campaign did not think they would be particularly challenged. As to the neoliberal dream bullshit - did you read the sentence right after which makes it clear she's talking about energy markets? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 8 hours ago, Altherion said: There's an interesting Atlantic article about this. The Clinton campaign has generally been very confident about which states it devotes resources to, preferring to go on the attack in states where Trump is competitive (if not always favored) rather than defend its "firewall." If this strategy works, they will have a significant electoral college victory. However, there does exist a small, but not entirely negligible probability of a 2017 article titled "The Epic Hubris of the Clinton Data Team": if Trump manages to hold on to all of the states they're attacking and breach the firewall (e.g. by winning New Hampshire), he would win. Its possible. Although I'd bet nearly anything Clinton is going to win Nevada at this point, which was never part of the "firewall" and covers any loss of New Hampshire and ME-2. If Clinton loses though, I don't think its because her data folks screwed up. I think it'd because of some combination of factors that no matter of analytics could overcome. Sometimes the better campaign just loses; the best recent example being Begich in 2014. He ran a fantastic campaign, but it was Alaska in a mid-term, and there was just no getting over the fact that the electorate there did not want a Democratic senator anymore. 5 hours ago, A True Kaniggit said: Didn't someone mention earlier that it makes no sense for candidates to waste resources on states they have no chance of winning? I live in Louisiana and I've been seeing a lot of anti-Trump ads recently. I think we can all agree that there is no chance of my state going for Clinton, so what's the point of spending funds on these ads? Just to try to swing the popular vote more in Hillary's direction? Could be they see something unexpected. The Times-Picayune had a poll out a week or two ago showing Trump only +3, although that's almost certainly a huge outlier; every other poll has given Trump a large lead. Some of it is probably hoping to boost Democratic turnout for the Senate race, and some of the other downballot races. Also, do you happen to be close to the Texas border? You could be seeing ads that are primarily meant for Texas (where Clinton probably doesn't have a shot statewide but turnout is up so much that Democrats may take a couple congressional seats they weren't expected to) and just so happen to be in the same media market. On another note, I saw an estimate that 70% of the estimated electorate in Florida will have voted by Sunday. I know Florida is always slow and weird in counting election results (understatement of the year!), but we may actually know who wins the state relatively early Tuesday night. Unlike 2012 where the state wasn't called by the networks until 3 days after the election, and it wasn't totally clear Obama had won it until several hours after the national race was called for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IheartIheartTesla Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 41 minutes ago, Fez said: On another note, I saw an estimate that 70% of the estimated electorate in Florida will have voted by Sunday. I know Florida is always slow and weird in counting election results (understatement of the year!), but we may actually know who wins the state relatively early Tuesday night. Unlike 2012 where the state wasn't called by the networks until 3 days after the election, and it wasn't totally clear Obama had won it until several hours after the national race was called for him. Florida is interesting in that all the poll averages (538, HuffPo, even RCP) consistently give Clinton +1.5-2.5, but 538's model adjusts for trend lines and fundamentals and basically brings it to a tie. An excellent test study to see if there are systematic effects that the polls are not picking up. Polling in early voting states probably also messes up response rates, so there may be a systematic bias. Just don't know which way it will go (I suspect towards the Democrats) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ariadne23 Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 3 hours ago, mormont said: Can we please stop talking about Brexit as if it has any relevance to the US presidential election? It's a different electorate, in a different country, participating in an election rather than a referendum, concerned with different issues, and the polling was conducted differently with different results. If people want to say that there could be a surprise, that's fine. But that surprise has SFA to do with Brexit. I think it's mostly handy shorthand for "that time when I realized white nationalism was a thing." In any case, it's for the good for the anti-Trump crowd if you can stomach it since it encourages voter turnout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 1 hour ago, Kalbear said: Holy fuck, Altherion - did you even bother reading those emails? Yes, the DNC absolutely coordinated with clinton on these things because that's what the party does for the main runners. It is not a particularly massive advantage, and as pointed out in the emails themselves the main reason they did it this way was specifically to hurt the Republican run. The idea that Clinton had a MASSIVE advantage because they got to pick debate times that would work best against the planned Republican times- really? This is where you're going with this? I think you misread this entirely. The mails established two things: that they wanted to coordinate to beat the Republican nominee and or manipulate the Republican primary a bit and that the Clinton campaign did not think they would be particularly challenged. As to the neoliberal dream bullshit - did you read the sentence right after which makes it clear she's talking about energy markets? Why are you still interacting with him like he's here to make an argument in good faith? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sologdin Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 dunno, what's wrong with a hemispheric common market, open borders, &c.? seems like only illiberal nazi types should oppose that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 4 minutes ago, sologdin said: dunno, what's wrong with a hemispheric common market, open borders, &c.? seems like only illiberal nazi types should oppose that. If I was the leader of another country in the Western hemisphere, particularly one that shared a land border with the US, I'm not sure I'd want these open borders. Too many fucking crazies here that need to be contained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongRider Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 3 minutes ago, Fez said: If I was the leader of another country in the Western hemisphere, particularly one that shared a land border with the US, I'm not sure I'd want these open borders. Too many fucking crazies here that need to be contained. You know my co-workers? LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGimletEye Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 7 minutes ago, sologdin said: dunno, what's wrong with a hemispheric common market, open borders, &c.? seems like only illiberal nazi types should oppose that. With regard to international trade problems, one of the solutions is for China to adopt a little more socialism or communism ie better social safety nets. The irony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boris the Blade Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 Came across a video of Jon Stewart talking about the Twitter war he had with Trump. After, I went to Google and typed in fuckfacevonclownstick, it brought Trumps Twitter up and the latest in his feed. I needed that laugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Future Null Infinity Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 Please, a question to my fellow american friends : Has the FBI email investigation slaughtered the whole Clinton campaign? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ormond Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 14 minutes ago, Future Null Infinity said: Please, a question to my fellow american friends : Has the FBI email investigation slaughtered the whole Clinton campaign? Unfortunately we have to wait until Tuesday night to know that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Future Null Infinity Posted November 4, 2016 Share Posted November 4, 2016 10 minutes ago, Ormond said: Unfortunately we have to wait until Tuesday night to know that. Thank you very much for the answer, it looks like it will be a very close election result Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.