lokisnow Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 The last line, damn. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/06/us/politics/latina-hotel-workers-harness-force-of-labor-and-of-politics-in-las-vegas.html?_r=0 -- suggestion for future thread subtitle: Nate Silver's pollercoaster! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lokisnow Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 A general rule of journalism is to always compare two unlike numbers to some unknown third number that is openly referred to but not mentioned. I think they do this deliberately to confuse their audience. Thus you get nonsense like "57,000 voters voted Friday an increase of eleventy percent from 1904!" why they don't compare two like numbers in journalism, I will never understand. wouldnt it be easier to write "57,000 voters cast ballots on Friday; in 2012, 51,000 voters cast ballots on the same Friday for an increase of 11%." Everyone inevitably writes percentages into all comparisons forcing me to get out a calculator, mentally do the algebra to figure out if I divide or multiply to reverse the percentage and find the missing (2012 or 2008) number. It's starting to become quite the pet peeve. I can reasonably compare 57,000 to 51,000, why do these writers make reasonable comparisons so hard! In any event, the nyt says that in Florida 2 in 3 Hispanic early voters voted in 2012, which doesn't mean anything. Later in the article they mention that Hispanic turnout was 48% in 2012. So algebra, 48=2/3x, x equals 72 So if we figure 72% is a latino turnout ceiling and turnout will be below that (because that is a crazy number), Hispanic turnout Still has a good chance to be at parity with white and black historic turnouts in the mid to high sixties. latest Latino decisions polling has Clinton at 76, and trump at 14. plug that 65% with a 76 share into 538s swing o magic and take a look at a really preposterous change. and although 74% Latino turnout sounds crazy, 82% in that same poll say they are certain to vote, so one datum in support of that insanity. 2am posts are the best posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lordsteve666 Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 Just out of interest what do people here think would be the best outcome for tomorrow for a Trump loss? I'm personally torn between i'd like to see him squirm for the whole night as his campaign tears itself apart around him as the result slowly becomes apparent, and seeing his campaign nuked from orbit (it's the only way to be sure) in a landslide Dem victory that destroys him utterly, leaving naught but ashes. I'm swinging towards the slow death being more entertaining though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Future Null Infinity Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 Hi friends, is Donald Trump an isolationist? I think that he want problems with Mexico, China, the arab world and the nato members and it will end up with the half of the world that will not want to talk to him and his response will surely be a little rhetoric that is : "America is great and we don't need friends" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted November 7, 2016 Author Share Posted November 7, 2016 The more I think about it, the more I think Trump's loss of access to Twitter is significant. This is the first time in his campaign he's been willing to listen to other people telling him what to do (or not to do). He wouldn't be doing that if he really, truly believed he was winning. He'd only do it if he had doubts, if he thought he was facing a narrow defeat and was out of ideas. And if that's true, it suggests his internal campaign data is telling him the same thing. Let's hope they're right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inigima Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 31 minutes ago, mormont said: The more I think about it, the more I think Trump's loss of access to Twitter is significant. This is the first time in his campaign he's been willing to listen to other people telling him what to do (or not to do). He wouldn't be doing that if he really, truly believed he was winning. He'd only do it if he had doubts, if he thought he was facing a narrow defeat and was out of ideas. And if that's true, it suggests his internal campaign data is telling him the same thing. Let's hope they're right. My understanding is that he doesn't really have internal polling data right now, because he refused to pay for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 Whew, today's song is. Anyway, seems like its time for people to make their official predictions for tomorrow; who wants to be a pundit? I think: President Clinton wins 335-203, with a popular vote margin of 50-45-3-1-1 (the last one being McMullin and various fringe candidates). Clinton states I'm least confident in: North Carolina, Arizona, New Hampshire Trump states I'm least confident in: Ohio, Georgia, Alaska Possible dark horse surprises: Trump winning Michigan, Clinton winning South Carolina Senate Democrats take a 52-46 majority, with run-offs pending for Georgia and Louisiana. Republicans will be heavy favorites for both though, and the final result will be a Democratic majority of 52-48. Unless there's the dream scenario in Louisiana where Republicans split their vote so much that the run-off ends up being between the two Democrats. In which case it'd be 53-47. Democratic wins I'm least confident in: New Hampshire, Missouri, North Carolina Republican wins I'm least confident in: Indiana, Florida. Thing is though, almost all the races are so damn close right now that almost anything could happen. Democrats look to have a clear path to 49 seats, and a lot of options to hit 50+, but no guarantees to get any of them. I'm leaning towards Democrats having the better night though just because of what I think happens at the Presidential level. Of the races that are at least a little competitive (or were earlier in the year) I'm sure that Republicans will hold Ohio and Arizona and Democrats will take Illinois, but that's about it. House I don't follow individual races enough to make specific predictions, but I think Democrats net between 15-20 seats and Republicans end up holding a majority of around 230 to 205. If that's the result, I think its even money whether Paul Ryan keeps his Speakership. If Democrats do a bit better, get that margin down to 225 to 210 or better, I think Ryan's gone. Governors I really haven't closely followed many of these races, but I think Democrats pick up North Carolina and Indiana and there's a good chance Republicans pick up Vermont (yeah, I know). Democrats look likely to hold Missouri, Montana, and West Virginia. New Hampshire is a toss-up, but I think Democrats hold it based on Clinton winning the state. State Legislatures I think Democrats have a reasonably good night, based on how the rest of the races go, but not an overwhelming wave. The margin isn't big enough and too many states are gerrymandered. Possible Democratic takeovers: Alaska House, Arizona Senate, Colorado Senate, Maine Senate, Michigan House, Minnesota House, Nevada House and Senate, New Hampshire House and Senate, New Mexico House, Washington Senate. Possible Republican takeovers: Iowa House, Kentucky House Democrats have a lot more opportunities just because Republicans control so much more right now. I don't think Democrats take all those chambers, but they could in a good night. In a wave there's others that could flip too, but it doesn't look like a wave election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mexal Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 Final national polls before tomorrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mexal Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 This is just as scary as Trump as president. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongRider Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 8 hours ago, Stannis is the man....nis said: Speaking of Trump get this Kellyanne Conway says the Trump campaign "beefed up our field team" in NV after seeing the early returns..........70% of the state already voted "Beefed up our field team" means they hit the slots in Vegas and beat up that one protester in Reno. Oh, a couple probably stopped to give a few of the girls some campaign literature in those funny houses in Carson City. You know, the ones with the long wings with all the windows. LOL, nice showing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Walker Texas Ranger Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 2 hours ago, lokisnow said: Thus you get nonsense like "57,000 voters voted Friday an increase of eleventy percent from 1904!" why they don't compare two like numbers in journalism, I will never understand. Thus you get nonsense like "57,000 voters voted Friday an increase of eleventy percent from 1904!" why they don't compare two like numbers in journalism, I will never understand. wouldnt it be easier to write "57,000 voters cast ballots on Friday; in 2012, 51,000 voters cast ballots on the same Friday for an increase of 11%." it be easier to write "57,000 voters cast ballots on Friday; in 2012, 51,000 voters cast ballots on the same Friday for an increase of 11%." THey have wordcount and space restrictions. IF you have two numbers, and a it's number that an be calculated solely from those two, then it's a waste of space to include all three. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaxom 1974 Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 10 hours ago, OldGimletEye said: I think it's hilariously funny how conservatives try to delegitimize every source of information to include most media and sources of data provided by various government agencies, but then try to argue that the only legitimate sources of information are things like Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. I'd posit that Fox news isn't cutting it for the hardcore, right wing conservatives. If my Facebook feed (I know, I know...) is any indication, those I know who are beyond solidly Trump aren't using Fox as a primary source...they're partial to the deepest, darkest recesses of the Internet for their "news", and every other source, no matter how independent or non partisan is a "liberal rag"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGimletEye Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 Just now, Jaxom 1974 said: I'd posit that Fox news isn't cutting it for the hardcore, right wing conservatives. If my Facebook feed (I know, I know...) is any indication, those I know who are beyond solidly Trump aren't using Fox as a primary source...they're partial to the deepest, darkest recesses of the Internet for their "news", and every other source, no matter how independent or non partisan is a "liberal rag"... Yes, it's gotten so ridiculous that even Fox News has become a betrayer of the Revolution. There have been conservative types, like say David Frumm, that have tried to warn the Republican Party about its current trajectory. But, they won't listen and just hand wave everything as being "liberal". The Republican Party is on a demographic and intellectual death spiral. One hand, seeing the Republican Party crash and burn is satisfying. But, I also know, we need two reasonably healthy parties in this country. And the sooner the Republican Party fixes itself, the better for everyone. But, I don't see the Republican Party making any changes any time soon. It will double down. Let's say it turns out that Trump gets beaten largely because of the Hispanic Vote. Will the Republican Party learn it's lesson? Nope, not bloody likely. Instead, they'll speak of voter fraud. They'll just double down on the crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sologdin Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 they doubled down after 2012. those were glenn beck's exact words. so this year should be a quadrupling down, taking 2012 into account. or maybe they just go straight to tripling down, as mere doubling down has become insufficiently hardcore for their ideological tastes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGimletEye Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 Just now, sologdin said: they doubled down after 2012. those were glenn beck's exact words. so this year should be a quadrupling down, taking 2012 into account. or maybe they just go straight to tripling down, as mere doubling down has become insufficiently hardcore for their ideological tastes. LOL. Doubling down isn't conservative enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongRider Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 12 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said: They'll just double down on the crazy. Doubling down ultimately is a sucker bet. Sure, one can win a hand or two, but ultimately, it's a losing hand and one amateur players really like. Not only have they created themselves a big problem with the Hispanic vote, but I think they now have themselves a bit of a woman, make that, a Nasty Woman problem now too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongRider Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 4 minutes ago, sologdin said: or maybe they just go straight to tripling down, as mere doubling down has become insufficiently hardcore for their ideological tastes. 3 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said: LOL. Doubling down isn't conservative enough. They should just go straight to the strip bars and forget the tables. The strip joints are where all the 'real' conservatives hang out. Where trickle down economics raises all boats. ewwwww! I just grossed myself out with my own joke! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGimletEye Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 3 minutes ago, Nasty LongRider said: Doubling down ultimately is a sucker bet. Sure, one can win a hand or two, but ultimately, it's a losing hand and one amateur players really like. Not only have they created themselves a big problem with the Hispanic vote, but I think they now have themselves a bit of a woman, make that, a Nasty Woman problem now too. Given my demographic background, I know more than my fair share of Trump supporters. And I've had more than one occasion to hear a couple of Republican knuckleheads sit there talk about why African American voters vote Democrat. They seem perplexed or maybe they just act like they have no clue. Evidently, they have no clue about the effect Barry Goldwater had. Or they just refuse to acknowledge it. Donald Trump may very well be the Barry Goldwater with respect to Hispanic voters and women voters. And Republican knuckle heads will sit there and wonder how the Republican Party lost those voters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongRider Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 11 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said: And Republican knuckle heads will sit there and wonder how the Republican Party lost those voters. There have already been reports with photos/video of very long lines for early voting. Tomorrow we'll see more of that and it will be in the neighborhoods of the Hispanic and black voters, where the voter suppression tactics are most visible and abhorrent. This will be seen worldwide and it will be part of America's shame. Make America Great Again? Here's a clue to the clueless....don't suppress the vote. Meanwhile, the ones the Repub's want to suppress are made of tougher stuff and they will stand in long lines if they have to, they've done it before and will do it again. And they will remember, and the Repub's can double down all they want to, but the world is watching and we know, oh yes, we know. After Trump loses it will be interesting to see the 'Grand Old Party' tear itself apart. Get busy you bastards, we don't need you anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGimletEye Posted November 7, 2016 Share Posted November 7, 2016 6 minutes ago, Nasty LongRider said: the world is watching and we know, oh yes, we know. Under the sea, Republicans wonder why nobody likes them, while the demographic tide turns against them. I know, I know, oh, oh, oh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.