US Elections - furniture shopping with disaster

[Lily Valley]

1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

There was a rumor from a friend of mine who said that Breitbart has another Clinton accuser coming out.

I'm otherwise expecting that Clinton plays not to lose, and baits Trump somewhat but not insanely.

And on that note: while I don't think Clinton looked amazing debating Trump in the first debate, I am not sure there has been a more calculated, planned and thorough takedown of the other candidate at a debate. While a lot of people point to the TrumpTape being a huge deal, it was the first debate where things really took a turn. Remember, prior to that debate polling was basically tied. Afterwards it was something like a 3-4 point jump. 

 

Clinton finally found a smart-woman trope she could use.   It was extremely clever.  In the first debate she played "smart-wife-of-husband-who-is-acting-like-an-idiot".  This is a beloved character featured on dozens of sitcoms.  You know the scene.  Wife looks on with amusement waiting with a wheelbarrow for drunken husband to be ready for bed.  

https://www.psychocats.net/ubuntucat/stupid-husbands-and-smart-wives-on-tv/

She was spot on and perfect and it was truly effective.  

Oh, I have seen this in real life when the Lobster and I get on a tear.  Mrs. Lobster has much patience and a profound sense of humor.  (I miss you guys!)

[Maithanet]

Poll of Utah shows McMullin up 4 points: McMullin 31%, Trump 27%, Clinton 24%.

It is pretty unlikely that Utah comes into play in the electoral college, and thus I would be very pleased if a third party candidate won the state.  If for no other reason than just because it hasn't happened in my lifetime.  Also, I would love to hear Trump complain about the media's "Pro McMullin bias".

[Kalbear]

3 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Poll of Utah shows McMullin up 4 points: McMullin 31%, Trump 27%, Clinton 24%.

It is pretty unlikely that Utah comes into play in the electoral college, and thus I would be very pleased if a third party candidate won the state.  If for no other reason than just because it hasn't happened in my lifetime.  Also, I would love to hear Trump complain about the media's "Pro McMullin bias".

More interestingly, it gives Utah an absurd amount of leverage in the general election. While Democrats certainly don't need Utah to win, Republicans basically have to have it. Which means that if Utah can reasonably say they don't approve of a candidate, Republicans are essentially completely hosed. 

Which means that Utah gets at least right of first refusal about candidates. That isn't a big deal for Romney (obviously) and McCain, and wasn't even that big a deal for Bush - but it does mean that someone like Trump who is heavily anti-immigration and heavily anti-religious freedom is likely going to get vetoed by an independent like McMullin, especially if he wins.

[Kalbear]

And heh - Trump has helped expose voter fraud! Namely, his THIRD campaign chair, Steve Bannon, is registered to vote in Florida at a house he's never lived in. That is actually against the law.

[Boris the Blade]

7 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

And heh - Trump has helped expose voter fraud! Namely, his THIRD campaign chair, Steve Bannon, is registered to vote in Florida at a house he's never lived in. That is actually against the law.

He's never heard of don't throw rocks if you live in a glass. He's such a joke haha.

[The Anti-Targ]

16 hours ago, OldGimletEye said:

Yep, the Republican Party has become a Dumpster Fire.

That's where I'd put my money. 

It will be a good time watching these idiots shout at each other about who is the most conservative in the next election cycle.

I wonder if Reagan was conservative enough? 

The funny thing about the not conservative enough line this time round is that because the Congressional frontline is distancing itself from Trump, there are a lot of the nutjob supporters of trump saying right now that the people who hitherto called past candidates not conservative enough are being called not true conservatives or not real Republicans. So who's going to own the narrative? If Trump loses, aside from doubling down on the rigged conspiracy, his main actually somewhat rational excuse for losing will be that he was betrayed by the weak-kneed congressional leaders in his own party. And if they had been true conservatives and stayed with him he would have won. I think for the wingnut division of the Republican party that's going to be a strong narrative, because they don't want to come out at the end of this being painted as rabid supporters of a not conservative enough candidate.

[all swedes are racist]

40 minutes ago, Lily Valley said:

Clinton finally found a smart-woman trope she could use.   It was extremely clever.  In the first debate she played "smart-wife-of-husband-who-is-acting-like-an-idiot".  This is a beloved character featured on dozens of sitcoms.  You know the scene.  Wife looks on with amusement waiting with a wheelbarrow for drunken husband to be ready for bed.  

https://www.psychocats.net/ubuntucat/stupid-husbands-and-smart-wives-on-tv/

She was spot on and perfect and it was truly effective.  

Oh, I have seen this in real life when the Lobster and I get on a tear.  Mrs. Lobster has much patience and a profound sense of humor.  (I miss you guys!)

Lol. I might resent that, if it wasn't so painfully accurate. 

(We miss you too!)

[Dr. Pepper]

What has early voting been like for everyone so far?  We've been open for three days here and the lines have been so long that I haven't even bothered yet.  I was quite surprised with the length of lines, though I guess since it's only a few polling stations open it makes sense.  

[Maithanet]

6 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

More interestingly, it gives Utah an absurd amount of leverage in the general election. While Democrats certainly don't need Utah to win, Republicans basically have to have it. Which means that if Utah can reasonably say they don't approve of a candidate, Republicans are essentially completely hosed. 

Which means that Utah gets at least right of first refusal about candidates. That isn't a big deal for Romney (obviously) and McCain, and wasn't even that big a deal for Bush - but it does mean that someone like Trump who is heavily anti-immigration and heavily anti-religious freedom is likely going to get vetoed by an independent like McMullin, especially if he wins.

Uh, not really?  If Trump wants to be President, he needs to prevent Clinton from reaching 270 EVs.  McMullin winning Utah doesn't change that.  If Clinton and Trump both fall short of 270, then the House will elect Trump (as any scenario where both falls short will undoubtedly mean Trump won more state delegations). 

[Maithanet]

3 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

What has early voting been like for everyone so far?  We've been open for three days here and the lines have been so long that I haven't even bothered yet.  I was quite surprised with the length of lines, though I guess since it's only a few polling stations open it makes sense.  

This is a good resource for early state voting.  Out of curiosity, what state is that?  NC starts voting tomorrow, and that state is looking more and more important in this election. 

[Kalbear]

14 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Uh, not really?  If Trump wants to be President, he needs to prevent Clinton from reaching 270 EVs.  McMullin winning Utah doesn't change that.  If Clinton and Trump both fall short of 270, then the House will elect Trump (as any scenario where both falls short will undoubtedly mean Trump won more state delegations). 

I'm saying in the future. 

I'm saying that for any generic Republican, if you can't win Utah the map to winning becomes absurdly difficult. You basically have to win Florida, Ohio, NC, Michigan, Wisconsin, and one of Pennsylvania or New Hampshire, as well as all of the traditional R states (so Arizona, Georgia, that sort of thing). That's really, really difficult to sweep the table like that.

It's not about Trump - it's about the leverage that Utah can have in picking the next R candidate. If Utah goes against Trump it essentially obliterates any chance he has of winning the election.

And to be really clear here - this has nothing to do with really this election or Democrats. The Democrat path is still a much easier one by comparison, and is trending upward. This has to do with whether or not Republicans have even a chance in the general. Utah being able to go independent successfully makes them have incredible leverage.

[Fez]

5 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Uh, not really?  If Trump wants to be President, he needs to prevent Clinton from reaching 270 EVs.  McMullin winning Utah doesn't change that.  If Clinton and Trump both fall short of 270, then the House will elect Trump (as any scenario where both falls short will undoubtedly mean Trump won more state delegations). 

If McMullin wins Utah and no candidate clears 270 EV, I'd give McMullin pretty good odds of becoming President.

He wouldn't even need a huge amount of support in the House. Technically he could do it with only 57 House members supporting him, although that would require getting majorities from the 26 states with the smallest delegations. 

More likely he gets through as a compromise candidate since Democrats won't have 26 delegations and just enough of the Republican delegations will be NeverTrumpers.

[Lily Valley]

12 minutes ago, Rhllor's void lobster said:

Lol. I might resent that, if it wasn't so painfully accurate. 

(We miss you too!)

Intended with much love!  In Portland it was totally aimed at me.  I had gotten into the Rye Loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong before you guys showed up.

[Dr. Pepper]

6 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

This is a good resource for early state voting.  Out of curiosity, what state is that?  NC starts voting tomorrow, and that state is looking more and more important in this election. 

I'm in Georgia.  The state isn't quite as important as I hoped, but it's been interesting to see so many polls with the two candidates within the margin of error when Johnson is factored in.  

[Maithanet]

14 minutes ago, Fez said:

If McMullin wins Utah and no candidate clears 270 EV, I'd give McMullin pretty good odds of becoming President.

He wouldn't even need a huge amount of support in the House. Technically he could do it with only 57 House members supporting him, although that would require getting majorities from the 26 states with the smallest delegations. 

More likely he gets through as a compromise candidate since Democrats won't have 26 delegations and just enough of the Republican delegations will be NeverTrumpers.

In order for Trump to prevent Clinton from getting to 270, he would have to have an incredible finishing kick and a fair argument that he has "momentum".  He would also have to be within at least a couple of points of the popular vote.  I am really doubtful that the House Republican delegations are going to support a complete unknown who won exactly one state and less than 2% of the vote over the guy who they nominated at the convention and came so close to winning.  That sounds like bad tv writing to me, not real life. 

[The Anti-Targ]

2 hours ago, Ariadne23 said:

That story is out. 

What gets me about this is: 

Quote

"It seems like a good time to talk about it because I think there’s still no accountability in the media for the behavior of the Clintons," 

Which is a statement from Millwee herself. What exactly is accountability for criminal behaviour in the media? You can't convict someone of a crime via the media, not in a system where there is a presumption of innocence until guilt is proven. The purpose of media in exposing crime in order to bring about accountability is for it to get the alleged criminal into the justice system when otherwise he or she wouldn't and for the justice system to work out guilt or innocence. 

At this point, accusations of sexual crimes against Bill and Donald neutralise each other. But in this case, Milwee isn't accusing the actual presidential candidate of anything, so in her particular case I wonder what she thinks Hillary Clinton should be accountable for?

I am fully prepared to believe this woman is telling the truth, but like in the rest of these situations, including Trump's, I don't actually know the truth, and neither does the general public. So if these accusations are influencing people's votes it is a faith-based decision not a fact based decision. There are facts that are known about the two candidates' attitudes and actions towards women, and those are relevant things to take into account. 

[Ormond]

57 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

And heh - Trump has helped expose voter fraud! Namely, his THIRD campaign chair, Steve Bannon, is registered to vote in Florida at a house he's never lived in. That is actually against the law.

This is slightly old news. Evidently because he was tipped off this story was going to run, he switched his registration to Sarasota from Miami, to a house owned by a friend. It is unclear if he really lives in the Sarasota house either, though.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-08-31/florida-officials-investigating-trump-campaign-ceo-stephen-bannons-voter-registration

[Kalbear]

3 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

At this point, accusations of sexual crimes against Bill and Donald neutralise each other. But in this case, Milwee isn't accusing the actual presidential candidate of anything, so in her particular case I wonder what she thinks Hillary Clinton should be accountable for?

 

I don't think they neutralize each other at all - what they do is actually reinforce each other and make them more likely to be true. Which isn't great for Bill, but is really bad for Donald. And so long as you don't get actual stories of Clinton repressing these, they tend to give her more sympathy. 

[Jace, Extat]

What time is the talky war? And is it gonna be on youtubes?

[Boris the Blade]

11 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

 

At this point, accusations of sexual crimes against Bill and Donald neutralise each other. But in this case, Milwee isn't accusing the actual presidential candidate of anything, so in her particular case I wonder what she thinks Hillary Clinton should be accountable for?

I am fully prepared to believe this woman is telling the truth, but like in the rest of these situations, including Trump's, I don't actually know the truth, and neither does the general public. So if these accusations are influencing people's votes it is a faith-based decision not a fact based decision. There are facts that are known about the two candidates' attitudes and actions towards women, and those are relevant things to take into account. 

No, the sexual crimes do not neutralize one another. Bill is not running for the presidency, Trump is. Also, Trump is also accused of not just sexually assaulting and raping grown women, but raping a child as well.