US elections: aiding an' Abedin

[Martell Spy]

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/10/the-gops-age-of-authoritarianism-has-only-just-begun.html

The GOP’s Age of Authoritarianism Has Only Just Begun
And it will not end with a Clinton presidency.

[Lordsteve666]

16 minutes ago, Boris the Blade said:

 

Clinton emails. Trump admitting sexual assault. Clinton emails. Trump charity fraud. Clinton emails. Trump calls for nuclear proliferation. Clinton emails. Trump calls for national stop and frisk. Clinton emails. Trump violates trade embargo with Cuba. Clinton emails. Trump sued over Trump U fraud. Clinton emails. Trump bribes DA. Clinton emails. Trump doesnt pay taxes for 20 years. Clinton emails. Trump employs campaign manager involved in illegal corruption with Russia. Clinton emails. Trump calls for ban of an entire religion from entering US. Clinton emails. Trump lied about support for Iraq War over and over in debate. Clinton emails. Trump in court for rape of a minor. Clinton emails. Trump unaware of Russia's Crimea occupation. Clinton emails. Trump unaware of situation in Syria. Clinton emails. Trump penalized for racist housing discrimination. Clinton emails. Trump files for bankrupcy 6 times. Clinton emails. Trump goes 0-3 in debates by showing scant knowledge of world politics. Clinton emails. Trump slams people for being POWs. Clinton emails. Trump calls mexicans rapists. Clinton emails. Trump questions judge's integrity because of parent's heritage. Clinton emails. Trump deletes emails involved in casino scandal. Clinton emails. Trump commits insurance fraud after florida hurricane. Clinton emails. Trump has dozens of assault victims and witnesses come forward with allegations of abuse. Clinton emails. Trump attacks former Ms America for being overweight. Clinton emails. Trump tweets about sex tapes at 3am. Clinton emails. Trump calls for US citizens to be sent to Gitmo. Clinton emails. Trump calls for more extreme forms of torture to be used. Clinton emails. Trump asks why cant we use our nukes if we have them. Clinton emails. Trump calls for offensive bombing attack on sovereign nations because someone gave the middle finger. Clinton emails. Trump calls to kill women and children of suspected terrorists. Clinton emails. Trump says women should be punished for having abortions. Clinton emails. Trump makes fun of disabled people. Clinton emails. Trump calls for end of freedom of the press. Clinton emails. Trump calls global warming a chinese hoax. Clinton emails. Trump praises Putin and Kim Jong Un's strong leadership. Clinton emails. Trump openly admits to not paying his employees during debate. Clinton emails. Trump calls Obama an illegitimate noncitizen hundreds of times over 7 years. Clinton emails. Trump uses campaign donations to enrich his own businesses. Clinton emails. Trump says Ted Cruz involved in JFK assassination unironically citing National Enquirer. Clinton emails. Trump says laziness is an inherent trait in black people. Clinton emails.

Yeah I see your point. From an outsider point of view we only tend to see the bigger stuff like the sexism things or the nuke stuff, I guess I'm just hopeful this turns into one of those bigger things. 

The whole email nonsense should have been dead and burried, it's just amazes me it's still hanging round even when you have the shit Trump spouts to drown it out. 

The real irony I think is that Clinton is getting shit for using some private server that was probably more secure than the state dept one, at least nobody would be looking for a private email sever to hack. Forgeign powers or those wishing to do harm would probably go for the government run servers, they'd never think that the most powerful country in the world was using Google or whatever to host their emails. Hiding somewhere nobody would ever think to look for it if you ask me!

[mormont]

As awful as it may be, the only bar Trump has to jump for a lot of voters is to be an angry man. He doesn't have to make sense, he doesn't have to have integrity, he doesn't have to understand world affairs, he doesn't have to have experience, he doesn't have to have policies, he doesn't have to explain his business failures or personal scandals and he certainly doesn't have to tell the truth. All he has to do is stand up, be angry and promise that 'only I can fix it'.

The only question about this election is whether there are enough voters for whom this is true to hand Trump the presidency. Signs point to 'no', but he's a lot closer than anyone is or should be comfortable with. Even if Trump loses, the fact that he can get so close means the US has a serious problem. (And even if he loses, the best I think the US can hope for is another four years of one party trying to stalemate anything and everything the President tries to do.)

[Mexal]

7 minutes ago, mormont said:

As awful as it may be, the only bar Trump has to jump for a lot of voters is to be an angry man. He doesn't have to make sense, he doesn't have to have integrity, he doesn't have to understand world affairs, he doesn't have to have experience, he doesn't have to have policies, he doesn't have to explain his business failures or personal scandals and he certainly doesn't have to tell the truth. All he has to do is stand up, be angry and promise that 'only I can fix it'.

The only question about this election is whether there are enough voters for whom this is true to hand Trump the presidency. Signs point to 'no', but he's a lot closer than anyone is or should be comfortable with. Even if Trump loses, the fact that he can get so close means the US has a serious problem. (And even if he loses, the best I think the US can hope for is another four years of one party trying to stalemate anything and everything the President tries to do.)

All true. And it scares the shit out of me.

[Boris the Blade]

19 minutes ago, Lordsteve666 said:

Yeah I see your point. From an outsider point of view we only tend to see the bigger stuff like the sexism things or the nuke stuff, I guess I'm just hopeful this turns into one of those bigger things. 

The whole email nonsense should have been dead and burried, it's just amazes me it's still hanging round even when you have the shit Trump spouts to drown it out. 

The real irony I think is that Clinton is getting shit for using some private server that was probably more secure than the state dept one, at least nobody would be looking for a private email sever to hack. Forgeign powers or those wishing to do harm would probably go for the government run servers, they'd never think that the most powerful country in the world was using Google or whatever to host their emails. Hiding somewhere nobody would ever think to look for it if you ask me!

There are a ton of things that could be focused on with Trump, including the new  things that have come to light. I saw a friend post something that said this "Misogyny is when the male candidate has a fraud trial date in November, a child rape case trial date in December, 73 other pending lawsuits but the campaign focus is on the female candidate and emails she did not send."
The media helps perpetuate this and it really is getting fucking tiring. 
 

4 minutes ago, mormont said:

As awful as it may be, the only bar Trump has to jump for a lot of voters is to be an angry man. He doesn't have to make sense, he doesn't have to have integrity, he doesn't have to understand world affairs, he doesn't have to have experience, he doesn't have to have policies, he doesn't have to explain his business failures or personal scandals and he certainly doesn't have to tell the truth. All he has to do is stand up, be angry and promise that 'only I can fix it'.

The only question about this election is whether there are enough voters for whom this is true to hand Trump the presidency. Signs point to 'no', but he's a lot closer than anyone is or should be comfortable with. Even if Trump loses, the fact that he can get so close means the US has a serious problem. (And even if he loses, the best I think the US can hope for is another four years of one party trying to stalemate anything and everything the President tries to do.)

Yup, it's truly fucked up.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

13 minutes ago, mormont said:

As awful as it may be, the only bar Trump has to jump for a lot of voters is to be an angry man. He doesn't have to make sense, he doesn't have to have integrity, he doesn't have to understand world affairs, he doesn't have to have experience, he doesn't have to have policies, he doesn't have to explain his business failures or personal scandals and he certainly doesn't have to tell the truth. All he has to do is stand up, be angry and promise that 'only I can fix it'.

The only question about this election is whether there are enough voters for whom this is true to hand Trump the presidency. Signs point to 'no', but he's a lot closer than anyone is or should be comfortable with. Even if Trump loses, the fact that he can get so close means the US has a serious problem. (And even if he loses, the best I think the US can hope for is another four years of one party trying to stalemate anything and everything the President tries to do.)

Trump is a nausating example of our species.

[LongRider]

58 minutes ago, Boris the Blade said:

 

Clinton emails. Trump admitting sexual assault. Clinton emails. Trump charity fraud. Clinton emails. Trump calls for nuclear proliferation. Clinton emails. Trump calls for national stop and frisk. Clinton emails. Trump violates trade embargo with Cuba. Clinton emails. Trump sued over Trump U fraud. Clinton emails. ~~~~snip & ect., ect,. Trump uses campaign donations to enrich his own businesses. Clinton emails. Trump says Ted Cruz involved in JFK assassination unironically citing National Enquirer. Clinton emails. Trump says laziness is an inherent trait in black people. Clinton emails.

Nailed it!

[Fez]

16 minutes ago, mormont said:

As awful as it may be, the only bar Trump has to jump for a lot of voters is to be an angry man. He doesn't have to make sense, he doesn't have to have integrity, he doesn't have to understand world affairs, he doesn't have to have experience, he doesn't have to have policies, he doesn't have to explain his business failures or personal scandals and he certainly doesn't have to tell the truth. All he has to do is stand up, be angry and promise that 'only I can fix it'.

The only question about this election is whether there are enough voters for whom this is true to hand Trump the presidency. Signs point to 'no', but he's a lot closer than anyone is or should be comfortable with. Even if Trump loses, the fact that he can get so close means the US has a serious problem. (And even if he loses, the best I think the US can hope for is another four years of one party trying to stalemate anything and everything the President tries to do.)

I don't think its even as complicated as that. What Trump has proved is that campaigns and candidates in national elections don't matter, or only matter at the edges, party affiliation is everything. If someone like Jeb! was the nominee, there'd be more focus on traditional Republican policies (plus W.'s screwups) to drive up Democratic turnout. And if Michelle Obama was the nominee, maybe African American support would be a bit higher and college-educated white support a bit lower. But nothing dramatic would be different.

The parties are very closely matched with Democrats having a slight edge (they have won the popular vote in 5 of the past 6 elections), but either party can generally win thanks to the small number of actual undecided voters and by how well they can turnout their base. That's only at the margins though, and only important because of how closely divided the country is. 

Maybe Clinton's campaign organization will prove important to boosting election day turnout, and Trump not having it will hurt him; but that's unrelated to his policies or personnel character.

[SeanF]

28 minutes ago, mormont said:

As awful as it may be, the only bar Trump has to jump for a lot of voters is to be an angry man. He doesn't have to make sense, he doesn't have to have integrity, he doesn't have to understand world affairs, he doesn't have to have experience, he doesn't have to have policies, he doesn't have to explain his business failures or personal scandals and he certainly doesn't have to tell the truth. All he has to do is stand up, be angry and promise that 'only I can fix it'.

The only question about this election is whether there are enough voters for whom this is true to hand Trump the presidency. Signs point to 'no', but he's a lot closer than anyone is or should be comfortable with. Even if Trump loses, the fact that he can get so close means the US has a serious problem. (And even if he loses, the best I think the US can hope for is another four years of one party trying to stalemate anything and everything the President tries to do.)

True of so many countries.

[OldGimletEye]

29 minutes ago, mormont said:

The only question about this election is whether there are enough voters for whom this is true to hand Trump the presidency. Signs point to 'no', but he's a lot closer than anyone is or should be comfortable with. Even if Trump loses, the fact that he can get so close means the US has a serious problem. 

Yes it does. And there are even names for it. One would be "The Republican Party". Another name would be "conservatism".

[Maithanet]

1 hour ago, Fez said:

Worst Plausible Case

Why are you so confident in Clinton winning NE-2?  Obama lost there in 2012.  There has been very little polling there, and the two that exist on 538 show Trump +4 and Trump+9.  Why would you say that a "worst plausible case" for Clinton still includes a victory there?

[IheartIheartTesla]

For everyone panicking about the elections, calm yourself. Take a look at this graph from Sam Wang's page

(ahh, I cant embed pictures, just follow the link)

http://election.princeton.edu/wp-content/uploads/autographics/EV_history.png

The margin between Clinton and Trump follows a reasonably similar track to this. Note that in order for Trump to win, he has to go way past what the state polls have been predicting so far (the site uses state polls almost exclusively). Now I believe Clinton will end up at the lower end of the red band because of Ohio and Iowa, but she has a comfortable lead that I think will hold till next week. The relative stability of this graph is what gives me confidence about this.

What is really a toss up is the Senate, the Republican senators are outperforming Trump by a few (~ 4) points that makes them much more competitive. If you truly believe Trump will win, you should be putting your resources towards the downticket senate races so they can be a bulwark against President Trump.

Just one more week to go....

[SerPaladin]

1 hour ago, Fez said:

Anyway, one week out my (not-final) predictions are:

Best Plausible Case

Worst Plausible Case

My Best Guess

Your worst case doesn't include Trump taking the rural Maine vote? I'd thought that one was a toss up, and would lead to the very dramatic "no one wins" scenario. That would be a true worst case, as we'd have yet another few weeks of the election.

My hope now is for a 285 to 295 electoral vote victory for Clinton, with a 48-46 popular margin, and a 51-49 Republican Senate. Nothing near a mandate for her, and the cloud of e-mails and foundation scandals hanging over her for a few years. That produces a virtual status quo politically, no radical Trumpist changes, no progressive craziness, and a fatally weak bully pulpit.

[Tywin et al.]

1 hour ago, Fez said:

 

My Best Guess

 

Give FL and NC to Trump and you'll have the correct map. 

[OldGimletEye]

8 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

For everyone panicking about the elections, calm yourself. Take a look at this graph from Sam Wang's page

Perhaps, it's good that people get a little scared about the election, so they will go out and vote. I've always worried about complacency with Hillary supporters.

It ain't over until it's over.

[Mexal]

3 minutes ago, SerPaladin said:

Your worst case doesn't include Trump taking the rural Maine vote? I'd thought that one was a toss up, and would lead to the very dramatic "no one wins" scenario. That would be a true worst case, as we'd have yet another few weeks of the election.

My hope now is for a 285 to 295 electoral vote victory for Clinton, with a 48-46 popular margin, and a 51-49 Republican Senate. Nothing near a mandate for her, and the cloud of e-mails and foundation scandals hanging over her for a few years. That produces a virtual status quo politically, no radical Trumpist changes, no progressive craziness, and a fatally weak bully pulpit.

It also guarantees absolutely nothing gets done for the next 4 years. I guess that's preferable for you to progress but this is a pretty bad consolation prize.

[mormont]

18 minutes ago, Fez said:

I don't think its even as complicated as that. What Trump has proved is that campaigns and candidates in national elections don't matter, or only matter at the edges, party affiliation is everything.

No, I don't think so. Because I believe a candidate like Trump wouldn't get the Democrat vote, party affiliation or not. (Assuming that somehow he got the nomination.) Those voters would likely consider a moderate Republican instead, should such a beast still exist.

Another way of saying this would be that there is a mass of angry voters looking for an angry politician, but largely they're on one side of the aisle. Whether they started there or gravitated there, it's not just about party affiliation: it's about where that inchoate anger vote goes. In some countries it's propelled minor parties to power or close to it. In the US, it's taking over one of the major parties. 

That's not to deny that party loyalties in the US are important and significant. That's very true. But it doesn't explain why Trump isn't held to the 'normal' standards, which is what I was talking about.

 

[Fez]

11 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Why are you so confident in Clinton winning NE-2?  Obama lost there in 2012.  There has been very little polling there, and the two that exist on 538 show Trump +4 and Trump+9.  Why would you say that a "worst plausible case" for Clinton still includes a victory there?

So I can't find it right now, my apologies, but I saw an analysis of the early vote yesterday there that was just insanely positive. I can't remember the exact numbers but it was something like Republicans had a 9k early vote lead at this point in 2012, whereas this time around Democrats have a 20k early vote lead. Which for a small, swingy congressional district is a big deal.

Its also exactly the right demographics for Clinton to make a big improvement from Obama; lots of college-educated whites, less reliance on African Americans and non-college whites, and a fairly substantial Hispanic population in Omaha itself.

1 minute ago, SerPaladin said:

Your worst case doesn't include Trump taking the rural Maine vote? I'd thought that one was a toss up, and would lead to the very dramatic "no one wins" scenario. That would be a true worst case, as we'd have yet another few weeks of the election.

It did a few weeks ago, but not anymore. There's been enough polling there showing Clinton re-taking the lead. 

I'm probably too bearish on having Trump winning Wisconsin under the worst plausible case, but I always have a bad feeling about Wisconsin.

8 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Give FL and NC to Trump and you'll have the correct map. 

Florida's nearly a coin flip, but I think Clinton has a real, substantial edge in North Carolina. Its not guaranteed, but it looks good.

[SerPaladin]

14 minutes ago, Mexal said:

It also guarantees absolutely nothing gets done for the next 4 years. I guess that's preferable for you to progress but this is a pretty bad consolation prize.

Yes. Both platforms are not particularly palatable to me. I think Trump potentially gets us into War and is bad for the country long term, and I think Clinton is too stubbornly progressive/ liberal, which is bad for me long term. 4 years of status quo and slight nudges is not an outcome I thought possible at any point in the last 18 months.

[Mexal]

6 minutes ago, SerPaladin said:

Yes. Both platforms are not particularly palatable to me. I think Trump potentially gets us into War and is bad for the country long term, and I think Clinton is too stubbornly progressive/ liberal, which is bad for me long term. 4 years of status quo and slight nudges is not an outcome I thought possible at any point in the last 18 months.

Yet that sets up even more precedent of obstructionism. That's not good for the long term health of this country, especially if as three republican senators has already said, they'll refuse to confirm any SCOTUS justice. Not sure how anyone could think that's a good thing for the future of the country.