Jump to content

US politics: No sub rosa Omarosa


IheartIheartTesla

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

I'm guessing this is what the Transgender woman wanted to happen. I don't know any other reason why a trans person would seek to give this cake shop their business, except to be denied the service and stir the issue up again.

You mean the Freedom Riders could have not driven for days to sit in those cafes and just eaten at home? “Bunch of northern troublemakers just coming down here to stir it up and make us look bad”, amIright? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SpaceForce Tywin et al. said:

Trump enjoys playing the role of president, but I'm sure he hates the requirement s of it. And he hates the criticism because he likely suffers from Narcissistic Personality Disorder, which differs from being an every day narcissist. 

I'm not sure why you don't think he'll run. He's already got his reelection campaign un and running, and he's joked before about looking into a third term. The man wants to be a king. 

http://fortune.com/2018/02/27/donald-trump-2020-reelection-campaign/

In line with what you're saying, regarding Trumps "Temperament and Judgment" I was telling people before the election, "This is a guy who craves attention, but absolutely detests scrutiny.  And, he's a candidate for a position of the most scrutinized job in the world..."

I have seen nothing to change my mind about this.  Crazy, I know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The discussion of who people thought was going to win as the votes were coming in led me to look up the threads of that day. If anyone else is interested in a trip down memory lane, here's the main thread:

US Elections 2016

It has quite a bit of drama in it: light banter over early returns, then a slowly building apprehension that this is not going to be as easy a victory for Clinton as predicted followed by discussion of Virginia as it slowly turns from Trump to Clinton and finally the realization that it doesn't matter and Trump is more likely to win than not. This was followed by this thread:

US Elections - Could this be an American Brexit?

wherein people reacted to Trump's victory despite it not being certain yet at the time. People debate the various causes and effects as Trump's victory becomes more and more certain and, fittingly, the last page has news of Clinton conceding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

http://fortune.com/2018/02/27/donald-trump-2020-reelection-campaign/

I line whith what you're saying, regarding Trumps "Temperament and Judgment" I was telling people before the election, "This is a guy who craves attention, but absolutely detests scrutiny.  And, he's a candidate for a position of the most scrutinized job in the world..."

I have seen nothing to change my mind about this.  Crazy, I know.

Are you... Sarah Kendizor?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, JEORDHl said:

Are you... Sarah Kendizor?

Wow I really butchered the spelling in that last one.

Nope.  Just a Canadian living in the United States.  Very soon to be going home.  Contemplating how to engage with Trump fans north of the border (Hoser idiots).

I can't say I'm specifically familiar with Sarah Kendizor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

Wow I really butchered the spelling in that last one.

Nope.  Just a Canadian living in the United States.  Very soon to be going home.  Contemplating how to engage with Trump fans north of the border (Hoser idiots).

I can't say I'm specifically familiar with Sarah *Kendzior

Your quote is almost verbatim what she's said, and been saying for a long, long time. Look her up.

 

*grammar, typos

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Altherion said:

The discussion of who people thought was going to win as the votes were coming in led me to look up the threads of that day. If anyone else is interested in a trip down memory lane, here's the main thread:

US Elections 2016

It has quite a bit of drama in it: light banter over early returns, then a slowly building apprehension that this is not going to be as easy a victory for Clinton as predicted followed by discussion of Virginia as it slowly turns from Trump to Clinton and finally the realization that it doesn't matter and Trump is more likely to win than not. This was followed by this thread:

US Elections - Could this be an American Brexit?

wherein people reacted to Trump's victory despite it not being certain yet at the time. People debate the various causes and effects as Trump's victory becomes more and more certain and, fittingly, the last page has news of Clinton conceding.

Not for nothing, but in the final month of the campaign, was there anyone serious saying it was going to be an easy win for Clinton?  I mean, I certainly was in the in July and August, but I've grown a little since then.

15 minutes ago, JEORDHl said:

Your quote is almost verbatim what she's said, and been saying for a long, long time. Look her up.

 

*grammar, typos

If someone else came to it first I have zero problem with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

Not for nothing, but in the final month of the campaign, was there anyone serious saying it was going to be an easy win for Clinton?  I mean, I certainly was in the in July and August, but I've grown a little since then.

Most of the poll aggregators (IIRC all but FiveThirtyEight) and most prediction markets had Clinton's chances at 90% or more (sometimes much more). I think few people expected a blowout, but more than not thought that she would win comfortably. You can read expressions of surprise from quite a few people in those threads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, JEORDHl said:

I didn't mean it like that.

Happy coincidence. No, I'm not her.

I mean, it should have been obvious, no?  His tendency to say the same thing over and over while simultaneously being as vague as its possible to be.  Bragging about how rich he is while simultaneously jumping though hoops to not release his tax returns.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Altherion said:

Most of the poll aggregators (IIRC all but FiveThirtyEight) and most prediction markets had Clinton's chances at 90% or more (sometimes much more). I think few people expected a blowout, but more than not thought that she would win comfortably. You can read expressions of surprise from quite a few people in those threads.

Yeah, but that 90% number could have been "We're 90% certain she'll win with 1% of the popular vote". that's not an easy win.  It would also be interesting to know how much those measured the impact of the Comey letter, which has been argued ultimately tipped the scales.

That's the thing with an election that's that close.  The polls were predicting narrow victories in mid-west states  that turned into razor thin defeats.  The whole thing turned on 70,000 mid-west votes out of ~130 million ballots cast. That's almost a rounding error.

I mean, I certainly thought she was going to win, and a 3 million popular vote advantage is nothing to sneeze at, but I obviously underestimated the importance of the distribution of the vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

Not for nothing, but in the final month of the campaign, was there anyone serious saying it was going to be an easy win for Clinton?  I mean, I certainly was in the in July and August, but I've grown a little since then.

There were still a number of people who were thinking it was an easy win. I was not one of them, mind you, but there were plenty. My favorite has to be Sam Wang, who famously was so sold on his shitty methodology that he ate a bug when proven wrong.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Deadlines? What Deadlines? said:

Yeah, but that 90% number could have been "We're 90% certain she'll win with 1% of the popular vote". that's not an easy win.  It would also be interesting to know how much those measured the impact of the Comey letter, which has been argued ultimately tipped the scales.

That's the thing with an election that's that close.  The polls were predicting narrow victories in mid-west states  that turned into razor thin defeats.  The whole thing turned on 70,000 mid-west votes out of ~130 million ballots cast. That's almost a rounding error.

I mean, I certainly thought she was going to win, and a 3 million popular vote advantage is nothing to sneeze at, but I obviously underestimated the importance of the distribution of the vote.

There were state-by-state predictions and it was not supposed to be that close. Here's a New York Times summary of the various aggregators immediately prior to the election (so yes, it includes Comey and everything else). The polls themselves were OK, but the aggregators messed up and so did the prediction markets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Darth Richard II said:

Sometimes I forget how sane this board is. I just had someone on another site legit try to tell me Nazis aren't real.

<steepled fingers on chin> Why don't you tell us about this "site" of yours?

1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

Yay the monthly relitigate the campaign is here I missed it so

Nuh uh. we're talking about... well yeah, it is.

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...