US Politics: Help Me Vladimir!!! Xi Wants Me to Lose!!!

[DMC]

12 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

And the many people who won't answer? That's what I'm talking about. There are a lot of weak supporters who would never admit it. And the polling cannot exactly capture them.

Well, first, no, weak supporters are not undecideds, they're weak supporters.  That's just the basics of a Likert scale.  Anyway, there were a large number of undecideds in 2016, sure.  But the problem wasn't them saying they weren't going to vote for Trump and then did, the problem is they went third party when Hillary - or any Dem candidates' coalition - was counting on them to break her way.  Again, that's not SDR, that's a reflection of the fact a lot of voters were dissatisfied with both candidates in 2016.  Generally, that should be much less of a problem when there's an incumbent on the ballot.  Is that something to watch out for with the pandemic and especially now with the Reade accusations?  Yeah, I agree, but that phenomenon is orthoganal to SDR.  You're simply misusing terms here.

21 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Have you ever worked in the actual field?

Yes.  Are you trained in statistical analysis to identify and account for random and non-random error?

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

8 minutes ago, Ormond said:

Tywin, face to face canvassing is not the same thing as other polling methods. 

Really, I never learned that before.....
 

Quote

There is research showing that the more anonymous you make your data collection, the more likely to people are to answer and to answer truthfully, and face to face canvassing is just about the LEAST anonymous form of data collection.

I was also taught that face to face polling research was the most ideal, albeit not about politics. 
 

Quote

You would find way more people who don't want to talk with you that way than you would by other methods. So don't extrapolate your experience with that method to all polling. 

Look at the number of self-identified independents verse people who regularly vote that way. Anyone who has studied poli sci knows most independents aren't that at all if they actually vote on a regular basis. 

Many Americans are not honest about their politics. And I believe it is occurring at a higher rate since Trump came on the scene. That really doesn't seem like a shocking take.

[Ormond]

5 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I was also taught that face to face polling research was the most ideal, albeit not about politics. 
 

Look at the number of self-identified independents verse people who regularly vote that way. Anyone who has studied poli sci knows most independents aren't that at all if they actually vote on a regular basis. 

Many Americans are not honest about their politics. And I believe it is occurring at a higher rate since Trump came on the scene. That really doesn't seem like a shocking take.

There is no research method which is "the most ideal" in general. 

Your comment about self-identified independents is irrelevant to the issue. It has nothing to do with accuracy of various polling methods.

I happen to be one of those people who describes myself to pollsters as an Independent, but if they follow up with other questions I will truthfully say that I plan to always vote for Democrats from now on (and have for the last several elections.) I don't think that makes me "dishonest" -- because I prefer the policies of the Democratic Party doesn't mean I have to label myself as one. 

[Zorral]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/05/04/trump-needs-two-electoral-blocs-win-pandemic-is-driving-wedge-between-them/
 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/government-report-predicts-covid-19-cases-will-reach-200000-a-day-by-june-1/2020/05/04/02fe743e-8e27-11ea-a9c0-73b93422d691_story.html

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

7 minutes ago, DMC said:

Well, first, no, weak supporters are not undecideds, they're weak supporters.  That's just the basics of a Likert scale. 

I would really love to see you be forced to work around people marginally interested at best in politics for a 12 hour daily event that runs for two weeks.

No smokes, drinking in moderation would be fine though.

Quote

Yes.  Are you trained in statistical analysis to identify and account for random and non-random error?

Nope. At least not anymore, if my undergrad degrees count for something in the past.

You take the human element out of politics too much. I always find it funny how often we lied to the Obama people in 2012. Their data people here in MN wanted us to bother likely voters every couple of days. Said likely voters wanted to kill us. So we just left them alone and said we were still contacting them.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

6 minutes ago, Ormond said:

I happen to be one of those people who describes myself to pollsters as an Independent, but if they follow up with other questions I will truthfully say that I plan to always vote for Democrats from now on (and have for the last several elections.) I don't think that makes me "dishonest" -- because I prefer the policies of the Democratic Party doesn't mean I have to label myself as one. 

But why? If you vote for one party consistently, you're a supporter of that party, not an independent.

Embrace that you're on team jackass, Ormond! 

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Tywin et al. said:

if my undergrad degrees count for something in the past.

They really don't.  Best school in the country, you can get a poly sci BA and have a grand total of one course on statistical methods that could be taught by a monkey.

4 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

You take the human element out of politics too much.

I don't think I do.  Dismissing anecdotal accounts from face-to-face canvassing isn't "taking the human element" out of anything, it's simply pointing out not only a statistical, but logical, fallacy.  All the data I analyze came from humans too.

[HexMachina]

3 hours ago, Fragile Bird said:

Yesterday CNN was running the story in the chyron, the crawling words at the bottom of the screen, and then I saw an interview with a city executive, the mayor or GM, saying the council had voted for opening with the requirement of masks being worn, but the reaction was so hostile and abusive that within 3 hours there were so many reports they rescinded the order. 

CNN should have a story and interview on their website. Just looked at a map, Stillwater.

Oh, here.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8285415/City-Oklahoma-overturns-face-mask-order-store-staff-threatened.html

eta Sorry, answered without checking to see if anyone else had.

I know this story is actually legitimate and all and I’m not disputing that at all, just to be clear. 

But following up a request for a legitimate news source with a link to the Daily Mail? 100 limes for you Birdie, “I must find better news sources”  

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

15 minutes ago, DMC said:

They really don't.  Best school in the country, you can get a poly sci BA and have a grand total of one course on statistical methods that could be taught by a monkey.

A monkey could have taught my intro to psych stats better than the grad student I had. I got one of my four A-'s from his class despite getting the second best score and only being a percent or two behind they guy who set the curve.

Also, it's ape, not monkey. Please do not let your pithecophobia overtake your otherwise thoughtful self. 

[DMC]

Just now, Tywin et al. said:

Also, it's ape, not monkey. Please do not let your pithecophobia overtake your otherwise thoughtful self. 

That's just monkey talk.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

Just now, DMC said:

That's just monkey talk.

Is this because I said no smokes at political events?

Or were you the mastermind behind all of this:
 

 

[DMC]

4 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Is this because I said no smokes at political events?

 

[Zorral]

10 minutes ago, HelenaExMachina said:

I know this story is actually legitimate and all and I’m not disputing that at all, just to be clear. 

But following up a request for a legitimate news source with a link to the Daily Mail? 100 limes for you Birdie, “I must find better news sources”  

This story has run in many newspapers including the NY Times and the WaPo.  There are those who don't consider them legit news sites, of course.

More interesting though is why people are determined not to believe it.  Because they don't want to believe that the nation is totally effed and broken probably, despite ever escalating rates of death and lies and cruelties and injustice and voter repression and downright torture and corruption and criminality that have been reported every single day for years.

[HexMachina]

2 minutes ago, Zorral said:

This story has run in many newspapers including the NY Times and the WaPo.  There are those who don't consider them legit news sites, of course.

More interesting though is why people are determined not to believe it.  Because they don't want to believe that the nation is totally effed and broken probably, despite ever escalating rates of death and lies and cruelties and injustice and voter repression and downright torture and corruption and criminality that have been reported every single day for years.

It was a joke, hence the first sentence of my post.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

6 minutes ago, DMC said:

 

You would use killing Malfoy to gain support. 

Heady play. 

[DMC]

14 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

You would use killing Malfoy to gain support. 

I think we all wanted to kill Malfoy.  It's time to admit it.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

10 minutes ago, DMC said:

I think we all wanted to kill Malfoy.  It's time to admit it.

A child with an abusive black sheep father of prominence who was good at sports and liked to stunt on people.

I can't hate him. Even if he was an evil bastard. 

[IheartIheartTesla]

For what its worth, Whitmer has come our in (qualified?) support of Biden, which I mentioned earlier would be one of the signals I would be looking for. Makes me a bit more comfortable voting for him, but I'm still confused by all the stuff swirling around this accusation. It'll take a few weeks to months for a better picture, so still holding out there a bit.

I thought Trump had given up on Michigan (I underestimated in 2016 the depth of antipathy towards Clinton here). Whether or not Amash plays a spoiler to that, or to Biden remains to be seen. I'd still pay attention to this state, but suggest it is below WI and MN and maybe PA. I feel good about Biden's chances here.

[karaddin]

7 hours ago, Kalbear said:

We'll soon be getting thinkpieces about how the people who are dying probably deserved it in some way (obese, diabetics, etc) and how this is actually a good thing, because they weren't particularly productive. 

They were already doing that just about life expectancy going down

7 hours ago, Week said:

Social security: Solvent again! 

/joke

Sorry editing on my phone, the above is basically a reply to this as well.

[Fez]

1 hour ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

For what its worth, Whitmer has come our in (qualified?) support of Biden, which I mentioned earlier would be one of the signals I would be looking for. Makes me a bit more comfortable voting for him, but I'm still confused by all the stuff swirling around this accusation. It'll take a few weeks to months for a better picture, so still holding out there a bit.

I thought Trump had given up on Michigan (I underestimated in 2016 the depth of antipathy towards Clinton here). Whether or not Amash plays a spoiler to that, or to Biden remains to be seen. I'd still pay attention to this state, but suggest it is below WI and MN and maybe PA. I feel good about Biden's chances here.

I'm not that worried about Biden's chances of getting back MI and PA. It's the third state he needs that's more worrisome. Right now he's in good shape, and I think if the election were today (and there was normal voting access) I think he'd win AZ, WI, and FL and maybe even NC. But there's a long way until the election and plenty of time for things to go bad.

As to Amash, I really don't think he'll play a big role in the election, even in Michigan. I don't think there's any guarantee he draws more votes from Biden than Trump. And I think nearly everyone so badly wants to see Trump lose or win that there will not be that many third party votes (plus the kinds of far leftists who refuse to vote for Biden are already at that place, Amash doesn't change anything for them).