US Politics- Roger Stoned to Death

[Week]

16 minutes ago, Simon Steele said:

PA is lost. People who live there say that Trumpism has become more entrenched, if anything.

Polling disagrees with (citation needed) anecdata. Not that polling is an end-all-be-all but the doom and gloom is unnecessary.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/pennsylvania/

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, Week said:

Yup. Yikes. 

Next Kim K. and Kanye will host a debate. Now go drink your Brawndo!

[Larry of the Lawn]

28 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Next Kim K. and Kanye will host a debate. Now go drink your Brawndo!

It has what PA craves

[IheartIheartTesla]

1 hour ago, Week said:

Polling disagrees with (citation needed) anecdata. Not that polling is an end-all-be-all but the doom and gloom is unnecessary.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/pennsylvania/

Clinton was leading by a bigger margin in 2016 (but smaller fraction of total voters), and there were more undecideds too,

Oh, and by the way, Clinton got 'only' 89% of the AA vote compared to Obama's 96, and even that slight difference was enough to tilt it away from her because it was so close. I dont think (but I could be wrong) that Biden would underperform her but I'm sure of nothing.

[Mexal]

26 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

Clinton was leading by a bigger margin in 2016 (but smaller fraction of total voters), and there were more undecideds too,

Oh, and by the way, Clinton got 'only' 89% of the AA vote compared to Obama's 96, and even that slight difference was enough to tilt it away from her because it was so close. I dont think (but I could be wrong) that Biden would underperform her but I'm sure of nothing.

How is he doing among old white men compared to Clinton? Wondering if there is some offset on AA/hispanic vote in the white vote.

ETA: thinking things like this...

 

[OnionAhaiReborn]

Does anyone else find it kind of darkly hilarious that the one election where the Democrat is doing well with 65+ voters is also the one where the pandemic is going to keep them from voting? 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

5 minutes ago, Chataya de Fleury said:

How is the pandemic stopping anyone from voting? There are absentee ballots. There are N95 masks.

Turnout could be low, especially if there’s another wave, and we still don’t know if there will be some hi-jinks with the mail in vote.

[Jace, Extat]

9 minutes ago, Chataya de Fleury said:

How is the pandemic stopping anyone from voting? There are absentee ballots. There are N95 masks.

Is this wilful ignorance or blind optimism?

Actually, it doesn't matter. All roads lead to the fall of Rome anyway.

[Fragile Bird]

A couple of weeks ago I reported how pissed off we were north of the wall because Trump announced tariffs on aluminum were being imposed on Canada again. Obviously it was a Trump election ploy. Canada announced there would be equal value tit-for-tat tariffs imposed on US aluminum products (we actually signed an agreement with the US that tariff retaliation would be on like products, I don't know if that was part of the new NAFTA or not). A press conference was going to occur in Ottawa this afternoon where the list of targetted products would be released, but news has just broken that the US has decided that Canada wasn't dumping aluminum on the US after all, and everything will be rolled back to Sept. 1.

Apparently many of the products being targetted by Canada were produced in swing states.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

19 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

A couple of weeks ago I reported how pissed off we were north of the wall because Trump announced tariffs on aluminum were being imposed on Canada again. Obviously it was a Trump election ploy. Canada announced there would be equal value tit-for-tat tariffs imposed on US aluminum products (we actually signed an agreement with the US that tariff retaliation would be on like products, I don't know if that was part of the new NAFTA or not). A press conference was going to occur in Ottawa this afternoon where the list of targetted products would be released, but news has just broken that the US has decided that Canada wasn't dumping aluminum on the US after all, and everything will be rolled back to Sept. 1.

Apparently many of the products being targetted by Canada were produced in swing states.

So Trudeau took a page from the EU playbook, tariff where it hurts.

[Maithanet]

1 hour ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

Clinton was leading by a bigger margin in 2016 (but smaller fraction of total voters), and there were more undecideds too,

Oh, and by the way, Clinton got 'only' 89% of the AA vote compared to Obama's 96, and even that slight difference was enough to tilt it away from her because it was so close. I dont think (but I could be wrong) that Biden would underperform her but I'm sure of nothing.

But comparing Clinton polls to Biden polls is kind of useless.  Clinton was up by a couple points on election day in PA, and by ~ 5 in WI and MI.  All of those were off such that Trump won them all by less than a percent.  There were two main reasons that Trump outperformed his polling:  late deciding voters went with Trump by ~25 points and polls didn't weight by education and undersampled noncollege white voters.  Most pollsters are weighting for education now, and there is no reason to assume undecided voters will swing to Trump this time. 

I think you know all this; I'm not trying to talk down to you.  It's just there's no reason to say that because Clinton was up by 3-5 points in the midwestern states in 2016 means Biden isn't likely to win with a 3-5 point lead this time.  A lead of that scale wins ~70% of the time, and that applies to Biden too. 

[All Cats Are Bad]

6 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

The dumbing down of America, on display. 

Which part of what I said was dumb? That Biden and Trump are rapists or that Joe Rogan would probably be a better debate moderator than Fox/CNN/etc.?

I mean both are pretty undeniably true. I'm not happy about it either, but it's true.

[IheartIheartTesla]

Yes, I think I know most of this. I am mostly trying to keep myself from getting complacent, which a series of good polls can do for you. Also, these posts are mainly a way of thinking out loud.

Leaving that aside, I do know the GOP has been doing new registration drives in PA and I think the Dems are lagging behind. There is also enough uncertainty from COVID that the polls may be off by a couple points (for instance, the education weighing in 2016 was not appreciated, maybe there is something else not considered in 2020). I'd like to see Biden lead by a bit more than something that is slightly higher than 1 SD in this important state.

[S John]

20 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

But comparing Clinton polls to Biden polls is kind of useless.  Clinton was up by a couple points on election day in PA, and by ~ 5 in WI and MI.  All of those were off such that Trump won them all by less than a percent.  There were two main reasons that Trump outperformed his polling:  late deciding voters went with Trump by ~25 points and polls didn't weight by education and undersampled noncollege white voters.  Most pollsters are weighting for education now, and there is no reason to assume undecided voters will swing to Trump this time. 

I have a hard time imagining that undecided voters will be a major factor this round. This isn’t Obama / McCain where it’s not too hard to imagine tortured centrists struggling to make a decision. Trump seems to elicit a strong response one way or another. I know it to be true that there must be undecided voters out there, but also - HOW?

How anyone has sat through the last four years and not made up their mind on whether or not they either love what Trump is doing - or want him gone as soon as possible - is tough for me to wrap my head around. I guess we will have to wait and see who wins the catatonic vote in 2020.

[All Cats Are Bad]

For the record I'm really not one of these guys who thinks Joe Rogan is my IDW Daddy. I mean really the guy is a fucking moron. I'm just baffled that anybody thinks Fox or CNN would be better at moderating a debate. I literally think Howard Stern would be better at it.

And yes, Joe Rogan, as in some average dipshit off the streets, literally would be better at running the country than Donald Trump or Joe Biden. Because the average idiot off the street would not kill civilians with drones or steal from the American people or sell missiles to Saudi Arabia and Israel. I don't get what is dumb about that.

To me dumb is looking at Biden promising a public option for the ACA, which is exactly what they promised 12 fucking years ago, and thinking "Oh, yay, this time for sure!" The perfect, child-like faith some of you people have in the 'Not Republicans' is truly something to behold.

[Maithanet]

4 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

I'd like to see Biden lead by a bit more than something that is slightly higher than 1 SD in this important state.

I'd like for Biden to be up 25 nationally, but as the worst president in history says, "it is what it is". 

2 minutes ago, S John said:

I have a hard time imagining that undecided voters will be a major factor this round.

There are a lot fewer than there were last election.  Third party + undecided voters are down from 12-14 percent in 2016 polls to more like 5-6 points now.  That helps reduce the uncertainty, because a 4 point lead of 50-46 is a lot safer than 46-42. 

But you should also remember than when people are talking about undecided voters, a lot of them are voters that are undecided between Biden and not voting / going 3rd party.  People who are truly undecided between the two candidates and will definitely vote are exceedingly rare.

[argonak]

9 minutes ago, SaltyGnosis said:

Which part of what I said was dumb? That Biden and Trump are rapists or that Joe Rogan would probably be a better debate moderator than Fox/CNN/etc.?

I mean both are pretty undeniably true. I'm not happy about it either, but it's true.

All of it was dumb.  All of it.  (By the way, just because you believe something doesn't make it undeniably true).

But to start with, what qualifications does Joe Rogan have that make him fit to host a debate to help decide the leader of 300 million people?   

[All Cats Are Bad]

4 minutes ago, argonak said:

But to start with, what qualifications does Joe Rogan have that make him fit to host a debate to help decide the leader of 300 million people?   

Almost none (actually some but it doesn't matter because my point would be the same, stick with me), but my point is that he'd be still be a better platform than corporate media stations that have more of an interest in putting on a spectacle to sell ad space than actually allowing for a debate.

I mean for the record, a debate between these two candidates is pointless anyway, we all already know where we stand, but really it would be better for them to sit down with a neutral moderator like Nixon and Kennedy did and have a real discussion about policy, which you will never got on televised debate.

Also I find it's very easy to say "all of it was dumb" when you don't like something I say, harder to actually point at something specific and say "No, this is not true, I disagree with this."

[All Cats Are Bad]

Ok you know what, I'm gonna be real to @Fragile Bird and everybody reacting with laugh emojis to the thing about Biden being a rapist (maybe it's the Rogan thing, but I think I've defended what I meant there). There is a tape of Tara Reid's mother calling in to Larry King with a story about her assault in like, the 90s. It's been authenticated.

I am so, like genuinely from the bottom of my heart disgusted by everyone who was breathing fire after that 'grab them by the pussy' tape came out, and is now trying to sweep this shit with Biden under the rug.

[aceluby]

12 minutes ago, SaltyGnosis said:

Almost none (actually some but it doesn't matter because my point would be the same, stick with me), but my point is that he'd be still be a better platform than corporate media stations that have more of an interest in putting on a spectacle to sell ad space than actually allowing for a debate.

I mean for the record, a debate between these two candidates is pointless anyway, we all already know where we stand, but really it would be better for them to sit down with a neutral moderator like Nixon and Kennedy did and have a real discussion about policy, which you will never got on televised debate.

Also I find it's very easy to say "all of it was dumb" when you don't like something I say, harder to actually point at something specific and say "No, this is not true, I disagree with this."

So let me get this straight.  You believe that any debate will be a spectacle to sell ad space and want it to instead be an actual policy debate.  I think I follow that and agree with it.  And then your solution to this is to let a shock jock podcast host make it less of a spectacle?  Am I following you here?

And not only are you suggesting this, but you're also suggesting that Joe Rogan would be better candidate than either of them because Trump has 20-something rape allegations, Biden has one unsubstantiated claim against him, so they are both rapists - and Joe Rogan presumably has  none (but really, who knows), and those alone make him better qualified to be President?

I think I'm following this correctly.   In which case:

23 minutes ago, argonak said:

All of it was dumb.  All of it.