US Politics: The Motorcade of Madness

[Maithanet]

3 minutes ago, argonak said:

Feels like there's still a lot of time left until the election.  A month in 2020 is an eternity.  I think our ballots don't arrive until the 22nd.

Sort of.  No doubt a ton of things will happen in the next four weeks.  But the election has already started, nearly 5 million ballots recieved, and almost a million more every day.

If Trump is going to do something to turn the race around, he needs to do it soon.  Nov 1 is probably too late.

[Gertrude]

6 minutes ago, argonak said:

Feels like there's still a lot of time left until the election.  A month in 2020 is an eternity.  I think our ballots don't arrive until the 22nd.

We have about three decades to go, measured in Trump years.

[Zorral]

2 hours ago, Kalibear said:

It is amazingly remarkable how stupid that is in my mind. Giving people money is usually a positive thing. Making people suffer when you're the incumbent is, well, not. 

It's called a stick-up. A stick-up by a depraved. deranged sadist idiot.

[DMC]

6 hours ago, ants said:

Any updates on the Dem’s Senate chances?  Is Biden’s bigger polling lead translating to down ticket strength?

Well, according to 538's forecast, Dem chances of winning the Senate have risen from 62% on September 30 to 66% today.  That's probably mostly due to Biden's increasing chances - there frankly haven't been many Senate polls that actually took place since the debate/diagnosis other than NC.  Traditional prognosticators have yet to react either - Cook hasn't updated their Senate ratings since September 23 while Sabato changed Colorado from Lean to Likely Dem and Alaska from Likely to Lean GOP on October 1.

3 hours ago, Fez said:

I'd probably rank the Democratic chances in the senate pick-up opportunities as:

Yeah I agree with these rankings exactly.  I would've ranked NC last out of the Big 4 even before the sexting news just due to the state's partisan lean (Arizona seems to be trending Dem much more consistently).

1 hour ago, Fez said:

Two options (the first being far likely):

1) Trump likes exercises power simply for its own sake, with no goal in mind. He had the ability to end the talks, so he ended the talks.

2) Trump is trying to lose on purpose.

I can think of no other reasons.

Well, one rational reason would be he knows the Senate GOP is not going to budge on more stimulus before the election (which is true) because fighting them and losing would make him look weak (which is true).  Not saying it's any more likely than anything else, but it's a rational reason!

35 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

If you believe 538 (and I don't think that I do) Biden is more likely to win 400+ EVs than Trump is to win 270.

Well, to be fair to 538 (what is happening to me?!?), their model assumes a free and fair election - plus does not account for even unintentional error on mail-in ballots.  If I assumed those things I'd probably put Biden's chances at 82% as well.

[Ran]

1 minute ago, DMC said:

plus does not account for even unintentional error on mail-in ballots

Is that really true? It seems an easy thing to throw in some factor for spoiled ballots based on past elections...

[Fragile Bird]

A fourth press aide at the WH has tested positive.

And all the Joint Chiefs of Staff are in isolation or quarantine.

[DMC]

Just checked their methodology writeup to make sure (which itself is not exactly transparent, at least at academic levels).  They do change some assumptions due to COVID, but the only real substantive ones I see are:

Quote

We allow COVID-19 to be a factor in determining covariance. That is to say, states that have had high rates of COVID deaths and cases (such as Arizona and New York, which otherwise don’t have that much in common politically) could have correlated outcomes. Likewise, we also consider covariance based on a state’s anticipated rate of mail voting. [...]

We now account for changes in how easy it is to vote in each state, as empirically, this yields higher turnout and a higher share of Democratic votes.

 

[Ran]

1 minute ago, DMC said:

Just checked their methodology writeup to make sure (which itself is not exactly transparent, at least at academic levels).  They do change some assumptions due to COVID, but the only real substantive ones I see are:

 

Very interesting. Will dig around and see if anyone's ever asked Silver and co. about it.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, Fez said:

Two options (the first being far likely):

1) Trump likes exercises power simply for its own sake, with no goal in mind. He had the ability to end the talks, so he ended the talks.

2) Trump is trying to lose on purpose.

I can think of no other reasons.

Option one makes sense, but there's probably a zero percent chance that Trump is trying to lose on purpose. My belief is he'll do anything to win because he's clinging to his legal immunity. 

What makes most sense to me is that he simply doesn't think ahead, got impulsive and rage tweeted. He could easily just change his mind tomorrow.

[Durckad]

Just now, Tywin et al. said:

Option one makes sense, but there's probably a zero percent chance that Trump is trying to lose on purpose. My belief is he'll do anything to win because he's clinging to his legal immunity. 

What makes most sense to me is that he simply doesn't think ahead, got impulsive and rage tweeted. He could easily just change his mind tomorrow.

Ie option 4: he's a dumb asshole who makes terrible decisions.

I know there's a severe lack of corroborating evidence, but just trust me on this one.

[Gertrude]

The obvious answers being the drugs, control power-trip, and just being a dumb asshole - does he think that maybe by holding stimulus hostage until he wins (Nov.) he can persuade people who need it to vote for him rather than wait until Biden is sworn in (Jan)? I mean, that's fucked up logic, but ... I have no idea how his brain works.

[IheartIheartTesla]

We already have data from North Carolina - I think its somewhere around 4% 1.8% of ballots that have been rejected. NC also allows for some spoiled ballots to be 'corrected' so I'm not sure if that is an upper bound on the errors or the actual number.

Of course, different states will have different rates (also note that AAs are more impacted by rejections, about 4.3% in NC, in part due to first time mail voting). I am hoping some of the stressors on the system such as in PA (or even my home state of MI) will be mitigated by the Dems being the party in power. I of course will be voting in person to do my small part to make Michigan be called early.

[Centrist Simon Steele]

2 hours ago, Fez said:

Two options (the first being far likely):

1) Trump likes exercises power simply for its own sake, with no goal in mind. He had the ability to end the talks, so he ended the talks.

2) Trump is trying to lose on purpose.

I can think of no other reasons.

He's using this to draw an image of, or distinction between, him and Democrats. His Tweet talks about his 1.6 trillion dollar offer and how Pelosi wouldn't budge from her 2.6(ish) trillion dollar proposal. The wisdom of this move is very debatable (as in, there seems to be no wisdom in this move), but if we've seen anything from Trump, he turns these things into wins. This is likely an issue with our media reporting specific aspects--all the news stories I've read don't give a statement from Pelosi or Dems unless it's buried at the end of the story. It's all Trump focused.

[Centrist Simon Steele]

2 hours ago, Week said:

3) Neurological impact of COVID and dexamethasone

That's not an issue with dexamethasone. It's a steroid, and it has been around a long time. It carries with it the usual side effects of steroids, but to suggest a neurological impact being related to that treatment is something I've not seen reported. 

[Xray the Enforcer]

1 hour ago, Gertrude said:

We have about three decades to go, measured in Trump years.

That is approximately 995 Scaramuccis.

[SpaceChampion]

There are now more new covid-19 cases over the last 7 days at the White House than several nations.  They are tied with Eritrea, but I'm sure to surpass them quickly.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

23 minutes ago, Xray the Enforcer said:

That is approximately 995 Scaramuccis.

I had the day off he was first introduced, and my immediate thought while watching his press conference was "Oh shit, we're fucked."

I was wrong.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

And just like that, Miller has it.

Fuck him.

[Trebla]

3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

And just like that, Miller has it.

Fuck him.

Yup. 

 

[The Mance]

Trump likes to break things before he "fixes" them.  So, I think re: the stimulus, Trump wants the headline "NO STIMULUS CHECK BEFORE THE ELECTION" to resonate for a bit before he swoops in and approves $$$ for everyone.  Never mind the "fact" that it was always him holding things up.  He likely believes, and is probably not entirely wrong, that there will be enough low info voters out there who will only hear "TrUmP PAsEs STimUluS BiLL iN TiMe FOr ELeCtIoN!!"