• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2016 |OT10| Jill Stein Inflatable Love Doll

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Sibylus

Banned
Blue NE, blue Ne, blew NEEEE

giphy.gif
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
After asking about the minimum wage

Arizona

Ann Kirkpatrick 44
John McCain 38

Missouri

Jason Kander 45
Roy Blunt 41

New Hampshire

Maggie Hassan 48
Kelly Ayotte 43

North Carolina

Deborah Ross 45
Richard Burr 42

Ohio

Rob Portman 46
Ted Strickland 40

Pennsylvania

Katie McGinty 48
Pat Toomey 39

Wisconsin

Russ Feingold 52
Ron Johnson 40

Stay losing Strickland.

Seems like the minimum wage is a good galvanizing issue overall though.
 
I

Ignatz Mouse

Banned
I have been skimming the last day's posts, wanted to add something regarding the tightening/um-imploding of Trump-- I think the race is tall basically over. Yes, Clinton has to actually campaign, and there will be some poll drama and shifts, but there is as near a zero chance of a Trump presidency as is possible in politics. People have baked-in opinions for the most part, and most of those go against Trump. Clinton still has some potential upside.

This is all about margin, for the following reasons

1) Put to bed the idea that the GOP loses because it puts forth too-moderate candidates
2) Win the Senate
3) Maybe (although very unlikely, unless Trump really implodes) win the House


There's room to Diablos about the Senate.
Winning the house (or states like GA) are pretty unlikely.
But there really isn't a significant chance of Trump in the Oval Office.
 
U

User 85168

Banned
Department of Labor (Remember Tom Perez?) says that middle-wage occupations are back to growing faster than others.

The Myth of Job Polarization

There are a wide variety of causes behind increasing wage inequality over the last three and a half decades (the erosion of labor standards like the minimum wage, declining unionization and worker voice, too-high unemployment much of the time, the “fissuring” of the workplace, etc.), but a careful look at the data shows that “job polarization” isn’t an important part of the story. Not only that, but job polarization hasn’t even happened over an extended period since the 1990s, despite much talk about the phenomenon.

A recent analysis from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York on job growth in the current recovery finds that while growth in middle-skill jobs was indeed weaker in the first few years of the recovery, that trend has long since reversed. They find that between 2013 and 2015, the economy added 2.3 million jobs in middle-wage occupations (such as jobs in transportation, construction, administrative support, production, installation and repair, and education).
Click to expand...

Job-gains-in-the-US-591x400.png
Click to expand...

Since 2013 the pattern has shifted. There has been a notable decline in the number of workers in very low-wage jobs. Because this was a period of strong job growth, the losses at the low end were likely due to workers moving into a higher wage category rather than experiencing job loss. Further, many states and localities increased their minimum wages over this period, giving low-wage workers a boost. It is worth noting, however, that the general pattern of a decline in the number of workers in very low-wage jobs holds both in states that increased their minimum wage over this period and in those that did not.

Importantly, the last few years saw disproportionate gains in middle- and high-wage jobs. In particular, there has been extremely strong growth in jobs with wages between $12 and $18 per hour. Jobs in the $19-$35 range saw growth that was roughly in line with what would have been expected given the overall level of job growth. And there was strong growth in jobs that paid more than $35 per hour.

In other words, as the labor market has strengthened, the pattern of very strong growth in low-wage jobs and weak growth in middle-wage jobs in the first few years of the recovery has shifted to a pattern of strong growth in middle- and high-wage jobs.
Click to expand...
 
T

titiklabingapat

Member
Uh guys, didn't she give that major speech about the Alt-right last week? What is this 'she's been quiet the whole of August' shit? I swear some of us here in Poligaf have a shorter attention span than the voting public lol
 
K

Kusagari

Member
So the absolute best case scenario for the Senate, because not even in a best case do I see Portman losing, is 55-45 for the Dems.
 
T

thestopsign

Member
titiklabingapat said:
Uh guys, didn't she give that major speech about the Alt-right last week? What is this 'she's been quiet the whole of August' shit? I swear some of us here in Poligaf have a shorter attention span than the voting public lol
Click to expand...

Yeah, but the majority of the press barely addressed the meat of the speech. It got compared to Trump's speech earlier last Thursday and was seen as equivalent somehow.
 
N

nature boy

Member
titiklabingapat said:
Uh guys, didn't she give that major speech about the Alt-right last week? What is this 'she's been quiet the whole of August' shit? I swear some of us here in Poligaf have a shorter attention span than the voting public lol
Click to expand...

Well Biden is in Ohio and she's not there.

HOPIUM SHOT
David Paleologos ‏@davidpaleologos 3m3 minutes ago
Suffolk U./USA TODAY poll of likely voters nationally - Hillary Clinton leads Donald Trump 48-41; in 4-way it’s HC 42, DT 35, GJ 9 & JS 4
Click to expand...
 
B

Bowdz

Member
Biden's killing it in Ohio. He better be camped out in the rust belt for the remainder of the election. No one connects with WWC voters than Biden.
 
W

whyamihere

Banned
Senate GOP PAC is doing a $8.1 MILLION (!!) ad buy for Burr from mid-September to Election Day. Why isn't the DSCC or ANYONE responding for Ross?!

Give up on Strickland it's not happening!!
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
Bowdz said:
Biden's killing it in Ohio. He better be camped out in the rust belt for the remainder of the election. No one connects with WWC voters than Biden.
Click to expand...
Yup.. come the last week of September, they could just put him on a bus starting in Philly and have him drive back-and-forth to Minneapolis for the rest of the campaign.
 
S

Spoiled Milk

Banned
Y2Kev said:
I can promise people one thing: you don’t know better than the Clinton campaign. You have less information than they do. If they are not doing something obvious, it is probably because the candidate herself has decided she does not to do it.
Click to expand...
I agree with this post a lot, and especially this bit. Someone in here (can't remember the name) called the Clinton campaign "stupid" for not holding press conferences. That's actually really insulting to the people running the Clinton campaign! I trust what they're doing, as they've gotten us this far.

sazzy said:
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/...foundation-private-email-support-teneo-227613
Click to expand...
So, this is interesting for a couple of reasons. At first I was miffed that someone posted a politco piece because they're bad and this one is just as bad. It reeks of optics optics optics and as they admit, nothing illegal here! Clinton rules, folks.

On the other hand, here's how the former presidents' act works:
- you get a 200k-ish pension (or whatever the current salary is for presidents)
- you get office + staff expenses of 96k a year
- you get a million dollars a year in security + travel expenses, the security expenses only being valid if you have relinquished your secret service protection.

So, this last category is where most of this money (the $16 million over 16 years) is going, and I'll get to that in a second. But this article is so bad. It's filled with quotes like this:

Also receiving a salary from both the GSA and the Clinton Foundation was Laura Graham, who remained in extremely close contact with Clinton’s top aide at the State Department, swapping emails about sensitive foreign policy issues. During most of her time on the GSA payroll, Graham was earning a six-figure salary from the Clinton Foundation, which topped out at $190,000 per year in 2014.
Click to expand...

Oooooh, spooky! Clinton put his friends on the government payroll! Six figure salary! Fraud! Fraud! Actually, hold on: remember that the legislation only guarantees a maximum of about 96k for all office expenses. Turns out that that six figure salary is mostly coming from the foundation's pockets, anyway. If 96k is a reasonable amount for a small, not-Clinton office, then 96k should remain an inoffensive amount even if it's used for a giant corporation like the Clinton foundation.

And that's why this article is so bad. Notwithstanding the tons of "REMEMBER WHEN THE CLINTON'S DID THIS OTHER SHADY THING", it really delves heavily into the staff of the Clinton foundation even though, at most, they've costed the government a little over a million dollars since 2001. Ummm... fraud?

So back to the rest of the money. I don't know what it went to. Politco decided not to report this. Oops! That's $15 million dollars we're talking about, pretty much all of the money in question. Seriously, what the hell? This is an error on the scale of AP admitting like 1,500 state department meetings only to focus on 100 of them just to get that half number.
 
N

nature boy

Member
Full USAToday/Suffolk results: http://www.suffolk.edu/academics/10741.php

Suffolk University/USA Today Poll Shows Clinton Leading Trump by 7 Points
September 1, 2016

Democrat Hillary Clinton leads Republican Donald Trump by 7 points nationwide, according to a Suffolk University/USA Today poll of voters likely to cast ballots in the November presidential election. Clinton (48 percent) led Trump (41 percent), with 9 percent undecided in the two-way ballot test.

In a four-way scenario that includes Libertarian Gary Johnson and Green Party nominee Jill Stein, Clinton maintained a 7-point advantage, 42 percent to Trump’s 35 percent; Johnson was at 9 percent; Stein, 4 percent; with 10 percent undecided.

“Clinton is fueled by strong support from the East and West Coast regions and by women across the nation,” said David Paleologos, director of the Suffolk University Political Research Center in Boston. “But her commanding lead among minority voters gives her a solid advantage no matter how you slice it.”

Clinton led Trump 54 percent to 38 percent among women, 92 percent to 4 percent among African-American voters and 65 percent to 24 percent among Hispanic voters. She was ahead in the Northeast 58 percent to 34 percent and in the West 52 percent to 37 percent.


Third parties and debates

Although Johnson did not receive the magic 15 percent threshold he needs to participate in the fall debates, there is strong voter appetite to hear the ideas and visions of serious third-party candidates. When likely voters were asked whether a third party candidate who is certified on a majority of state ballots should be included in the presidential debates, 76 percent said yes; 17 percent said no; and 7 percent were undecided.
“The U.S. electorate is welcoming – with open arms – serious third-party candidates into the national conversation,” said Paleologos.

Both Johnson and Stein are certified on a majority of state ballots for the general election.


Issues of trust

Voters indicate that they have trust issues with both major-party candidates, with 61 percent saying Trump is not honest and trustworthy and 59 percent saying the same of Clinton. Nearly 78 percent of likely voters said that Trump should follow the practice of previous presidential candidates and release his tax returns, at least for those years that are no longer being audited. Over 14 percent disagreed.

While 54 percent of voters said that Bill and Hillary Clinton didn’t take appropriate steps to avoid conflict of interest in donations to the Clinton Foundation, nearly 30 percent said that Hillary Clinton shouldn’t be criticized for donations to the Clinton Foundation due to its good works.

Both candidates have high unfavorable ratings, with Trump at 59 percent and Clinton at 51 percent unfavorable. Nearly one in five voters say they dislike both candidates. Among those who dislike both, Trump led 32 percent to Clinton’s 28 percent, with 32 percent undecided and 8 percent refusing a response. In the four-way ballot test among “the haters” Johnson tops the field with 34 percent, followed by Trump (21 percent), Clinton (15 percent), and Stein (8 percent), while 20 percent were undecided.
Click to expand...
 
O

Orbis Tabula

Member
Plinko said:
I was joking, if you didn't happen to pick that up.



I've been confident in my position since I was the first one on here to declare Trump would win the primary. I hold that victory high and will continue to do so.
Click to expand...

I know I'm like six pages late, but I just wanted to point out that you weren't the first person to declare Trump would win. Other people thought he would win last July, and you still had him at 8:1 odds. You thought Bush and Walker were tied for most likely at 5:2 odds, with Rubio at 5:1. So I don't think you can really justify your confidence with "I've been right all along."
 
B

Box of Kittens

Banned
hawk2025 said:
While in the topic of 538: Always disappointing when an article points out an omitted variable bias and somehow still poses their analysis as valid:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features...6-a-month-to-trim-a-minute-off-their-commute/
Click to expand...

The scourge of statistics is people wanting to handwave away all the flaws in their analysis because they want those neat and tidy conclusions.

This is why I kinda think everyone's first stats course should be from a Freedman text. You need a healthy respect for the limitations of the techniques.
 
T

thebloo

Member
among “the haters” Johnson tops the field with 34 percent, followed by Trump (21 percent), Clinton (15 percent), and Stein (8 percent)
Click to expand...

Not even the people that dislike both candidates would vote for Jill.


Joe would know about "foot in mouth"-is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
Poligaf 2017 |OT| It Almost Isn't Fair
9
4K
Bonen no Max'd replied
Top Bottom