• 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.
This is transparent because other states allow absentee and expressly forbid them from counting if you die

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2008/05/can_a_dead_woman_vote.html
Plus, if there was any evidence of people pretending to be deceased voters, that would have been the kinda thing that, you know, they would have presented to the Supreme Court in their case. Considering no such evidence emerged or was presented whatsoever, yeah, it's completely transparently 100% nonsense.
 

Emarv

Member
Fallon says Clinton isn't contagious. Fallon, Mook and others essentially had some other type of cold. Fallon blames Mook.

Breaking news: Clinton is robot confirmed. Not contagious because she doesn't have a human immune system!
 

KingK

Member
So I've been out of the loop on the election the past few weeks aside from what I hear on NPR while driving. I've been busy with the start of my last semester, and I've been feeling more depressed than usual lately, so I just haven't been as interested.

But I see the polls have tightened a lot since I was last keeping track and now the pneumonia thing...Should I start worrying at all, or is November still looking pretty good? I'm guessing the long shot odds of taking the House are gone, but is the Senate still within reach?
 
So I've been out of the loop on the election the past few weeks aside from what I hear on NPR while driving. I've been busy with the start of my last semester, and I've been feeling more depressed than usual lately, so I just haven't been as interested.

But I see the polls have tightened a lot since I was last keeping track and now the pneumonia thing...Should I start worrying at all, or is November still looking pretty good? I'm guessing the long shot odds of taking the House are gone, but is the Senate still within reach?

You were away for the entire tightening period. We are already seeing it widen again.

One of my theories is that many voters who may choose neither feel more urgency to stop Trump (by voting Clinton) if they see it becoming dangerously close.
 
So I've been out of the loop on the election the past few weeks aside from what I hear on NPR while driving. I've been busy with the start of my last semester, and I've been feeling more depressed than usual lately, so I just haven't been as interested.

But I see the polls have tightened a lot since I was last keeping track and now the pneumonia thing...Should I start worrying at all, or is November still looking pretty good? I'm guessing the long shot odds of taking the House are gone, but is the Senate still within reach?
Senate is still ok.

Basically Dems need to win 4 seats to tie, 5 for an outright majority. Right now WI and IL look like givens, IN possibly as well (there's been some troubling public polling recently but Democrats have released several internal polls showing Bayh up by double digits). In NH and PA, the Democrats (Hassan and McGinty) have led most public polling.

The DSCC has just announced they're investing in NC and MO, which have polled somewhat close (Ross, the Democrat has even led in some NC polling). Rubio jumping back into FL seems to have hurt the Democrats' chances there rather significantly. Democrats are just writing off OH because our nominee there is performing so poorly. The only competitive seat Dems are defending is NV.

So the Senate picture is overall not really a sure thing but pretty promising.

House looking like a gain of 10-15 seats for Democrats. 20 tops. Unless there's a wave it's not happening. But congressional races tend to break later as people generally don't pay attention to them until mid-October.
 

KyroLen

Neo Member
Posted something on facebook resembling Hillary's deplorables comment, basically stating that voting for Trump is un-American and if you support him you support bigotry and racism.

Wowzers, had a few family and friends freak out about that one. Some family even resorted to attacking my wife verbally and insulting her even though she had nothing to do with what I said or politics. I think what happened is this member of the family tried to say that videos of Trump showcasing his bigotry and unintelligence were fabricated or part of a Hillary ad so shouldn't be trusted, and I questioned her intellect for thinking that videos of him at his own rallies and pressers was fabricated. Flood gates opened up, this person had no comeback to the facts I was stating about his bigotry and instead resorted to going off the rails with insults toward me and my wife.

Fun times.
 
Oh fuck Rubio. Little shit doesn't deserve to jump in. Lazy fucker.
I agree and I hope Murphy can win on the back of a competent campaign. I feel Rubio's strength mainly comes from high name recognition after his presidential run, but it shouldn't be too hard to paint him as a lazy opportunist who's only jumping in because it's the next best thing after president. Hell, he didn't even commit to serving a full term.
 
Posted something on facebook resembling Hillary's deplorables comment, basically stating that voting for Trump is un-American and if you support him you support bigotry and racism.

Wowzers, had a few family and friends freak out about that one. Some family even resorted to attacking my wife verbally and insulting her even though she had nothing to do with what I said or politics. I think what happened is this member of the family tried to say that videos of Trump showcasing his bigotry and unintelligence were fabricated or part of a Hillary ad so shouldn't be trusted, and I questioned her intellect for thinking that videos of him at his own rallies and pressers was fabricated. Flood gates opened up, this person had no comeback to the facts I was stating about his bigotry and instead resorted to going off the rails with insults toward me and my wife.

Fun times.
Is your wife non-white?
 

Mizerman

Member
Oh fuck Rubio. Little shit doesn't deserve to jump in. Lazy fucker.

As a Floridian, I completely agree.


I agree and I hope Murphy can win on the back of a competent campaign. I feel Rubio's strength mainly comes from high name recognition after his presidential run, but it shouldn't be too hard to paint him as a lazy opportunist who's only jumping in because it's the next best thing after president. Hell, he didn't even commit to serving a full term.

Yeah, I think a few people pointed that out. Which is foolish that he decided to do a series of debates against Murphy. That'll just give Murphy more recognition in hindsight.
 
Senate is still ok.

Basically Dems need to win 4 seats to tie, 5 for an outright majority. Right now WI and IL look like givens, IN possibly as well (there's been some troubling public polling recently but Democrats have released several internal polls showing Bayh up by double digits). In NH and PA, the Democrats (Hassan and McGinty) have led most public polling.

The DSCC has just announced they're investing in NC and MO, which have polled somewhat close (Ross, the Democrat has even led in some NC polling). Rubio jumping back into FL seems to have hurt the Democrats' chances there rather significantly. Democrats are just writing off OH because our nominee there is performing so poorly. The only competitive seat Dems are defending is NV.

So the Senate picture is overall not really a sure thing but pretty promising.

House looking like a gain of 10-15 seats for Democrats. 20 tops. Unless there's a wave it's not happening. But congressional races tend to break later as people generally don't pay attention to them until mid-October.

This is very tempered for you and extremely correct!
 
He might have seen not doing the debates as a bad PR move, but I don't think many people care much about debates. At the presidential level it would look terrible if a candidate skipped out on them (plz Trump), but below that you have to really fuck up to gain any sort of notoriety or outrage it seems (think back to legitimate rape comments or Christine O'Donnell having to run ads about not being a witch)

This is very tempered for you and extremely correct!
lol I feel like I have a reputation for being an irrational partisan that's not entirely earned.

I try not to bet against the polls too much, although certainly as a Democrat that colors my perspective sometimes. Still I learned after 2010 not to get too far ahead of myself (even by the end of 2014 the best I was hoping for was a 50-50 tie and that Hagan would pull it out, sigh).

All I'm saying is that Patty Judge winning the Iowa Senate seat is going to be the story of the year.
 
Fallon says Clinton isn't contagious. Fallon, Mook and others essentially had some other type of cold. Fallon blames Mook.

Breaking news: Clinton is robot confirmed. Not contagious because she doesn't have a human immune system!

schumer as pneumonia too.

all of NYC is gonna be dead soon.
 

KingK

Member
You were away for the entire tightening period. We are already seeing it widen again.

One of my theories is that many voters who may choose neither feel more urgency to stop Trump (by voting Clinton) if they see it becoming dangerously close.

Senate is still ok.

Basically Dems need to win 4 seats to tie, 5 for an outright majority. Right now WI and IL look like givens, IN possibly as well (there's been some troubling public polling recently but Democrats have released several internal polls showing Bayh up by double digits). In NH and PA, the Democrats (Hassan and McGinty) have led most public polling.

The DSCC has just announced they're investing in NC and MO, which have polled somewhat close (Ross, the Democrat has even led in some NC polling). Rubio jumping back into FL seems to have hurt the Democrats' chances there rather significantly. Democrats are just writing off OH because our nominee there is performing so poorly. The only competitive seat Dems are defending is NV.

So the Senate picture is overall not really a sure thing but pretty promising.

House looking like a gain of 10-15 seats for Democrats. 20 tops. Unless there's a wave it's not happening. But congressional races tend to break later as people generally don't pay attention to them until mid-October.
Ok good to hear. It would be crazy if Bayh wins and we have two democrats in the Senate lol (at least until Donnelly loses in 2018).
 
I'm really kind of frustrated with the senate. We're gonna lose a lot in 2018 and its gonna take forever to get it or the house back. Gridlock forever!
 

Diablos

Member
Holy crap, her whole campaign is sick. That's bad timing fam.

MI lead is still solid but sucks to see it cut in half. Hopefully MI does not get any closer.

How can Bayh win in IN? It's 2016 and he's running as a Dem in a red state
 

NeoXChaos

Member
2010 and 2014 got y'all shook for 2018.

Then again I am already prepared for the likes of Donnelly, Tester etc to lose. I just hope we can save the other 5.
 
Holy crap, her whole campaign is sick. That's bad timing fam.

MI lead is still solid but sucks to see it cut in half. Hopefully MI does not get any closer.

How can Bayh win in IN? It's 2016 and he's running as a Dem in a red state

Based on the fact that Hillary seems to show better leads in the 2-way polls than the 4-way or 3-way polls, I wouldn't be too worried.

It started later than it usually does, but we are already seeing early signs of the usual third party support dip as the election gets closer, which for the most part means more Hillary voters:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/gary-johnson-presidential-debates-227654

Also, Bayh is a well liked (in Indiana) blue dog who wasn't still in office because he retired from office but now wants to re-enter his old seat.
 

Zukkoyaki

Member
Holy crap, her whole campaign is sick. That's bad timing fam.

MI lead is still solid but sucks to see it cut in half. Hopefully MI does not get any closer.

How can Bayh win in IN? It's 2016 and he's running as a Dem in a red state

For what it's worth, that Michigan poll was landline only which notably favors Trump. That fact that it still showed Clinton +6 is great news.
 

Slayven

Member
Posted something on facebook resembling Hillary's deplorables comment, basically stating that voting for Trump is un-American and if you support him you support bigotry and racism.

Wowzers, had a few family and friends freak out about that one. Some family even resorted to attacking my wife verbally and insulting her even though she had nothing to do with what I said or politics. I think what happened is this member of the family tried to say that videos of Trump showcasing his bigotry and unintelligence were fabricated or part of a Hillary ad so shouldn't be trusted, and I questioned her intellect for thinking that videos of him at his own rallies and pressers was fabricated. Flood gates opened up, this person had no comeback to the facts I was stating about his bigotry and instead resorted to going off the rails with insults toward me and my wife.

Fun times.
Sorry to hear that, but at least you know what kind of poeple they are.
 
Holy crap, her whole campaign is sick. That's bad timing fam.

MI lead is still solid but sucks to see it cut in half. Hopefully MI does not get any closer.

How can Bayh win in IN? It's 2016 and he's running as a Dem in a red state

1) people get sick

2) as previously stated, it was a landline only poll

3) because he's won many times in IN before?
 

Zukkoyaki

Member
If folks are going to dismiss landline-only polls, they might as well dismiss online and robocall polls.

Based on what both Nates say, that may not be a bad idea haha. But honestly it's better to not pick and choose and just average everything out/adjust for possible discrepancies.
 
?????????

Chaser:
I know what he said, still disagree with him.
Online = doesn't reach older people as easily, total garbage!
Robo = We don't know who's dialing, could be Harambe born again!

It's not a coincidence that the so-called "high quality" pollster do live interviews, and are hell bent on finding people of a certain demographic.

Based on what both Nates say, that may not be a bad idea haha. But honestly it's better to not pick and choose and just average everything out/adjust for possible discrepancies.

Oh just take it at face value and be open-minded. It's a snapshot not a prediction come November.
 
Aren't online polls basically worthless 'cause they're a self-selecting sample (and thus, nonrandom)?

Yep. It's ironic to see conservatives complain that liberals are voting more than once while these same conservatives post online polls that you can ballot stuff just by clearing your cookies.
 
I know what he said, still disagree with him.
Online = doesn't reach older people as easily, total garbage!
Robo = We don't know who's dialing, could be Harambe born again!

It's not a coincidence that the so-called "high quality" pollster do live interviews, and are hell bent on finding people of a certain demographic.



Oh just take it at face value and be open-minded. It's a snapshot not a prediction come November.

I mean, yes, live interviews that include cell phones are the best polling. I don't think anyone's denying that. But landline only is also a specific type of terrible that shouldn't exist in 2016. That's the entire point. Whattaboutism for other polling methods when we're talking about the follies of landline polling is also annoying, but I'm also not a fan of online-only and robo-dialing if it makes you feel better.

Clinton's camp seems more than happy with Trump's new ad.

CsLKPybXEAEhOPh.jpg:large
 
I mean, yes, live interviews that include cell phones are the best polling. I don't think anyone's denying that. But landline only is also a specific type of terrible that shouldn't exist in 2016. That's the entire point. Whattaboutism for other polling methods when we're talking about the follies of landline polling is also annoying, but I'm also not a fan of online-only and robo-dialing if it makes you feel better.

Right, but if we limited ourselves to live interviews, we would never get the amount of state polls we get (neither would the campaigns, although they've far more sophisticated tools to analyze a state), so unless the polls produces completely bizarre results (like that Florida poll with absurd Hispanic numbers) just take it at face value and move on. If we had weekly or even monthly quality state polls we could easily dismiss this one, but we don't.
 
See my posts a few pages back about why you SHOULD be arrogant to hardcore conservatives and white supremacists and methods of doing it.

Obviously you shouldn't be arrogant to EVERYONE that isn't liberal, but to those that are just stubborn bigots you shouldn't waste time trying to reason with them. The best result you can hope for is shaming and humiliating them until they become a lot more closeted about their bigotry.

Just going "hey that's not really nice. please listen to these facts." Doesn't work with the "deplorables". You have to have a tone of "You're a desperate fucking idiot for your beliefs and here's why. Stop bitching and moaning about me telling it like it is."

Yeah, the true post-racial society that we can actually achieve is one where people only find out about others' racist leanings after they die and people go through their estate. Like, everyone's uncle (you know the one) who thinks black people have smaller brains than white people will just never say that shit out loud, and when he dies and you find all the alt-right pamphlets, you go, "Oh, guess he was a racist."

Shame these people. Engaging with them just gives tacit approval. Saying "White people are better than black people" should not be held any higher than "the Purge should be a thing" as an opinion. It's insanity and should be viewed as such.
 
Right, but if we limited ourselves to live interviews, we would never get the amount of state polls we get (neither would the campaigns, although they've far more sophisticated tools to analyze a state), so unless the polls produces completely bizarre results (like that Florida poll with absurd Hispanic numbers) just take it at face value and move on. If we had weekly or even monthly quality state polls we could easily dismiss this one, but we don't.

You don't have to take every poll at face value. You can scrutinize the methodology (which we should do in order to get better polls!) and take them for what they are. That's not unskewing: sometimes, there is bad science in polling.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom