PoliGAF 2016 |OT11| Well this is exciting

Status
Not open for further replies.
Iolo said:
Eh. If Hillary wins there will be plenty of time after the election to gloat at Nate Silver. There's not much point now, just unfollow him if it bothers you.

If you want to trash Maureen Dowd though now be my guest
Click to expand...

The point is, there's like no chance he'll be wrong, because he'll say she had a 60% chance of winning and she did so I'm right.

Nate's problem is his bitchiness. I'm a bitch. But i do sass more than bitchy. There's a difference.
 
watershed said:
I don't mean to be pessimistic, but I don't think Hillary can "win" the debate. The bar is too high for her and too low for Trump.
Click to expand...

People keep saying this, but this isn't even really the first debate of the year. We had a mini debate like format a few weeks ago and Trump bombed it and everyone noticed.
 
Maybe the GOP is melting down because the 1994-2010 Republican Party was diseased and unable to be saved?

[Ken] Starr: "Coach Briles was never told about quote-unquote 'violence.' A grave injustice was done to Coach Briles." #hereallysaidthis #ttf #wtf
Click to expand...

https://twitter.com/anamariecox/status/779698532647260160

“A grave injustice was done to Art Briles,” Starr said of the coach’s firing, going on to say that he takes issue with media descriptions of Briles’ behavior. “Coach Briles has been calumnied ... it’s completely unfair.”

Of Briles’s character, Starr had nothing but high praise, requesting “fairness to Coach Briles” in discussion of the administration’s failings and describing him as “an honorable, decent man who committed his life to molding the lives of young men.”

In an hour-long interview that involved much in the way of circumlocution and meandering non-answers from Starr, there was but one question that received an immediately clear reply:

“Was Art Briles given a raw deal?”

“Yes.”
Click to expand...

http://deadspin.com/ken-starr-believes-art-briles-is-the-true-victim-in-bay-1787037572

Ken Starr on his college's football coach covering up several rapes.
 
I find Nate Silver's bizarre transition into punditry and seeming desire to keep the perception of the race as close as possible very peculiar.

I think there is a great chance ESPN gave him the guidelines, and he's trying to stay in them.
 
There will be snap polling after the debate. This will be done before the media can settle on a narrative. If Hillary wins the snap polling, they'll go with that narrative for the next few days. They'll be a window of like an hour where they can try and spin. Once those numbers drop, that's the story they'll go with.
 
Plinko said:
I find Nate Silver's bizarre transition into punditry and seeming desire to keep the perception of the race as close as possible very peculiar.

I think there is a great chance ESPN gave him the guidelines, and he's trying to stay in them.
Click to expand...

you know, I think this also- it defies logic that anyone could honestly push that narrative.

But then again I think back to the primaries when he was pushing the "trump can't win" narrative far harder than he should have, and long past its expiration date. ESPN wasn't dictating that, that was entirely his own hubris.
 
watershed said:
I don't mean to be pessimistic, but I don't think Hillary can "win" the debate. The bar is too high for her and too low for Trump.
Click to expand...

Honestly, the more I talk to my friends and family about the debate (some into politics, other not), this isn't really the perception at all.

She has to be herself and Trump will be himself very likely, even if he's "composed" more than usual, and most people have already made up their minds. It's the political nerds like us who are hypersensitive to even the slightest Hillary cough (although I agree that it's mostly Hillary's to lose, not Trump's to win).

Obama's poor performance in the first 2012 debate shook even the most loyal supporters into thinking he didn't even want the job, and the stakes were (from our perspective) lower then than they are now. But, even so, internal polls from the Obama campaign showed almost no true movement in the electorate.
 
I kind of want to make a thread about the cognitive dissonance and hypocritical stupidity of gaters.
i'm not going to make it but somebody else should

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/...harassed-off-twitter-after-gizmodo-hit-piece/

So gamersgate was a campaign to harass and threaten feminists and other "SJW." We're all familiar with the disgusting shit they did, but all Gizmodo does shine a light on the garbage she's making publicly available, in no way harasses or threatens her, and the alt right is freaking out that she was chased off social media. THATS ALL YOU ASSHOLES DO. YOU CREATED A MOVEMENT OUT OF HARASSING AND THREATENING WOMEN. They can dish it out, but they can't even take it. Not that what gizmodo did is even remotely close to being what GG does.
 
Hillary could trick Trump into dropping the worst statements and ramblings during the debate and every online poll ever would drop for Hillary faster than the like bar of a liberal's youtube video.

Thankfully bots can't vote in a tradition poll or pull the lever (yet).
 
I just can't imagine Trump seeing coherent in an hour and half discussion of policy and political philosophy.

Despite this, I'm still anxious for the debate. The first 2012 debate caught me so off guard- Romney is orders of magnitude smarter than Trump but that Romney performance in that first debate still sticks with me.
 
Four_Chamber said:
I just can't imagine Trump seeing coherent in an hour and half discussion of policy and political philosophy.

Despite this, I'm still anxious for the debate. The first 2012 debate caught me so off guard- Romney is orders of magnitude smarter than Trump but that Romney performance in that first debate still sticks with me.
Click to expand...

Trump bombed even the softball with Matt Lauer. If it weren't for Lauer's shittiness overshadowing the whole thing, Trump would have been panned for his answers. Like for example on his love affair with Putin
TRUMP: Well, he does have an 82 percent approval rating, according to the different pollsters, who, by the way, some of them are based right here. Look, look …
Click to expand...
 
For some reason, looks like WaPo released a new poll at midnight EST?

Hillary: 46
Trump: 44
Johnson: 5
Stein: 1

Hillary didn't gain or lose anything, Trump gained 3, Johnson lost 4, Stein lost 1.

Debate expectations closer than 2012: 44 expect Clinton to win, 34 expect Trump to win. In 2012, it was 56 Obama, 29 Romney.
 
whyamihere said:
For some reason, looks like WaPo released a new poll at midnight EST?

Hillary: 46
Trump: 44
Johnson: 5
Stein: 1

Hillary didn't gain or lose anything, Trump gained 3, Johnson lost 4, Stein lost 1.

Debate expectations closer than 2012: 44 expect Clinton to win, 34 expect Trump to win. In 2012, it was 56 Obama, 29 Romney.
Click to expand...

When was thw poll taken? And those debate expectations are a good thing for Hillary, I guess. Obama's performance was compounded by huge expectations from everybody.

It also looks like a lot of Johnson supporters went to Trump, with some undecideds still in the waiting. Hope the debate convinces them to go with Hillary.
 
Joeytj said:
When was thw poll taken? And those debate expectations are a good thing for Hillary, I guess. Obama's performance was compounded by huge expectations from everybody.
Click to expand...
Two weeks ago.

Kind of funny how the ABC poll was +5 right when everything was getting tighter. Now when a lot of pollsters are showing an increased lead for Clinton, ABC tightens :P
 
Joeytj said:
What?! This was taken during the Week from Hell and she's up +2 in LV?!
Click to expand...
Wait... I thought you were asking when their last poll was. My apologies.

This was 19-22. So included with the rest of the polls from this week, we're probably looking at around a 3-4 point lead up from 1-2 during the week from hell.
 
I think Hillary can very liberal for the most part in the debate. Sometimes the candidates will have to look centrists to gain any undecideds and independents. For Hillary's case she just needs to regain her support from other Democrats\leaners and liberals. I doubt her main goal will be trying to gain other votes besides those groups because almost anything else is a lost cause. The current environment also is especially making it much easier for her to be liberal, mainly because of Donald Trump. When it comes to social issues she'll be very liberal, and most of her positions are actually popular nation-wide, or popular to a certain demographic she wants to have more support in.

National security and foreign policy, she'll won't be as liberal in, but that is probably for the best as many Americans aren't that much liberal when it comes to those subjects. It wouldn't be warmonger-y either though. Her positions will most likely be very detailed to the amount of time she is given and will look like it has some sense to it. Being a policy wonk will very much benefit her in this. I say in most subjects that they will talk about she'll should have the advantage, it just what her strategy is going to be.
 
Abinash117 said:
I think Hillary can very liberal for the most part in the debate. Sometimes the candidates will have to look centrists to gain any undecideds and independents. For Hillary's case she just needs to regain her support from other Democratsleaners and liberals. I doubt her main goal will be trying to gain other votes besides those groups because almost anything else is a lost cause. The current environment also is especially making it much easier for her to be liberal, mainly because of Donald Trump. When it comes to social issues she'll be very liberal, and most of her positions are actually popular nation-wide, or popular to a certain demographic she wants to have more support in.

National security and foreign policy, she'll won't be as liberal in, but that is probably for the best as many Americans aren't that much liberal when it comes to those subjects. It wouldn't be warmonger-y either though. Her positions will most likely be very detailed to the amount of time she is given and will look like it has some sense to it. Being a policy wonk will very much benefit her in this. I say in most subjects that they will talk about she'll should have the advantage, it just what her strategy is going to be.
Click to expand...

Agree that she can especially be wonky in foreign policy, because most Americans also don't understand a lot lf it but understand it's very complicated and dangerous right now. Domestic policy though, it's more about vision and general terms, ironically.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT2| Well, maybe McMaster isn't a traitor.
397 398 399 400 401
20K
2M
ShadowSwordmaster replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2016 |OT16| Unpresidented
395 396 397 398 399
20K
1M
PKrockin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2016 |OT15| Orange is the New Black
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
The Technomancer replied
  • 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 2016 |OT13| For Queen and Country
386 387 388 389 390
19K
2M
Magni replied
Top Bottom