• 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 |OT11| Well this is exciting

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MHWilliams

Member
Plinko said:
So first the Assange thing last night and then the fake folder thing tonight. The far right is getting yanked all around right now.
Click to expand...

When you don't believe anyone, you leave the door open for snake oil salesmen. They deserve it.'

Iolo said:
Wrong. Due to the historic unfavorables of both major party candidates, and the fact that he was steady all year, Johnson will maintain or increase his share of the vote.
Click to expand...

So instead of netting 1.2 million of the national vote, he might get up to 2 million?
 
H

HylianTom

Banned
Plinko said:
I still wish Joe would have been the nominee. To see him win the presidency after all he has been through would have been absolutely amazing. Plus, watching him deconstruct Trump in a debate would have been glorious. Hillary did a great job, no doubt, but there's something different about Joe's demeanor when it happens.
Click to expand...

I feel wistful about it when I see him out on the trail. She's good, and I have a deep enjoyment on how her victory will get under the GOP's skin at a base mental level, but Biden was the cool liberal Catholic uncle that I never had (contrasted with my own working class Irish family chock-full of conservatives), so I have my own emotional soft spot for him.

Not fair.
 
B

Boke1879

Member
Plinko said:
Fantastic. Keep it up with the imbecile gimmick, Gary.



I still wish Joe would have been the nominee. To see him win the presidency after all he has been through would have been absolutely amazing. Plus, watching him deconstruct Trump in a debate would have been glorious. Hillary did a great job, no doubt, but there's something different about Joe's demeanor when it happens.
Click to expand...

Yup. Let him keep acting stupid, but I also think naturally we are seeing many people come around. I think having Bernie in Iowa would be a huge help tomorrow.

But barring some major event. Like Clinton OR Trump shooting someone dead in the street. I don't think much will change. I expect she'll do very well on Sunday and that should honestly solidify everything.
 
M

Mael

Member
The Assange thing, I talked about it with my wife who don't really follow this cycle.
She was on the floor laughing at how stupid anyone who was trapped at 3A.M waiting for something were.

Xamtheking said:
Yes
Joe Biden came in and just sang country songs for an hour and a half
Click to expand...

Goddamnit, it's not even in my newsfeed! and I missed the gaf thread too!
Wait a moment...
 
I

Iolo

Member
Suikoguy said:
Over/Under on Benghazi?
Click to expand...

I think 100%; take every attack Donald Trump whiffed on, and Pence is going to try to pack it in there. Conservatives are demoralized after Trump cucked himself, they need an intestine-shattering diet of red meat.
 
J

jbug617

Banned
ugaboga232 said:
A bit quick on the snap GOP: https://gop.com/who-won-the-vice-presidential-debate/
Click to expand...

ugaboga232 said:
If you click through the other articles, they have 4+ already up as placeholders on the debate

https://gop.com/10-things-voters-are-saying-about-the-debate/
https://gop.com/governor-mike-pences-top-5-moments-from-the-debate/
https://gop.com/its-clear-who-lost-the-vp-debate-hillary-clinton/
Click to expand...

lol. One of the local political reporters say they expect Pence to ignore the questions and attack Hillary because Trump didn't do it at the first debate.
 
E

Emarv

Member
Gotchaye said:
I listened to 538's podcast where Silver is defending his model and it's just not addressing what strike me as the serious concerns people have. Now, probably he is getting bombarded with a lot of tweets making terrible criticisms, but you can't only address those. He characterizes his critics as not believing that the polls have moved, but the issue is not with 538's now-cast but that polls-only looks almost identical to the now-cast. It's great that you see a lot of volatility in the polling, but then shouldn't you suspect that the polls will continue to be volatile such that you could have predicted that they were probably going to move a lot from wherever they happened to be in mid-August?

At one point he even criticizes other models for not moving a lot after each convention. But of course your model shouldn't move much after the conventions. Conventions aren't surprising! You knew months before the convention that the convention would happen and the candidate would get a polling bounce, so you could have included it in your model beforehand. It's true that if you're trying to build a model from only polls with no information about the timing of important events like this you're going to have issues distinguishing unexpected movement that signals a change in the dynamics of the race from expected movement due to things like conventions. That's a weakness of a polls-only model, and it means that if you're making a polls-only model you should probably not make it very reactive because if you do you're going to see a lot of artificial movement where your model thinks that a totally normal event is actually a big shift in who's likely to win.
Click to expand...

The even funnier part is he specifically said before the conventions that his model was built to understand and account for typical convention bumps.
 
M

makingmusic476

Member
So with both Sanders and Clinton committing to some sort of tax reform, think we'll see something happen early next year, assuming Dems retake the Senate and narrow the gap in the House?

I'm glad we're not losing Sanders in the Senate. It'd be wonderful if we could finally get this shit sorted.
 
G

Grief.exe

Member
jbug617 said:
lol. One of the local political reporters say they expect Pence to ignore the questions and attack Hillary because Trump didn't do it at the first debate.
Click to expand...

That's essentially what he does whenever he is interviewed anyways. Not a stretch to assume he will do it here.
 
Y

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
Gotchaye said:
I listened to 538's podcast where Silver is defending his model and it's just not addressing what strike me as the serious concerns people have. Now, probably he is getting bombarded with a lot of tweets making terrible criticisms, but you can't only address those. He characterizes his critics as not believing that the polls have moved, but the issue is not with 538's now-cast but that polls-only looks almost identical to the now-cast. It's great that you see a lot of volatility in the polling, but then shouldn't you suspect that the polls will continue to be volatile such that you could have predicted that they were probably going to move a lot from wherever they happened to be in mid-August?

At one point he even criticizes other models for not moving a lot after each convention. But of course your model shouldn't move much after the conventions. Conventions aren't surprising! You knew months before the convention that the convention would happen and the candidate would get a polling bounce, so you could have included it in your model beforehand. It's true that if you're trying to build a model from only polls with no information about the timing of important events like this you're going to have issues distinguishing unexpected movement that signals a change in the dynamics of the race from expected movement due to things like conventions. That's a weakness of a polls-only model, and it means that if you're making a polls-only model you should probably not make it very reactive because if you do you're going to see a lot of artificial movement where your model thinks that a totally normal event is actually a big shift in who's likely to win.
Click to expand...

He stopped defending polls plus after it shit the bed in the primaries. His current argument ignores his own flops honestly!
 
J

JP_

Banned
Gotchaye said:
I listened to 538's podcast where Silver is defending his model and it's just not addressing what strike me as the serious concerns people have. Now, probably he is getting bombarded with a lot of tweets making terrible criticisms, but you can't only address those. He characterizes his critics as not believing that the polls have moved, but the issue is not with 538's now-cast but that polls-only looks almost identical to the now-cast. It's great that you see a lot of volatility in the polling, but then shouldn't you suspect that the polls will continue to be volatile such that you could have predicted that they were probably going to move a lot from wherever they happened to be in mid-August?

At one point he even criticizes other models for not moving a lot after each convention. But of course your model shouldn't move much after the conventions. Conventions aren't surprising! You knew months before the convention that the convention would happen and the candidate would get a polling bounce, so you could have included it in your model beforehand. It's true that if you're trying to build a model from only polls with no information about the timing of important events like this you're going to have issues distinguishing unexpected movement that signals a change in the dynamics of the race from expected movement due to things like conventions. That's a weakness of a polls-only model, and it means that if you're making a polls-only model you should probably not make it very reactive because if you do you're going to see a lot of artificial movement where your model thinks that a totally normal event is actually a big shift in who's likely to win.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's what I've been thinking. There's Now-Cast, and then there's basically the "What if the election was held a week from now" version that's just a bit less reactionary. I still mostly use his to check on things, but I think of polls-only more like merely a now-cast.
 
D

Diablos

Member
NeoXChaos said:
Flashback to 4 years ago.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=494714

clip4_biden_ryan_unemployment.gif
Click to expand...
This was one for the ages. Easily one of the best VP debates of all time and will stay that way for decades.
 
Y

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
Most polls showed Biden lost that debate lol. Shows how cowardly liberals just need to be amped up.
 
J

Joe Shlabotnik

Banned
Iolo said:
It will be great to relitigate Hillary's emails tonight.
Click to expand...

I assume Kaine won't go off the reservation on this and will just stick to "she made a mistake, she admitted it, let's move on"--however, he bailed her out in that 60 Minutes interview with an angle she should have used from the very beginning: the whole government is sloppy with this shit and our classification system is dumb and stupid. (He was a little more eloquent than I was.) She could have championed reform here to make all of it more consistent between govt departments and logical. It turns a "character issue" around into a "government issue" with a proposed positive solution.

I'm a little curious if he touches on it this way again.
 
A

AnotherNils

Member
Emarv said:
The even funnier part is he specifically said before the conventions that his model was built to understand and account for typical convention bumps.
Click to expand...
Bingo. He says those bumps are baked in already.

Y2Kev said:
He stopped defending polls plus after it shit the bed in the primaries. His current argument ignores his own flops honestly!
Click to expand...
I think his primary poll-plus was based on 'the party decides' model which flopped completely. I think the current one uses different metrics, such as economic strength.

That said, his polls plus and polls only models agreed in like 94% of the primaries, so it feels near pointless.
 
A

AntraxSuicide

Banned
Gotchaye said:
I listened to 538's podcast where Silver is defending his model and it's just not addressing what strike me as the serious concerns people have. Now, probably he is getting bombarded with a lot of tweets making terrible criticisms, but you can't only address those. He characterizes his critics as not believing that the polls have moved, but the issue is not with 538's now-cast but that polls-only looks almost identical to the now-cast. It's great that you see a lot of volatility in the polling, but then shouldn't you suspect that the polls will continue to be volatile such that you could have predicted that they were probably going to move a lot from wherever they happened to be in mid-August?

At one point he even criticizes other models for not moving a lot after each convention. But of course your model shouldn't move much after the conventions. Conventions aren't surprising! You knew months before the convention that the convention would happen and the candidate would get a polling bounce, so you could have included it in your model beforehand. It's true that if you're trying to build a model from only polls with no information about the timing of important events like this you're going to have issues distinguishing unexpected movement that signals a change in the dynamics of the race from expected movement due to things like conventions. That's a weakness of a polls-only model, and it means that if you're making a polls-only model you should probably not make it very reactive because if you do you're going to see a lot of artificial movement where your model thinks that a totally normal event is actually a big shift in who's likely to win.
Click to expand...

All of this would even be fine if he hadn't made his name on being the calm, "this race is not a toss-up" guy in 2012, and the polling for that race was much worse for the Dems than this one is! Somehow the Dems are doing better in the polling, but Silver's model (yes, yes, NowCast isn't Polls Plus or Polls Only, but all of the damn models have really lost their distinguishing features recently) says the race is less certain than before.

If he had a good explanation for this, I'd be fine with it. But his best shot is "a lot of people don't like the candidates, so it looks like 3rd parties are making my model not work." But those same 3rd parties always plummet after the first debate, so why didn't his model account for their inflated numbers before? I honestly think it's less that ESPN wants clicks and more that Nate is a libertarian and doesn't want to kill his own movement's dreams by telling them, "No, people actually don't like libertarians at all and won't vote for them."
 
J

jonjonaug

Member
F

Finale Fireworker

Member
I'm really looking forward to when Kaine looks directly into the camera and tells me, by name, to clean my room and apologize for telling my mother to "suck toast."
 
D

DataStream

Member
I wonder if Clinton/Kaine anticipated that Trump would live tweet.

Seems like it would be very easy for Trump tweetstorm ending up being the primary conversation by talking heads as opposed to the actual VP debate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Show us your gaming setup: 2025 Edition
2
84
6K
Nankatsu replied
Show us your gaming setup: 2024 Edition
2 3 4 5 6
263
52K
Topher replied
  • Locked
Show us your gaming setup: 2023 Edition | 20th anniversary thread
2 3 4 5 6
268
60K
DGrayson 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 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
Top Bottom