• 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 |OT12| The last days of the Republic

Status
Not open for further replies.

Retro

Member
Let's be honest with ourselves, the reformation of the Republican party is essential to the continuation of this democracy. We cannot continue on like this indefinitely.

A bit late responding to this and posting from my phone so there may be some typos...

I would change that to "the existence of a conservative party is essential." In order to remain competitive, the Republican Party has had to become a circus tent to house all the fringe voting blocs. Blocs that are fighting each other for control of the party and compromising their ability to function; the Tea Party holding a gun to John Boehner's head any time he dared to so much as glance across the aisle, or Eric Cantor getting primaried out.

I don't see the Republican Party lasting long if they can't actually follow through with their post-failure hand wringing over demographics. They need to shake off the groups that are sabotaging the party's evolution and make them an object of contempt and derision to all but uneducated white male voters. That means losing an election or two or four or more as they try to make up ground in different demographic groups.

If they try to remain as the circus tent, they're done. You can't win the African American vote when you're hosting white supremacists. You can't win the female vote when you're the home for anti-abortion evangelical zealots. You can't win the Hispanic vote when you're Anti-Immigration Central.

If they can't ditch the fringe groups keeping them afloat while simultaneously dragging them under, then a new conservative party will have to break away, like the current one did from the Whigs.
 
A bit late responding to this and posting from my phone so there may be some typos...

I would change that to "the existence of a conservative party is essential." In order to remain competitive, the Republican Party has had to become a circus tent to house all the fringe voting blocs. Blocs that are fighting each other for control of the party and compromising their ability to function; the Tea Party holding a gun to John Boehner's head any time he dared to so much as glance across the aisle, or Eric Cantor getting primaried out.

I don't see the Republican Party lasting long if they can't actually follow through with their post-failure hand wringing over demographics. They need to shake off the groups that are sabotaging the party's evolution and make them an object of contempt and derision to all but uneducated white male voters. That means losing an election or two or four or more as they try to make up ground in different demographic groups.

If they try to remain as the circus tent, they're done. You can't win the African American vote when you're hosting white supremacists. You can't win the female vote when you're the home for anti-abortion evangelical zealots. You can't win the Hispanic vote when you're Anti-Immigration Central.

If they can't ditch the fringe groups keeping them afloat while simultaneously dragging them under, then a new conservative party will have to break away, like the current one did from the Whigs.

They're in no rush to change if they keep sweeping everything that isn't the president.
 

StoOgE

First tragedy, then farce.
Ratings are in

35.6m viewers

Lowest since Cheney-Lieberman in 2000

Honestly,

I suspect that is the result of a lot of people making up their minds already. Undecided numbers are coming down heavily. Wishy Washy liberals came home. Johnson support is dropping.

I think the last debate made Trump a total non-starter for almost everyone, and reconfirmed the worst of Trump is the real Trump.

I wouldn't be shocked if the Townhall is not heavily viewed either. That performance and subsequent shitshow of a week following it may have fatally wounded his campaign in a way that cannot be repaired.
 

StoOgE

First tragedy, then farce.
I still can't believe what Bill said about Obamacare. Such stupid mistakes he makes.

He can't shut up. The thing is, he made very salient points about the problems that Obamacare created while crediting the successes that it had.

But we live in a world where nuance is not allowed, and because of the current political environment you have to be 100% in lockstep at all times.
 

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
Honestly,

I suspect that is the result of a lot of people making up their minds already.

I think the last debate made Trump a total non-starter for almost everyone, and reconfirmed the worst of Trump is the real Trump.

I wouldn't be shocked if the Townhall is not heavily viewed either. That performance and subsequent shitshow of a week following it may have fatally wounded his campaign in a way that cannot be repaired.

Yeah, this is Hillary's race to lose now.
The VP Debate went close to how they planned too.
They are far too organized and well run there to be an unforced error.

He can't shut up. The thing is, he made very salient points about the problems that Obamacare created while crediting the successes that it had.

But we live in a world where nuance is not allowed, and because of the current political environment you have to be 100% in lockstep at all times.

It's infuriating for us Policy wonks.
 
Super bummed at RuBot.

I really wanted his threat to be gone forever but now he looms over 2020. He is not a complete dingus like Rick Perry so he can recover from the fatality on that debate stage in NH. Really hoping for an Ayotte like moment in Rubio/Murphy debates.

And screw DWS.
 

StoOgE

First tragedy, then farce.
They're in no rush to change if they keep sweeping everything that isn't the president.

Disagree. The thing is Republicans get less vote for Congress than Democrats. Once a more liberal Supreme Court starts tearing up their maps and Citizens United it'll start to cost them everything else.
 

avaya

Member
Disagree. The thing is Republicans get less vote for Congress than Democrats. Once a more liberal Supreme Court starts tearing up their maps and Citizens United it'll start to cost them everything else.

I thirst for this dream to become a reality.
 
The mathematical link between sample size to MoE to probability is what determines the weights in that case. It's...sort of basic statistics and probability.

Right; I forgot - the volume of complaints about weighting is directly proportional to the result of the poll and how favorable it is to Clinton. :p

One of the problems with only (or primarily) judging polls based on their sample size is that sometimes poll have a large sample size because they had difficulty getting something close to a representative sample. Sometimes polls with bad or fundamentally flawed methodologies try to brute force their way through with large samples. It doesn't make sense to reward them for that.

What's crazy is that this is shit that I have heard from Silver himself in years past. I really don't know what's going on with him this year.

Trump is a crammer if he ever studied at all. I wonder what his grades at Wharton were like. Did daddy buy Donnie's way in.

Trump is that guy that always says: Don't worry guys, I do my best work under pressure!"

I hate that guy.
 

HylianTom

Banned
Honestly,

I suspect that is the result of a lot of people making up their minds already.

I think the last debate made Trump a total non-starter for almost everyone, and reconfirmed the worst of Trump is the real Trump.

I wouldn't be shocked if the Townhall is not heavily viewed either. That performance and subsequent shitshow of a week following it may have fatally wounded his campaign in a way that cannot be repaired.

Stole my response. That first debate was a yuuuuge eye-opener for a lot of people. Voters already had doubts about his ability to be President, and he confirmed those doubts emphatically.

The joke on SNL where Kate McKinnon (as Hillary) says "I think I'm gonna be President" rang so damn true.. when Hillary did her little shimmy, I was sitting at home thinking, "she's got this. This race is over. And she knows it."
 

Toxi

Banned
Honestly,

I suspect that is the result of a lot of people making up their minds already. Undecided numbers are coming down heavily. Wishy Washy liberals came home. Johnson support is dropping.

I think the last debate made Trump a total non-starter for almost everyone, and reconfirmed the worst of Trump is the real Trump.

I wouldn't be shocked if the Townhall is not heavily viewed either. That performance and subsequent shitshow of a week following it may have fatally wounded his campaign in a way that cannot be repaired.
I feel like the Townhall will be heavily viewed because people want to see another Trump trainwreck.
 

blackw0lf

Member
So this surprised me. CNN polling after each VP debate

2016: 48 Pence / 42 Kaine
2012: 48 Ryan / 44 Biden
2008: 51 Biden / 36 Palin

Check out 2012. That's not how I remember the narrative being.
 

Cybit

FGC Waterboy
There's zero point to Nate listing ratings for each pollster if it doesn't actually matter. He should especially tuned to this since other statisticians are giving him shit for his weird model. TRENDZ is not a great justification.

And I forgot that the likelihood of a Cybit post defending Bronze without enough justification was pretty high!

A) Ratings matter. They just matter less than having 867 respondents versus 545 respondents. If a statistician gives him shit for weighting a poll with 50% more respondents more heavily than an individual pollster's ratings when adjusted (table with math located here: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-fivethirtyeight-calculates-pollster-ratings/) - then they should go back to algebra, because the functional difference between an A pollster and an A- pollster is often one tenth to two tenths of a percentage on average, versus an MoE difference that goes from 3.3% to 4.2%.

Statisticians can say that he is extrapolating too heavily from a small sample size; but that argument lies in whether you are treating an election as a single event, or whether you are treating the election as a series of discrete events that can fundamentally change. That's a fair argument, and Mamba and I have gone back and forth about it. (IIRC Mamba likes the idea of using all the polls as data for the trend, while I like the idea of trying to adjust polls to as close of a baseline as possible and then using them all).

So yeah. When someone complains about the pollster ratings being ignored for "TRENDZ", it's because they don't bother to take the time to read the actual pollster ratings and their APM / PPM versus the MoE difference between the polls being compared. Because otherwise, they're saying that the reverse engineered and calculated .1 to .2% potential accuracy difference is more important than a .9% difference in Margin of Error in a given poll.

B) He literally puts the formula in his article explaining pollster ratings.

My colleague Harry Enten looked at Senate polls since 2006 and found that methodologically poor pollsters improve their accuracy by roughly 2 percentage points when there are also strong polls in the field. My own research on the broader polling database did not find quite so large an effect; instead it was closer to 0.6 percentage points. Still, the effect was highly statistically significant. As a result, Predictive Plus-Minus includes a “herding penalty” for pollsters with low methodology ratings.

The formula for how to calculate Predictive Plus-Minus is included in the footnotes.
Basically, it’s a version of Advanced Plus-Minus where scores are reverted toward a mean, where the mean depends on whether the poll passed one or both methodological standards. The fewer polls a firm has, the more its score is reverted toward this mean. So Predictive Plus-Minus is mostly about a poll’s methodological standards for firms with only a few surveys in the database, and mostly about its past results for those with many.

As a final step, we’ve translated each firm’s Predictive Plus-Minus rating into a letter grade, from A+ to F. One purpose of this is to make clear that the vast majority of polling firms cluster somewhere in the middle of the spectrum; about 84 percent of polling firms receive grades in the B or C range.

Disqualified for being an actual GAFfer

Seriously? Didn't know he was a GAFfer.
 
So this surprised me. CNN polling after each VP debate

2016: 48 Pence / 42 Kaine
2012: 48 Ryan / 44 Biden
2008: 51 Biden / 36 Palin

Check out 2012. That's not how I remember the narrative being.

I certainly remember there being criticisms toward Biden for being rude and interrupting, not unlike Kaine (but much better at it).
 

avaya

Member
So this surprised me. CNN polling after each VP debate

2016: 48 Pence / 42 Kaine
2012: 48 Ryan / 44 Biden
2008: 51 Biden / 36 Palin

Check out 2012. That's not how I remember the narrative being.

The narrative was formed by the clips of Biden mocking Ryan for being a charlatan. The actual debate became irrelevant (not that he won that debate on any substance, given he was an actual charlatan).
 
So this surprised me. CNN polling after each VP debate

2016: 48 Pence / 42 Kaine
2012: 48 Ryan / 44 Biden
2008: 51 Biden / 36 Palin

Check out 2012. That's not how I remember the narrative being.

Obama bombed the first debate, and Biden was a confidence boost to Democrats. It didn't matter that he "lost" the debate, he woke scared Democrats up that it was going to be okay and Obama is still a strong candidate.
 

Geist-

Member
giphy-downsized-large.gif

Amazing...

So, I gotta say, this has to be the scariest election I've ever witnessed. Not because Trump is one of our choices (although it is significant), but because I don't think I've ever really realized how much some people can hate someone they've never met. Like, people I know, who have been for the most part calm and reasonable people, are now somehow deluding themselves that every new scandal that comes out about Trump, even when he says it himself, is just the liberal media spinning things and they have to vote Trump because Hillary is the devil.

I realize there has always been political delusion among voters in every election, but the crazy is so visible this time among people that I see everyday... it's making me sick to my stomach.
 
So this surprised me. CNN polling after each VP debate

2016: 48 Pence / 42 Kaine
2012: 48 Ryan / 44 Biden
2008: 51 Biden / 36 Palin

Check out 2012. That's not how I remember the narrative being.

A competent conservative always "wins" debates because the people watching love hearing about debt and reforming social security

Voters don't tend to vote that way though
 
So this surprised me. CNN polling after each VP debate

2016: 48 Pence / 42 Kaine
2012: 48 Ryan / 44 Biden
2008: 51 Biden / 36 Palin

Check out 2012. That's not how I remember the narrative being.
In the immediate aftermath, Biden saved the Democratic morale but Ryan won because optics. As the days went on, Ryan got factchecked to hell and narrative evolved into welll Biden brought the Democrats from the brink and Ryan sort of failed to excite anyone.
 
I realize there has always been political delusion among voters in every election, but the crazy is so visible this time among people that I see everyday... it's making me sick to my stomach.

It's weird to discover it on like Facebook and Twitter that your friends and family may be obscenely insane.

It's like if you suddenly discovered a bunch of the worlds population had mutant powers or something. But like sexist or racism powers
 
Honestly,

I suspect that is the result of a lot of people making up their minds already. Undecided numbers are coming down heavily. Wishy Washy liberals came home. Johnson support is dropping.

I think the last debate made Trump a total non-starter for almost everyone, and reconfirmed the worst of Trump is the real Trump.

I wouldn't be shocked if the Townhall is not heavily viewed either. That performance and subsequent shitshow of a week following it may have fatally wounded his campaign in a way that cannot be repaired.
Too much hopium; please tone it down.
 

Holmes

Member
Dave Wasserman ‏@Redistrict 15m15 minutes ago
Between July and September, CA registration rolls added a net 95,739 Dems & 54,734 No Party Preference. GOP went *down* 9,670.

Yup that's my state.
 

Syncytia

Member
He can't shut up. The thing is, he made very salient points about the problems that Obamacare created while crediting the successes that it had.

But we live in a world where nuance is not allowed, and because of the current political environment you have to be 100% in lockstep at all times.

Yeah, it's too bad the issues with Obamacare can't really be talked about without it becoming a republican talking point. Even though Bill was 100% right in what he said. Context matters, and the reasons those problems exist also matter. He didn't say Obamacare as a whole was the craziest thing in the world, but that's how the media portrays it.
 

andthebeatgoeson

Junior Member
So how common is split voting historically? I mean I usually go down ballot except when I voted for Bloomberg in NYC.
I'm actually going to vote for a libertarian because a Republican is running with no democratic counterweight. Like office of the fuck all or something. Just checked my sample ballot. I actually don't know either candidate. It's my protest vote.
 
The only Republican I'd consider voting for is the father of a friend of mine from High School.

Because I've met him personally and he was a really nice guy. I don't really know what he's even running for, I need to look more into him. He's been in office for almost 15 years at this point, though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom