• 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 |OT14| Attention NV shoppers, democracy is on sale in aisle 4!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Diablos

Member
I do wonder why Clinton is spending money in MI. Padding the firewall ok but if it's a safe state maybe dump it into NC instead.
 
OPPPOOOOO!


Nothingburger

Video shows Trump with mob figure he denied knowing

A newly uncovered video appears to contradict Donald Trump’s claim that he never knew a high-stakes gambler who was banned from New Jersey casinos for alleged ties to organized crime.

The reputed mob figure, Robert LiButti, can be seen standing alongside Trump in the front row of a 1988 “WrestleMania” match in Atlantic City, N.J. LiButti wasn’t there by accident, according to his daughter, Edith Creamer, who also attended the event. “We were his guests,” she told Yahoo News in a text message this week.

The video was given to Yahoo News by a confidential source who discovered it in the online archives of World Wrestling Entertainment, the sponsor of “WrestleMania.”

The video appears to lend new support to assertions Trump once had close relations with LiButti, who was banned from the state’s casinos in 1991 because of his ties to Mafia boss John Gotti, then the chief of the Gambino crime syndicate. Separately, the New Jersey Casino Control Commission that same year levied $650,000 in fines against the Trump Plaza hotel over its dealings with LiButti, who gambled huge sums at the hotel’s casino. LiButti died in 2014.

“That’s definitely Bob LiButti standing right next to Donald Trump,” said David Cay Johnston, an author and former Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times journalist who, as a reporter for the Philadelphia Inquirer, extensively interviewed the gambler in the early 1990s. At the request of Yahoo News, Johnston reviewed the video of the “WrestleMania IV” contest, held at the Atlantic City Convention Hall on March 27, 1988. “It’s at an event that Bob described to me a quarter century ago when I spent an afternoon in his Saddle River home,” Johnston added. “The ‘WrestleMania’ event is just one of many times that Trump was close to Bob, who was the biggest loser at Trump casinos and therefore Trump’s most important customer.”

...
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
You can have one bad poll now and one bad poll in a few days, or you can have one good poll in a few days.

This is like that test they do on small children where they offer them one cookie now or six cookies later, and children can't grasp the concept of delayed gratification until six years old or something. We are that five year old who wants to take the cookie and run.

Wait the more I think about it the more this is a bad analogy! One scenario has no perks and one is only good. You need to at least have some trade offs!

Two things though:
1. If you are less likely to respond to a pollster, are you likely to vote?
2. Makes me wonder about the Marquette poll considering it hasn't been a good week for democratic partisans.
 

Diablos

Member
Trump has no GOTV but the GOP kinda does. So I wonder if that makes up for his nearly complete lack of a ground game even if it's half assed. Might explain why we can't brag as much about Clinton's advantage as we would have liked.
 
@ElectProject 3m3 minutes ago
Reg Dems almost made up deficit from reduced polling locations. Change from 2012:
Dems -1.8%
Rep +10.8%
Unafffiliated +41.1%

Hopefully Dems keep catching up. But GOP being up 10% is quite something.

This is for NC.
 

Grief.exe

Member
You know what's funny about the Bush emails? Obama's administration and the Democrats should have prosecuted but just decided not to.

That's the main difference between Democrats and Republicans right now. Democrats are still under the illusion of creating a working Government, while the Republicans are trying to burn it down.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
Two things though:
1. If you are less likely to respond to a pollster, are you likely to vote?

Yes, -ish. This was what went wrong with the 2015 British election polling, and is increasingly causing problems around the polling world. Response rates are really low - to get a sample of 1,000, YouGOV had to make about 13,500 calls in a day (i.e. about 7-8% response rates). To compare and contrast, in the '70s and '80s, you'd get ~60% response rates. The trouble is, what causes a response rate isn't unbiased. If you said "yes, I'm willing to take half an hour of my life to answer a bunch of political questions", then you were more politically interested than the average person, and as a rule of thumb, politically interested people tend to be marginally more left/liberal. So there's been a big problem of undersampling people who aren't politically interested but feel a societal compulsion to vote - and it is enough to introduce significant error. Sometimes that can be okay for the left - the Liberal Party was underpredicted because politically interested people were more likely to vote NDP - but it usually isn't.

This is one of the reasons I think Clinton will moderately underperform her polling. To me, if you said "American who doesn't care about politics, but belongs to a subculture that has a strong focus on turning up anyway", I think "Trump supporter" - or at least, balance of odds. Thankfully, I also don't think it will matter because even allowing for a 2-3 point underperform, she's still winning and you can't get Trump past 266. But I am worried the Senate is off the table at this point.

EDIT: Good article on this: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/21/opinion/sunday/whats-the-matter-with-polling.html

Moral of this story: if you're getting a data analytics job, don't do it in polling!
Also it doesn't pay well compared to consulting.
 
Oh only 10k. Makes more sense now.

Is the campaign able to divert x% to Senate races? Ross and Kander need it
I don't think the campaign itself can (someone who's better versed can correct me here), but the SuperPAC can do whatever the fuck it wants. I believe they're already running ads for Hassan and McGinty as well as I believe some House candidates.

Hopefully Dems keep catching up. But GOP being up 10% is quite something.

This is for NC.
Unaffiliateds are more important since minorities and especially youth are less likely to register with parties nowadays. Additionally a lot of straight-R voters are still registered Democrats, and may have even switched to vote in the primary (which would help explain apparently high R turnout, in that some of the R voters voting early are just former "Democrats")
 

PBY

Banned
Trump has no GOTV but the GOP kinda does. So I wonder if that makes up for his nearly complete lack of a ground game even if it's half assed. Might explain why we can't brag as much about Clinton's advantage as we would have liked.
Yeah is there any data we have that shows how effective her GOTV is?
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
I have to imagine these are Democratic GOTV people who just didn't declare party affiliation. While there are conceivable alternatives to this possibility, none seem nearly as likely.

Why would Democratic GotV efforts only manage to evoke a response from unaffiliated Democratic voters and get no response at all from affiliated Democratic voters?
 
‏@LukeBrinker

#FeelTheTightening: RCP averages currently peg Electoral College map at 273 Clinton, 265 Trump.

Was 333-205 a week ago

CwQTepTWgAEOEbB.jpg
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
Why would Democratic GotV efforts only manage to evoke a response from unaffiliated Democratic voters and get no response at all from affiliated Democratic voters?
They have, I think. Despite massive voter suppression efforts, dems will end up + over 2016. And obama had a ground game not to shake a stick at.

Hopium day!

Edit: also giving him Nevada is stupid
 

Cyanity

Banned
Joe Scarborough reads this thread? He's mocking Hillary supporters saying "don't freak out." It's a good thing he isn't relevant.

lmao. People in here have been pretty awful lately, it's true. I wish more people would step back, take a deep breath, and chill out until election day when the political picture will become MUCH clearer.
 

Emarv

Member
This map should be very comforting to anyone who wants to humor that Trump might be president.

Joe Scarborough reads this thread? He's mocking Hillary supporters saying "don't freak out." It's a good thing he isn't relevant.

Seriously. So there's two worlds: 1) Trump is gonna win and have the greatest last minute comeback of all time or 2) the race is where we all think it is and we just don't have quality polls now and all of these pundits are gonna (continue to) look foolish.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
No matter how close it gets, PA staying blue means Hillary wins.

NH is nearer to switching than PA and would give Trump the win from that map. So is Colorado. Neither of those are close to swinging, but they're closer than PA and it is conceivable Trump could win without PA.
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
Colorado EV looks fine so not worried there. NH is a mystery but Nevada is the insurance policy.

Far more curious about Wisconsin given governor walkers ugly fat face.

Also NC is important obviously.
 

Pyrokai

Member
Prepare for images like this to be flying around Facebook on November 9. After Hillary wins NV, NC, and FL idiots will point to images like this as proof the election was rigged.

What would that mean? Like, if this were the real map, then that's more cause to claim it was rigged than anything, right? But she'd still win. I don't understand, lol
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom