• 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 |OT3| You know what they say about big Michigans - big Florida

Status
Not open for further replies.
The post you linked never mentioned anything about the media. Just said probable nominee.

I know, and he put it in "quotes". I just read between the lines.

I think you mean "error"; margin of error typically prefers to the construction of a confidence interval (or in Bayesian terms, a credibility interval). It reflects underlying uncertainty in the model or prediction. The same estimate can have wider or narrower margins of error depending on the level of confidence you want. It would be very nonstandard in statistical terms to use the term "margin of error" to refer to the magnitude of the error term in an empirical prediction.

I'm not about to get into a semantical debate about this.

Wiki said:
Margin of error is often used in non-survey contexts to indicate observational error in reporting measured quantities.

Observational error (or measurement error) is the difference between a measured value of quantity and its true value.[1] In statistics, an error is not a "mistake". Variability is an inherent part of things being measured and of the measurement process.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margin_of_error

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observational_error


Your post was completely uncalled for. Not because you misunderstood me, but because you immediately assumed that I wasn't informed about what I was talking about just because you didn't understand what I meant. Then AFTER I clarified myself, you want to argue that my use of the terminology is 'nonstandard'.

It's just blatant condescension and, frankly, disappointing. But now that I've shared my feelings on the matter, I'm dropping this, full stop.

Feel free to respond but I have no desire to continue this conversation.
 

danm999

Member
The National Review reveals that their problem with Trump isn't the misogyny or the racism or the fascism, just that Trump says he won't let the poor die in the streets (even though his health care plan will allow that).

CdjxUcsUUAAZlBf.jpg

Wow that's some ghastly shit.
 
I agree with you on all of this post full stop (hate his lack of nuance and crap campaigning but hes a 78 year old socialist that waters down his own values so go figure).

But part of me thinks that while hillary hits all of these points (I don't doubt at all that she is progressive even when she tries to bring in the center, thats just good politcking), is that she won't try to change the basic system or even voice concern about the fundamentals of the system. There is lots of research on how laws are not crafted based on the views of the population (which is fine at some level but is at absurd levels in the republican party) and it will be hard to fix this just be waiting things out till the right of the future is the left of now.

I made a post a few days ago. I'm encouraged by bernies supporter and what it represents. I just want them to go to better left leaning candidates. That aren't like bernie in their ridgedness

And I understand having problems with clinton. I much prefer temperament and thought process of obama (though I think there be areas where clinton will be allowed to be less cautious were obama was). She's not the ideal.
 

Stumpokapow

listen to the mad man
Your post was completely uncalled for. Not because you misunderstood me, but because you immediately assumed that I wasn't informed about what I was talking about just because you didn't understand what I meant. Then AFTER I clarified myself, you want to argue that my use of the terminology is 'nonstandard'.

It's just blatant condescension and, frankly, disappointing. But now that I've shared my feelings on the matter, I'm dropping this, full stop.

??
 

pigeon

Banned
I want a democratic party that advocates for massive increase in the size of the government. Big programs, big changes.

We got this in 2008.

I want a democratic party that isn't in the pocket of big business.

Vague and subjective.

I want a democratic party that doesn't advocate for unrestricted trade deals that screw of American working people.

Don't worry, all of our trade deals so far have been great for American working people. Our future ones will probably follow this trend.

I want a democratic party that isn't in the pocket of big business.
I want a democratic party with an agenda that isn't dictated by corporate scum-bags.

This is the ideological stuff that we're talking about. How can you objectively and consistently judge this? What qualifies as a corporation? Anything with limited liability? My father has a two-person corporation. If he gives money to a candidate, is he a scumbag? This sounds like just a blank check to hate every candidate and agitate constantly for MORE PURITY. Which is exactly what the Tea Party did and how they helped corrode the GOP into nothingness.
 
I see that 538 still has Clinton with 90% or above to win Ohio and Illinois, which is interesting because they downgraded Missouri to a virtual coin flip. I know they botched Michigan along with everyone else but I've trusted them completely since 2008 so I guess tomorrow is the make or break.
1064629.jpg

I, for one, welcome our new Tyler overlord.
 
I made a post a few days ago. I'm encouraged by bernies supporter and what it represents. I just want them to go to better left leaning candidates. That aren't like bernie in their ridgedness

Oh totally, I mean bernie in the abstract sense of his raw liberalness. He is a pisspoor candidate, something I've said multiple times, (probably worse than jeb) buoyed by what I find as honesty (not that I think his positions are all right, just that he doesn't play the game in the same way as other politicians) and decent positions we all kinda want. He is a rebuke of the system that I think we all agree could be a lot better. If he had the details of hillary and charisma/ability to communicate of obama, I think he would be doing a lot better.
 
I made a post a few days ago. I'm encouraged by bernies supporter and what it represents. I just want them to go to better left leaning candidates. That aren't like bernie in their ridgedness

To me once you get many really really passionate groups in one side one point or the other you will get fracturing. It seems like every time you get those types of people they start to split off because everyone has they own idea to change things. I don't trust those groups and I won't trust a bunch of liberals that are like that.
 
I know, and he put it in "quotes". I just read between the lines.



I'm not about to get into a semantical debate about this.



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margin_of_error

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observational_error


Your post was completely uncalled for. Not because you misunderstood me, but because you immediately assumed that I wasn't informed about what I was talking about just because you didn't understand what I meant. Then AFTER I clarified myself, you want to argue that my use of the terminology is 'nonstandard'.

It's just blatant condescension and, frankly, disappointing. But now that I've shared my feelings on the matter, I'm dropping this, full stop.

Feel free to respond but I have no desire to continue this conversation.
We have hit peak brainchild here.
 

I was talking about your original post, [paraphrased] "You should go research this terminology because clearly you have no idea what you're talking about".
I then tell you what I'm talking about, and then you dismiss my explanation as 'nonstandard' despite my qualifying me statements with context.
 
We got this in 2008.



Vague and subjective.



Don't worry, all of our trade deals so far have been great for American working people. Our future ones will probably follow this trend.



This is the ideological stuff that we're talking about. How can you objectively and consistently judge this? What qualifies as a corporation? Anything with limited liability? My father has a two-person corporation. If he gives money to a candidate, is he a scumbag? This sounds like just a blank check to hate every candidate and agitate constantly for MORE PURITY. Which is exactly what the Tea Party did and how they helped corrode the GOP into nothingness.

Some of the more obvious sources of "corruption" have been with the non-negotiation of drug prices, the ENTIRE DRUG SCHEDULING SYSTEM (nothing pisses me off more than people who love their amazing healthcare but won't listen to doctors and scientists on policy), and general healthcare shenanigans.
 

pigeon

Banned
I was talking about your original post, [paraphrased] "You should go research this terminology because clearly you have no idea what you're talking about".
I then tell you what I'm talking about, and then you dismiss my explanation as 'nonstandard' despite me qualifying me statements with context.

All mods look alike to you?
 
To me once you get many really really passionate groups in one side one point or the other you will get fracturing. It seems like every time you get those types of people they start to split off because everyone has they own idea to change things. I don't trust those groups and I won't trust a bunch of liberals that are like that.

I think this is what's happening with the tea party and also just part of "parties" its hard to get that many people to not disagree
 
Having memories of my days as a huge Edwards guy in '08... I was crushed when he dropped out but I switched to Obama when he endorsed him and hoped he'd be the VP... Then the shit hit the fan. Then Elizabeth passed... :-( Ugh. Fuck that guy, man. Broke my political heart.
 
I think this is what's happening with the tea party and also just part of "parties" its hard to get that many people to not disagree

It's really easy! Just give everyone dopamine antagonists and low levels of GABA agonists. Boom, totally dispassionate and not really fear reactive humans! Too bad they lack all joy in life.
 
Mods come and go but there is only one brainchild. He is the mighty cliff that stands abreast of the pounding surf; titanic, majestic, timeless.
 
The National Review reveals that their problem with Trump isn't the misogyny or the racism or the fascism, just that Trump says he won't let the poor die in the streets (even though his health care plan will allow that).

CdjxUcsUUAAZlBf.jpg

It is fascinating to watch the right turn on its own people, using the same classist attacks that they have employed on ethnic minorities for decades and offering the same dumbshit advice - just pick up and move, poors! - that they have used to decry other people.

May NR and the rest of the Buckleyites be relegated to the dustbin of history sooner rather than later.
 
Having memories of my days as a huge Edwards guy in '08... I was crushed when he dropped out but I switched to Obama when he endorsed him and hoped he'd be the VP... Then the shit hit the fan. Then Elizabeth passed... :-( Ugh. Fuck that guy, man. Broke my political heart.

My dad loathed Edwards, from 2004 onwards. Said there was something about him that he couldn't put his finger on but was just wrong. Edwards was near us in 2004 and my dad flat out refused to go. Only time I think he never went and saw someone near enough to drive.
 

pigeon

Banned
They are not the same but politcally and discoursevely they are used and parroted quite similarly, to the point they become difficult to differentiate.

I mean, only by people who oppose them! I would certainly never call myself a centrist, but I call myself a pragmatist all the time. People call me a centrist as a slur. Don't confuse that with them just being generally confused with one another!

Doing stuff is an ideology. What stuff has to be "done"?

I mean, at the base level, stuff like funding the government and raising the debt ceiling is actually required for America to continue existing. I'm not exaggerating when I say that ideology has threatened even this low bar of functionality!

How do you prioritize? When something becomes worthy of discussion, debate and compromise and when it does not? The line is more blurry than what pragmatics would like to believe.

Sure. I wouldn't argue that, like, there's an objective truth here. But I think that, ultimately, we have to be willing to argue for, and implement, small steps towards our goal, and we have to be willing to accept compromises that serve the goals of the opposition if they also serve our goals. Obamacare is a great example of exactly what I'm talking about in terms of identifying the best possible outcome given the constraints of the real world and the stakeholders in that world, and fighting to achieve that best possible outcome in real time.

I don't think I'm crazy to suggest that lots of Sanders supporters seem to reject this basic idea. I think this is bad! At its core, the American political system is about just this kind of horse trading. The more we reject it, the more we move towards violating existing constitutional norms and creating a nonfunctional institution.
 

Krowley

Member
We got this in 2008.



Vague and subjective.



Don't worry, all of our trade deals so far have been great for American working people. Our future ones will probably follow this trend.



This is the ideological stuff that we're talking about. How can you objectively and consistently judge this? What qualifies as a corporation? Anything with limited liability? My father has a two-person corporation. If he gives money to a candidate, is he a scumbag? This sounds like just a blank check to hate every candidate and agitate constantly for MORE PURITY. Which is exactly what the Tea Party did and how they helped corrode the GOP into nothingness.

I want massive campaign finance reform with publicly financed elections, and I don't think we'll get that until we have a candidate who doesn't owe huge favors to corporate America.

I don't trust Hillary at all on this. I just don't. And Obama? I'm just not going to get into it. I've been happy with his approach to foreign policy. He's a good person. I can't say he's been a bad president. But there have been great disappointments. I guess I'm pretty much with TYT on Obama.

My mother owns a corporation too, and I've basically been self employed in one way or another for my entire life.. I understand that all business people aren't inherently bad. But the ones at the very top have been stealing from everybody else for a long time, and they've rigged everything so that it works in their favor.

I'm ready to join with the mob, and we can get the pitchforks out and take some of that money back.

As for your pro-trade stance, I'm sorry, but you'll never convince me. I've seen with my own eyes that free trade is bad for poor Americans. It just is. I live in Georgia, and in the 1980s and early 90s people used to do just fine working in manufacturing and textile factories. Things were just fine then. We didn't need free trade. Everything started going to hell almost immediately after NAFTA was signed.

Now many of the people that used to work in factories making decent money are working at Walmart, or McDonald's, or they don't work at all, and they live in trailer-parks and they're in terrible debt, and they've lost their houses. Their kids are too poor to move out, so you have whole families of grown people living together, all of them being subsidized on foodstamps because they couldn't eat otherwise. Even if they went and got a better education, there are no jobs to replace the old ones except for shitty service industry bullshit. Even the tech industry jobs are being outsourced whenever it's possible to do so. Maybe if they lived in another state they would have more options, but it's not easy to relocate. Not when you're poor as dirt.


You'll never convince me that free trade has been anything but a disaster. Maybe in a global sense there's some advantage in a long-term kind of way, but I'm talking about immediate issues on the ground in America, in the places that got the shitty end of the deal. It's been awful. And nobody cares. All the politicians in both parties like to pretend it isn't even happening. I have no patience with them anymore.
 
My dad loathed Edwards, from 2004 onwards. Said there was something about him that he couldn't put his finger on but was just wrong. Edwards was near us in 2004 and my dad flat out refused to go. Only time I think he never went and saw someone near enough to drive.

Lol. My mom felt the same way about him. Said he was like a used car salesmen. But he was the only one out there talking about the poor and their struggle and that really resonated with me.
 

Brinbe

Member
The National Review reveals that their problem with Trump isn't the misogyny or the racism or the fascism, just that Trump says he won't let the poor die in the streets (even though his health care plan will allow that).

CdjxUcsUUAAZlBf.jpg

The different reactions to the piece are telling...

http://www.nationalreview.com/corne...ral-responsibilities-defense-kevin-williamson

vs

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/03/...-trump-supporting-communities-deserve-to-die/
http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/12/national-review-writer-working-class-communities-deserve-to-die/
http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...ies-morally-indefensible-they-deserve-to-die/

I think the party is really dying... We're witnessing history, folks.
 
Movement conservatism is really just terrible political philosophy. Libertarian when it comes to taxes and government helping the poor, neoconservative when it comes to foreign policy, lots of weird religious bullshit, and full to the brim with racism and sexism. No one cared about any of movement conservatism either, they just liked Reagan because he was a huge racist and a religious fanatic.
 
Movement conservatism is really just terrible political philosophy. Libertarian when it comes to taxes and government helping the poor, neoconservative when it comes to foreign policy, lots of weird religious bullshit, and full to the brim with racism and sexism. No one cared about any of movement conservatism either, they just liked Reagan because he was a huge racist and a religious fanatic.
What evidence is there of reagan's huge racism?
 
re-watching the 2012 VP debate and aside from losing my shit at biden's facial expressions, i keep thinking "god damn, i'm even gonna miss paul ryan's goblin ass with the shitshow that the GOP ticket's guaranteed to be"
 

Grizzlyjin

Supersonic, idiotic, disconnecting, not respecting, who would really ever wanna go and top that
I don't see Christie having a career in politics after this. Hope those Trump checks are good.

I don't know why he risked his political future to get aboard this. Did he really see it as his last chance to get into the White House, or at least that inner circle?

Should have kept his mouth shut and tried again in 2020
 

Cerium

Member
I don't know why he risked his political future to get aboard this. Did he really see it as his last chance to get into the White House, or at least that inner circle?

Should have kept his mouth shut and tried again in 2020

By all accounts it was an emotional decision born of his hatred for Marco Rubio.
 
What evidence is there of reagan's huge racism?

IDK

-Said that supporting LBJ over Goldwater was supporting tyranny over freedom
-Opposed Civil Rights Act
-Wished to end Voting Rights Act
-Vetoed Civil Rights Restoration Act
-Called the Voting Rights Act "humiliating to the South"
-Called Jefferson fucking Davis "a hero of mine"
-Opposed Fair Housing Act


Not sure if there's racism there idk.
 

danm999

Member
Christie was being implored by Murdoch to run in 2012. He was the darling of the party. Must be galling to have fallen so far in 4 years.

Oh well. At least he derailed Rubio, another person who has no future outside selling insurance.
 
On a television set somewhere in Miami, March 19, 2017. A family huddles around the television, ready to watch an episode of The Voice.

Cue Music.

Enters Marco Rubio holding a bottle of water:

Hello I'm Little Marco Rubio. As you know, I loved to cut the pork from the federal budget. That's why, the only meat market I take my family to is Markel's Meat Market on Highyway 17 in beautiful Miami. Let's dispel with the fiction that they don't know how to provide Grade A cuts of meat. Markel knows exactly what he's doing. Mention my name, and you'll receive blank stares and a two for one deal on bottled water.

That's Markel's Meat Market, on Highway 17.

The only meat I put in my mouth. On camera, anyway.

: wink :

Fade out.
 
IDK

-Said that supporting LBJ over Goldwater was supporting tyranny over freedom
-Opposed Civil Rights Act
-Wished to end Voting Rights Act
-Vetoed Civil Rights Restoration Act
-Called the Voting Rights Act "humiliating to the South"
-Called Jefferson fucking Davis "a hero of mine"
-Opposed Fair Housing Act


Not sure if there's racism there idk.
I haven't read about the jefferson davis thing but everything else looks to be like positions a conservative would defend as opposition to federal overreach rather than outright racism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom