• 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.
A

ant1532

Banned
Retromelon said:
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.
Click to expand...

he opposed and led the fight against the civil rights movement. that is inherently racist.
 
S

shinra-bansho

Member
It's not bait and it's not just semantic point of contention. It's explanation. So far as I can tell he hasn't released moe, or really anything, from his 'model'.

If a poll is performed or a prediction given and the result occurs, the difference between the former and the actual latter is not the moe.
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
I love it when "intellectuals" like Scalia argued to their professors that black kids should get hung for crimes they didn't commit just so that the federal government didn't "overreach" and impinge on "state's rights."

But regulating who gets to fuck whom and whether cops can shoot you for being scared and running away and the drug war: All small government.
 
HUELEN10

HUELEN10

Member
Enter the Dragon Punch said:
3o7abkti7UphSopcl2.gif
Click to expand...

Holy crud, this made me laugh My ass off.

So yeah, it's election time in Florida today! I already voted (even became a democrat to do so!), but here's hoping for good turnout.

Go Trump, go Sanders; I'm rooting for the both of you.
 
E

East Lake

Member
pigeon said:
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.
Click to expand...
Not all of them.

But in textiles, "the people most at risk in this industry are predominantly women, blacks and Hispanics," said Herman Starobin, research director for the International Ladies Garment Workers Union in New York City, where 80,000 workers make clothing. "These are people who need the jobs most."
Click to expand...

http://www.nytimes.com/1993/11/18/u...t-jobs-now-exist-industries.html?pagewanted=2

But surely it helps mexicans?

For Alvares Correa, NAFTA has been a disaster. While the trade agreement opened up U.S. markets to Mexican corn farmers, they haven't been able to sell any corn in America.

Meanwhile, American farmers have flooded Mexico with cheap corn thanks to generous U.S. government subsidies — subsidies left unchecked by NAFTA. A U.S. corn grower receives an average annual subsidy of $20,000 a year. The Mexican government gives their farmers just $100.

Farmers said that entire towns are emptying because thousands of small farms have gone out of business. As many as 2 million farm workers have lost their jobs — the vast majority headed north across the U.S. border looking for better pay.
Click to expand...

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/is-nafta-good-for-mexicos-farmers/

Or it helps whites?

During the 1993 battle over the North American Free Trade Agreement, the proposal's promoters' most politically effective argument was that NAFTA would keep Mexicans out of the United States. As political writer Elizabeth Drew later observed, "Anti-immigration was a sub-theme used, usually sotto voce, by the treaty's supporters."

The voce was not always sotto. "We don't want a huge flow of illegal immigrants into the United States from Mexico," said former President Gerald Ford, speaking at one of then-President Bill Clinton's pro-NAFTA rallies. "If you defeat NAFTA, you have to share the responsibility for increased immigration into the United States, where they want jobs that are presently being held by Americans."
Click to expand...
http://prospect.org/article/how-nafta-failed-mexico
 
R

Retromelon

Member
OrangeGrayBlue said:
I wonder where this opposition to federal overreach and love of states' rights comes from.
Click to expand...
You make it sound like holding conservative principles automatically designates you as racist.

Btw i did some binging on reagan and it turns out he used some unseemly terms to describe blacks while campaigning in the south; fuck his crispy old white ass.
Your rhetorical skills could use some work itwasmeantobe19, when the guy youre arguing with has to do his own legwork to prove your point
 
R

royalan

Member
I would love to know what Christie is getting for selling his soul to Trump. He looks so miserable every time you see them together.
 
A

And_Gignac

Member
HUELEN10 said:
A what?
Click to expand...

A big fat mess.

So are you voting Trump or Sanders? You better stay in the bright side.

Edit: Oh, you voted Sanders. Good. If you like Sanders, you will LOVE Clinton. You better vote for her in the generals.

East Lake said:
Not all of them.



http://www.nytimes.com/1993/11/18/u...t-jobs-now-exist-industries.html?pagewanted=2

But surely it helps mexicans?



http://www.cbsnews.com/news/is-nafta-good-for-mexicos-farmers/

Or it helps whites?

http://prospect.org/article/how-nafta-failed-mexico
Click to expand...

NAFTA was instrumental to the creation of the Two Mexicos reality that basically gave fertile ground to the brutalization of the narcowars.
 
O

OrangeGrayBlue

Member
Retromelon said:
You make it sound like holding conservative principles automatically designates you as racist.

Btw i did some binging on reagan and it turns out he used some unseemly terms to describe blacks while campaigning in the south; fuck his crispy old white ass.
Click to expand...

Automatically, no. But there's an appreciable portion of the republican base whose passion for states' rights and disdain for the federal govt stems from the Civil War. Not many conservatives would use that attribution today, but the general sentiment can be traced back to those events. If I recall, Reagan's use of the term "states' rights" was more frequent when campaigning in the south. He knew what was up.
 
I

ItWasMeantToBe19

Banned
royalan said:
I would love to know what Christie is getting for selling his soul to Trump. He looks so miserable every time you see them together.
Click to expand...

Queen actually pondered this question with Chris Matthews (caught on hot mic):

The subject quickly turned to Christie, and Clinton wondered: "Why did he support him?"

Matthews explained that Christie and others who support Trump "want a future" politically.

"Did he have a debt?" Clinton mused.
Click to expand...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...risties-support-for-trump-did-he-have-a-debt/
 
B

brainchild

Banned
shinra-bansho said:
It's not bait and it's not just semantic point of contention. It's explanation. So far as I can tell he hasn't released moe, or really anything, from his 'model'.

If a poll is performed or a prediction given and the result occurs, the difference between the former and the actual latter is not the moe.
Click to expand...

These two concepts are not interchangeable. They provide different contexts for the definition of MoE. You can't just ignore the context, and the definition is not prescriptive (no definition is).

Here are TWO definitions of MoE according to wikipedia:

Wiki said:
[First definition]

The margin of error is a statistic expressing the amount of random sampling error in a survey's results.

[Second definition]

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

[Definition of Observational Error]


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.
Click to expand...


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


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

Both the first and second definitions refer to margin of error, just in different context. Considering that Tyler's model is non-survey based, I was referring to the second definition, which is essentially talking about observational error.

Now typically when we're talking about observational errors, we're talking about scientific instrument measurements. However, in this case, we're talking about the measurement of Tyler's statistical model. More importantly, when talking about the difference between those measurements and reality, it's referred to as 'margin of error'.

I think the problem is that Tyler's model doesn't use polls, yet he uses a statistical model. So I can see how that can be confusing, but that doesn't make my use of the term any less valid.

I honestly don't know how I can make it any clearer than I already have.
 
W

watershed

Banned
Christie never looks happy when he's with Trump. I think the humanity in him regrets his choice to endorse Trump every single day but the politician in him won out.
 
B

brainchild

Banned
B-Dubs said:
I'm sorry, but I gotta ask. Are you Tyler? Because you're going to bat for this thing like you made it.
Click to expand...

Lol, no, but I do wish I came up with the idea to use a similar model before he did. As you can see, I'm very interested in seeing how viable it turns out to be for primary/general elections.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
watershed said:
Christie never looks happy when he's with Trump. I think the humanity in him regrets his choice to endorse Trump every single day but the politician in him won out.
Click to expand...

The guy's political career is dead. Trump probably promised him a job either way.
 
B

blackaroni

Member
Grizzlyjin said:
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
Click to expand...
He also went to this event instead of a state trooper's funeral. http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/03/christie_skips_third_nj_police_funeral_for_trump_e.html#incart_river_home_pop
brainchild said:
What in the actual fuck...
Click to expand...
Making Trump proud
-30067a6191ca8139.jpg

Holmes said:
lol earlier today I joked that the Sanders campaign would link Clinton to Arpaio in Arizona but I didn't think they themselves would make it so easy to do it against them.


https://mobile.twitter.com/RealSheriffJoe/status/709541483330732032
Click to expand...

Why on earth would she go to this?
 
J

johnsmith

remember me
Gross, between this and the Minuteman vote Hillary has enough ammo to shoot down Bernie with the Mexican vote if she needed to. California will be hers, not that she'll need it.
 
A

And_Gignac

Member
Holmes said:
https://mobile.twitter.com/GriseldaNevarez/status/709527925796700160
Click to expand...

I understand Sanders has this "approach the enemy" thing going, but no, it doesnt work here. Arpaio is the legal representation of the fears and terrors of plenty of undocumented hispanic families. You dont get close to a person like this. You dont care about "his version" or whatever Jane was trying to pull off by going there.

Edit:

WAIT

https://twitter.com/janeosanders/status/709573015156056064

You tried it, Holmes. Jane is a QUEEN. Forgive me for doubting, future First Lady.
 
H

Holmes

Member
Cool but if Clinton can be tied to Rahm then Sanders can now be tied to Arpaio. Latinos in Arizona need to understand the facts and the facts say that Jane Sanders stands with Arpaio. Literally. There's photographic evidence.
 
R

royalan

Member
Melkr_ said:
I understand Sanders has this "approach the enemy" thing going, but no, it doesnt work here. Arpaio is the legal representation of the fears and terrors of plenty of undocumented hispanic families. You dont get close to a person like this. You dont care about "his version" or whatever Jane was trying to pull off by going there.

Edit:

WAIT

https://twitter.com/janeosanders/status/709573015156056064

You almost got me, Holmes. Jane is a QUEEN.
Click to expand...

But honestly, what did she expect him to say?

Obviously there was nothing nefarious about this visit. It just seems incredibly naive. What did she hope to achieve here?
 
F

Future Foundation

Member
adam387 said:
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.
Click to expand...

Holy shit, that's perfect.
 
H

Holmes

Member
The Dem electorate in Arizona very well may be 50% latino now just so they can vote against the Arpaio-enabling Sanders.
 
S

shinra-bansho

Member
Even if you want to use the term moe, in a generally nonstandard way given we're not referring to a measurement tool, to denote post-event deviation of a model for a given forecast it still doesn't amount to being indicative of future predictive power and deviation. Although I don't care enough given in a day or two this rando will probably have been forgotten to continue this line of discussion so whatever.
 
A

And_Gignac

Member
Holmes said:
The Dem electorate in Arizona very well may be 50% latino now just to vote against the Arpaio-enabling Sanders.
Click to expand...

Dont come for me because I exposedT your mainstream media LIES.
Do5sHYK.gif


royalan said:
But honestly, what did she expect him to say?

Obviously there was nothing nefarious about this vision. It just seems incredibly naive. What did she hope to achieve here?
Click to expand...

Nothing. Joe showed up there without invitation. Queen J confronted and dragged him accordingly.
 
B

brainchild

Banned
shinra-bansho said:
Even if you want to use the term moe, in a generally nonstandard way given we're not referring to a measurement tool, to denote post-event deviation of a model for a given forecast it still doesn't amount to being indicative of future predictive power. Although I don't care enough given in a day or two this rando will probably have been forgotten.
Click to expand...

Not in and of itself, no. But the combination of a pattern of narrow MoE's with consistently accurate predictions would be reliable enough for me, personally. Not necessarily objectively.

adam387 said:
I for one would like to see the transcripts of what was said.
Click to expand...

SHOTS FIRED!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • 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
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
Poligaf 2017 |OT| It Almost Isn't Fair
9
4K
Bonen no Max'd replied
Top Bottom