Support NeoGAF

[Fox318]

Bernie = Arachnaman
Austin = Hillary
Paul Heyman = Debbie Wasserman Schultz

edit: dangit, fox. lol.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6m5e3_arachnaman-vs-steve-austin_sport

Then who is rude?

 

[B-Dubs]

Holy crap, this article.



I don't understand things any more. Apparently that was the goal.

I'm reading this and all I can think is that someone this stupid got published.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Shocking. White, Male, Suburban Democrat leaners are leading the unfavorable Hillary numbers among Democrat leaners.

Given the margin of error is +/-3%, there's not actually enough evidence to conclude that men lead the unfavourable Clinton numbers (as it is 52/48). There's only enough evidence to conclude that women lead the favourable numbers, which is different.

EDIT: Or put differently, if you were to pick a random Democrat or Democrat-leaning voter who dislikes Clinton out of a hat, it's essentially an even chance of drawing a man or a woman, whereas if you draw someone who likes Clinton out of a hat, it is almost twice as likely to be a woman. Interestingly, this implies this Clinton is benefiting from being a woman more heavily than she is harmed by it.

 

[Black Mamba]

Given the margin of error is +/-3%, there's not actually enough evidence to conclude that men lead the unfavourable Clinton numbers (as it is 52/48). There's only enough evidence to conclude that women lead the favourable numbers, which is different.

No. Women see her favorable by a 4:1 margin, men 2:1. Do the math.

The 52-48 split just means 52% of those who view her unfavorable are men. But being a 50/50 split still reflects poorly on men because there are a lot more women in the Democrat party/leaners.

EDIT: Or put differently, if you were to pick a random Democrat or Democrat-leaning voter who dislikes Clinton out of a hat, it's essentially an even chance of drawing a man or a woman, whereas if you draw someone who likes Clinton out of a hat, it is almost twice as likely to be a woman. Interestingly, this implies this Clinton is benefiting from being a woman more heavily than she is harmed by it.

This is correct, and demostrates than men are the drivers are the unfavorable ratings.

Do the ratio among just men and just women who view favorable and who don't!

 

[Dubbedinenglish]

I am uncertain how the "Islam never gets criticized!" people know how to tie their shoes.

Trump's entire political campaign is about how Muslims are snakes that needed to be massacred with pig's blood! Do these people exist in reality? Can they process information? How insanely racist are they?

"I'm criticizing Islam" is mostly carte Blanche for racism against brown people.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

No. Women see her favorable by a 4:1 margin, men 2:1. Do the math.

The 52-48 split just means 52% of those who view her unfavorable are men. But being a 50/50 split still reflects poorly on men because there are a lot more women in the Democrat party/leaners.

You said "no", but then you agreed with me. I am confused. All I said was:

there's not actually enough evidence to conclude that men lead the unfavourable Clinton numbers (as it is 52/48)

which you've then corroborated.

 

[Fenderputty]

My wife has watched that goddamn Chewbacca video like 50 times and cracks up harder than the lady in the mask! If she watched a documentary about the federal reserve 50 times i'd probably divorce her.

Seriously. You would have to wonder if Benji got to her.

 

[pigeon]

Symbolic

This GIF is so amazing it makes me want to switch to GOP so that I can share it.

 

[Black Mamba]

You said "no", but then you agreed with me. I am confused. All I said was:



which you've then corroborated.

Let's go back to your edit and change the game.

If you picked only women out of a hat, what % would come up favorable.

If you picked men out of a hat, what % would come up favorable.

This is the point I'm making with the chart. That it's basically an even split in absolute numbers among unfavorable is irrelevant.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

Let's go back to your edit and change the game.

If you picked only women out of a hat, what % would come up favorable.

If you picked men out of a hat, what % would come up favorable.

This is the point I'm making with the chart. That it's basically an even split in absolute numbers among unfavorable is irrelevant.

Yes, that's also true. I picked up my point to forestall the usual Berniebro comments - they're very tedious when the evidence suggests that Sanders' supporters are actually relatively evenly spread across genders.

 

[AntraxSuicide]

Holy crap, this article.



I don't understand things any more. Apparently that was the goal.

Man, that really is terrible. Here's another fun quote:

...if I tell you I have the power to fly and in time will find a way to manifest that power to you in real time, your first response isn’t to ask whether I agree that all proposed flight plans should be pre-cleared with the FAA.

This is true in one sense, but to put it another way; if you tell me that you can make me fly, I'd better see some receipts for how before you push me off of a cliff.

This feels like its so close to an epiphany

They're close! They admit that the policies are, in fact, racist, but they're still saying it's just a coincidence.

When Clinton clinches the nomination when New Jersey closes on the 7th, she needs to make her victory speech then. If she does it after California closes, it'll be late at night for many on the other side of the country. She needs to make it known that Sanders and his supporters will have a place at the table at the DNC and going forward in the fall, and call for unity to defeat Trump in November.

I agree. NJ seals it, and she should make that clear. Yes, it's with supers (but the delegates from CA later that night will seal the pledged majority as well), but that's worth it. She wins it on June 7th, and there shouldn't be any running from that.

 

[Black Mamba]

Yes, that's also true. I picked up my point to forestall the usual Berniebro comments - they're very tedious when the evidence suggests that Sanders' supporters are actually relatively evenly spread across genders.

When you look at Bernie supporters, yes. But there are more female voters (especially reliable Dem voters) so it's not comparable.

If you're a white, male Democrat/leaner, you're more likely to support Bernie than if you're a white, female Democrat/leaner.

Notice also how her unfavorables are also among moderates, there?

These are just anti-Clinton and anti-Obama people, not Bernie supporters.

I think the lesson of the 2016 Primary isn't related to Bernie at all. I think it's a reflection on what REALLY went on in 2008 and how much Clinton's 2008 vote was anti-Obama for...uh, reasons.

(in fairness, I think the youth Bernie movement is not about 2008 at all, just a combo of fatigue, naiveity, and some sexism)

 

[Beer Monkey]

Bernie 'NO' shares for the KY primary on PredictIt are back down to 90c because his followers there are high on his fumes.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

I can't believe Hillary's favorables are so bad because of a smear campaign against her husband that was done mostly by rapists (Hastert) or people that are pro-rape (DeLay, Starr).

 

[JP_]

Already posted?

John Oliver on primaries https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_S2G8jhhUHg

 

[johnsmith]

This GIF is so amazing it makes me want to switch to GOP so that I can share it.

Clinton bashing isn't limited to the GOP these days.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

I'm not sure why you highlighted moderates, actually. Comparing the likelihood of being moderate/liberal/etc between Sanders and Clinton, they look essentially the same bar white noise. 17/22/41/16 is not different to 16/25/39/18; certainly, if you were to pick a random moderate, you wouldn't be able to say much about their relative likelihood to support a certain candidate compared to a relative liberal.

 

[RustyNails]

Huma is flawless though.

She is a total waifu material. Goddam I hate Weiner so much.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

She is a total waifu material. Goddam I hate Weiner so much.

lol

 

[User 85168]

Heh

 

[RustyNails]

You guys crazy, Chi Chi should have won this season.

pigeon noooo

 

[itschris]

Sanders camp cleans up 'messy' remark

After Bernie Sanders told The Associated Press that the Democratic National Convention would be "messy," the Vermont senator and his campaign have since insisted that the reference was merely to the democratic process and not a subliminal message to his supporters to create chaos in Philadelphia.

"The media often takes words out of context. The context of that was that democracy is messy. That people will have vigorous debate on the issues," Sanders told NBC News' Kristen Welker in an interview aired Tuesday on "Today." Asked whether the convention itself will be messy, Sanders replied, "Well of course it will be. But everything — that's what democracy is about."

Sanders also bristled at the suggestion that his staying in the race would hurt Hillary Clinton against Donald Trump, snapping, "I guess if we take your assumption, and Clinton supporters' assumption, that that is the logical conclusion, we should go back to a monarchy and not have any election at all."

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Sanders camp cleans up 'messy' remark

He literally is incapable of not saying anything with out bringing in a insult.

Sanders winning is the only thing that would be close to a "monarchy" since, you know, clinton got more votes and Sanders would require superdelgates.

 

[pigeon]

Sanders camp cleans up 'messy' remark

SANDERS PROPOSES AMERICAN DICTATORSHIP; CALLS DEMOCRACY "MESSY"

 

[Suikoguy]

Heh

bwhaha

 

[Black Mamba]

I'm not sure why you highlighted moderates, actually. Comparing the likelihood of being moderate/liberal/etc between Sanders and Clinton, they look essentially the same bar white noise. 17/22/41/16 is not different to 16/25/39/18; certainly, if you were to pick a random moderate, you wouldn't be able to say much about their relative likelihood to support a certain candidate compared to a relative liberal.

over 50% of Hillary's unfavorables come from moderates and conservatives who are also Dem/leaners.

That's kind of a lot!

Again, there's more moderates/conservative that lean Dem than those that are liberal.

My point here is that Hillary's favorables/unfavorables are not aligning to Bernie's actual candidacy in terms of politics.

He is not getting 40% of the vote because he's so liberal and the party is moving that way drastically. He's getting a lot of support from people who couldn't care less about his political positions.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Literally nothing Trump says is coherent.

This is response to Hillary talking about how Trump wanted the housing market to crash and gave out subprime mortgages.

How is this is a response?

 

[Black Mamba]

Literally nothing Trump says is coherent.



This is response to Hillary talking about how Trump wanted the housing market to crash and gave out subprime mortgages.

How is this is a response?

"When the economy collapses, we will make money off it."

Typical Trump!

 

[dramatis]

He literally is incapable of not saying anything with out bringing in a insult.

Sanders winning is the only thing that would be close to a "monarchy" since, you know, clinton got more votes and Sanders would require superdelgates.

True that, even Trump got more votes than him lol

 

[Dominican Power]

Literally nothing Trump says is coherent.



This is response to Hillary talking about how Trump wanted the housing market to crash and gave out subprime mortgages.

How is this is a response?

His response is talk about how great he is at something.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

His response is talk about how great he is at something.

But Trump Mortgage failed, lmao.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

My point here is that Hillary's favorables/unfavorables are not aligning to Bernie's actual candidacy in terms of politics.

He is not getting 40% of the vote because he's so liberal and the party is moving that way drastically. He's getting a lot of support from people who couldn't care less about his political positions.

Oh, sure. I agree strongly. Been saying that for ages. He's first and foremost an anti-establishment candidate. People aren't really sure what they want, they just look at the current political class and know it isn't that.

 

[Holmes]

"When the economy collapses, we will make money off it."

Typical Trump!

My favorite defense of Trump's "I hope the housing market crashes" claim in 2006 is that he said it because he's a smart businessman, so he'll be a smart President as well. Because actively rooting for the housing market to crash in order to make money off the lower and middle class' housing foreclosures sure is Presidential.

 

[B-Dubs]

Oh, sure. I agree strongly. Been saying that for ages. He's first and foremost an anti-establishment candidate. People aren't really sure what they want, they just look at the current political class and know it isn't that.

It's not even that is the point. He's getting a lot of the same vote in certain places that Hillary got in 2008 for much the same reason she got it.

 

[Iolo]

And What the fuck at Bernie asking for a recount in Kentucky??? Like, I've been on the "this is normal politics" stuff, but that one seems weird. At best, he nets 1 delegate from this? This is nothing but to damage the DNC's reputation...which isn't a smart decision.

He's trying to get retroactive momentum.

 

[SheSaidNo]

over 50% of Hillary's unfavorables come from moderates and conservatives who are also Dem/leaners.

That's kind of a lot!

Again, there's more moderates/conservative that lean Dem than those that are liberal.

My point here is that Hillary's favorables/unfavorables are not aligning to Bernie's actual candidacy in terms of politics.

He is not getting 40% of the vote because he's so liberal and the party is moving that way drastically. He's getting a lot of support from people who couldn't care less about his political positions.

Isn't the data saying if you picked a moderate/conservative they would be more likely to be favorable (or equally likely to be favorable) towards hillary than if you picked a liberal/somewhat liberal. Over 50% of her favorability comes from those groups as well

 

[Fenderputty]

"When the economy collapses, we will make money off it."

Typical Trump!

Technically we did that already as well with the bank bailouts.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

I like the logic chain going from "when the economy crashes, I can make money off it" to "when the economy crashes, we can all make money off it". It's almost beautifully wrong, like some sort of elegant but ultimately flightless bird.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

It's not even that is the point. He's getting a lot of the same vote in certain places that Hillary got in 2008 for much the same reason she got it.

That I think is less true, or Sander's support would not be as evenly balanced across genders as it is. It's not that men don't like Clinton, it's that women quite strongly like Clinton (Democratic women, at least).

 

[Crocodile]

That I think is less true, or Sander's support would not be as evenly balanced across genders as it is. It's not that men don't like Clinton, it's that women quite strongly like Clinton (Democratic women, at least).

I think B-Dubs is making a comment on votes based on the racial axis rather than the gender or ideology axis if you catch my drift.......

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

BernieBros on GAF are New Atheists too.

Kill me.

Kill me.

 

[itschris]

Come on guys, think of the children!

 

[balladofwindfishes]

they couldn't make it five pixels wider so the s on that one line wasn't cut off?

I don't understand why "Healthcare for all" or "Overturning Citizens United" is on there. Do they mean to say that Hillary won't do those things? But the way it's worded implies shoe will do those things and it's a bad thing? Also she will do those things, or at least work towards them, so it's either really stupid or just outright wrong. Or both.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Fracking destroyed Russia and Venezuela, so it's not all bad.

I like GMOs and Monsanto getting two separate bullet points.

 

[Gotchaye]

Isn't the data saying if you picked a moderate/conservative they would be more likely to be favorable (or equally likely to be favorable) towards hillary than if you picked a liberal/somewhat liberal. Over 50% of her favorability comes from those groups as well

Every ideological self-identification is just under 3:1 favorable, yes.

 

[hammysaurusrex]

Jill Stein, a rabid anti-vaccinationist, and "think of the children" does not compute.

 

[Macho Madness]

GMOs

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Think of the children, how will they understand Goldman Sachs speech transcripts.

 

[pigeon]

Isn't the data saying if you picked a moderate/conservative they would be more likely to be favorable (or equally likely to be favorable) towards hillary than if you picked a liberal/somewhat liberal

I don't think so. These numbers are crosstabs on the favorability question, not crosstabs on the political identification question. I think some people are reading them the wrong way because they flipped the axes, which is itself a crime but let's pass over that.

72% of Dem leaners favor Hillary Clinton and 39% of those are liberal/very liberal. That's 28% of Dem leaners.

27% of Dem learners disfavor Hillary Clinton and 41% of those are liberal+. That's 11% of Dem leaners.

So picking a random liberal person, they're 28/39 = 71% likely to favor Hillary.

Same math for the other side:

72% favorable, 57% moderate-, 41% of Dem leaners.
27% disfavor, 57% moderate-, 15% of Dem leaners.

Moderates are 41/56 = 73% likely to favor Hillary.

It's pretty much a wash.

 

[Deleted member 231381]

I think B-Dubs is making a comment on votes based on the racial axis rather than the gender or ideology axis if you catch my drift.......

I think that's even less true, then. Sanders might not be able to actively attract minority voters, but he quite clearly cares about minority issues - he just appointed more minority drafting committee members than Clinton did, for example. I don't see why you'd choose Sanders over Clinton as a racist. I mean, I don't see why you'd participate at all if that was your main priority anyway, to be honest, but even as a secondary issue I don't think it really has much capacity to impact things compared to '08 where you straight up had a black candidate against a white one.