Election 2016

Engage in discussions about news, politics, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
E.H. Ruddock
Guys, I am not a moderator! I swear to God! Why does everyone think I'm a moderator?
Posts: 52024
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:48 pm

Re: Election 2016

Post by E.H. Ruddock »

I'll live post while in line at the polls tomorrow
Clouuuuds Rolll byyy...BANG BANG BANG BANG
nyquillyn
Misplaced My Sponge
Posts: 5825
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:11 pm

Re: Election 2016

Post by nyquillyn »

GOP (SC)
1. Trump
2. Rubio
3. Cruz

Dems (NEV)
Clinton edges Bernie

I've read that while Nevada is a fairly diverse state, the caucusgoers will primarily be white, which obviously favors Bernie. Still think Hilldog eeks out a victory.
User avatar
4/5
See you in another life, brother
Posts: 6989
Joined: Thu December 20, 2012 4:45 pm

Re: Election 2016

Post by 4/5 »

Democratic storyline regardless of who wins:
Is there something about Hillary that makes her fundamentally unelectable?
"I want to see the whole picture--as nearly as I can. I don't want to put on the blinders of 'good and bad,' and limit my vision."-- In Dubious Battle

User avatar
LoathedVermin72
The Master
Posts: 33961
Joined: Sun May 25, 2014 9:32 pm

Re: Election 2016

Post by LoathedVermin72 »

Have you guys seen this? I saw it a few months ago and it caught my attention.

http://firebrandleft.com/university-100 ... president/
User avatar
Simple Torture
I Have A Third Nipple
Posts: 21689
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 7:41 am
Location: Cumberland, RI

Re: Election 2016

Post by Simple Torture »

LoathedVermin72 wrote:Have you guys seen this? I saw it a few months ago and it caught my attention.

http://firebrandleft.com/university-100 ... president/
It's interesting, but I wonder: would it really have been that hard to guess the winners of all the elections since 1975? We're only talking 10 elections, and a bunch of those were landslides (let's say it's a landslide if you get at least 379 electoral votes): 1980, 1984, 1988, 1996. Probably the most impressive thing would be predicting 1976 and 2008, especially if you did it a year out from the elections.
McParadigm wrote:lol
User avatar
tommymtcom
Rank This Poster
Posts: 4306
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 6:49 pm
Location: there all is aching

Re: Election 2016

Post by tommymtcom »

4/5 wrote:Democratic storyline regardless of who wins:
Is there something about Hillary that makes her fundamentally unelectable?
Yes, nobody trusts her. I don't think she would be able to motivate people to get out and vote, especially given how scummy her primary campaign has been.
E.H. Ruddock wrote:What a great post, tommy
User avatar
McParadigm
NEVER STOP JAMMING!
Posts: 22393
Joined: Wed January 02, 2013 1:56 am

Re: Election 2016

Post by McParadigm »

Simple Torture wrote:
LoathedVermin72 wrote:Have you guys seen this? I saw it a few months ago and it caught my attention.

http://firebrandleft.com/university-100 ... president/
It's interesting, but I wonder: would it really have been that hard to guess the winners of all the elections since 1975? We're only talking 10 elections, and a bunch of those were landslides (let's say it's a landslide if you get at least 379 electoral votes): 1980, 1984, 1988, 1996. Probably the most impressive thing would be predicting 1976 and 2008, especially if you did it a year out from the elections.
Hindsight bias.
(patriotic choking noises)
nyquillyn
Misplaced My Sponge
Posts: 5825
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:11 pm

Re: Election 2016

Post by nyquillyn »

Problem with that prediction model is that this is unlike any election there has ever been. This primary season has already made people like Nate Silver and John Sides look like idiots.

Also, it has Bernie winning several southern states in the primary, which isn't gonna happen.
User avatar
Green Habit
Site Admin
Posts: 6946
Joined: Wed December 12, 2012 10:33 pm

Re: Election 2016

Post by Green Habit »

McParadigm wrote:
Simple Torture wrote:
LoathedVermin72 wrote:Have you guys seen this? I saw it a few months ago and it caught my attention.

http://firebrandleft.com/university-100 ... president/
It's interesting, but I wonder: would it really have been that hard to guess the winners of all the elections since 1975? We're only talking 10 elections, and a bunch of those were landslides (let's say it's a landslide if you get at least 379 electoral votes): 1980, 1984, 1988, 1996. Probably the most impressive thing would be predicting 1976 and 2008, especially if you did it a year out from the elections.
Hindsight bias.
Exactly.
--The outcome of the Redskins game before a presidential election repeatedly predicted the outcome...until it didn't.
--The winner of Missouri's electoral votes repeatedly predicted the outcome..until it didn't.

This one will ultimately be no different. And that electoral map is laughable--Sanders winning Oklahoma and Utah but losing Maryland (with O'Malley on the ticket?!) and Illinois?
User avatar
Simple Torture
I Have A Third Nipple
Posts: 21689
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 7:41 am
Location: Cumberland, RI

Re: Election 2016

Post by Simple Torture »

McParadigm wrote:
Simple Torture wrote:
LoathedVermin72 wrote:Have you guys seen this? I saw it a few months ago and it caught my attention.

http://firebrandleft.com/university-100 ... president/
It's interesting, but I wonder: would it really have been that hard to guess the winners of all the elections since 1975? We're only talking 10 elections, and a bunch of those were landslides (let's say it's a landslide if you get at least 379 electoral votes): 1980, 1984, 1988, 1996. Probably the most impressive thing would be predicting 1976 and 2008, especially if you did it a year out from the elections.
Hindsight bias.
Probably. I wasn't around or conscious enough for 80, 84, or 88, so I'm not sure if those were considered shoe-ins before they happened. I seem to remember Clinton feeling inevitable in 1992, but that was probably after the primaries, and it looks like these predictions were made before. So the more I think about it, the more interesting it seems--but it's still only 10 elections, so that's a small sample size.
McParadigm wrote:lol
User avatar
Green Habit
Site Admin
Posts: 6946
Joined: Wed December 12, 2012 10:33 pm

Re: Election 2016

Post by Green Habit »

Simple Torture wrote:I seem to remember Clinton feeling inevitable in 1992, but that was probably after the primaries, and it looks like these predictions were made before.
The irony of Clinton's win is so many more prominent Democrats decided not to run in 1992 because they thought a Bush re-election was inevitable. That was a really weird year.
User avatar
Simple Torture
I Have A Third Nipple
Posts: 21689
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 7:41 am
Location: Cumberland, RI

Re: Election 2016

Post by Simple Torture »

Green Habit wrote:
Simple Torture wrote:I seem to remember Clinton feeling inevitable in 1992, but that was probably after the primaries, and it looks like these predictions were made before.
The irony of Clinton's win is so many more prominent Democrats decided not to run in 1992 because they thought a Bush re-election was inevitable. That was a really weird year.
Image
McParadigm wrote:lol
User avatar
Fuck You Jobu
AnalLog
Posts: 1531
Joined: Wed January 16, 2013 10:46 pm
Location: Wrigleyville

Re: Election 2016

Post by Fuck You Jobu »

LoathedVermin72 wrote:Have you guys seen this? I saw it a few months ago and it caught my attention.

http://firebrandleft.com/university-100 ... president/
Been there, done that. (the college, that is).
b_i_revisited
Broken Tamborine
Posts: 299
Joined: Mon October 26, 2015 2:04 pm

Re: Election 2016

Post by b_i_revisited »

Salon hops on the "Bern the Middle Class Alive" train.

https://www.salon.com/2016/02/19/hillar ... t_the_gop/
Alex wrote:i wonder what the supermassive jackhole broken iris would have thought about this
http://www.livefootsteps.org/user/?usr=1278
User avatar
4/5
See you in another life, brother
Posts: 6989
Joined: Thu December 20, 2012 4:45 pm

Re: Election 2016

Post by 4/5 »

Democratic policy experts really aren't feeling the bern. Typical establishment shills.
"I want to see the whole picture--as nearly as I can. I don't want to put on the blinders of 'good and bad,' and limit my vision."-- In Dubious Battle

User avatar
The Argonaut
I've been POOSSTTIiiEEnngeeaahh
Posts: 11941
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 1:53 pm
Location: in the air tonight

Re: Election 2016

Post by The Argonaut »

Trump is already shifting his stances. He's sounded more like a racist Democrat than like a Republican recently.
Please consider voting for me
nyquillyn
Misplaced My Sponge
Posts: 5825
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:11 pm

Re: Election 2016

Post by nyquillyn »

Hilldog!
nyquillyn
Misplaced My Sponge
Posts: 5825
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 2:11 pm

Re: Election 2016

Post by nyquillyn »

4/5 wrote:Democratic storyline regardless of who wins:
Is there something about Hillary that makes her fundamentally unelectable?
Ummmmm... No.

I think she starts rolling now.
User avatar
Simple Torture
I Have A Third Nipple
Posts: 21689
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 7:41 am
Location: Cumberland, RI

Re: Election 2016

Post by Simple Torture »

turned2black wrote:
4/5 wrote:Democratic storyline regardless of who wins:
Is there something about Hillary that makes her fundamentally unelectable?
Ummmmm... No.

I think she starts rolling now.
Yeah, I think so too. South Carolina is gonna be rough for Bernie.

Someone go resuscitate 96583UP.
McParadigm wrote:lol
User avatar
stip
The worst
Posts: 42946
Joined: Thu December 13, 2012 6:31 pm

Re: Election 2016

Post by stip »

sanders killed her with independents apparently. that wont help him in later primaries but bodes ill for clinton in the general election. right now sanders is probably the stronger candidate


primary advantage is still clintons but she hasnt exactly sewed up the nomination just yet. march 1st is a long way away
Post Reply