US Politics Thread |OT| THE DARKEST TIMELINE

[benjipwns]

someone who appeared in playboy is a porn star now?

[Syph]

wut

[benjipwns]

Mrs. Trump, who received a green card in March 2001 and became a U.S. citizen in 2006, has always maintained that she arrived in the country legally and never violated the terms of her immigration status. During the presidential campaign, she has cited her story to defend her husband's hard line on immigration.

The wife of the GOP presidential nominee, who sometimes worked as a model under just her first name, has said through an attorney that she first came to the U.S. from Slovenia on Aug. 27, 1996, on a B1/B2 visitor visa and then obtained an H-1B work visa on Oct. 18, 1996.

The documents obtained by the AP show she was paid for 10 modeling assignments between Sept. 10 and Oct. 15, during a time when her visa allowed her generally to be in the U.S. and look for work but not perform paid work in the country.

deport donald for this horseshit

[james]

someone who appeared in playboy is a porn star now?

He cheated on his illegal immigrant wife with a porn model and then had this cronies at the National "Mainstream Media" Enquirer pay her $150,000 to kill the story.

LOCK THEM UP
LOCK THEM UP
LOCK THEM UP

wut

The oppo is hot and fresh my man, open your mouth and get ready for more

 

[benjipwns]

Avra C Weinstein · Adler University Chicago Campus
Careful what you wish for. The Putins around the world are wishing for a weakened America and Trump is the weakest of them all. Who do you want leading, a bankrupt, lying, sexual predator, who dodged the draft, or a pitbull of a fighter, who never gives up! VOTE!! Vote Clinton!

DODGED THE DRAFT?!?!? WELL I NEVER



worst of the worst

[chronovore]

Trump knows what he is saying is BS but its all about ginning up the crowd at this point and the crowd don't care.

Trump even after he loses wins because he has brought in the old style fuck that the other side politics of old or what you are seeing now in Europe. Polarizing politics and take no compromise attitude

Genie is out of the bottle.

Yes, I've read that Hitler also didn't really care too much about the Jewish people one way or the other, he just recognized a convenient scapegoat and started rolling on them.

The most pertinent observation I've seen so far this year is "What would happen if someone unlike Trump, someone canny, someone in control of their faculties, reason, and their own mouth, but with the same xenophobic and autocratic agenda were running against Hillary?"

It has been truly staggering to watch Trump supporters stride blithely past the man's provable lies and disgusting behavior, in favor of fear and hatred in the name of "taking back America." You can bet the Kochs have people looking into alternate mouthpieces for 2020.

[benjipwns]

shows you how hypocritical lieberals are that they never mention how Obama used his education IN A FOREIGN NATION as part of his way to having avoided serving in Vietnam

[zepblackstar]

Trump knows what he is saying is BS but its all about ginning up the crowd at this point and the crowd don't care.

Trump even after he loses wins because he has brought in the old style fuck that the other side politics of old or what you are seeing now in Europe. Polarizing politics and take no compromise attitude

Genie is out of the bottle.

Yes, I've read that Hitler also didn't really care too much about the Jewish people one way or the other, he just recognized a convenient scapegoat and started rolling on them.

The most pertinent observation I've seen so far this year is "What would happen if someone unlike Trump, someone canny, someone in control of their faculties, reason, and their own mouth, but with the same xenophobic and autocratic agenda were running against Hillary?"

It has been truly staggering to watch Trump supporters stride blithely past the man's provable lies and disgusting behavior, in favor of fear and hatred in the name of "taking back America." You can bet the Kochs have people looking into alternate mouthpieces for 2020.

Thats the next version for 2018 congress ,2020 elections. Find someone good looking for television who can smooth talk his/her way up. I mean Trump now is in a dogfight with Hillary and he is just rough all over.

GOP voters are not taking anymore McCain  or Romney types

[agrajag]

Benji defend this

[benjipwns]

Trump wins 10,260 simulations and Clinton wins 9,740.

[agrajag]

Trump wins 10,260 simulations and Clinton wins 9,740.

Is he using the same software as Deadliest Warrior?

[benjipwns]

Just read the page, it explains how it gets to the percentages to setup for the simulation. (Which is used just to get a distribution more than actually determine the outcome.)

The main thing is Trump's momentum which you can see clearly in RCP's graph, a seven point swing in two weeks: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/nv/nevada_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson-6004.html

You can see it here too. http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-nevada-president-trump-vs-clinton/ (Reduce the smoothing, to see a bigger trend take out the partisan pollsters. To see a yooge trend take out the internet polls.)

It gives him two percentage points alone in the 538 model.

What part is upsetting you most? The fact that it's displayed on a webpage?

Sam Wang also has Nevada tied.

[agrajag]

that real data doesn't support his model's conclusions?

Also, check an aggregate:
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-nevada-president-trump-vs-clinton

[benjipwns]

I just linked you to two aggregates (538 is also an aggregate) including that very one.

And what "real data" are you using to check it against? It says Nevada is a 50/50 tossup. Same thing as Sam Wang says. There's still four days to update not only the data in the models but before we can test them. And as long as Trump or Clinton wins Nevada, they'll be right.

If I lessen the smoothing on Pollster's aggregate and do nothing else, I get 44.5% Trump, 43.5% Clinton, 9.0% Johnson. 538's unadjusted aggregate is 44.5% Clinton, 43.1% Trump, 6.2% Johnson.

538 and PEC both have it as a toss-up because it's so far within the margin of error it'd be stupid to rate it as anything else.

[agrajag]

Real data is early voting in which dems are up by more than a few percentage points iirc

[Mandark]

What's your point?

[benjipwns]

Early voting data only tells us what percentage of registered voters are voting early, not who they're voting for, not anything about who will vote on election day, etc. It's not any kind of data to check a model with its own incomplete data against.

The Clinton campaign is also optimistic about steady Hispanic early-voting participation in Colorado and Nevada. In Nevada, 7.6% of all early ballots mailed in or cast in person have been by Hispanic or Latino voters, according to Catalist. What isn’t clear in those states is whether the Clinton campaign has attracted new Hispanic supporters or whether it has simply convinced more Hispanics to cast their ballots early rather than on Election Day.

Hispanic/Latino turnout in 2012 was 15% of the total vote in Nevada. 21% of the state's population is of Mexican heritage.

[agrajag]

My point is that Nevada is a lock for dems, and that his model has become increasingly flimsyand wonky. It seems to give a lot of weight to pollsters that have little credibility, while not taking into account early voting numbers at all (this problem is not exclusive to 538). It is suspicious that as we get closer to election day and more and more data is available for analysis, his predictions are LOSING certainty. More than half the ballots are going yo be cast before the election daynand I bet he will still have it as a toss up. As a predictive tool his model has little use.

[agrajag]

Benji, you know that you can extrapolate a lot of info from voting demographics.

[Mandark]

"Suspicious?"

What do we suspect?

[benjipwns]

You can't "take into account" early voting because it doesn't tell you anything other than who is voting early based on their registration.

Early voting as of yesterday in Nevada is 47-34-19 for D-R-Other. Registration in the state is 40-34-26. Even if we assume 50% of voters will vote early and 50% will vote on election day. There's no reason to assume election day wouldn't be 33-34-33 to even things back out. And there's no reason to assume that "Other" vote isn't splitting in such a way to reflect the polls vs. registration difference. i.e. for Trump.

EDIT: Indeed, CNN's poll (the newest one in Nevada) has Independents voting 56-28-10 for Trump-Clinton-Johnson. 88% of them say their mind is made up. They go 58-33 for Trump when presented just the major two candidates. That alone would erase the D turnout advantage assuming every single registered D is voting Clinton.

[agrajag]

"Suspicious?"

What do we suspect?

"We?"

[Mandark]

Indeed, CNN's poll (the newest one in Nevada) has Independents voting 56-28-10 for Trump-Clinton-Johnson.

There's also the issue that party registration and self-identification aren't really the same thing (think people who have voted Republican since 1980 but are still registered as Dems), so comparing party splits between polls and early votes is generally apples-to-oranges.

More generally, it's conceivable that you could draw somewhat reliable correlations between early voting and the final tallies given enough data, but it's such a small sample size that I wouldn't assume tossing it into a statistical model would automatically improve its accuracy.

[benjipwns]

Right, and that "Other" share, even in early voting, is 20%(!) of the total and you have to decide somehow how to allocate it. I'd more concerned about that throwing even in more noise than simply staying with the polls which we know historically are generally pretty accurate in terms of calling the winner. And tossing them into the model at a 60/30/10 split for Trump isn't going to make people any happier.

538 may be overweighting momentum (at least that looks like the largest potential error across the board) which is why Trump has the slight advantage in the 50/50 toss-up. Trying to factor in early voting wouldn't affect this because momentum can't be retroactively changing the votes of people who already voted. And PEC doesn't, and it also is the only other site in the Upshot's chart to list Nevada as a toss-up. (PEC also gives Ohio to Trump in 95% of simulations.)

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

Jay-Z a member of the illuminati confirmed

[Mandark]

Drew Linzer also has NV as a tossup, with Trump very slightly ahead.

I mean, it's very possible that they get this wrong, especially since Nevada seems tricky to survey (Obama outperformed in 2012 iirc and Reid was waaaay ahead of his polling in 2010), but it seems weird to single out NV as evidence that Silver is making uniquely bad decisions or dishonestly changing his model on the fly when his model's pretty much in line with the other aggregators, as benji's pointed out.

[benjipwns]

Linzer also recently posted a good chart that shows why 538 seems to be doing something out of the ordinary for people who obsessively check the projections, this is how the simulations spit out Electoral Vote count distributions:

These histograms—and the chances of Clinton winning—are different from what each model is actually reporting as their national-level forecast because, like us, none of the other forecasters assume that state election outcomes are independent. If the polls are wrong, or if there’s a national swing in voter preferences toward Trump, then his odds should increase in many states at once: Nevada, Ohio, Florida, and so forth.

This adds extra uncertainty to the forecast, which widens the plausible range of electoral vote outcomes, and lowers Clinton’s chances of winning.

And linked to an upshot piece from a month back:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/30/upshot/why-are-the-different-presidential-forecasts-so-far-apart.html

None of this is surprising to people who bother to read what each model is trying to do instead of thinking there's some kind of motive to support one candidate at the expense of their continued credibility.

Someone should just aggregate the various aggregates but not tell anybody that's all their black box does.

[VomKriege]

Yes, I've read that Hitler also didn't really care too much about the Jewish people one way or the other, he just recognized a convenient scapegoat and started rolling on them.

Nah that one is bullshit. Hitler was actually fairly consistent from the writing of Mein Kampf to the war. Keep in mind the extermination process was secret (even if transparently so to some segments of the population) and as such had no public image "benefit" with the antisemitic sentiment of the general population. Also that the regime, up to the very last minute and even while conducting last ditches defense on its home soil, continued to waste time and resources to the extermination effort. Hitler and Nazis were committed to the whole thing despite the whole effort being irrational to the extreme.

[benjipwns]

To explain the charts oversimply, say three polls come out that show a swing to Trump of three points, one point and five points.

The HuffPo model will quickly take Hillary's chances from say 90% to 80% to 75% and then stay there until new data. Nate's will do something like go from 85% to 83% to 82% to 81% to 77% to 75% to 76% because it's churning far far more data.

Nate's model is super-conservative because he's trying to smooth everything out by introducing tons more regressions. It looks like it's moving all over the place when it's actually just trying to settle over time. That's why he has the "nowcast" and "polls-plus" and they will ideally converge. (They basically have at this point.) Most of the other models are doing "nowcasts" and there's no expectation that the HuffPo projection from two months ago should drift towards the one today. Ideally, the "polls-plus" from four months ago looks more like the one today than any nowcasts did.

Today Polls-Plus: 48.4% Clinton (290), 45.6% Trump (248), 4.5% Horseshit
Today Nowcast: 48.3% Clinton (290), 45.5% Trump (248), 4.6% Horseshit
Day Before GOP Convention "polls-plus": 47.5% Clinton (298), 44.7% Trump (240), 6.5% Horseshit
Day Before GOP Convention "nowcast": 45.9% Clinton (306), 42.5% Trump (232), 10.4% Horseshit
Clinton's peak in the nowcast was August 8th: 50.3% Clinton (388), 40.6% Trump (150), 7.8% Horseshit
On the same day, the polls-plus was projecting: 49.0% Clinton (324), 44.4% Trump (214), 5.3% Horseshit

Ultimately, Nate is making things more complicated and creating his own readers confusion because there's only one trial. But he's most likely working from a sports stats mentality of putting in past seasonal data to smooth out the flukes. This probably explained why he was so damned adamant about finding a model that explained every primary back to 1972 and fitting 2016 into it rather than looking at the data in front of him (and the completely different calendar, and sheer number of candidates and...) as a separate trial and dismissing everything except some aspects of 2008 and 2012.

[Joe Molotov]

http://www.infowars.com/spirit-cooking-clinton-campaign-chairman-invited-to-bizarre-satanic-performance/

In what is undoubtedly the most bizarre Wikileaks revelation to date, Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta was invited to a “spirit cooking dinner” by performance artist Marina Abramovic, to take part in an occult ritual founded by Satanist Aleister Crowley.

In an email dated June 28, 2015, Abramovic wrote, “I am so looking forward to the Spirit Cooking dinner at my place. Do you think you will be able to let me know if your brother is joining? All my love, Marina.”

Tony Podesta then forwarded the email to his brother John Podesta (Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman), asking him, “Are you in NYC Thursday July 9 Marina wants you to come to dinner.”

[benjipwns]

Clinton campaign death spiral:

A Democratic elector in Washington state said Friday he won't vote for Hillary Clinton even if she wins the popular vote in his state on Election Day, adding a degree of suspense when the Electoral College affirms the election results next month.

Robert Satiacum, a member of Washington's Puyallup Tribe, supported Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primary. He said he believes Clinton is a "criminal" who doesn't care enough about American Indians and "she's done nothing but flip back and forth."

He said he has wrestled with what to do, but feels that neither Clinton nor Republican Donald Trump can lead the country.

"She will not get my vote, period," he said in a phone interview with The Associated Press.

Americans vote for the president, but they're really casting votes for each state's electors, who will decide the next president on Dec. 19.

In all but two states, the winner of the state's popular vote gets all of the state's electors. There's nothing in the Constitution that says the electors are required to vote for a particular candidate, but some states have penalties for so-called "faithless electors." Satiacum faces a $1,000 fine in Washington if he doesn't vote for Clinton, but he said he doesn't care.

"This is a time we all need to stand up and speak out," he said.

Satiacum is one of 12 Democratic electors in Washington, which Clinton is expected to win. He said he has gotten a lot of criticism since he told media outlets earlier this month that he might not vote for Clinton. But he said he has also heard from electors in other states who thanked him for speaking out. He said he hopes some of those electors follow his lead.

remember, if he goes to state prison for not paying the fine he's no longer an "offender"

[Raist]

Wait. What the fuck is this?

There's nothing in the Constitution that says the electors are required to vote for a particular candidate, but some states have penalties for so-called "faithless electors." Satiacum faces a $1,000 fine in Washington if he doesn't vote for Clinton, but he said he doesn't care.

It's not April 1st so I'm confused.

[benjipwns]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless_elector#List_of_faithless_electors

This is why I told them not to let H.A. Goodman pick the slate of electors.

[Raist]

Oh. Cool. The US electoral system is even more fucked up than I thought.

[agrajag]

I don't buy that Undecided voter poll at all in NV. You guys will see on election day. 

[TakingBackSunday]

Nevada is truly a toss up, but I think last night is evidence that Clinton should be confident about picking it up.

Silver's Florida and North Carolina projections are far more questionable.

[agrajag]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/nevada-early-vote_us_581d5e39e4b0e80b02ca43d0?

Registered Democrat votes higher than in 2012 at the same point, when Obama took the stare by a 7 point margin. 

[Raist]

when Obama took the stare by a 7 point margin. 

[Phoenix Dark]

Hillary has already won Nevada with early voting.

[Mandark]

The Culinary Union doing work.

[agrajag]

You guys still think it's a dead heat? You should work for CNN 

[seagrams hotsauce]

For fucking real. Wednesday cannot come soon enough. I'm just gonna hibernate with my new cat and play Skyrim til then.

[Madrun Badrun]

Before this show ends, I just want to say thank you.  This last year has a given me a real boost to my sense of superiority and national pride as a Canadian. 

[agrajag]

Before this show ends, I just want to say thank you.  This last year has a given me a real boost to my sense of superiority and national pride as a Canadian.

Rob Ford would like to have a word with you!

[Madrun Badrun]

How, he's dead. 

[agrajag]

How, he's dead.

If you chant his name three times, he will materialize with an 8 ball

[Phoenix Dark]

Fuck Wednesday. Fast forward to 11PM Tuesday EST so I can read the butthurt tweets/comments

[agrajag]

Fuck Wednesday. Fast forward to 11PM Tuesday EST so I can read the butthurt tweets/comments (Image removed from quote.)

wat if Trump wins

[zomgee]

Fuck Wednesday. Fast forward to 11PM Tuesday EST so I can read the butthurt tweets/comments (Image removed from quote.)

wat if Trump wins

Same butt hurt different tweets.

[agrajag]

Fuck Wednesday. Fast forward to 11PM Tuesday EST so I can read the butthurt tweets/comments (Image removed from quote.)

wat if Trump wins

Same butt hurt different tweets.

some people just want to watch the world burn 

[seagrams hotsauce]

Fuck Wednesday. Fast forward to 11PM Tuesday EST so I can read the butthurt tweets/comments (Image removed from quote.)

Was almost gonna post this exact time but only cuz it's when Desus and Mero's election special airs 

[Phoenix Dark]

Fuck Wednesday. Fast forward to 11PM Tuesday EST so I can read the butthurt tweets/comments (Image removed from quote.)

wat if Trump wins

I'll become a black republican and eventually host my own show on Trump TV.

[Samson Manhug]

If Trump wins I’ll move to Exxon Mobil controlled Syria.

Now everyone else post their plans for when Trump wins.

[agrajag]

If Trump wins I will continue reaping the benefits of being a White American Straight Male.

[Tasty]

If Trump wins I will continue reaping the benefits of being a White American Straight Male.

You're going to do that either way though.

[agrajag]

If Trump wins I will continue reaping the benefits of being a White American Straight Male.

You're going to do that either way though.

True, but I'm With Her

[Syph]

Before this show ends, I just want to say thank you.  This last year has a given me a real boost to my sense of superiority and national pride as a Canadian.

as a fellow canadian, enjoy it while you can

Great that I have an exit plan to Montreal that I didn't even plan out, though.

hope you dont plan on leaving the city limits if you dont speak french

[archie4208]

I can't wait to read /pol/ and /r/the_donald for all the butthurt

spoiler (click to show/hide)

And GAF if he actually wins. 

[close]

[TakingBackSunday]

He won't win.

[Joe Molotov]

Fuck Wednesday. Fast forward to 11PM Tuesday EST so I can read the butthurt tweets/comments (Image removed from quote.)