2022 Senate Elections

[Voldemort86 2259]

48 minutes ago, Humble Beast said:

Calling them temporary challenges is wishcasting at best, being deceptive at worst. The man has pronounced aphasia 5 months out. He also could have other issues with cognition that they’re hiding. 
 

 

 

 

Keep in mind the senate currently has people like tommy tubberville and may have Herschel Walker as well. Those 2 aren’t our best and brightest. If we as a country have to rely on them for anything, we would be fucked.

[Js1 85426]

50 minutes ago, Humble Beast said:

Calling them temporary challenges is wishcasting at best, being deceptive at worst. The man has pronounced aphasia 5 months out. He also could have other issues with cognition that they’re hiding. 

Ah, I recall from the Trump presidency that people shouldn't go on TV and give medical diagnoses of people they've never examined.  That's what your lot told us, over and over. 

Dumbass troll. 

[A-Tex Devil 2451]

13 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Ah, I recall from the Trump presidency that people shouldn't go on TV and give medical diagnoses of people they've never examined.  That's what your lot told us, over and over. 

Dumbass troll. 

And it shouldn’t matter if the other choice is Doctor Fucking Oz. 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13515]

NV, GA and PA looking more and more like a coin flip. Crazy that GA is in play with Walker.

[tx 3 putt 77102]

4 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

NV, GA and PA looking more and more like a coin flip. Crazy that GA is in play with Walker.

 

we're not across the finish line yet 

[Pancho 44860]

 

[Voldemort86 2259]

57 minutes ago, Pancho said:

 

Trying to depress dems and make them think they will lose and convince their voters not to show up.

[Pato del Muerto 52529]

I don’t understand how making people think the result is a forgone  conclusion doesn’t suppress both sides more or less equally. If there’s data that it affects the losing side more, I guess I’d chalk it up to people wanting to be part of a winner and not be part of a loser. 

Edited October 29, 2022 by Pato del Muerto

[Humble Beast 258]

10 hours ago, Js1 said:

Ah, I recall from the Trump presidency that people shouldn't go on TV and give medical diagnoses of people they've never examined.  That's what your lot told us, over and over. 

Dumbass troll. 

You can diagnose it pretty easily. He literally can’t understand when people speak to him. His brain can’t process it. That’s why he needs closed captioning. He can understand it when he reads it. The brain is a fascinating thing. Oh, and even if he understands what is asked after reading, he has difficulty verbalizing responses. Receptive and expressive aphasia. Google it. Profound deficits. Laughable to minimize it. 

[tx 3 putt 77102]

 

[A-Tex Devil 2451]

6 hours ago, Humble Beast said:

You can diagnose it pretty easily. He literally can’t understand when people speak to him. His brain can’t process it. That’s why he needs closed captioning. He can understand it when he reads it. The brain is a fascinating thing. Oh, and even if he understands what is asked after reading, he has difficulty verbalizing responses. Receptive and expressive aphasia. Google it. Profound deficits. Laughable to minimize it. 

Still a better outcome than Oz.  

[MeerkatBong 115]

18 minutes ago, A-Tex Devil said:

Still a better outcome than Oz.  

The obvious question if you are a handler and/or strategist— why not substitute an able-minded Democrat and make the stroke concerns, whether valid or scare tactics, moot?

[Biff Tannen 45691]

7 hours ago, Humble Beast said:

You can diagnose it pretty easily. He literally can’t understand when people speak to him. His brain can’t process it. That’s why he needs closed captioning. He can understand it when he reads it. The brain is a fascinating thing. Oh, and even if he understands what is asked after reading, he has difficulty verbalizing responses. Receptive and expressive aphasia. Google it. Profound deficits. Laughable to minimize it. 

Laughable to maximize it, you piece of shit. 
 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wellness/2022/10/13/fetterman-closed-captioning-stroke-aphasia/

[heso 2813]

1 hour ago, MeerkatBong said:

The obvious question if you are a handler and/or strategist— why not substitute an able-minded Democrat and make the stroke concerns, whether valid or scare tactics, moot?

Sure would be nice to have Conner Lamb out there. Instead both the senate seat he ran for and the house seat he vacated to run are little better than coin flips for the Dems. 

I still think Shapiro pulls Fetterman across the finish line. 

[Voldemort86 2259]

Ralstons blog in Nevada seems ok for the dems so far.  Could be better, but could be a lot worse.  It seems like this seat could be as close as the 2020 Biden / trump race in the state.

[gmr548 16580]

15 hours ago, Humble Beast said:

You can diagnose it pretty easily. He literally can’t understand when people speak to him. His brain can’t process it. That’s why he needs closed captioning. He can understand it when he reads it. The brain is a fascinating thing. Oh, and even if he understands what is asked after reading, he has difficulty verbalizing responses. Receptive and expressive aphasia. Google it. Profound deficits. Laughable to minimize it. 

If we had more politicians that couldn't talk, but were perfectly capable of processing information through reading, we'd probably have a lot less grandstanding and a much healthier political system.

Instead, you're stanning for another TV star.

[Fudge Nuggets 19206]

On 10/26/2022 at 9:34 PM, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

 

 

I'm all for it.  Sign me up.

[Bama Chick 28596]

Obama has been stumping in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin all in the last 24 hours.

And he’s been on FIRE.

There’s a bunch of clips on that ^ Twitter account and they’re all spectacular.

[YGIFS 19452]

20 hours ago, Humble Beast said:

You can diagnose it pretty easily. He literally can’t understand when people speak to him. His brain can’t process it. That’s why he needs closed captioning. He can understand it when he reads it. The brain is a fascinating thing. Oh, and even if he understands what is asked after reading, he has difficulty verbalizing responses. Receptive and expressive aphasia. Google it. Profound deficits. Laughable to minimize it. 

$50 says you googled aphasia but don't really know what it looks/sounds like in real life.  Fetterman doesn't have any of the symptoms of it.  The correlation between speech issues and cognitive decay is nowhere near what most people think it is when they think of strokes.  Just through helping my wife study and get multiple degrees, I have forgotten more speech pathology than you'll ever know.  His issue isn't aphasia, we can talk about what it actually is if you like, but probably better you get it straight from a trained SLP-CCC.  Or Brian Kilmeade, wherever you get your speech therapy talking points.  

Most reasonable people would say he's having some speech challenges (again, I'd encourage you to just get straight science data on this), but there appears to be no cognitive issue.  Plenty of stroke victims speak with the conjugation, eloquence, and verbal prowess of a college debate champion but their brain is fucking fried.  The opposite is true as well.  But what makes this Fetterman issue so insane to some of us is the people espousing his cerebral decline are, in the same breath, looking at Donald Trump, Herschel Walker, MTG, et. al. and thinking, "Now that's what a goddamn Orator is supposed to sound like...where do I send me $100?"  

[4th&Five 41560]

Flying over Eagles game today.

[Js1 85426]

Actual reputable pollster

Kelly over 50 and +6

Fetterman +6 and almost at 50 (voters think he’s healthy enough to serve by a 48-35 margin but that was the whole sample, it narrowed a bit post-debate but they didn’t post the numbers)

Warnock almost at 50 and at outright win

CCM tied in a notoriously hard to poll state 

Edited October 31, 2022 by Js1

[Guest]

What's the consensus on Nate Silver and 538? I've always thought of them as highly reputable, but watching this chart makes me question that.

There's been no big changing event that would lead to the sharp drop off seen in the past couple of weeks. Yet the "chances" have gone from about 2:1 to a coin flip. So it seems to me either that big Dem surge throughout the late summer was wrong, or the drop off in the past few weeks was wrong. 

[Js1 85426]

8 minutes ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

What's the consensus on Nate Silver and 538? I've always thought of them as highly reputable, but watching this chart makes me question that.

There's been no big changing event that would lead to the sharp drop off seen in the past couple of weeks. Yet the "chances" have gone from about 2:1 to a coin flip. So it seems to me either that big Dem surge throughout the late summer was wrong, or the drop off in the past few weeks was wrong. 

It’s the same issue as every forecast - really poor quality right wing polls are flooding the averages. Trafalgar, Inside Advantage, Wick, Coefficient.

These orgs seem to have unlimited money to poll weekly it seems. It’s fishy 

Edited October 31, 2022 by Js1

[Pato del Muerto 52529]

There’s no way it was 70-30 6 weeks ago. 

Edited October 31, 2022 by Pato del Muerto

[The Dog 44066]

[Biff Tannen 45691]

1 minute ago, The Dog said:

 

I think this is probably most correct.  With the mass polarization we have experienced, 95% of people had their minds made up months or years ago.  The 5% (I think it's probably really less than that) left are the only ones that might be persuadable, but I'd bet they are more likely to NOT vote than to pick a side at this point.

[YGIFS 19452]

If the Democrats were half smart, they'd simply be encouraging tepid/older Republicans to just not be enthused about the shit-tastic slate before them, and just sit this one out and feel warm that their fellow 'conservatives' will help carry the day.  In so many of these races, you need less than 100,000 people to just say, "Meh, fuck it...it looks like rain...I'm sure Oz has this in the bag." 

You're not winning anybody over to your side this week, you're just portraying their candidate as not worth the expensive gas...

[South Austin 52521]

1 minute ago, YGIFS said:

You're not winning anybody over to your side this week, you're just portraying their candidate as not worth the expensive gas...

Thanks, Biden!

[Nice Guy Eddie 13515]

50-50 and 70-30 is not that far apart in how 538 aggregates polls. In their eyes, if you're at 30%, you still have a decent chance of winning. 

for anyone not following 538, their percentages do not indicate the breakdown of the vote but the likelihood of an event happening. Like betting on a game. 70-30 indicates a slight favorite. 

You can disagree with their labels, but I've seen people online misinterpret what 538 is saying.

[The Dog 44066]

1 hour ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

What's the consensus on Nate Silver and 538? I've always thought of them as highly reputable, but watching this chart makes me question that.

There's been no big changing event that would lead to the sharp drop off seen in the past couple of weeks. Yet the "chances" have gone from about 2:1 to a coin flip. So it seems to me either that big Dem surge throughout the late summer was wrong, or the drop off in the past few weeks was wrong. 

I think Nate "fudges the numbers" a bit too much and that hurts his forecasts rather than just adding to the pile. 

That said, it's clear the GOP has flooded the zone with a bunch of trash polls and that affects everyone's forecasts.

We'll get a few more late that will "correct" the numbers if that's the case. 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13515]

Also 538 doesn't treat every poll equally. They discount polls that they think are partisan or poor by reviewing how those polls have performed in the past. And since some states are hard to poll to begin with (e.g., Nevada) that makes 538 also have uncertainty with those states.

[Pato del Muerto 52529]

45 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

50-50 and 70-30 is not that far apart in how 538 aggregates polls. In their eyes, if you're at 30%, you still have a decent chance of winning. 

for anyone not following 538, their percentages do not indicate the breakdown of the vote but the likelihood of an event happening. Like betting on a game. 70-30 indicates a slight favorite. 

You can disagree with their labels, but I've seen people online misinterpret what 538 is saying.

I see now that I wasn’t paying enough attention to that graph and it’s a % of likelihood to control the senate, not a guess at the senate split. 
 

it only says as much explicitly in the title, has the Y labeled as %, and has the current values listed as x in 100 and not x of 100. So I can hardly blame the graph. 

Edited October 31, 2022 by Pato del Muerto
I blame this festering case of the mondays

[Dr. Teeth 5845]

53 minutes ago, The Dog said:

I think Nate "fudges the numbers" a bit too much and that hurts his forecasts rather than just adding to the pile. 

That said, it's clear the GOP has flooded the zone with a bunch of trash polls and that affects everyone's forecasts.

We'll get a few more late that will "correct" the numbers if that's the case. 

They aren’t flooding the media with polls to affect 538. They are doing so to create the narrative that there is an issue with voting to be able to provide even more cover for dangerous and restrictive voting laws before 2024. For them, the goal was to always win the House in 2022. Senate would be icing on the cake. But either way, it is ultimately to steal the 2024 election. Which is why they care far more about Arizona and New Mexico’s state elections. 

[Js1 85426]

44 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Also 538 doesn't treat every poll equally. They discount polls that they think are partisan or poor by reviewing how those polls have performed in the past. And since some states are hard to poll to begin with (e.g., Nevada) that makes 538 also have uncertainty with those states.

yea and no

Trafalgar has an A rating bc of 2020 but their 2018 midterm performance was bad

 

Just now, Dr. Teeth said:

They aren’t flooding the media with polls to affect 538. They are doing so to create the narrative that there is an issue with voting to be able to provide even more cover for dangerous and restrictive voting laws before 2024. For them, the goal was to always win the House in 2022. Senate would be icing on the cake. But either way, it is ultimately to steal the 2024 election. Which is why they care far more about Arizona and New Mexico’s state elections. 

Yep. Flood the zone with bad polling showing them leading = FRAUD if they don’t win 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13515]

Another point about 538 is that Nate Silver is a big poker player and his analysis of politics can somewhat be related. If you have 4 cards to a open ended straight in hold em, your odds are about 20% of hitting the straight. 1 in 5. You won't hit the straight most of the time but far from impossible.

In 2016, 538 had Trump at a final percent of 29% to win. There were 0 polls that showed Trump winning WI, MI or PA so the chance of Trump winning appeared to be very low but not impossible.

Unless you see 538 showing a >80% result, a race can go either way.

[Dr. Teeth 5845]

Silver is essentially the Bill Simmons of politics. Built a good company off a liberal fanbase and has come under a lot of fire for having some issues with how they react to criticism from people outside and inside that fanbase. They view every slight extremely negatively and have gone a little bit to the right after having to defend themselves so much. Like a lot of white dudes in their line of work, they were probably a little liberal but mostly for work and have some problems with underlying issues on race and culture. Both, but especially Silver, have let it affect his overall viewpoint on what they cover. 

[Js1 85426]

3 minutes ago, Dr. Teeth said:

Silver is essentially the Bill Simmons of politics. Built a good company off a liberal fanbase and has come under a lot of fire for having some issues with how they react to criticism from people outside and inside that fanbase. They view every slight extremely negatively and have gone a little bit to the right after having to defend themselves so much. Like a lot of white dudes in their line of work, they were probably a little liberal but mostly for work and have some problems with underlying issues on race and culture. Both, but especially Silver, have let it affect his overall viewpoint on what they cover. 

They also let go some of their better analysts. And Nate really showed his whole ass during COVID

Edited October 31, 2022 by Js1

[Dnaguy 12002]

1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

50-50 and 70-30 is not that far apart in how 538 aggregates polls. In their eyes, if you're at 30%, you still have a decent chance of winning. 

for anyone not following 538, their percentages do not indicate the breakdown of the vote but the likelihood of an event happening. Like betting on a game. 70-30 indicates a slight favorite. 

You can disagree with their labels, but I've seen people online misinterpret what 538 is saying.

[Sawbonz 27580]

On 10/28/2022 at 11:20 PM, Humble Beast said:

You can diagnose it pretty easily. He literally can’t understand when people speak to him. His brain can’t process it. That’s why he needs closed captioning. He can understand it when he reads it. The brain is a fascinating thing. Oh, and even if he understands what is asked after reading, he has difficulty verbalizing responses. Receptive and expressive aphasia. Google it. Profound deficits. Laughable to minimize it. 

Person Man Woman Camera TV

[Js1 85426]

 

They don't really push undecided - 43-41 CCM and 45-41 Sisolak.  

But they had Laxalt +2 and Lombardo +3 so it's a 4 point swing towards CCM and 7 point swing towards Sisolak

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19119]

This is an interesting article.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/10/31/opinion/focus-group-georgia-suburban-voters.html

My takeaway, 75% of our fellow Americans are complete fucking morons.

[Bama Chick 28596]

I stan the right man!

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11669]

 

first I’ve seen this from 538.  We are officially rooting for an upset now. 

[C-Man 27231]

This is depressing AF: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2022-election-forecast/senate/
 

[Voldemort86 2259]

Man this sucks.

[Horn Dog 9875]

27 minutes ago, C-Man said:

This is depressing AF: https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2022-election-forecast/senate/
 

We live in a country where there are at least 2 possible scenarios where Walker wins by around 20% margin of the popular vote.

 

[C-Man 27231]

1 minute ago, Horn Dog said:

We live in a country where there are at least 2 possible scenarios where Walker wins by around 20% margin of the popular vote.

 

First off, I could look at that GIF for hours. That is Scarlett at her absolute zenith.

And second, didn't 538 do rather poorly with 2020 projections?

[Voldemort86 2259]

Ralston update looked kinda bleak today in Nevada.

[Dr. Teeth 5845]

A lot of their scenarios are based on likely voters voting as in past elections. This is basically saying that Dems are likely going to stay home again. The fact that Rs are polling at an advantage in excitement to vote despite Dobbs, student loan relief, good SC pick, climate change initiatives, etc. is pretty bad. 

[bonnieblue 542]

20 hours ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

This is an interesting article.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/10/31/opinion/focus-group-georgia-suburban-voters.html

My takeaway, 75% of our fellow Americans are complete fucking morons.

This was one of the most frustrating things I’ve read lately. “Swing” voters are morons. Candidate X stands for all of my favorite positions, which is why I’m going to vote for Y!