Jump to content

2024 Presidential Election Thread - Let's keep the party going.


Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, Bullneck said:

How about Legionaire's Disease? 

If Penn Station gets hit with a meteor I have to park at Newport Mall and use the PATH to get to my office. 

It's contagious. We need something that doesn't impact the rest of highly blue NYC.

  • Haha 1
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, cactusflinthead said:

 

20241027_100031.jpg

It sucks that this is what 45% of the electorate are voting for him because of these things. And before anyone says it’s only 30%, it’s not. I wish it was, but at this point it’s time to face facts. 

Edited by Dr. Teeth
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Dr. Teeth said:

It sucks that this is what 45% of this people are voting for him because of these things. And before anyone says it’s only 30%, it’s not. I wish it was, but at this point it’s time to face facts. 

And there’s definitely others that are inclined to vote for Trump but they just don’t vote. Not to play the idiocracy trope again but we have a large segment of the population who revel in their own ignorance. Many wants to educated/entertained with 10 seconds clips. 10 seconds is the gop’s wheelhouse.  Very absolutist policies that can’t withstand the slightest questioning.

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Pancho said:

This MSG “a rally” is going to be a disaster, right?

Everything he does is a disaster and everything he does has no bearing on the possibility of becoming president.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

And yet, Democrats seem to hedge when given the opportunity to run on popular policies like taxing the rich, universal healthcare, protecting Social Security and Medicare, and protecting a woman's right to choose.

Do you, sir, mean to suggest that the Dems are timid? Come, now!

 

I believe it was back in the summer that I heard on NPR that any teeth the national campaign was showing was Kamala ignoring the advice that "weird" was too much and wouldn't play well. The piece said she was more willing to follow her own instincts than before. I realize "weird" came from Walz, but Harris embraced the notion of aggressive language.

My enthusiasm for Harris has only grown from delight at the emergence of a candidate that could repeat Biden's feat of saving the republic to just plain enthusiasm about who she is and what she will mean for the presidency. I love it all except for kidnapping children from schools to change their sex and then giving their pets to murderous immigrants to eat.

The children!

Edited by RomaVicta
  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted

I didn’t have The NY Times growing a pair on my bingo card but I may just have to subscribe after the election if Harris wins.  I still want to thank the pitchbot for its incredible contributions.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, Pancho said:

This MSG “a rally” is going to be a disaster, right?

 

17 minutes ago, immamac said:

For America, yes. 

In fairness, hosting fascist rallies is a bit of a tradition for MSG

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 2
Posted
2 hours ago, quigley said:

 

Polling has fucked us for the last decade.

The polls have terribly low response rates (2.5% from NYT-Siena) so they have massive error bars. If they reported their true data, with possibly 10 - 15% margin of error (or more), people would stop listening to pollsters. The pollsters want to keep their jobs so they dial down the margin of error to ~ 5% and include the 50% threshold in their error. By doing this, they appear to be herding, even if they don't aren't explicitly compromising their data.

Tight polling gives the appearance of a tight race so news outlets have a game to cover instead of focusing on policy and competency, which are boring. This reporting is a self-fulfilling prophecy, increasing anxiety and distrust in the populous.

The margin of error reported by polls is just the pure random statistical error, which is inversely proportional to the square root of the sample size. I agree that it's conveniently small compared to how far off many polls are.

Where most polls screw up is with the systematic error: unrepresentative sampling, wonky weighting, incorrect expectations of voting behavior, etc. To play devil's advocate, thought, there is no way to measure this error mathematically, so pollsters report the only error they can measure quantitatively.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

Thought this was thought-provoking, although I have a hard time with a chick who goes by Katty Kay. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjr430gry81o

This in particular:

So for some voters, this November’s election has turned into a referendum on gender norms, and the social upheavals of recent years. This seems particularly true for the voters Kamala Harris has a tough time reaching: the young men who live in a world that is rapidly changing for, well, young men.

Seems like maybe all the trans campaign ads are a subtle way of saying "we can't have a woman president."

One thought it provoked.  I disliked HIllary at the time, very possibly as a result of suppressed misogyny.  HOWEVER, the notion that a woman president was undesirable for any reason never entered my conscious calculus.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Posted
Hope we finally get to learn how much Trump is paying for MSG or perhaps Dolan just giving it to him for free.
We know he's not paying, even if MSG thinks he's paying.
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, berlinerbaer said:

The margin of error reported by polls is just the pure random statistical error, which is inversely proportional to the square root of the sample size. I agree that it's conveniently small compared to how far off many polls are.

Where most polls screw up is with the systematic error: unrepresentative sampling, wonky weighting, incorrect expectations of voting behavior, etc. To play devil's advocate, thought, there is no way to measure this error mathematically, so pollsters report the only error they can measure quantitatively.

You're correct and know more than a bit about this.

I did survey design and analysis professionally for a while a decade ago. There are models you can use when response rate is so low but data becomes so unreliable that project becomes pointless. I had a project that was suffering from this didn't get funding. I did it anyway because I had some data. Someone else with less data and similarly low response rates actually got it published. So you may see why it's stuck in my craw.

I think the pollsters are trying to avoid applying these models by arbitrarily balancing by voter registration and skewing when they don't meet their targets. I haven't gone back to dig up the methods because it's complicated and would be opening up old frustrations.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
9 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Obama gave them the business and they listened?

 

2 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Why has nobody told us in this thread that the polls were wrong on black voters!!!

Those polls didn't address the turnout, which is what Obama was talking about and what the polls fail to accurately measure.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Pancho said:

Vance is the most punchable person since….

I cannot stand this fucker

 

 

JD Vance is the epitome of everything Republican voters said they hated about politicians in 2016 when they supported Trump.

  • Hook 'Em 8
Posted
28 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Hope we finally get to learn how much Trump is paying for MSG or perhaps Dolan just giving it to him for free.

Distinction without a difference.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted

A non-exhaustive list of chelators 

Quote
Natural Chelators
  • Water.
  • Carbohydrates, including polysaccharides.
  • Organic acids with more than one coordination group.
  • Lipids.
  • Steroids.
  • Amino acids and related compounds.
  • Peptides.
  • Phosphates.

Finally with rfk in charge we will be able to get our hands on water, carbohydrates, and fats. 

Posted
Vance is the most punchable person since….
I cannot stand this fucker
 
 

The ease with which the GOP lies, even when presented with receipts, is astounding.
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Rage+1 3
Posted
2 minutes ago, C-Man said:

The ease with which the GOP lies, even when presented with receipts, is astounding.

It reveals the utter contempt they have for their audience. It's hard to believe more people aren't offended by how stupid Republicans think they are.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
36 minutes ago, Pancho said:

image.thumb.png.057ba11714335021f30594e0f3174cfb.png

Dear Bobby, thank you for stopping the ear against sunshine and Christmas!

On a side note, I think it would be great if someone on the Trump team suggest using Richard Wagner's music for the MSG rally.  Maybe some creative lighting, red banners and the like 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
  • Fuck You 1
Posted
2 hours ago, BamaATL said:

Again, look at where the vast majority of these votes are.  40% of the non voter is from 5 counties (out of 159 total), some of whom have a historical percentage of Democratic margin of 90% (each county varies some as low as 60%).  In any event, it's reasonable to believe that while this vote varies it a bit, it doesn't deviate dramatically from the area.  For example, in Dekalb County, which is an 85% Democratic County, 40k worth of Trump voters didn't just suddenly move there.  This is a heavy turnout, in strongly Democratic areas of previously non engaged or low engaged voters.   

Again, of the 180k out of 492k I pointed, out I only went into 5 major Democratic counties, there are others.  The nonvoter turnout in Democratic counties is easily half of the statewide total.  Even if Republicans take 55% to 45% everywhere else, they can't overcome 70% to 30% in the Democratic areas.   

 

I think the fact that the gender gap is holding up with ~20% new voters is also a good sign.   For 493k new voters that's 49k more new women voting then new men. And the women are going to save all our asses. I hope. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
  • Drool 1


×
×
  • Create New...