Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

[joecct]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Does Trump win or did Hillary lose if the GOP pulls it off?

The amount of papers that will be published on this election will be monstrous.

[The Sicatoka]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Does Trump win or did Hillary lose if the GOP pulls it off?

The amount of papers that will be published on this election will be monstrous.

South Park last night (or was it Monday's debate ):

GD: "I'm not qualified. Don't vote for me."
TS: "My opponent is a liar. Don't believe him."


GD - Giant ****** / Mr. Garrison / Donald Trump
TS - Turd Sandwich / Hillary Clinton / Hillary Clinton

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Can't wait to read what the apologetics have to say about this one... http://campusreform.org/?ID=8185

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Can't wait to read what the apologetics have to say about this one... http://campusreform.org/?ID=8185

Throw the book at him. Unacceptable behavior is unacceptable. Idiots need to be trained.

[The Sicatoka]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Can't wait to read what the apologetics have to say about this one... http://campusreform.org/?ID=8185

Was it this guy? That guy against a Gustavus woman wrestler I'll say the woman pins him (and leaves him crying on the mat) in the second.

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Can't wait to read what the apologetics have to say about this one... http://campusreform.org/?ID=8185

Apologists. Apologetics is the art of argument in solicitation of a cause.

Charge them with assault. Of course.

The problem with your strawmen is they don't map to reality.

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Was it this guy? That guy against a Gustavus woman wrestler I'll say the woman pins him (and leaves him crying on the mat) in the second.

Nah. Guys who work out to look like that are usually pretty strong.

One of the funniest things about the phobes is the "sissy boys" they snicker about could throw them through a brick wall. There are as many weak bodies as weak minds on the right.

[The Sicatoka]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Nah. Guys who work out to look like that are usually pretty strong.

One of the funniest things about the phobes is the "sissy boys" they snicker about could throw them through a brick wall. There are as many weak bodies as weak minds on the right.

Apparently you ain't met the Gustavus women's wresting team. I stand by prior statement.

[The Sicatoka]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Nah. Guys who work out to look like that are usually pretty strong.

One of the funniest things about the phobes is the "sissy boys" they snicker about could throw them through a brick wall. There are as many weak bodies as weak minds on the right.

For every powerful there's at least one poser.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptvTVAE5Wx8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ofehqbuIue4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-llaWwZqVg

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Not a big fan of RCP as they aggregate even that ridiculous LA Times/USC poll

Nate devoted an entire piece to that poll, its problems, and whether it's useful data.

tl; dr:

The problem: Every poll takes crosstabs and then weights the responses by party affiliation. This has turned out to be very useful and predictive. The problem with the LAT poll is it weights based on how people say they voted in 2012 rather than their current party affiliation. While we're still stuck with a SSS, that is probably an unwarranted methodological error or, in technical terms, bullsh-t.

Overall usefulness: However, the poll also does some good stuff that other polls don't both in sampling and in questionnaire construction.

The solution: It's actually pretty simple. The LAT poll is probably a really good poll if you just add 6 points to Hillary. That normalizes the methodological difference without sacrificing the good features.

My criticism of Nate's solution: OK, that really sets off alarm bells for me, because that 6% number doesn't have any theoretical justification, it just happens to true up the results with the other polls -- something called "herding" which is Double Plus Ungood. If Nate offered mathematical reasons why 6% is the magic number, rather than say 5 or 8, then I'd be more comfortable, but he doesn't -- he's reasoning back from results, and that is atypically bad process for him. He of all people knows you don't "unskew" the polls by quantifying how much they differ from the herd, because the outlier poll could actually be right.

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

For every powerful there's at least one poser.

src?

The best part about those ads is the cliche of the manly looking but actually effeminate model is itself a cliche that Tough Guys (TM) use to tell themselves their beer guts make them attractive to women (spoiler: they don't). The ad is actually a double parody, with the people who buy the product not getting the second joke.

You know the old saying. "I could never be gay. I just can't get that fit."

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

That's gonna leave a mark.

[The Sicatoka]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

src?

Strictly anecdotal, but my eyeballs at the gym. I see many of those guys with "toned for show" arms that have nothing behind them. I think it upsets them when a physically unassuming guy like me starts his workout at the same setting they finished theirs at.

[MaizeRage]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Despite my perceived jerkiness I can appreciate the allure of a hypothetical middle of the road 3rd party candidate unbound by party doctrine to say and do what's right for the country. Ross Perot came closest to filling that void and looking back on it I give him tremendous credit for bagging about 20% of the vote with no help from an organized party apparatus. The problem is before and since him 3rd party candidates are usually unserious loons with poorly thought out positions or single issue candidates. Gary Johnson and Jill Stein aren't in the conversation or the debates because they're both nuts. If you want ridiculous conspiracy theories like vaccinations cause autism (Stein) or zero workable knowledge of foreign affairs (Johnson) just vote Trump.

I still disagree. Bernie wasn't bound by party doctrine. Trump certainly wasn't. Party doctrine is only as good as the public support that it has. If they're not politically savvy enough to build consensus on their home turf, I have no interest in seeing them try and fail at the national level.

The question is, where does that large cohort of Johnson voters that were smart enough not to vote Trump, but still needed to vote for a ***** end up going? Do they thank God there is a curtain on the ballot station and vote Trump(I don't know why, but reading this board has made me extremely paranoid about people voting Trump, despite claiming otherwise publicly), or do they just sit the thing out, which presumably has big implications down the ballot?

[The Sicatoka]

Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

That's gonna leave a mark.

Not to nitpick (translated: stand by), but isn't the issue "equal pay for equal work"? Trump saying, "If they do as good of a job", isn't that saying equal pay for equal work? Am I missing a nuance? And if that woman is the top performer in a company (should be true 50% or more of the time based on workforce participation rates), if she's out on maternity it does inconvenience the business.

Trump not paying taxes? As long as he'd doing it LEGALLY, fine. That's where I'd like the returns (or the audit findings ).

Otherwise, it's Trump being Trump. Anyone surprised?