What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Rover said:
Handy I saw you trying to deal with the President of the Bedwetter's Caucus, Scooby yesterday.
Click to expand...

Would you please stop with stuff like this? As a favor? You aren't a troll, but it makes you sound like one.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

joecct said:
Even if they want him out of their club?
Click to expand...

"Promote up and out," the time-honored way to get rid of a jerk and why so many unpleasant people wind up way above their Peter Principle-dictated level of incompetence.

There's something to that.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Kepler said:
Would you please stop with stuff like this? As a favor? You aren't a troll, but it makes you sound like one.
Click to expand...

Kep my apologies but Scoobs is an idiot. I'm hopeful you're feeling a little better about the election however. If there's one bright spot in the self centered ramblings of my postings, its pointing out that excessive nervousness does in fact hurt the movement. As the great song goes.."paranoia strikes deep. Into your lives it will creep. Starts when you're always afraid..."
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Rover said:
excessive nervousness does in fact hurt the movement
Click to expand...

As does over-confidence. As one is Charybdis, the other is Scylla.

The polls need no narrative -- simply look at them. Hillary's probability in the 538 Polls Plus model has varied as follows:

Code: 
49.9 ... 7/30   Low point prior to DNC bounce
89.2 ... 8/14   Height of bounce plus Trump's terrible weeks
56.2 ... 9/20   Low point of erosion plus Hillary's terrible week
60.8 ... 9/24   Current
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Questions, because I don't know: What is the best mechanism we know for predetermining turnout and to what degree has it been successful in the past? And if there is such a thing, what does it say?

Seems like that's the key and the hardest thing to predict.

With high negatives for both candidates the surface primary driver seems like it's to "stop" the other side, which I see as a negative motivation vs. a positive one, like a strong feeling for "Hope and Change", for example. My head tells me that a negative motivation isn't nearly as good and is much more easy to blow off on election day for the average citizen. Because of that, I feel like actual turnout could be suppressed as things stand today.

Which could be totally wrong, as for example, it's true that there's massive interest in the debates. But then again, there would be as much or more massive interest in Kanye throwing down with Taylor Swift. It kind of has some of that train wreck quality that you can't stop watching about it.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Wisko McBadgerton said:
Questions, because I don't know: What is the best mechanism we know for predetermining turnout and to what degree has it been successful in the past? And if there is such a thing, what does it say?
Click to expand...

It's the hardest thing there is, and with a split electorate like ours it's inconveniently decisive.

The first approximation is easy: on-cycle elections have similar turnout; as do off-cycle elections. Presidential elections have a much larger and more Democratic electorate. Think of that as the mean. The variance is explained by local effects like voter anger, or scandals, or the state of the economy, or incumbent fatigue. If you can figure out a good system for predicting the balance of all those things you are going to be a rich man.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Subscribed because it's better than the alternative.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Mark Cuban will be in the front row for HRC. For tD - yep, Gennifer Flowers.

One bag or two bags of popcorn?
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

Articles like this one in the NYT would be the most effective way to discredit Trump to his own supporters, but his supporters are too stupid or blind or naive to be able to grasp the truth. And that truth happens to be he is a lying puddle of diarrhea who is treating most of them like the rubes they apparently are. If nothing else, I think Clinton's inability to put a 1972 or 1984 style beatdown on Trump is because people who want to vote for her DO listen to the detractors and CAN find reasons to wonder about her. Some are legitimate, most are not. But Trumps minions can't be bothered to think critically. That such a massive portion of the American public is so emotionally and logically stunted is why we're probably effed as a civilization anyway.

I've always believed the undecided voter was a myth. In one presidential election in my life (and there have been a lot by now) I went into the post convention stretch not completely convinced who I would vote for (ended up being GHW Bush), but every other time I knew by the springtime who I wanted to vote for and certainly by the convention I had decided. I know that is anecdotal and not evidence, but I doubt there really are people who are still weighing a choice between Clinton or Trump. Perhaps a few are going back and forth between one of them or a third party vote, or one of them and sitting out the election altogether. But whatever undecideds there are, I hope they watch the debate and I hope Clinton crushes him and then takes a figurative whiz on the ashes.
 
joecct said:
Mark Cuban will be in the front row for HRC. For tD - yep, Gennifer Flowers.

One bag or two bags of popcorn?
Click to expand...

Is that confirmed? I thought tD just tweeted that as a response to Mark Cuban a al "oh yeah?!?! How 'bout I just bring Gennifer Flowers?"

Did Trump ever respond - even flippantly - to Cuban's offer to donate $10 million to a charity of his choice if he sat down with Cuban to explain his policies?
 
Scarlet said:
Is that confirmed? I thought tD just tweeted that as a response to Mark Cuban a al "oh yeah?!?! How 'bout I just bring Gennifer Flowers?"

Did Trump ever respond - even flippantly - to Cuban's offer to donate $10 million to a charity of his choice if he sat down with Cuban to explain his policies?
Click to expand...

Just saw a tweet that it is confirmed by the tD camp.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

joecct said:
Just saw a tweet that it is confirmed by the tD camp.
Click to expand...
I knew Trump would do this stuff and the Clintons long past will make it easy for him to do
 
Re: Campaign 2016 Part XIX: Escape from the Planet of Debates

I'm sure Hillary has in no way found a way to deal with that over the last 20-30 years, nosiree.
 
Wisko McBadgerton said:
Questions, because I don't know: What is the best mechanism we know for predetermining turnout and to what degree has it been successful in the past? And if there is such a thing, what does it say?

Seems like that's the key and the hardest thing to predict.

With high negatives for both candidates the surface primary driver seems like it's to "stop" the other side, which I see as a negative motivation vs. a positive one, like a strong feeling for "Hope and Change", for example. My head tells me that a negative motivation isn't nearly as good and is much more easy to blow off on election day for the average citizen. Because of that, I feel like actual turnout could be suppressed as things stand today.

Which could be totally wrong, as for example, it's true that there's massive interest in the debates. But then again, there would be as much or more massive interest in Kanye throwing down with Taylor Swift. It kind of has some of that train wreck quality that you can't stop watching about it.
Click to expand...

Odd situation.

People just don't care to vote. Mookie is the opposite, he votes every time. Many times there is perhaps 1 contested race. In every unopposed Mookie writes in himself.
He just votes.

Have to assume a very small minority is in the same boat
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top