2016 Election Thread

[Shane Wahl]

Black swan events . . . I don't even know what they could be. This just isn't the same old situation with the GOP being ahead of the Dems when it comes to matters of security, so some kind of terror event probably does little for Trump.

 

I have like 600 FB friends. I think probably 5 of them are Trump voters, all of them actually in MN, not IN. One of those dudes up near Bemidji is rabid . . . and he posts crazy conspiracy stories and sometimes actually false stories. Anyway, the newest ones center around Clinton having brain damage to the point where she is having seizures on camera, having difficulty walking up stairs, etc. It is wildly insane, but I think only her health could count as any sort of weird event that could shift the election.

[Shane Wahl]

 

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

 

Instead of using a secondary source, go to the primary. Nate Silver's site offers three forecasts.

 

Now-cast: if the election were held today. Uses the latest polls. This shows 90+% for Hillary at the moment and is probably what your article was looking at. It's already swung back a couple ticks toward Trump. It's always going to be the most volatile one, and thus the most "newsworthy".

 

Polls-only: uses previous polls as well as the current to try to sort out temporary bumps from the underlying poll trends. This shows 83% for Hillary.

 

Polls-plus: uses the above, plus economic and other trends. This shows 75% for Hillary.

 

I'm pretty sure the latter is the one Silver considers his definitive forecast. "If the election were held today" is close to meaningless for a prediction, since it is not being held today.

 

All are strong for Hillary, but the 75% one includes an approximately 15% chance of some black swan event throwing things Trump's way. I'm not ready to say anything's in the bag in August.

 

Thank you for that clarification. I actually sorta ignore 538, even though I know it is good. I really like just following polls on RCP and comparing to previous elections.

[TheLeviathan]

The "I don't know anybody who is a Trump supporter" meme has been around for 6 months.  And yet here we are......

 

Mike said it best, don't underestimate your fellow citizen.

[BeenHazy]

Right, I scoffed at him the entire nomination process and look where we are. He consistently out-performed polling and consistently turned out huge vote totals.

 

If I had to bet, I'd bet he loses the election. But I've long learned my lesson this year about betting on the election.

If that's the main source of your Trump anxiety, maybe this will help a little. If anything, Trump underperformed the polling when the primaries were still competitive.

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-supporters-probably-arent-lying-to-pollsters/&ved=0ahUKEwj5nbfcobLOAhUH_WMKHX1ZAK4QFggfMAE&usg=AFQjCNG98itnAWv1CA9M9fgoSjB2P6imfw

[TheLeviathan]

 

If that's the main source of your Trump anxiety, maybe this will help a little. If anything, Trump underperformed the polling when the primaries were still competitive.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-supporters-probably-arent-lying-to-pollsters/&ved=0ahUKEwj5nbfcobLOAhUH_WMKHX1ZAK4QFggfMAE&usg=AFQjCNG98itnAWv1CA9M9fgoSjB2P6imfw

 

Hey, believe me, I hope that's how it plays out.  I think a lot of the arguments on the left right now are failing to grasp the ol' Is/Ought fallacy.  But I genuinely hope in the end that they're right, I just have serious doubts.

[Badsmerf]

I live in rural Iowa and believe me, there are plenty of trump supporters. It's still early, and those numbers mean very little right now. This race will tighten up. Trump may be an idiot, but the last few days has shown he can learn and adjust. While i have confidence Clinton will win the debates, trump will be much more nasty and even in losing will still get the media attention.

 

The thing that amazes me is over half the country believe Hillary Clinton is pure evil. A good portion of the population still watches fox news and listens to rush Limbaugh. They will forgive and forget for trump before they vote Clinton. That voter base doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt until they start sowing it by not electing Michelle Bachmann type candidates.

[Shane Wahl]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ut/utah_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5971.html

 

Haha. Utah is 37, 25, 16, 1, for Trump, Clinton, Johnson, and Stein right now. Notice that those numbers add up to 79.

[Shane Wahl]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/08/08/trump_hit_his_ceiling_131448.html

 

Trump hit his ceiling and is tumbling quickly. The last stand for the white, male power structure will not succeed.

[PseudoSABR]

Former CIA Agent and Anti-Trump Republican launches independent bid. 

[TheLeviathan]

 

Former CIA Agent and Anti-Trump Republican launches independent bid. 

 

Where's that "who?" sounder when you need it?

[PseudoSABR]

 

Where's that "who?" sounder when you need it?

Right; but here's your hawkish Republican candidate, we already have the Libertarian candidate; now we just need a social conservative candidate to give GOP voters choices that fit their defining ideology.   I don't know how many of these such candidates will get on the ballots in the various states, but that this candidate exists at all isn't good for Mr. Trump.  

 

And how about that new Mammouth poll, which 538 rates as an A+?  Again, not a guarantee of anything, but the more distance away from conventions and last weeks controversies don't necessarily seem to be favoring Trump in the way one would expect.    But, of course, we'll see.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

The thing that amazes me is over half the country believe Hillary Clinton is pure evil. A good portion of the population still watches fox news and listens to rush Limbaugh. They will forgive and forget for trump before they vote Clinton. That voter base doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt until they start sowing it by not electing Michelle Bachmann type candidates.

That's entirely possible but let's not forget that Clinton is raising money hand over fist while Trump is wandering around to the Benny Hill theme.

 

Clinton has the money to make sure no one forgets Trump's blunders.

 

As for Bachmann, the further she went right, the more she marginalized herself. She didn't retire because she had such great opportunities elsewhere, she retired because she knew she was losing her district.

 

She won her final election by less than one percentage point. It was only her fourth election to Congress.

[PseudoSABR]

 

 It was only her fourth election to Congress.

The truth of this statement is as absurd as it is dismaying.  I hope there comes a day where we never refer to candidate's "only" fourth election to Congress....

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

The truth of this statement is as absurd as it is dismaying.  I hope there comes a day where we never refer to candidate's "only" fourth election to Congress....

Yeah. Sigh.

 

But in terms of Bachmann and her district, that was a pretty short period of time. Had she not been insane, she could have held that district for decades.

[PseudoSABR]

 

Yeah. Sigh.

 

But in terms of Bachmann and her district, that was a pretty short period of time. Had she not been insane, she could have held that district for decades.

Oh I know what you meant, and concede your point.  That Bachmann who had gained national celebrity went so far right as to lose her district within a decade speaks to what lurching to the right does to even the most conservative candidates in the most conservative districts.  

[PseudoSABR]

 

Trump won't lose more than anyone in history.

Oklahoma [...] surely won't go blue.

He'll still win Oklahoma, but Tulsa World for the first time since 1940 failed to endorse the Republican Candidate for president. 

[Craig Arko]

Never fear, Curt is here.

 

http://www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow/la-sp-curt-schilling-president-20160808-snap-htmlstory.html

[ashbury]

Black swan events . . . I don't even know what they could be.

You kind of just defined what a black swan event is.

 

Imagine Hillary passing out during the middle of a campaign event and extrapolate from there.

[ashbury]

Where's that "who?" sounder when you need it?

#nevertrump to be replaced by #neverheardofthisguy

[nicksaviking]

 

Never fear, Curt is here.

http://www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow/la-sp-curt-schilling-president-20160808-snap-htmlstory.html

 

He'll surely copy every thing that Trump is doing now. If there was a well known non-traditional candidate who wasn't bat**** crazy, they might actually win this thing.

 

Instead of Trump or Curt Schilling, what if it was Al Michaels or Bruce Springsteen or Phil Mickelson or Tom Hanks? What if it was someone who everyone said, "Hey, that's a good dude, and I can't recall him doing anything insane."

 

But I guess most sane people probably aren't all that interested in the job.

[Mike Sixel]

 

He'll surely copy every thing that Trump is doing now. If there was a well known non-traditional candidate who wasn't bat**** crazy, they might actually win this thing.

 

Instead of Trump or Curt Schilling, what if it was Al Michaels or Bruce Springsteen or Phil Mickelson or Tom Hanks? What if it was someone who everyone said, "Hey, that's a good dude, and I can't recall him doing anything insane."

 

But I guess most sane people probably aren't all that interested in the job.

 

so, a national Jesse Ventura before he went batty*

 

*I mean, some people think that.....not me.

[nicksaviking]

 

so, a national Jesse Ventura before he went batty*

 

*I mean, some people think that.....not me.

 

I'm guessing everyone would have known he was batty if we had Twitter and Facebook back then.

 

I'm talking about the few well known people who have survived the social media onslaught relatively unscathed.

[Mike Sixel]

Well, that would be Michael Bloomberg, even though he is a "politician", imo.

 

Outside there, Alec Baldwin?

The Rock?

David Robinson (aka, the Admiral)?

[kydoty]

Well that was fun.  Trump today called for his political opponent to be assassinated. 

[PseudoSABR]

 

Well that was fun.  Trump today called for his political opponent to be assassinated. 

I think "called for" is framing it a bit too harshly, although the implication was definitely there.  Whether Trump implied that the Second Amendment guys should do something about Clinton or her Supreme Court nominee also isn't clear.  

 

Politico gives about as fair of a treatment as one could give to Trump's statements. 

 

Here's the actual quote, with some context:

“Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish, the Second Amendment,” he said as an aside while smiling. “By the way, and if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don’t know. But I’ll tell you what, that will be a horrible day.”

[DaveW]

Trump doesn't deserve any benefit of the doubt at this point.

[ashbury]

I might be the only person on the planet who didn't think "assassination" when I heard Trump's comment. I was thinking "armed general insurrection".

 

Call me a generous soul.

[BeenHazy]

He clearly meant it as a joke about shooting Clinton.  There's no doubt when looking at the faces behind him that many his crowd obviously got the joke.  The best of the bunch is the guy with the white beard to the right who looks almost shocked, turns to his companion and says "whoa", then looks downright sheepish for several seconds.

 

Somebody needs to gif-meme that guy.

[Badsmerf]

How is making a joke about that ok? Honestly, what the ****? What a disgusting human. Just when I think gee can't get any lower, there he goes.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Just when I think gee can't get any lower, there he goes.

It's kind of amazing, isn't it?