2016 Election Thread

[biggentleben]

 

Well so much for giving the people their voice. John McCain said today that he will make sure all SCOTUS nominees will be blocked for the entirety of Hillary's presidency.

 

And I hope she turns around and asks him for any legislation he would like passed and graciously advocates for that to get passed. Then allow him to continue explaining to national media how he can have that stance on the court.

 

The back and forth gets nowhere. Someone has to turn that around.

[kydoty]

FYI, keep in mind that the legal minimum amount of SCOTUS justices needed on the bench to make a decision is six. There are some whom there is real potential to not even make it another four years. If we get to five, the SCOTUS cannot even legally operate.

 

As stupid as that would normally sound, it's becoming legitimately a real concern.

[Craig Arko]

The correct answer is of course to swing the Senate and let Sanders and Warren be in charge.

[nicksaviking]

No one swings between being sympathetic to maddenly insane as quickly and often as John McCain.

[PseudoSABR]

 

No one swings between being sympathetic to maddenly insane as quickly and often as John McCain.

Maverick

[Badsmerf]

I will post opinions from abroad a little later. I'm in Germany now and have the perspective from others around the world. I get asked often about our election, and it's embarrassment.

[Craig Arko]

Finishing this article now and it's really good:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/the-white-flight-of-derek-black/2016/10/15/ed5f906a-8f3b-11e6-a6a3-d50061aa9fae_story.html

Here's another one.

 

http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-reasons-trumps-rise-that-no-one-talks-about/

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Here's another one.

http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-reasons-trumps-rise-that-no-one-talks-about/

Yeah, saw that a few weeks ago. Cracked is a pretty solid site. Half their articles are garbage, about a quarter are funny, and the last quarter are a mix of funny and intelligent.

[Brock Beauchamp]

FiveThirtyEight now giving the most likely Senate outcome to the Democrats at 52 seats.

[Squirrel]

 

I will post opinions from abroad a little later. I'm in Germany now and have the perspective from others around the world. I get asked often about our election, and it's embarrassment.

I have friends and relatives from elsewhere ... I get the same questions.

[nicksaviking]

 

I will post opinions from abroad a little later. I'm in Germany now and have the perspective from others around the world. I get asked often about our election, and it's embarrassment.

 

It is embarrassing, but it probably shouldn't be. European countries regularly have nut jobs in a dead heat for elections, often winning. Look at what GB just did, look at what Greece continues to do. At least Trump isn't officially a leader of a hate group, lot's of those countries have mainstream parties winning elected posts who's platforms are 'White Nationalist' type garbage, and not just the struggling Balkan area, Scandinavia has some real elected lunatics espousing hateful stuff. 

 

America is the media capital of the world, so while Trump is embarrassing and unfortunately the whole world is watching, these other countries probably need to look in the mirror.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Yeah, saw that a few weeks ago. Cracked is a pretty solid site. Half their articles are garbage, about a quarter are funny, and the last quarter are a mix of funny and intelligent.

 

That article pretty much nails it.  I come from a small town like the ones referenced there and the author pretty much nails it.  

 

Especially those first few points.  I agree with liberals on a number of issues, I'm not religious, I don't revere Donald Trump, but where I completely sympathize is my impression of liberals as snooty urban no-nothings who have no concept of what it's like to work hard and be self reliant in a rural environment.  And this election has brought out the worst of that in the left.

 

Some self-recognition of that is going to be vital for preventing the next Trump and healing some of the divide.

[ashbury]

Here's another one.

 

http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-reasons-trumps-rise-that-no-one-talks-about/

Rooted against Indiana Jones. LOL. Guy's a talented comic writer, at minimum.

[Mike Sixel]

 

That article pretty much nails it.  I come from a small town like the ones referenced there and the author pretty much nails it.  

 

Especially those first few points.  I agree with liberals on a number of issues, I'm not religious, I don't revere Donald Trump, but where I completely sympathize is my impression of liberals as snooty urban no-nothings who have no concept of what it's like to work hard and be self reliant in a rural environment.  And this election has brought out the worst of that in the left.

 

Some self-recognition of that is going to be vital for preventing the next Trump and healing some of the divide.

 

In fairness, I am not sure that most suburban republicans are any better....nor am I sure that rural people have any idea what inner cities are actually like, and are snobby about the lazy, poor, that are taking all their tax money and buying drugs. People have a need, for some reason, to feel better than other people.

 

I do agree, there is a lot of snobbiness in the world 

[nicksaviking]

 

 

Especially those first few points.  I agree with liberals on a number of issues, I'm not religious, I don't revere Donald Trump, but where I completely sympathize is my impression of liberals as snooty urban no-nothings who have no concept of what it's like to work hard and be self reliant in a rural environment.  And this election has brought out the worst of that in the left.

 

 

I'm trying to phrase the question frankly, apologies if it doesn't come out right.

 

I know young people leaving rural areas for the "city" is an issue, and really it has probably always been an issue. I would guess there is often great consternation regarding this, but do the parents and the other residents tend to get exasperated with the young people themselves for leaving, or do they blame the urban area for drawing them?

 

I'm just curious, perhaps that kind of thing isn't really discussed.

[TheLeviathan]

 

In fairness, I am not sure that most suburban republicans are any better....nor am I sure that rural people have any idea what inner cities are actually like, and are snobby about the lazy, poor, that are taking all their tax money and buying drugs. People have a need, for some reason, to feel better than other people.

 

I do agree, there is a lot of snobbiness in the world 

 

Oh absolutely.  The right exploits these people and rural Americans don't understand urban life.  It definitely goes both ways.

 

There should be great care given by both sides to bridge those gaps.

[TheLeviathan]

 

I'm trying to phrase the question frankly, apologies if it doesn't come out right.

 

I know young people leaving rural areas for the "city" is an issue, and really it has probably always been an issue. I would guess there is often great consternation regarding this, but do the parents and the other residents tend to get exasperated with the young people themselves for leaving, or do they blame the urban area for drawing them?

 

I'm just curious, perhaps that kind of thing isn't really discussed.

 

I think it's largely understood.  There are some that feel bitter about family farms ending because their sons don't stay.  But, in my experience, I never felt like the bitterness was towards urban/city life pulling kids away.  It was just expected and understood by the nature of opportunities.  Especially since many rural people do want their kids to live a better life than them.

[nicksaviking]

 

I think it's largely understood.  There are some that feel bitter about family farms ending because their sons don't stay.  But, in my experience, I never felt like the bitterness was towards urban/city life pulling kids away.  It was just expected and understood by the nature of opportunities.  Especially since many rural people do want their kids to live a better life than them.

 

That sounds like the exact kind of mindset needed to work this out.

[Mike Sixel]

Was it in Pollan's first book, where he interviewed that farmer that uses chickens to eat cow dung, and moves his animals around, and whatnot, where he basically said a big problem in rural areas is that the smartest children move on, and that parents want that?

 

I mean, that's got to create some serious issues.....if true.

[ashbury]

I'm trying to phrase the question frankly, apologies if it doesn't come out right.

 

I know young people leaving rural areas for the "city" is an issue, and really it has probably always been an issue. I would guess there is often great consternation regarding this, but do the parents and the other residents tend to get exasperated with the young people themselves for leaving, or do they blame the urban area for drawing them?

 

I'm just curious, perhaps that kind of thing isn't really discussed.

You're asking about the present, and I have a data point from 70 years ago. My mom grew up in an impoverished farming family in southern Indiana, looked down on by the folks in town as they were thirty minutes from the nearest paved road, and she absolutely could not wait to move from there to the "big city" of Indianapolis, three hours by car and a world away, once she graduated from high school. The pejorative she heard before and after she moved, which she was eternally embittered about, was that "Shirley always was big feeling'ed" - I guess some combination of egotistical and not knowing her place. They could have been more charitable and said she had gumption or spunk, or tried the fifty-cent word "ambitious".

 

I bet it's not very different there now, but I don't know for sure. My sense of the place, which I loved visiting as a child, is that it doesn't change very fast.

[biggentleben]

 

Was it in Pollan's first book, where he interviewed that farmer that uses chickens to eat cow dung, and moves his animals around, and whatnot, where he basically said a big problem in rural areas is that the smartest children move on, and that parents want that?

 

I mean, that's got to create some serious issues.....if true.

 

Parents want their children to do the best they can. If that is the farm, then great. However, I think the realization is that for many, the opportunity is simply not present in the rural community to make best use of high-end skill sets.

[biggentleben]

 

You're asking about the present, and the only data point I can offer is 70 years ago. My mom grew up on an impoverished farm in southern Indiana, looked down on by the folks in town as they were thirty minutes from the nearest paved road, and she absolutely could not wait to move from there to the "big city" of Indianapolis, three hours by car and a world away, once she graduated from high school. The pejorative she heard before and after she moved, which she was eternally embittered about, was "big feeling'ed" - I guess some combination of egotism and not knowing her place. They could have been more charitable and said she had gumption or spunk, or tried the fifty-cent word "ambitious".

 

I bet it's not very different there now, but I don't know for sure.

 

I told people in high school that I had no desire to attend college in South Dakota as I wanted an elite education if I could find a way to make it affordable. Once football became something that could write my ticket, I definitely had that opportunity. No one ever once challenged that idea to me.

 

My younger brother was actually challenged by my parents to do his grad school work intentionally out of state when he was considering going in state because they felt there were going to be better schools for him out of the state.

 

I think there are different ideas from different people, but in large part, most rural communities are tremendously supportive of their youth seeking their dreams.

 

Lo and behold, I'm back in the area I grew up in, and very pleased to be here, but I certainly don't get on any of the high schoolers at church that are considering colleges out of the state.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Assuming she goes on to a 6 point win or better, it better hit close to 100% at some point before the election or else there is something wrong with Nate's algorithms. A wek in advance, there is hardly scope for a new Black Swan event, and it will be down to sampling error, which his aggregation methods are meant to reduce to a percent or so.

I thought of this response randomly today and realized I never responded.

 

FiveThirtyEight's prediction model doesn't really work that way. It's a simulation of (I believe) 1,000 elections so the number will never hit 100% or anything approaching that number unless Clinton has a 20+ point lead.

 

Part of the reason for that is the system uses a t-distribution model, which naturally leaves more wiggle room for less likely outcomes (but outcomes that are still feasible).

 

For example, polling can be off 3-4% on a pretty regular basis. Unexpected voter swings at the last minute can account for 3-4% of a voting change. In total, maybe there is a 9%-ish possible swing in the overall electorate.

 

Neither of those situations are likely. Both of those situations happening simultaneously are unlikely. Both of those situations happening simultaneously and being in favor of one candidate are super-duper unlikely.

 

But it's still feasible that it could happen. So even if Clinton has a, say, 8% lead in the aggregate polls, there's still a small, maybe 2-3%, chance of those events completely skewing the election and Trump wins.

 

I seem to remember reading that Silver said even if Clinton had a ~11-12% poll lead, she'd still only hit 97-98% in the prediction algorithm.

 

So it's not really a prediction algorithm so much as it's a "most likely outcome" algorithm.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Was it in Pollan's first book, where he interviewed that farmer that uses chickens to eat cow dung, and moves his animals around, and whatnot, where he basically said a big problem in rural areas is that the smartest children move on, and that parents want that?

 

I mean, that's got to create some serious issues.....if true.

 

It is true.  Now many people stay or move to those towns too.  There still have to be schools and hospitals and all of that.  The problem is that those infrastructures are slowly crumbling as communities lose jobs and spending power wanes.  

 

I have bounced around a lot, including moving not far from where I grew up for a few years and it was really interesting to see my Chicago-native wife try to adjust to the wide open rural spaces.  The disconnect is real.  And it's a real problem.

[Craig Arko]

John Oliver on our 3rd party hopefuls...

 

[nicksaviking]

 

John Oliver on our 3rd party hopefuls...

 

 

I think it just goes to show that most sane and humble people have no interest in the job.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

It is true.  Now many people stay or move to those towns too.  There still have to be schools and hospitals and all of that.  The problem is that those infrastructures are slowly crumbling as communities lose jobs and spending power wanes.

Ironically, hospitals are one of the only industries that do well in many rural areas as the population gets older and government assistance pays for much of the hospital care.

 

But, yeah, overall I completely agree with you. Where my parents grew up in the UP had money pouring out its ears in the 40s and 50s. Great schools, great town, plenty of cash from the iron ore mines in a post WWII boom.

 

When I was unemployed after the crash, I stayed up there for 6-9 months. I talked to many of these people and the things they'd say were horrifying (ignoring the blatant racism and ignorance stuff, which was also horrifying). Some of the crap I heard just filled me with despair.

 

There used to be a small Coleman manufacturing facility in the town. That closed some time ago. AFAIK, there's just one business in town that employs more than 30 people. All the mines closed, the last one in the 70s.

 

And, to a person, almost everyone there blames the government. The mines closed due to regulation and difficulty extracting the ore. Today there are new processes to extract difficult ore but it's expensive to build a mine under current regulations so I believe there's only one ore mine operating in the entire UP right now. Another reason to blame the government. The only industry that pays reasonably well is the lumber industry, which is under constant attack from liberals. Again, the government is ruining these peoples' lives. Michigan has oppressive tax law, one of the worst in the country. They could get away with it for years because of the auto industry but how did that ever help the UP? They have nothing to do with the auto industry. So, it's not only the feds that are screwing them, it's those idiots in Lansing, too.

 

It's not hard to spot a trend here. Everything in that region is in decay and has been for 3-4 generations. They clearly know who to "blame" for their issues, which is a big reason why the GOP platform sounds so appealing to them.

[TheLeviathan]

 

It's not hard to spot a trend here. Everything in that region is in decay and has been for 3-4 generations. They clearly know who to "blame" for their issues, which is a big reason why the GOP platform sounds so appealing to them.

 

To me the explanation is simple.  Who would you rather throw your lot in with?  The group that doesn't care but at least doesn't openly hate you or the group that openly hates and despises you and runs on platforms that will directly impact your life for the worse (but might rarely make it better)?

 

The left mocks, ridicules, and ignores an entire class of people for various reason.  And those people mock, ridicule, and ignore the plights of other entire classes of people for various reasons.  Is it really any wonder we have such a disconnect?

[PseudoSABR]

Schilling will run for Warren's Senate seat.

[Craig Arko]

Schilling will run for Warren's Senate seat.

He could use some humiliation.