La-La-La-La! Lo-Lo-Lo-Lo!

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 18 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #24063
    LurkingGrendel
    Participant

    That’s the Fat Lady. She’s just about done warming up and is ready to take the stage.

    Largely due to his own moronic words and actions, (which that nefarious “media” continues to report word for word. How unfair! Sad!) Drumpf has been getting shellacked in a spate of polling over the last several weeks. Clinton’s national leas are anywhere between four and twelve points with the Real Clear Politics average shows Hillary up 6.4.

    That’s an almost comical margin which portends apocalyptic results for The GOP.

    The aggregate polling among the battle ground states also shows Hillary with leads ranging from narrow to commanding; with several “must win” states for Drumpf clearly out of reach for the small handed, serial laying, narcissistic, bigoted and bellicose faux billionaire. The only bright light I could find for that clod was a statistical tie in Ohio; and that only due to the presence of both Gary Johnson and Jill Stein on the ballot. Regardless, Hillary can lose Ohio and still comfortably pass the 270 mark through a variety of scenarios. Drumpf, not so much.

    Then there’s this: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/poll-who-is-winning-2016-229886

    That’s Hillary +12. That’s right. Twelve.

    Trump: The L Word. (Note: not the same thing as the Showtime series of the same title.)

    #24064
    Langston
    Participant

    The Onion is reporting that Trump is already planning first 100 days of not conceding election.

    #24066

    Hillary is not up by 12.

    Put your money down now if you think she’s going to win by 12.

    #24067
    Amus
    Participant

    #24068
    Andy Brown
    Participant

    What concerns me is

    1. drumpf in the campaign calling for violence against protesters at his rallies
    2. drumpf in the campaign calling for foreign operatives to hack U.S. data
    3. drumpf’s minions (the hard core ones, the 23%’rs –
    whatever the actual percentage it’s too high) that seem to be prepared to go into battle at the drop of a hat whom he is now convincing that the election process is ‘rigged’
    4. drumpf’s distaste for being a ‘loser’ and his general unpredictability

    On the good side, the fact that recent revelations about drumpf’s predatory treatment of women has caused many Republican women to see how irresponsible their parties leadership has become and how out of control their nomination process has become. Hillary would have had a steeper climb had the GOP nominated almost anyone else that was running. As it is, many GOP voters are going to stay home and that bodes well for Democratic takeover of the Senate and a chance to even up the House if not take the majority there, too.

    You know, when the senate goes back to being Democratic, Bernie becomes Senate Finance Committee Chair.

    https://www.thenation.com/article/paul-ryan-inadvertently-makes-the-best-case-for-a-democratic-senate-budget-chair-bernie-sanders/

    The House has long looked like impossible to flip because gerrymandering has given Republicans a fortress of extraordinarily safe seats. (In 2012, for instance, Democratic House candidates won 1.7 million more votes than their Republican foes — and still ended up with 33 fewer members of the House.) Democrats need to win 30 Republican-held seats to flip the House, and are widely expected to nab closer to 15.

    If the Democratic presidential nominee wins a House district, the Democratic congressional candidate also probably wins that House seat.

    This is not an ironclad rule, but it’s a pretty good indicator — in 2012, only 6 percent of districts that voted for Barack Obama voted a Republican into the House.

    A 6-point Clinton win could put the House in play. That kind of national victory would likely mean 50 House districts currently controlled by Republicans would vote for Clinton — therefore suggesting they have a good shot of also going blue at the House level.

    Of course, a Clinton win in these 50 districts wouldn’t guarantee House Democrats will pick up all of those seats. (Many are held by powerful or longstanding Republican incumbents who are well-funded and enjoy good reputations at home.) But it does mean that Democrats could lose 40 percent of the House races in districts won by Clinton and still take back control of the House.

    http://www.vox.com/2016/10/8/13211858/house-math-trump

    #24070
    LurkingGrendel
    Participant

    “Hillary is not up by 12”, belches out Pope Bacon, in defiance of objective reality.

    Did you bother reading the article that was linked and is in fact from which I cited?

    In the latest Monmouth University poll national poll, released today, Hillary Clinton is +12.

    So, you’re (yet again) provably wrong.

    And did I, or anyone for that matter, suggest that would be the actual margin of victory?

    A: No.

    Do you work as hard as it appears at being a complete dipshit or is it a natural skill?

    #24073
    Andy Brown
    Participant

    People who are morally corrupt, economically stupid, socially repugnant and politically disenfranchised like Bacon do not need to read. They know everything automatically. The unbound and limitless hate he has within his tiny brain needs to be let out. Reading and most definitely comprehending what others write only gets in the way.

    #24075
    edselehr
    Participant

    Unless voter turnout does some bizarro crazy flippy thing, Hillary Clinton will be our next president. It would be nice if the right would face up to this, and start thinking about living in a world of Madam President and her First Gentleman. Yes, yes…there are probably lots of jokes to be made about calling Bill “gentleman”. (And if you want to keep dreaming about your magical Trump win this November, go ahead, but keep it to yourself. If he actually pulls it off, you’ll have four years to rub our noses in it.)

    What I’m thinking about is how we move forward as a nation. Trump will go away (or not, whatever) and government will move forward in it usual dysfunctional way. But what about us – the people? What about Trump supporters and non-Trump supporters, and how they move forward together? In the end, we as a nation cannot remain divided like this if we really want to deal with the problems we face. I don’t think this is too dissimilar to the reunification of the North and South after the Civil War. It will be hard – damn hard – but we have to do it.

    I recommend this really good Cracked article for any non-Trump supporter who wants to begin to understand the mindset of those who still support The Donald.

    #24079
    LurkingGrendel
    Participant

    It was an interesting read. Thank you for sharing.

    I was already aware of how population density affects voting patterns, generally speaking any city with a population greater than a quarter of a million people will tilt blue, (that’s the historical pattern and has only accelerated during the last four presidential cycles) but the added rural mindset context was interesting. Not at all surprising or in my opinion particularly insightful, but interesting.

    Upon finishing the article, a joke told by Patton Oswalt came to mind:

    “You’ve got to respect everyone’s beliefs”. No-you-don’t! That’s what gets us into trouble. Look, you have to acknowledge everyone’s beliefs, and then you have to reserve the right to go “That is fucking stupid. Are you kidding me”? I acknowledge that you believe that, that’s great, but I’m not going to respect it. I have an uncle that believes he saw Sasquatch. We do not believe him, nor do we respect him.

    That’s how I feel about a wide swath of humanity in general and in specific a significant majority of self-described Republicans.

    While the socioeconomic challenges that beset many of the communities of rural American are undeniably real and worth both our attention and our empathy, I’m not going to sit idly by and without challenge allow both the merely ignorant and the abjectly stupid to inarticulately and irrationally ascribe venomous blame to the “other” while simultaneously sneering at objectively true and fact based analysis that happens to run contrary to their belief based ideology. If there’s a real political “war” being fought right now, it’s not Democrat vs. Republican. It’s smart vs. stupid.

    One does not, should not, “tolerate” isms any other noxious ills. They require challenge.

    That’s a dynamic that’s inarguably both present and actively enflamed by The Republican Party over the past several decades and that has now metastasized in the candidacy of Donald Trump. In my opinion the author is giving far too free a pass, there.

    I.e. Not all Republican are racist, but all racists are Republican.

    If you support Donald Trump and are not a racist or bigot, etc. you’re still perfectly ok with sharing the same tent and airspace with those whom are. This is a party that (again, inarguably and easily factually supportable) has a disturbing thread of racism, bigotry, and xenophobia along with a twisted form of evangelical Christianity that’s coupled with a vigorous (and insane) anti-science and anti-knowledge agenda. It’s a whole lot of not good. It can’t be excused no matter the (very real) extenuating circumstances or challenges that may be present in some of our communities. Oh, I understand the angst and acknowledge you believe it’s due to the things you claim. I simply do not respect it.

    Have factors such as tax policy, trade policy, and the globalization of business had an adverse effect on many industries and/or communities that are (predominately) in smaller municipalities and more rural areas? Inarguably. Yet, those policies have been initiated as much if not more so by Republicans elected to national office than their Democratic counterparts. More specifically, Republicans oppose minimum wage increases, actively attack and attempt to dismantle unions and any and all worker protections, continue to push for tax decreases that impact only the very wealthy while leaving everyone else largely unaffected, continue to push for further deregulation including consumer protections, environmental protections, etc. and the like, and have for multiple decades pursed a macroeconomic objective which in no way, shape, or form would benefit the rural, base voters whom they’ve actively courted for decades via the cynical utilization of divisive social issues.

    And, it’s *never* going back to “the way it was”. (Which is of course the basic, underscored messaging to everything going on in the GOP today.) Claiming or wishing otherwise is both an exercise in futility as well as being extraordinarily naive; bordering on criminal ignorant to the point of becoming a danger to yourself and others. We see that dynamic at work today during the current election.

    On one hand, we have Donald Trump screaming about how everything is awful, how it’s entirely the fault of others, and how via waving a magical wand he’ll restore manufacturing and great paying, middle class jobs to wide swaths of rural American. (Spoiler: Even if he were elected, there’s a 0.0% chance of that occurring.) On the other hand, we have Hillary Clinton attempting to (gingerly) address the very real concerns of those voters by stressing that continuing education, the development of new industries and new technologies, etc. can over time help restore prosperity to some of those communities and give individuals a chance to advance. It’s not a particularly sexy message; but its reality based. Because, again, it’s never going back to the way it was. It’s a fallacy. I.e. Republican candidates are, yet again, lying to Republican voters.

    Yet this is the fault of “liberals”? This is the fault of informed experts? I could give innumerable examples of (governmental) Democratic outreach to our colleague across the aisle that have been uniformly rejected without any real consideration. President Obama offered compromise after compromise, time and again, only to have it thrown back in his face. In some cases he went as far as to actually adopt/include proposals that had been Republican ideas/policy proposals, which once he adopted Republicans then immediately decried and rebuke.

    The Republicans decided some time ago as a party the path to more power was best achieved by doing everything in their power to reduce the effectiveness of government, and then run for office claiming that “government doesn’t work”. Cynical doesn’t even begin to describe this. It’s a disservice to the American people, including and perhaps most specifically those of rural America, and until at such time there’s an acceptance of their culpability in the process they’re doomed to endlessly repeat the cycle. Demonstrably, the Republican Party could not give two shits about “the people”. They’re the party of big business, special interests, and a bellicose (and moronic) foreign policy that only benefits the military-industrial complex and its attendant industries.

    “Washington” is not broken. One of our two major political parties is broken.

    As the author shared, “Blue island in an ocean of red. The cities are less than 4 percent of the land mass, but 62 percent of the population and easily 99 percent of the popular culture. Our movies, shows, songs, and news all radiate out from those blue islands. And if you live in the red, that fucking sucks”.

    Well, kind of. Or, one could argue that’s how representative Democracy works. Or, one could suggest that the part of personal accountability actually begin to take some (for a change) and quit demonizing literally *everyone* they view as not of their kind. You can’t reason with the unreasonable.

    Broadly speaking, meet a “liberal” or a “Democrat” halfway on any number of issues and you’ll encounter an outreached hand. I believe in compromise. Our government was designed to function on that principle. Today we have an entire group of people (The GOP base/Trump supporters, etc.) who actively eschew the very foundation upon which the U.S. Constitution is drafted.

    Until THAT changes…good luck rural America. I’ll be pulling for you….and I and others will be happy to lend a hand and meet you halfway on any number of issues when you quit being fucking idiots and acting completely and totally fucking insane.

    #24085
    Andy Brown
    Participant

    I felt the article offered nothing new. It’s obvious they can’t keep new generations on hand to help run the farm but that’s always been the case since after WWII. As far as the manufacturing towns gone south, it doesn’t have to be a disaster. It just takes time and good state leadership. Allentown and Bethlehem didn’t die when Beth Steel left. The problem is both political and scientific. Urban growth is not random. Cities have grown the same way since the industrial revolution. Politicians have been corrupted by money and power since long before this years election. The reason that many rural communities are hurting these days is that the very same conservative Republicans that the rural vote puts into office has spun these voters around and effed them right in the ass.

    The bottom line is easy. The GOP and drumpf (two different items any more) both are saying how bad a shape this country is in and blah blah blah. Well, the GOP has controlled both houses of Congress for a while and never passed a jobs bill. That’s just one item. They whined and moaned about the ACA but it took them 8 years to formulate an alternative albeit a very bad one. Republicans have sided with big business for so long they are all owned by it both personally and as a party. Republicans won’t pass legislation to do anything. They are do nothing politicians. It appears that drumpf’s excuse for a campaign may result in a long term rebuilding project for the Republicans. They have few players that can defend the actions (actually lack of actions) of the party this year in allowing drumpf to be nominated. This election is like putting dorque in the ring against Muhammad Ali.

    It becomes weary to have to constantly discuss complex issues on this board when total buffoons like Bacon and dorque are allowed to participate. Without being elitist, I do believe the discussions this year could have been a lot more productive if the board as a whole did not have to constantly deal with the aberrant unsubstantiated views of two lunatics that won’t (and can’t) do research, can not parse complex issues into fundamental topics, can not make a cogent argument for or against anything and are totally driven by media accounts they never check the accuracy of. But hey, they are both lemons and I don’t mind making lemonade out of them. We have definitely put Bacon in his place (lower then squid ink) just by pointing out his mistakes. It would have been a lot harder if he had any brains to work with.

    #24105
    duxrule
    Participant

    It’s down to less than 10% for Il Donald, according to this expert from Microsoft.

    Microsoft predictions expert: Clinton has a 91% chance of winning and Cubs will win World Series

    Hillary Clinton has a 91 percent chance to the win presidency, according to Microsoft Research economist David Rothschild, higher odds than any candidate received in the previous three presidential elections under his forecasting model.

    Rothschild spoke at the Seattle Interactive Conference Tuesday, and he opened his talk with this simple declaration: “Hillary Clinton is likely to be the next president of the United States.” Rothschild, adorned in a red bowtie and a pair of yellow pants that I am heading out to buy as soon as I post this story, discussed issues with polling, details about his forecasting models and a number of other topics.

    Rothschild, who joined Microsoft in 2012, correctly picked all but one state from the 2012 presidential election as well as an average of 20 of 24 Oscars from 2013 to 2016, and all 15 knockout games in the 2014 World Cup. His model, called PredictWise, includes a combination of prediction markets, along with polling and online/social media data, and it helps power Bing’s election forecasts.

    http://www.geekwire.com/2016/microsofts-research-guru-hillary-clinton-is-the-next-president-the-cubs-are-world-series-favorites/

    #24106
    Amus
    Participant

    I read an interesting perspective on fivethirtyeight this morning.

    Texas is in play…well sort of but not really.

    Fact is that Hillary’s chances of winning Texas are better than Trump’s chances of winning the presidency.

    http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-clintons-texas-opportunity-and-her-texas-problem/

    #24107
    LurkingGrendel
    Participant

    It’s certainly a positive development; particularly when you take the (demographic) long-view of Texas’s changing electorate.

    The data would suggest we’re still another decade from Texas becoming a real swing state for the Democrats, but it’s coming.

    While Texas’s electoral votes will undoubtedly go to Trump this year, the fact it’s as close as it is simply underscores his incredible toxicity and unsuitability for higher office even among a significant numbers of Republicans.

    H

    #24109
    Alfredo_T
    Participant

    I would submit that the “government is broken” ideology was cribbed from the Libertarian Party and Ayn Rand. When libertarian ideas are taken to their logical extremes, a certain form of private property anarchy is the result. All roads should be toll roads. Jitneys should replace public transit. Anybody should be able to buy any type of firearm anywhere, anyhow, at any time. There should be no FCC. Public schools should be phased out. There should be no governmental control over trade. Socialism and its cousin, Communism, are boogeymen who are waiting just around the corner.

    This world view is rather simplistic, despite the intellectual veneer that many libertarians put on. I think that ultimately, they believe, people will act in a “good” way and that all countries will move to free market principles, with mutual benefit.

    #24110
    Andy Brown
    Participant

    “There should be no FCC.”

    Historical note: When radio broadcasting began there was no FCC. No rules. No regulations. If you had a little station going on in Somewhereville, U.S. and were starting to generate revenue from the local merchants buying ads, the rich guys would put a tower up on the other end of town and put their transmitter on the same frequency and radiate four times or more power as yours and drown you out.

    Attendees of the National Radio Conference in 1925 appealed to the Secretary of Commerce to regulate frequency, power assignments and hours of operation, but the Commerce Department lacked the power to control this new industry. In 1926, Congress, at the request of President Coolidge, passed the Radio Act of 1927 and formed the Federal Radio Commission (FRC). Within months of its formation, the FRC established the standard broadcast band (500-1500kc) and 150 of the existing 732 radio stations were forced to cease operation. As a result of the initiation of proper regulation, the listening public responded to interference free reception of programming by purchasing millions of receivers. Radio flourished during the depression years of the 1930’s. After all, many receivers were already in place before the market crashed, and radio was free. Unfortunately, the FRC became the victim of the very industry it regulated as it passed regulatioons that heavily favored the big and wealthy licensees over the mom and pop pioneers of radio. President Roosevelt used radio extensively in communicating with the public as he faced the ominous task of rebuilding the country’s economy. It was under his direction that Congress passed the Communications Act of 1934, abolishing the FRC and establishing the Federal Communications Commission, to oversee and regulate all electronic forms of communication, including both broadcast and wire. Sadly I must report that the FCC has morphed into a majority party tool of the politicians to continue to advantage the already big and powerful with little to no concessions or help of any kind to small time broadcasting.

    Anyway, not to digress any more then I already have, it appears that tonight is drumpf’s last chance to speak and act presidential (unlikely) and get his campaign back in the race which the NY Times reported this morning is down to an 8% chance of winning the election. Every single reliable electoral analysis web site shows next to no path to victory for the drumpf and a lot of the focus in the most recent articles and op eds is about the imminent GOP loss of Senate control and danger to their House majority as well.

    Have you noticed that there isn’t anyone chiming in with dorque and Bacon this year? No Deane, no Herb, no nobody.

    There is also a lot of service on the internet concerning the viability of the GOP going forward past the drumpf disaster. I for one think that this experience in letting the extremist right wing take over the nomination process has taught the GOP a valuable lesson but whether or not it can get past it is another question for the post drumpf loss time period.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 18 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.