(November 10th, 2016, 20:26)greenline Wrote:His work has always been probability-based, and based on other people's work (he doesn't do polling of his own). If he's given low-quality information (lack of polls, high numbers of undecided/third-party voters, possibly pollsters not wanting to challenge the consensus), he can't do much but express how much uncertainty there is in the polls, especially as the race tightened in the final week.(November 10th, 2016, 00:29)Cheater Hater Wrote: Because Nate Silver didn't flounder--he was the only major predictor to even think that Trump could win (even explicitly giving the "win while losing the popular vote" case for Trump a 10% chance).
I wasn't comparing Nate to other prediction services, but to his past election predictions; there's a huge disparity there.
|
Politics Discussion Thread (Heated Arguing Warning)
|
(November 9th, 2016, 06:55)Nicolae Carpathia Wrote: on one hand (white) americans should be reassured that they wont cut medicare and social security, on the other hand trump isnt going to raise taxes on the wealthy to pay for any of his spending Was anyone? I don't think a single candidate had any practical plan for cutting the federal deficit. Hillary was riding her community college/Obamacare++ horse and sort-of-but-not-really-tax-Wall-St plan (peanuts compared to Bernie FWIW), and neither of those would have gotten through Congress anyway. So that would leave a budget that would get eaten up even faster with the bottomless pit that is medicare and now ISIS fighting money being spent on the Air Force's ridiculous new fighter planes that will never once engage another plane in combat. On the other side you have the Republicans talking about healthcare 'reform' which would inevitably get mangled beyond belief from whoever's original idea it was. I don't think Trump even had plans for what he was going to replace Obamacare with before winning office, but it's probably assured to be just as terrible. And all the hawks are going to demand more money for their forever wars in the middle east and to get in a publicity contest with Putin over. Tax cuts will just make the problem worse. Maybe someone should try resurrecting Ross Perot right about now 
(November 10th, 2016, 23:37)Bobchillingworth Wrote: He'd have to be dead first!Take *that*, statistics for manic-depressive lifespans! In lighter news, is Trump our first hypomanic president since Teddy Roosevelt?
If only you and me and dead people know hex, then only deaf people know hex.
I write RPG adventures, and blog about it, check it out.
With regards the primaries instead of 3 votes with weighting as suggested why not do what they did with the london mayor elections (but advanced a bit further) essentially instant run off voting. Also have all the primary votes on 1 day rather than spread like they are currently
November 11th, 2016, 10:07
(This post was last modified: November 11th, 2016, 10:08 by T-hawk.)
 (November 10th, 2016, 20:57)Cheater Hater Wrote: Was anyone? I don't think a single candidate had any practical plan for cutting the federal deficit. John Kasich had already done it in Ohio. A quick google found this for his federal plan: http://crfb.org/blogs/how-would-governor...e-deficits (November 10th, 2016, 21:35)greenline Wrote: And if all goes as it should, there'll be a sequel: Chelsea vs Ivanka, 2024 Well, the trendy projection at the moment is Michelle Obama, 2020... |
