|
ocrumsprug posted:I imagine that some day Canadians will realize that the POTUS doesn't make or ratify treaties. It's the Canadian translation of: "Quick, buy mor guns afore Obummer 'n Hillary kin take 'em away!"
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 22:20 |
|
|
It's heartening to see that only 30 years after Reagan we have a second chance for an addle-brained actor to end the western world. Maybe he'll pull it off this time guys.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:It's heartening to see that only 30 years after Reagan we have a second chance for an addle-brained actor to end the western world. The more I read about mainland Chinese politics the more I think Trump will fit right in.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 19:04
|
|
|
Trump is way too bombastic for mainland Chinese politics.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 19:04
|
|
|
peter banana posted:Another Barrie goon? Hah, I wish. I'm almost equidistant between Toronto and London, where I get all of the racism and rural livin' of London, but without any remotely urban feel of Toronto (I assume it's being absorbed by Hamilton).
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 19:06
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:It's heartening to see that only 30 years after Reagan we have a second chance for an addle-brained actor to end the western world. But enough about PM Selfie
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 19:12
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:It's heartening to see that only 30 years after Reagan we have a second chance for an addle-brained actor to end the western world. Look at this low-energy poster. Sad! 
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 19:18
|
|
|
Infernal Machines is a mess! Loser!
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
PT6A posted:It means "who the gently caress knows what he's going to do." Trump will do whatever is best for himself. That is a truth as absolute as any empirical fact.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
peter banana posted:Trump will do whatever is best for himself. That is a truth as absolute as any empirical fact. Not exactly. He will do whatever he thinks is best for himself, which is not the same thing as doing what's actually best for himself.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
Trump is a completely unpredictable figure for a lot of reasons -- both because he's a born liar and hype man, and also because it's hard to know what his relationship with Congress would look like. I actually think his administration might play out a bit like Rob Ford's mayoralty did. If you remember, Ford's initial victory was so shocking that a lot of city Councillors were very supportive of his agenda at first. It's hard to imagine now but originally Rob and Doug Ford were actually passing out score cards which instructed their council allies on exactly how to vote on each measure put in front of them for the day. But over time the Ford brothers' aggressive and bombastic style started to wear on people's patience and eventually Doug Ford tried to throw away 10 years of planning between three levels of government so that he could hatch this hair brained scheme to build the world's biggest ferris wheel and mega mall on a strip of land that was supposed to be developed into a full-scale new community neighborhood. That pissed people off so much that they stopped voting in-line with the Fords and after that the Ford agenda never really recovered and the mayor and his brother became total outcasts unable to pursue most of their objectives. I could imagine Trump similarly coming in very strong and bending the GOP to his will at first, but then eventually prompting a backlash in which even members of his own party might turn on him. The biggest question about Trump might not be "what will he do if he wins?" but rather "what does Trump tell us about the GOP?" Specifically, it's not clear what the GOP's stance on trade will be going forward. It's possible we're seeing a reorientation of the US political spectrum in which the GOP becomes the anti-globalization party. It's not necessarily a winning position at the national level but there's a very large body of angry whites who see globalization as directly linked to their own economic decline. Obviously the Ted Cruz' and John Kasich's of the party are going to try and take back the party from Trump's supporters but at this point it isn't clear they'll succeed. Dreylad posted:Most of Canada's visible problems are regional, and while various parts of the country teeter on financial oblivion there hasn't yet been any impact on Canadian quality of life. The slow retreat of social welfare institutions has been gradual enough that I think most people my age and younger are just used to them. My grade school experience was one where our teachers were constantly rationing supplies -- not that we were deprived in any real way, just that there was a sense that there was less and less materials, craft supply, whatever available each year. While regionalism is a major factor I think that the move away from traditional small towns or cities and toward suburbs is actually a more significant factor here. The suburb is the ultimate geographical expression of the neoliberal 'there is no such thing as society, only people and their families' ethos that has been so prevalent for the last 40 years.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
I actually sort of admired the Zodiac Killer's principled refusal to endorse the small-handed, angry little oompa-loompa. So that's another reason to hate Trump: he made me feel something other than utter revulsion toward one of the worst human beings imaginable. I don't know what it says about the Republican party when, indeed, that guy is the only one who didn't capitulate to Trump like a little bitch. If only his political stances weren't completely reprehensible, he's the sort of guy I could really support.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 21:17
|
|
|
Ted Cruz is still the best word filter.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 21:18
|
|
|
McGavin posted:Ted Cruz is still the best word filter. I don't even leave it to chance, I just type Zodiac Killer to begin with. I still can't believe he referred to spanking his kids multiple times while on the campaign trail. I think there's something very wrong with him, he's creepy beyond normal levels of creepy. I would not be surprised to discover he kills prostitutes in his spare time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 21:20
|
|
|
PT6A posted:I actually sort of admired the Zodiac Killer's principled refusal to endorse the small-handed, angry little oompa-loompa. So that's another reason to hate Trump: he made me feel something other than utter revulsion toward one of the worst human beings imaginable. I don't think it's particularly principled. He's anticipating a Trump blowout and wants to position himself to run in 2020. The real question is what kind of lies he had to tell to let them get on that stage in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 21:25
|
|
|
Also, there's never a bad time to post this video.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
Helsing posted:While regionalism is a major factor I think that the move away from traditional small towns or cities and toward suburbs is actually a more significant factor here. The suburb is the ultimate geographical expression of the neoliberal 'there is no such thing as society, only people and their families' ethos that has been so prevalent for the last 40 years. I'd also probably expand that the move from small towns > cities/suburbs has also insulated or time-delayed some of the economic consequences of current/recent political decisions in the larger population centres. The small towns have been hosed, economically (depending on the industry, forestry I'm looking at you in particular) and demographically, but their ability to effect political action was either too small to begin with or now no longer exists in any meaningful capacity. Meanwhile, you've had an expansion in suburban and urban living and in general the fortunes of those that escaped small town decline have risen, comparatively from what they were fleeing from, even if on the whole we'd argue that things are precarious.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 21:27
|
|
|
PT6A posted:I still can't believe he referred to spanking his kids multiple times while on the campaign trail. I think there's something very wrong with him, he's creepy beyond normal levels of creepy. I would not be surprised to discover he kills prostitutes in his spare time. I think that's a really weird thing to call out about Cruz. A huge number of people are still ok with spanking their kids. That number is dwindling but it's not exactly outside of the mainstream.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 21:48
|
|
|
CLAM DOWN posted:Trump is way too bombastic for mainland Chinese politics. Maybe. It could just be a matter of time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qikBsQ1h4S8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GIj2BVJS2A
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 21:49
|
|
|
Cruz is incredibly Harperesque. They came from the same batch of Conservadroids.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
Hexigrammus posted:Maybe. It could just be a matter of time. Reporter: *A bunch of legitemate questions" Chinese dude:  
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 22:00
|
|
|
Cruz is in perfect position to dismantle all the good that the Democrats have actually done and will do for America in the past 8 and next 4 years. All of North America and our leaders are objectively poo poo still tho
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
Jordan7hm posted:I think that's a really weird thing to call out about Cruz. A huge number of people are still ok with spanking their kids. That number is dwindling but it's not exactly outside of the mainstream. It's not odd that he does it, even if it's increasingly frowned upon; it's weird that he's seemingly so enthusiastic about it that he referred to spanking his own child in one speech, and the possibility of spanking another child in a different speech. That's not normal.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
Helsing posted:The biggest question about Trump might not be "what will he do if he wins?" but rather "what does Trump tell us about the GOP?" Specifically, it's not clear what the GOP's stance on trade will be going forward. It's possible we're seeing a reorientation of the US political spectrum in which the GOP becomes the anti-globalization party. It's not necessarily a winning position at the national level but there's a very large body of angry whites who see globalization as directly linked to their own economic decline. And it won't matter because by then the base will be all whipped up into a fury by the latest terror threat or war of choice, or whatever. Juul-Whip fucked around with this message at 23:49 on Jul 21, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 23:44
|
|
|
look you stupid loving innumerate gender studies majors, trump has no loving chance so shut uppppp http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/ i went through this for a whole loving year leading up to 2012 telling people romney had no loving chance thanks to 538. stop giving political pundits and 'journalists' goddamn time of day
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 23:50
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbKkjm-gheY shut uppppppp about turmp
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 23:51
|
|
|
namaste faggots posted:look you stupid loving innumerate gender studies majors, trump has no loving chance so shut uppppp Depends on voter turnout. Trump's tactics are going to get his base out to vote in force. If those who oppose him are equally energized to stop him, then he'll get clobbered; however, if they don't take him seriously, many of them may stay home or vote third-party, which could very well hand him the Presidency.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2016 23:56
|
|
|
Helsing posted:Doug Ford tried to throw away 10 years of planning between three levels of government so that he could hatch this hair brained scheme to build the world's biggest ferris wheel and mega mall on a strip of land that was supposed to be developed into a full-scale new community neighborhood. This unintentional pun would have been better applied to Trump. On that note, are we really worried about Donald Trump repealing NAFTA? That's one of the least bad crazy promises he has made. Is anyone here besides Harperbot 9000 that eager to preserve whatever benefits NAFTA is supposed to have brought us?
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 00:21
|
|
|
The person who will have to energize the populace against Trump is Hillary loving Clinton. This is the American voting public we're talking about. Donald Trump will he the next President of the United States of America.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 00:22
|
|
|
If the UK can vote Leave, the US can certainly elect Trump to the presidency. Nothing is ever too stupid for the Anglophone countries.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 00:25
|
|
|
namaste faggots posted:look you stupid loving innumerate gender studies majors, trump has no loving chance so shut uppppp 60/40? Clinton is AQ and Trump is KJ all in preflop with billions in the pot. I'd watch that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
PT6A posted:If the UK can vote Leave, the US can certainly elect Trump to the presidency. Nothing is ever too stupid for the Anglophone countries. you are loving retarded shut up
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
namaste faggots posted:you are loving retarded shut up Man, havin a baby dicks rough on people.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 00:32
|
|
|
namaste faggots posted:look you stupid loving innumerate gender studies majors, trump has no loving chance so shut uppppp I guess you missed the GOP primary that just ended where Nate Silver morphed into exactly the sort of pundit he mocked in 2012 and made similarly embarrassing predictions about how Trump could never win.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 00:33
|
|
|
EvilJoven posted:The person who will have to energize the populace against Trump is Hillary loving Clinton. All the premature victory dances aren't helping. Someone posted some stills of Trump waving at the convention and was like like "Look! He's heiling! Like Hitler! Nobody'll vote for him now! Clinton victory is assured!"
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 00:35
|
|
|
Helsing posted:I guess you missed the GOP primary that just ended where Nate Silver morphed into exactly the sort of pundit he mocked in 2012 and made similarly embarrassing predictions about how Trump could never win. drat well i guess that's what you get when you ignore gut feelings, innuendo, rumours, pundits and guess work. man gently caress math that poo poo is wrong!!!!!!!!!
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 00:37
|
|
|
quote:But why didn’t we build a model for the nomination process? My thinking was this: Statistical models work well when you have a lot of data, and when the system you’re studying has a relatively low level of structural complexity. The presidential nomination process fails on both counts. On the data side, the current nomination process dates back only to 1972, and the data availability is spotty, especially in the early years. Meanwhile, the nomination process is among the most complex systems that I’ve studied. Nomination races usually have multiple candidates; some simplifying assumptions you can make in head-to-head races don’t work very well in those cases. Also, the primaries are held sequentially, so what happens in one state can affect all the later ones. (Howard Dean didn’t even come close to defeating John Kerry in 2004, for example, finishing with barely more than 100 delegates to Kerry’s roughly 2,700, but if Dean had held on to win Iowa, he might have become the nominee.) To make matters worse, the delegate rules themselves are complicated, especially on the GOP side, and they can change quite a bit from year to year. The primaries may literally be chaotic, in the sense that chaos theory is defined. Under these conditions, any model is going to be highly sensitive to its assumptions — both in terms of which variables are chosen and how the model is parameterized. looks like you didn't read it either or is this passage to mathy 4 u
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 00:41
|
|
|
namaste faggots posted:drat well i guess that's what you get when you ignore gut feelings, innuendo, rumours, pundits and guess work. man gently caress math that poo poo is wrong!!!!!!!!! You understand that polls are based on how past trends and existing demographics are interpreted and are actually a branch of social science and mathematics, right?
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 00:41
|
|
|
oh yes ~sOcIaL sCiEnCe~**
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 00:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 22:20 |
|
|
namaste faggots posted:looks like you didn't read it either or is this passage to mathy 4 u This kind of reserve is why Silver previously hedged his bets and didn't make arrogant pronouncements before there was available data. And then being the latest elections wunderkid when to his head and he made some embarassing declarations about how Trump would never be nominated. His explanation of why the primaries are so hard to predict doesn't vindicate him it just makes him look dumber in the first place because he should have known better and actually got famous for supposedly being above that kind of behaviour.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2016 00:44
|
|