USPOL Sep: Hillary has tuberculosis

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USPOL Sep: Hillary has tuberculosis

BI NOW GAY LATER: Jan 17, 2008; So people stop asking, the "Bi" in my username is a reference to my love for the two greatest collegiate sports programs in the world, the Virginia Tech Hokies and the Marshall Thundering Herd.

FactsAreUseless posted:

Here's a link: http://journalistsresource.org/studies/politics/elections/presidential-debates-effects-research-roundup

I also think that appearance is going to play a bigger role given the gender issues at play in the campaign. Trump wants to contrast his masculine image with Clinton, and physical presence is a big part of that.

That doesn't really prove anything duder; it's A study with some conflicting information and confounding variables.

But sure, go ahead and decide that Trump being taller is going win him the debate. Like even if you want to go along with the idea that visual matters more than anything -- Trump's "visual" in this scene is never really that inspiring. He has lovely posture, bad makeup and hair, and he's really twitchy. The odds of him making a yawn or looking at his watch thing are so much higher than anything Hillary is going to do as to be silly.

BI NOW GAY LATER fucked around with this message at 18:01 on Sep 26, 2016

# ? Sep 26, 2016 17:57

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 3, 2024 18:30

Dead Cosmonaut: Nov 14, 2015; by FactsAreUseless

CascadeBeta posted:

Map it. How does Trump win?

Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida. He absolutely needs to win those states.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 17:58

Tatsuta Age: Apr 21, 2005; so good at being in trouble

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

I lost all faith in the American people when fan-subs became the preferred anime localization scheme.

what the hell

# ? Sep 26, 2016 17:57

Moxie: Aug 2, 2003

BI NOW GAY LATER posted:

Maybe you should work on your empathy?

Sorry, should have specified white sperg guy

# ? Sep 26, 2016 17:58

Majorian: Jul 1, 2009

Harrow posted:

Yeah, I agree. I was just laying out a hypothetical scenario in which "people turn away from Clinton because they listened to Sanders, but won't vote for her when he says to" isn't all that outlandish.

You're right, though--that anti-Clinton sentiment has been around for so long and is so deeply-ingrained that even if Sanders had treated her as a literal angel through the whole primary, some of his supporters would still hate her with the fire of ten thousand suns.

Yeah, it's a lovely situation.

Now, all that said, it's important for the most die-hard Clinton supporters (and particularly those on her team) to not use this fact as an excuse or a crutch. It may not be fair that she's been characterized as untrustworthy over the years, but that doesn't mean that she's had to play into that unfair characterization so directly in a few key instances.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 17:58

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

FactsAreUseless posted:

It absolutely does. I'm not saying Trump will win the ELECTION. Just the debate. I think Clinton is still far more likely to win the election. I don't even think it's a 50/50 coin flip. One of the things about only running against stuff is that it isn't sustainable. Sooner or later, somebody is going to say "Now what?" Long-term, the left wins. But short-term, the right can do some damage. The debate is short-term. But the election is long-term.

The Presidency is long term in the sense both that it last for a few years and also the next President is going to nominate at least two and perhaps three Justices.

The election is in a few weeks. That's short term.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 17:58

call to action: Jun 10, 2016; by FactsAreUseless

I loving love when liberals start lecturing people about LATINOS and how they WILL be Democratic voters without understanding the extremely complicated relationship Latinos have with other Latinos (particularly how they loving hate being all stereotyped as people that would be pissed about a border fence) and their underlying social conservatism (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/06/27/5-facts-about-abortion/)

I worked with a Guatemalan-American dude and all he ever loving did was tell me about how much he hated Mexicans

# ? Sep 26, 2016 17:59

Fitzy Fitz: May 14, 2005

Thinking about the NYT's long-overdue Clinton endorsement from the other day, what are the chances the media drops the horse race stuff as we get closer to election day? By that point they'll have gotten their views, made their money, proved they're super serious objective journalists, etc. and will be able to, in their minds, safely say that they've weighed all the evidence and found Trump lacking. There won't be time left for a Trump pivot. There won't be any new news about emails. We'll have been through all the debates.

I assume most of them don't actually want Trump to win, right?

# ? Sep 26, 2016 17:58

Guy Goodbody: Aug 31, 2016; by Nyc_Tattoo

Bushiz posted:

It's sandwiched between West U and Upper Kirby. It's not as rich as river oaks but you still can't get a house for under half a million.

It's a wealthy neighborhood, but that shopping center just has a lovely a Kroger and a weirdly placed Tuesday Morning. It's not a great shopping Center. The shopping center with a HEB and a Starbucks and all the restaurants is over on Buffalo Speedway

# ? Sep 26, 2016 17:59

FactsAreUseless: Feb 16, 2011

Kilroy posted:

The Presidency is long term in the sense both that it last for a few years and also the next President is going to nominate at least two and perhaps three Justices.

The election is in a few weeks. That's short term.

Well, yes, you can compare any two things and one of them will be shorter-term than the other. I'm saying I think that Trump's strengths will give him a boost in the first debate, but won't be sustainable to the other debates or the election overall, because Trump's strengths are shallow and his weaknesses go really deep.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:00

ImpAtom: May 24, 2007

Fitzy Fitz posted:

I assume most of them don't actually want Trump to win, right?

Who do you think would be better for their business?

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:00

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Tatsuta Age posted:

what the hell

Either learn Kanji and appreciate the wordplay that the author intended or GET OUT. It's pretty simple.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:01

Aves Maria!: Jul 26, 2008; Maybe I'll drown

call to action posted:

I loving love when liberals start lecturing people about LATINOS and how they WILL be Democratic voters without understanding the extremely complicated relationship Latinos have with other Latinos (particularly how they loving hate being all stereotyped as people that would be pissed about a border fence) and their underlying social conservatism (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/06/27/5-facts-about-abortion/)

I worked with a Guatemalan-American dude and all he ever loving did was tell me about how much he hated Mexicans

Latinos vote handily for Dems, duder. Also, that article you linked shows Hispanic Catholics dislike abortion, not that all Hispanics skew socially conservative.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:02

Liquid Communism: Mar 9, 2004; коммунизм хранится в яичках

iospace posted:

Two reasons, really.
1. Same-sex marriage, by and large, seems to have been accepted as a fact of life. Yeah, FRC and NOM are still active, but NOM is in utter shambles right now, and FRC doesn't seem to be focusing on marriage as much as it used to (correct me if I'm wrong)
2. Trump isn't as actively anti-LGBTQ as say Romney, or at least, not as open about it. Yeah there was that bit with Ray Cohn in the past, but Ray Cohn is also a sack of poo poo, so it's a wash.

However, it would be a good line of attack in NC, because of HB2. Also, for single-issue voters, Johnson is known to be somewhat supportive of LGBTQ rights at best, possibly quietly homophobic at worst.

Johnson is a pile of Libertarian poo poo who is still rear end-damaged because even the GOP wouldn't let him privatize the entire state government and make it fully cease to function. He is the literal archetype of the Tea Party's refusal to govern and intent to destroy the very means of governing.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:01

TyrantWD: Nov 6, 2010; Ignore my doomerism, I don't think better things are possible

Fitzy Fitz posted:

Thinking about the NYT's long-overdue Clinton endorsement from the other day, what are the chances the media drops the horse race stuff as we get closer to election day? By that point they'll have gotten their views, made their money, proved they're super serious objective journalists, etc. and will be able to, in their minds, safely say that they've weighed all the evidence and found Trump lacking. There won't be time left for a Trump pivot. There won't be any new news about emails. We'll have been through all the debates.

I assume most of them don't actually want Trump to win, right?

They won't drop the horse race stuff, because it seems like we are in for a horse race now.

I also don't think media companies would mind a Trump presidency as it would probably keep their readers/viewer subscription numbers a lot higher as people try to keep up with the latest Trump craziness.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:02

Paint Crop Pro: Mar 22, 2007; Find someone who values you like Rick Spielman values 7th round picks.

I do not understand Stein supporters at all.

I feel like I have to go full Walter Sobchak.

Stein supporters. gently caress me. Say what you want about the policies of Gary Johnson, Dude, but he has at least held political office beyond being a member of a Town Meeting.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:03

Jazerus: May 24, 2011

ImpAtom posted:

Who do you think would be better for their business?

Prison wages are a lot worse than the pay for the same kind of work outside of prison, guessing the press gulags would be a step below regular prison.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:03

delfin: Dec 5, 2003; SNATTER'S ALIVE?!?!

Moxie posted:

A close win for Clinton, or any scenario that doesn't change the makeup of Congress is a loss for me. Looks like that's what we're headed for now.

We are not headed for any scenario that has even a remote chance of changing the makeup of the House.

The Senate is iffy, but a 50D+VP/50R or 51D/49R Senate is not going to be a huge game changer. It will help the Democrats at least get some nomination processes started but if you think a parade of Republican filibusters and/or conservative Democrat defections won't happen, you're a lot more optimistic than I am.

And that's the good scenarios for this election.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:03

Majorian: Jul 1, 2009

FactsAreUseless posted:

Reasons Trump will win:

1. Broader shoulders.

2. Taller.

3. More vivid hair color.

4. Broader smile.

5. Body language projects strength.

You think a single word on that stage matters? Trump is doing this so that he can be seen on camera next to Clinton.

I think these are all genuine pluses for him, in the mind of the shallow American voter, unfortunately. That said, things like stamina matter a whole lot more in debates. Trump gets tired pretty quickly, and his discipline breaks down shortly thereafter. I have a feeling Clinton's going to be able to bait him pretty ably tonight.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:03

Guy Goodbody: Aug 31, 2016; by Nyc_Tattoo

OxySnake posted:

I do not understand Stein supporters at all.

I feel like I have to go full Walter Sobchak.

Stein supporters. gently caress me. Say what you want about the policies of Gary Johnson, Dude, but he has at least held political office beyond being a member of a Town Meeting.

She's a nice old lady. A little nutty, but she's like your abuela.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:03

Ice Phisherman: Apr 12, 2007; Swimming upstream
into the sunset

Man. I just want to sleep for the next 45 days. Just sleep in. This loving election is driving up my anxiety. I don't think I can even watch the debates. And by coming back here and reading the comments it's like I'll be mainlining pure, 100%, uncut Columbian Arzy fuel.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:03

theflyingorc: Jun 28, 2008; ANY GOOD OPINIONS THIS POSTER CLAIMS TO HAVE ARE JUST PROOF THAT BULLYING WORKS; Young Orc

Dr Christmas posted:

I'm a bit freaked out because it seems the birther fiasco didn't hurt Trump or help Clinton in the polls at all.

It did, but something reversed it.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:03

lozzle: Oct 22, 2012; by zen death robot

ImpAtom posted:

Who do you think would be better for their business?

Probably the one that won't line them up against the wall, but they themselves don't seem to realize this.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:04

Dead Cosmonaut: Nov 14, 2015; by FactsAreUseless

OxySnake posted:

I do not understand Stein supporters at all.

I feel like I have to go full Walter Sobchak.

Stein supporters. gently caress me. Say what you want about the policies of Gary Johnson, Dude, but he has at least held political office beyond being a member of a Town Meeting.

Trump never held political office too, if you haven't got the memo.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:03

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

OxySnake posted:

I do not understand Stein supporters at all.

I feel like I have to go full Walter Sobchak.

Stein supporters. gently caress me. Say what you want about the policies of Gary Johnson, Dude, but he has at least held political office beyond being a member of a Town Meeting.

Donald Trump has never held political office and he's going to be the next President. Stein's mistake is that she is too much of a political insider.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:04

computer parts: Nov 18, 2010; PLEASE CLAP

call to action posted:

I worked with a Guatemalan-American dude and all he ever loving did was tell me about how much he hated Mexicans

I bet he'll hate an orange man who confuses Guatamalans for Mexicans even more.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:04

paranoid randroid: Mar 4, 2007

Gary Johnson might not know what Aleppo is, but Stein doesnt know what a Columbus is

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:05

Kilroy: Oct 1, 2000

call to action posted:

I loving love when liberals start lecturing people about LATINOS and how they WILL be Democratic voters without understanding the extremely complicated relationship Latinos have with other Latinos (particularly how they loving hate being all stereotyped as people that would be pissed about a border fence) and their underlying social conservatism (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/06/27/5-facts-about-abortion/)

I worked with a Guatemalan-American dude and all he ever loving did was tell me about how much he hated Mexicans

They don't have to be "pissed about the border fence" they just have to be intelligent enough to recognize that the border fence is part of a broader racism from the right and from the GOP. Some can convince themselves for a long while that the GOP isn't racist against them (I'm not Mexican! I'm Guatemalan!) but unfortunately for them Republicans don't actually care about the difference.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:06

Paint Crop Pro: Mar 22, 2007; Find someone who values you like Rick Spielman values 7th round picks.

Fitzy Fitz posted:

Thinking about the NYT's long-overdue Clinton endorsement from the other day, what are the chances the media drops the horse race stuff as we get closer to election day? By that point they'll have gotten their views, made their money, proved they're super serious objective journalists, etc. and will be able to, in their minds, safely say that they've weighed all the evidence and found Trump lacking. There won't be time left for a Trump pivot. There won't be any new news about emails. We'll have been through all the debates.

I assume most of them don't actually want Trump to win, right?

I think we are starting to see the beginnings of this. They have pushed the horse race narrative fornas long as they could and they got what they pushed for. But look at the headlines from the past weekend. Major journalist sources are realizing they could actually have a President Trunp and they are starting to push back hard against him.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:05

Petr: Oct 3, 2000

call to action posted:

I loving love when liberals start lecturing people about LATINOS and how they WILL be Democratic voters without understanding the extremely complicated relationship Latinos have with other Latinos (particularly how they loving hate being all stereotyped as people that would be pissed about a border fence) and their underlying social conservatism (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/06/27/5-facts-about-abortion/)

I worked with a Guatemalan-American dude and all he ever loving did was tell me about how much he hated Mexicans

I agree, Mexicans will be the reason Trump wins.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:06

Iron Lung: Jul 24, 2007; Life.Iron Lung. Death.

Ice Phisherman posted:

Man. I just want to sleep for the next 45 days. Just sleep in. This loving election is driving up my anxiety. I don't think I can even watch the debates. And by coming back here and reading the comments it's like I'll be mainlining pure, 100%, uncut Columbian Arzy fuel.

Thats how I feel. I was hoping they would be over by the time I got home tonight, but I should be walking in the door at 630MST, just enough time to miss the first third. Hopefully it'll be about the time that Trump stops having anything to stay and just cheetos around.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:06

lozzle: Oct 22, 2012; by zen death robot

Guy Goodbody posted:

She's a nice old lady. A little nutty, but she's like your abuela.

She's a narcissist who would strangle a puppy if she thought it would get her a vote.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:06

Periodiko: Jan 30, 2005; Uh.

Kilroy posted:

This is true since Sept 16 when he finally pushed the press too far, "too far" apparently being wasting 30 minutes of their time. They are not in the tank for him now. There coverage of his trash fire of a campaign before that was atrocious.

No, it's been true since the primaries. Even in the GOP primary season he was a joke that establishment media treated as an unserious side-show.

Coverage has always been "atrocious", but that's the nature of the news media. The vast majority of established news media has been anti-Trump from the beginning. Literally zero major newspapers have endorsed Trump. Even ostensibly conservative moderate media personalities are taking a very anti-Trump, drat them both tone or openly endorsing Clinton. CNN has literally been putting fact-checking parentheticals ("No He Didn't") in their chyrons. CNN milquetoasts have had the temerity to call surrogates on brazen lies.

This is what the news media going in lockstep against a candidate looks like, you've been seeing it for most of the year. That it isn't actually very impressive or very effective is just the state of things. It might get marginally better because of Sept. 16 and all that, but this is basically about as fast as the engine goes.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:07

Liquid Communism: Mar 9, 2004; коммунизм хранится в яичках

CascadeBeta posted:

Hillary's probably the worst possible opponent that he could be up against as well. Yes, she's been the target of character assassination for decades, but do you really think she's going to walk into that debate and not be prepared for questions about Bill's infidelity, emails and Ben Ghazi? Do you really expect her to lose her cool if Trump tries to take a cheap shot at her? She's been the target of cheap shots her entire career. She knows the game, how to play it, and is ready to play hardball.

She's going to make a joke out of him. There is nothing Trump can stand less than being joked about.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:08

Dead Cosmonaut: Nov 14, 2015; by FactsAreUseless

OxySnake posted:

I think we are starting to see the beginnings of this. They have pushed the horse race narrative fornas long as they could and they got what they pushed for. But look at the headlines from the past weekend. Major journalist sources are realizing they could actually have a President Trunp and they are starting to push back hard against him.

Even if they attack him, they don't know how the criticize him. The blowhard Cris Matthews said that the moderator calling a Trump a liar in the last townhall is a violation of objective journalism.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:09

Oxxidation: Jul 22, 2007

The problem is that even when the media hates Trump they still keep covering him. They're either always covering him to praise him, or always covering him to condemn him. Either way, the airwaves are constantly choked with his face. Hillary is rarely given a second thought unless something else about the email scandal comes up.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:09

Nocturtle: Mar 17, 2007

FuturePastNow posted:

All polls are BS and polling companies exist to scam money from campaigns and the media

For real. They're not even good at it anymore. Aside from all the recent primary examples the failure to predict the UK's Brexit vote was/is damning (and should worry people a little in this thread).

On the subject of polling, does anyone know if the margins of errors reported with polls are generally just sampling errors, or do pollsters try to propagate model uncertainties? I ask because one of the biggest unknowns for this upcoming election (to my mind) is the likely turnout of hispanic and non-college educated "middle-class" whites. Large changes in turnout from either of these groups wrt the 2012 election could be a significant systematic error in polls/predictions. It'd be interesting to see how well pollsters think they understand this issue.

For example, according to this useful NY Times app , there were 156 million eligible white voters in the US in 2012, of which 95.5 million (~61%) voted. However of the 57 million non-college educated whites, the average turnout was only ~47%. Conversely there were 23 million eligible hispanic voters in 2012, with average turnout of 44%. In either case a large increase in turnout from either of these historically low turnout groups could be decisive in a close state.

It's worth pointing out that these demographic jumps do happen, for example black turnout jumped significantly in 2008 for some weird reason...

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:08

canepazzo: May 29, 2006

New Monmouth national poll (LV):

https://twitter.com/MonmouthPoll/status/780453016952528897

Was +7 in August.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:10

GalacticAcid: Apr 8, 2013; NEW YORK VALUES

The American Prospect posted:

It's hard to fathom that a small journal like the Occidental Quarterly, which publishes articles defending the science of eugenics, claiming that "neoconservatism is indeed a Jewish intellectual and political movement," contending that Abraham Lincoln was a white supremacist pressured into "an unnecessary war," and saying that the United States made a grave error in declaring war on Nazi Germany, could have had much of an impact on American politics.

Yet as the premier voice of the white-nationalist movement, the Occidental Quarterly acts as a roundtable for some of the far right's most influential figures. And with election day only eight weeks away, many of the activists and intellectuals on the Quarterly's board are campaigning -- from Western swing states to backrooms at the Republican national convention -- to reshape the Republican Party in their ideological mold.

Sitting on the Occidental's advisory board is a who's who of the national anti-immigration movement, including Virginia Abernathy, a Vanderbilt University professor and self-avowed "separationist" who is directing a contentious anti-immigrant Arizona ballot measure, Protect Arizona Now. Also on the board is Brent Nelson of the American Immigration Control Foundation. He's working with a coalition of anti-immigrant groups to support the congressional campaigns of Republican candidates who have opposed more lenient immigration policies. The Occidental's publisher is William Regnery II, a white nationalist and heir to the fortune of Regnery Publishing Inc., which recently published Unfit for Command: Swift Boat Veterans Speak Out Against John Kerry.

The anti-immigrant activists on the Occidental board have united behind Representative Tom Tancredo, a virulently anti-immigrant Republican from Littleton, Colorado (home of Columbine High School). As the Republican convention opens with the Republican National Committee endorsing George W. Bush's guest-worker proposal for undocumented immigrants, Tancredo is working behind the scenes to make sure that the convention plank supports his anti-immigrant politics. He's vowing "to raise hell" if he's thwarted.

Tancredo's frustration is echoed by Jared Taylor, Occidental Quarterly board member and editor of American Renaissance, a magazine that he says approaches issues of race and culture "from a white perspective."

Says Taylor: "The amazing thing about Republicans is they keep saying, 'If we could only get 12 percent instead of 2 percent of Hispanics to vote for us, we'd be in fat city.' All they need to do is raise their percentage of the white vote one-half a percent and that would make much more difference than all of this futile pandering to minorities. Clearly Bush is going to have sacrificed votes all over the country, although how many is hard to say."

According to Devin Burghart, director of the Center for New Community, a Chicago-based group that monitors the far right, rising anger against the Bush administration's immigration policy within the GOP could provide a prime opportunity for the white nationalist and anti-immigrant movements to incorporate their ideologies into the party.

This article was published on August 31, 2004, in The American Prospect and is worth reading in its entirety.

To reiterate, August 31, 2004.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:10

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 3, 2024 18:30

theflyingorc: Jun 28, 2008; ANY GOOD OPINIONS THIS POSTER CLAIMS TO HAVE ARE JUST PROOF THAT BULLYING WORKS; Young Orc

canepazzo posted:

New Monmouth national poll (LV):

https://twitter.com/MonmouthPoll/status/780453016952528897

Was +7 in August.

4 is fine.

I'd much rather it be 8, but 4 is fine.

# ? Sep 26, 2016 18:10

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USPOL Sep: Hillary has tuberculosis

«‹›798 »