USPOL Nov: The vindication of Prester Jane by the narcissist Donald Trump

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USPOL Nov: The vindication of Prester Jane by the narcissist Donald Trump

«‹›284 »

Chokes McGee: Aug 7, 2008; This is Urotsuki.

Night10194 posted:

I mean it's flippant but this is kinda how it looks like it's shaking out.

I'm super bullish on Clinton's chances but I wouldn't go this far.

Every vote counts because of the Senate, get out and volunteer

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:33

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 10, 2024 16:32

Mulva: Sep 13, 2011; It's about time for my once per decade ban for being a consistently terrible poster.

UmOk posted:

Come on. You aren't the least bit curious to see what an unfiltered President Trump would be like? Four years of pure self destruction?

Nah. Accelerationists are pampered losers too weak to kill themselves, waiting for the world to do it for them. In the time it takes them to get through a Trump Presidency they could have eaten a bullet and already been dead 4 years.

Never be an Accelerationist.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:33

Hieronymous Alloy: Jan 30, 2009; Why! Why!! Why must you refuse to accept that Dr. Hieronymous Alloy's Genetically Enhanced Cream Corn Is Superior to the Leading Brand on the Market!?!; Morbid Hound

I think electors would have a decent argument that laws restricting their votes are unconstitutional.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:33

Instant Sunrise: Apr 12, 2007; The manger babies don't have feelings. You said it yourself.

a faithless elector is literally the only time the libertarian party has ever won an electoral vote

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:34

Peztopiary: Mar 16, 2009; by exmarx

Tir McDohl posted:

Recently, I was in a car with a friend and there was an audio clip of Madonna saying she'd give bjs for men voting for Hillary. I ignored it, clearly an out of context quote to generate buzz like anything else you hear on the radio. My friend was less than amused and talked about how Madonna was always like that and back in the 90s she was taken to the ER and they had to pump a gallon of sperm out of her belly or some poo poo.

I called it out for the urban legend bullshit it is, but he got on my case asking why I was so defensive. I found the Snopes page about this particular urban legend, which has been attributed to several music artists including Freddie Mercury and others.

Then my friend told me Snopes is biased and don't trust them. People don't care about the truth and create their own narrative whenever convenient.

Seriously, your friend is going to get more broken after the election. It's not your job to fix him.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:34

size1one: Jun 24, 2008; I don't want a nation just for me, I want a nation for everyone

Don't want to see Trump elected, but live in a safe blue state? Have a phone? And some spare time? Do something more productive than just arzying over polls, FBI leaks, and faithless electors.

:siren:

Make calls to help Hillary get out the vote in battleground states! :siren:

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:35

Charlz Guybon: Nov 16, 2010

Doesn't look that good to me. I think if Florida isn't won she's going to lose.

http://heavy.com/news/2016/11/early...rican-turn-out/

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:35

Spaced God: Feb 8, 2014; All torment, trouble, wonder and amazement
Inhabits here: some heavenly power guide us
Out of this fearful country!

https://twitter.com/ryanjreilly/status/794683757739577344

Here we loving gooooooo :sigh:

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:36

Covok: May 27, 2013; Yet where is that woman now? Tell me, in what heave does she reside? None of them. Because no God bothered to listen or care. If that is what you think it means to be a God, then you and all your teachings are welcome to do as that poor women did. And vanish from these realms forever.

Are we aryzing? Should we be?

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:35

Zwabu: Aug 7, 2006

Pollyanna posted:

It's a genuine problem and I think it's something that we can't actually mitigate. The best thing about in-person voting is that it has protections against coercion.

Yeah, the mail in ballot is also subject to vote buying/selling. Someone pays you to vote a certain way, verifies the ballot is filled out the way they want, then they seal the envelope and mail it for you.

Or, alternatively, a boss coerces votes from his employees under an implicit or explicit threat of being fired. Verifies "proper" vote and mails in the ballots afterwards.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:35

fishmech: Jul 16, 2006; by VideoGames; Salad Prong

Pollyanna posted:

So, wait a minute. I know there's the popular vote, and then the electoral vote. Even though we're getting some numbers now for the popular vote that look good, what's stopping the electoral college from voting against the wishes of their districts/states on Tuesday?

The total amount of electoral votes cast against the wishes of the state, since the country was founded, is about 178. And like 100 of them were the result of a candidate dying, or electors refusing to vote for a vice presidential candidate while still voting for the presidential candidate. Much of the rest were accidental.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:36

Fojar38: Sep 2, 2011; Sorry I meant to say I hope that the police use maximum force and kill or maim a bunch of innocent people, thus paving a way for a proletarian uprising and socialist utopia

also here's a stupid take
---------------------------->

Luigi Thirty posted:

My dad is always just like "I don't understand how anyone buys Trump's complete bullshit" and I don't have an answer for him.

Critical thinking is a taught skill.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:36

Bloops Crusts: Aug 14, 2016

skylined! posted:

Don't assume the 3% of people that are both going to vote and aren't ardently decided at this point are going to give a poo poo about anything new coming to light at this point.

There's a huge danger in a lot of these polls in how low the decided vote is. Take the Detroit Free Press poll out of Michigan:

http://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2016/11/04/free-press-poll-donald-trump-gains-hillary-clinton-race-michigan-tightens/93287658/

42-38 is a horrible number in Michigan. That's a firewall state. That's supposed to be blue wall. But the fact that it's only 42 makes it a hell of a lot more dangerous than if it were 48-44. You may say, "Not a lot of those undecideds are actually going to vote" -- but it won't take much to upset the apple cart if there's a late break toward Trump. That, I would say, is an ominous poll.

Source: me, myself, and I. I'm not channeling Nate Silver here, I'm not parroting whatever article he put up on 538. It's a simple fact.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:36

Islam is the Lite Rock FM: Jul 27, 2007; by exmarx

Being a faithless elector sounds like a good way to get a slocking.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:36

Chokes McGee: Aug 7, 2008; This is Urotsuki.

Hieronymous Alloy posted:

I think electors would have a decent argument that laws restricting their votes are unconstitutional.

Well. The major problem is if you let all electors just do whatever there's a chance, however slim, that a vast majority of the population wants one candidate and they all get together and go "nah let's take the other one."

IIRC the way the US government was meant to work is you vote on the people who vote on the president, but I'm probably pulling that directly out of my rear end, and anyway here we are in modern times.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:36

Moktaro: Aug 3, 2007; I value call my nuts.

tadashi posted:

How does the restraining order actually hinder Trump, Stone, etc. if it just re-specifies the "buffer zone". Is there something more than just the normal laws enforced? Is it just a chance to increase the penalties if they violate the rules of poll observing?

To bring it all back around...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8Higghuw_I

:v:

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:37

Chokes McGee: Aug 7, 2008; This is Urotsuki.

Covok posted:

Are we aryzing? Should we be?

Yes, no

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:37

Charlz Guybon: Nov 16, 2010

Bloops Crusts posted:

There's a huge danger in a lot of these polls in how low the decided vote is. Take the Detroit Free Press poll out of Michigan:

http://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2016/11/04/free-press-poll-donald-trump-gains-hillary-clinton-race-michigan-tightens/93287658/

42-38 is a horrible number in Michigan. That's a firewall state. That's supposed to be blue wall. But the fact that it's only 42 makes it a hell of a lot more dangerous than if it were 48 or 49. You may say, "Not a lot of those undecideds are actually going to vote" -- but it won't take much to upset the apple cart if there's a late break toward Trump. That, I would say, is an ominous poll.

Source: me, myself, and I. I'm not channeling Nate Silver here, I'm not parroting whatever article he put up on 538. It's a simple fact.

And it's why Florida is a must win state for Hillary, it innoculates against some northern defections.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:37

Farchanter: Jun 15, 2008

I think a hypothetical faithless elector would be more likely to abandon Trump for McMullin or something.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:38

Islam is the Lite Rock FM: Jul 27, 2007; by exmarx

Bloops Crusts posted:

There's a huge danger in a lot of these polls in how low the decided vote is. Take the Detroit Free Press poll out of Michigan:

http://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2016/11/04/free-press-poll-donald-trump-gains-hillary-clinton-race-michigan-tightens/93287658/

42-38 is a horrible number in Michigan. That's a firewall state. That's supposed to be blue wall. But the fact that it's only 42 makes it a hell of a lot more dangerous than if it were 48-44. You may say, "Not a lot of those undecideds are actually going to vote" -- but it won't take much to upset the apple cart if there's a late break toward Trump. That, I would say, is an ominous poll.

Source: me, myself, and I. I'm not channeling Nate Silver here, I'm not parroting whatever article he put up on 538. It's a simple fact.

It's going to be ok BC. Dread Abuela will win.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:40

Chokes McGee: Aug 7, 2008; This is Urotsuki.

Bloops Crusts posted:

There's a huge danger in a lot of these polls in how low the decided vote is. Take the Detroit Free Press poll out of Michigan:

http://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2016/11/04/free-press-poll-donald-trump-gains-hillary-clinton-race-michigan-tightens/93287658/

42-38 is a horrible number in Michigan. That's a firewall state. That's supposed to be blue wall. But the fact that it's only 42 makes it a hell of a lot more dangerous than if it were 48-44. You may say, "Not a lot of those undecideds are actually going to vote" -- but it won't take much to upset the apple cart if there's a late break toward Trump. That, I would say, is an ominous poll.

Source: me, myself, and I. I'm not channeling Nate Silver here, I'm not parroting whatever article he put up on 538. It's a simple fact.

assuming you're even the least bit serious, check out a Mel Mudkipper post and hit "?", then look for his latest polling screenshots

if you still believe the same thing after that then you may want to seek professional help

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:39

Northjayhawk: Mar 8, 2008; by exmarx

If we were actually 270-268, then we'd get a firm head count on those 270, and the weight of the world (and the hellfire that would come if you even think about suggesting you won't vote for Hillary) will, hopefully convince the potential faithless electors to quit.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:39

Shimrra Jamaane: Aug 10, 2007; Obscure to all except those well-versed in Yuuzhan Vong lore.

Covok posted:

Are we aryzing? Should we be?

It was a great polling day despite Nate Silver literally tweeting to the contrary. He counted bad polls in Missouri, Utah, and Kansas as more impactful than good polls in Florida, NC, PA, and WI.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:40

Instant Sunrise: Apr 12, 2007; The manger babies don't have feelings. You said it yourself.

Farchanter posted:

I think a hypothetical faithless elector would be more likely to abandon Trump for McMullin or something.

or vote for "Mike Pnce"� on the top ticket.

--

� actually happened in 2004, one of the electors in minnesota cast their electoral vote for "John Ewards" for president.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:40

Nessus: Dec 22, 2003; After a Speaker vote, you may be entitled to a valuable coupon or voucher!

UmOk posted:

Come on. You aren't the least bit curious to see what an unfiltered President Trump would be like? Four years of pure self destruction?

Well, it's true that the mere facts of people's lives, safety, etc. is less important than the entertainment of Americans, BUT I think Trump is already getting incredibly loving dull, so no, not even on that front.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:42

Covok: May 27, 2013; Yet where is that woman now? Tell me, in what heave does she reside? None of them. Because no God bothered to listen or care. If that is what you think it means to be a God, then you and all your teachings are welcome to do as that poor women did. And vanish from these realms forever.

Shimrra Jamaane posted:

It was a great polling day despite Nate Silver literally tweeting to the contrary. He counted bad polls in Missouri, Utah, and Kansas as more impactful than good polls in Florida, NC, PA, and WI.

Why? Those were red states?

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:42

Shimrra Jamaane: Aug 10, 2007; Obscure to all except those well-versed in Yuuzhan Vong lore.

Bloops Crusts posted:

There's a huge danger in a lot of these polls in how low the decided vote is. Take the Detroit Free Press poll out of Michigan:

http://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2016/11/04/free-press-poll-donald-trump-gains-hillary-clinton-race-michigan-tightens/93287658/

42-38 is a horrible number in Michigan. That's a firewall state. That's supposed to be blue wall. But the fact that it's only 42 makes it a hell of a lot more dangerous than if it were 48-44. You may say, "Not a lot of those undecideds are actually going to vote" -- but it won't take much to upset the apple cart if there's a late break toward Trump. That, I would say, is an ominous poll.

Source: me, myself, and I. I'm not channeling Nate Silver here, I'm not parroting whatever article he put up on 538. It's a simple fact.

Michigan is 100% going blue good god you are nuts.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:42

Blurred: Aug 26, 2004; WELL I WONNER WHAT IT'S LIIIIIKE TO BE A GOOD POSTER

Young Hegelian posted:

I believe some states have provisions for recall of faithless electors.

The other threat is a bigger constitutional crisis than the Civil War, which we hope none of those people want.

There would be law-suits out the rear end, and the winner of the election would be instated president anyway. It would lead to an imediate reform / abolition of the ECV, though, so it'd actually probably be a good thing in the long run.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:43

Cingulate: Oct 23, 2012; by Fluffdaddy

Bloops Crusts posted:

There's a huge danger in a lot of these polls in how low the decided vote is. Take the Detroit Free Press poll out of Michigan:

http://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2016/11/04/free-press-poll-donald-trump-gains-hillary-clinton-race-michigan-tightens/93287658/

42-38 is a horrible number in Michigan. That's a firewall state. That's supposed to be blue wall. But the fact that it's only 42 makes it a hell of a lot more dangerous than if it were 48-44. You may say, "Not a lot of those undecideds are actually going to vote" -- but it won't take much to upset the apple cart if there's a late break toward Trump. That, I would say, is an ominous poll.

Source: me, myself, and I. I'm not channeling Nate Silver here, I'm not parroting whatever article he put up on 538. It's a simple fact.

Yes.

Undecideds are, still, the worst.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:43

skylined!: Apr 6, 2012; THE DEM DEFENDER HAS LOGGED ON

Bloops Crusts posted:

There's a huge danger in a lot of these polls in how low the decided vote is. Take the Detroit Free Press poll out of Michigan:

http://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2016/11/04/free-press-poll-donald-trump-gains-hillary-clinton-race-michigan-tightens/93287658/

42-38 is a horrible number in Michigan. That's a firewall state. That's supposed to be blue wall. But the fact that it's only 42 makes it a hell of a lot more dangerous than if it were 48-44. You may say, "Not a lot of those undecideds are actually going to vote" -- but it won't take much to upset the apple cart if there's a late break toward Trump. That, I would say, is an ominous poll.

Source: me, myself, and I. I'm not channeling Nate Silver here, I'm not parroting whatever article he put up on 538. It's a simple fact.

You are dumb and bad. A horrible number would be tied or behind in an aggregate. 'Consistently leading the state for the entire season by 5+' is not a horrible place to be.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/michigan-election-forecast.html

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/michigan/#plus

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:43

Necc0: Jun 30, 2005; by exmarx; Broken Cake

UmOk posted:

I selfishly secretly kinda want Trump to be president. He has made this election so amazingly absurd that I will have a hard time letting go of it after election day. His behavior in debate 2 was probably the funniest thing I have seen all year. I need more of that.

I'm gonna guess you weren't politically 'aware' during the Bush admin?

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:44

AriadneThread: Feb 17, 2011; The Devil sounds like smoke and honey. We cannot move. It is too beautiful.

Islam is the Lite Rock FM posted:

Being a faithless elector sounds like a good way to get a slocking.

checkout my new band, faithless elector

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:44

Sulphagnist: Oct 10, 2006; WARNING! INTRUDERS DETECTED

Dr. Angela Ziegler posted:

Donald Trump needs 270 electoral votes to become president.

Hillary needs 271

Figures that a woman's electoral vote would be worth less than a man's.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:44

Cingulate: Oct 23, 2012; by Fluffdaddy

skylined! posted:

You are dumb and bad. A horrible number would be tied or behind in an aggregate. 'Consistently leading the state for the entire season by 5+' is not a horrible place to be.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/upshot/michigan-election-forecast.html

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/michigan/#plus

Uncertainty is not as bad as being behind, but uncertainty is still bad.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:44

Farchanter: Jun 15, 2008

If he loses the election I wonder if Trump will continue doing rallies, presenting himself as the real President of the United States, like some kind of illegitimate Roman Emperor.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:44

GalacticAcid: Apr 8, 2013; NEW YORK VALUES

AriadneThread posted:

checkout my new band, faithless elector

The guitarist's side project, Hanging Chad, is worth a listen.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:45

sourdough: Apr 30, 2012

Charlz Guybon posted:

And it's why Florida is a must win state for Hillary, it innoculates against some northern defections.

That is not what "must win" means.

Hillary is more likely to win each of Ohio, Iowa, Utah, Arizona, or Georgia than Trump is to win Michigan. If you want to take some of those aggregator probabilities literally, using the first column (NYTimes, which is less worried about Clinton than 538 but more worried than the other aggregators), Hillary is more likely to win both Ohio and Iowa than Trump is to win Michigan.

Edit: Also, if you want a laugh, guess which column is 538

sourdough fucked around with this message at 00:47 on Nov 5, 2016

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:45

fishmech: Jul 16, 2006; by VideoGames; Salad Prong

Chokes McGee posted:

IIRC the way the US government was meant to work is you vote on the people who vote on the president, but I'm probably pulling that directly out of my rear end, and anyway here we are in modern times.

Keep in mind that it wasn't until about 1840 that the majority of electoral votes were cast by states that actually had a normal popular vote for President.

Let's take 1808's election for example:
Method of choosing Electors
Each Elector appointed by state legislature: Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Massachusetts, New York, South Carolina, Vermont
Each Elector chosen by voters statewide (what every state does now: New Hampshire, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia
State is divided into electoral districts, with one Elector chosen per district by the voters of that district: Kentucky, Maryland, North Carolina, Tennessee

Note that these "electoral districts" for the last category had no requirement to be chosen on the basis of equal population or to match state legislative districts.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:45

Shimrra Jamaane: Aug 10, 2007; Obscure to all except those well-versed in Yuuzhan Vong lore.

Covok posted:

Why? Those were red states?

Because Nates model puts more stock in "trends" seen in these red states than polls from actual important states.

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:46

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 10, 2024 16:32

Cingulate: Oct 23, 2012; by Fluffdaddy

Shimrra Jamaane posted:

Because Nates model puts more stock in "trends" seen in these red states than polls from actual important states.

Where are you getting this "more" from?

# ? Nov 5, 2016 00:47

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USPOL Nov: The vindication of Prester Jane by the narcissist Donald Trump

«‹›284 »