|
Eugene V. Dubstep posted:For example, I'm wondering how you look at this chart, which shows that 48% of Sanders supporters are men compared to 45% of the party overall, and conclude that 'being a man' is the second-biggest predictor of Bernie support: Yeah, I'd go with the edit that <30 is a better predictor. I said that because I was looking at the cross-tabs with race and there's a clear split between man/women support among white and black voters and I was giving more weight to that because "race=other" is so hard to parse and it seemed like his general support from voters whose race was "other" was distorting the data on gender. You're right though, his female support from that category brings it much closer to even so maybe that's trying too hard to read into things.
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 22:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 04:07 |
|
|
rick wilson hates trump with a passion though, hes on msnbc as much as possible saying so or am i missing what you're saying
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 22:11
|
|
|
Flying_Crab posted:I’d read that more as Bernie mobilizing normally conservative voting people, not Bernie Bros or whatever people want to call them? Well that or people that REALLY did not like Hillary.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 22:12
|
|
|
Eugene V. Dubstep posted:There was a long time between the Democratic primaries and the federal election, during which time Clinton deliberately chose not to campaign in Wisconsin, and hardly at all in Michigan and Pennsylvania. It should be no shock that Trump picked up votes from democrats across the board, not just Bernie voters. That's the whole point of campaigning. Well, I will stand by the statement that any Bernie supporter who cross-shopped their Bernie support to Trump support is an abysmal jerk. ~10% of Bernie primary supporters voted for Trump over Clinton. That poo poo's terrible. Now, we don't have the counterfactual of Bernie winning the primary and seeing what percent of Hillary supporters would've voted for Trump. Maybe also 10%? I don't know. The closest evidence we have is polls pre-end-of-primary asking Hillary and Bernie supporters who they'd support of their candidate dind't win. There are past examples of this playing out as well. Something like ~25% of 2008 Democratic Primary supporters of Clinton voted for McCain. Surprise, that 25% correlated with more negative views of African Americans. The available data shows that the Sanders->Trump crowd were not hardcore democrats to begin with, and those people switching from Sanders->Trump were, unsurprisingly, also the portion most likely to have racial animus. So Clinton may have lost out on the non-traditional, independent, and most racially biased subset of Bernie's supporters.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 22:14
|
|
|
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/putin-russian-constitutional-reform-pm-steps-down-1.5427456 All hail our new russian 
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 22:19
|
|
|
DrHub posted:https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/putin-russian-constitutional-reform-pm-steps-down-1.5427456 The Trump Base gonna have some chafed cocks thinking about this one
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 22:21
|
|
|
Flying_Crab posted:I’d read that more as Bernie mobilizing normally conservative voting people, not Bernie Bros or whatever people want to call them? What's interesting is that if you compare Trump's approval demographics to the Dem primary demographics you could make the arguement that Trump and Bernie are splitting the no college vote. That would lead me to believe there's crossover in both directions
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 22:25
|
|
|
Rick Wilson, for all his (very profitable) public hatred of Trump, is still a Republican, and a professed socialist taking office is his worst-case scenario. He is campaigning against Bernie here by posting blatantly misleading stats.mlmp08 posted:So Clinton may have lost out on the non-traditional, independent, and most racially biased subset of Bernie's supporters. These are often called 'swing voters'. Rick Wilson wants to paint the swing voters that voted for the only candidate who campaigned in their state as bitter Berniebros.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 22:27
|
|
|
Eugene V. Dubstep posted:For example, I'm wondering how you look at this chart, which shows that 48% of Sanders supporters are men compared to 45% of the party overall, and conclude that 'being a man' is the second-biggest predictor of Bernie support: Please give me the name of this diagram type so I can learn about it. I have never seen this before.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 22:33
|
|
|
Eugene V. Dubstep posted:Consider what Rick Wilson, a Republican political operative, gains by framing Trump's win this way, at a time when Sanders is just pulling ahead in the Iowa polls. You're taking a Republican attack on Sanders at face value. You're not wrong, and I agree, def. take what Rick Wilson says with a huge grain of salt. I mean he's the guy who made the ads questioning Max Cleland's patriotism. That's all you need to know on that front. But I will say this, if there is one thing I feel some Sanders supporters are really really bad at, it's recognizing potential weak areas that Sanders has and actually acknowledging them rather than hand waving everything away. I realize this isn't exclusive to him or his supporters (Clinton and emails, Warren and being a Republican till 1996, etc), but it does feel very grating that very vocal Sanders people will hear nothing about where he might need to work on things and maybe it's just my perception of things but it has only amplified itself in the past few weeks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 22:36
|
|
|
Eulogistics posted:Please give me the name of this diagram type so I can learn about it. I have never seen this before. it's 'hosed up designer bullshit' I believe
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 22:40
|
|
|
Handsome Ralph posted:But I will say this, if there is one thing I feel some Sanders supporters are really really bad at, it's recognizing potential weak areas that Sanders has and actually acknowledging them rather than hand waving everything away. I realize this isn't exclusive to him or his supporters (Clinton and emails, Warren and being a Republican till 1996, etc), but it does feel very grating that very vocal Sanders people will hear nothing about where he might need to work on things and maybe it's just my perception of things but it has only amplified itself in the past few weeks. Most Bernie supporters that I know do not believe his policy is perfect. We wish Bernie would be even farther left, which may be a foreign concept to you and register as no challenge being stated at all. That's not our problem. Bernie is not a marxist, even though many of us are. He only supports capitalism with more constraints, which capital is expert at pulling right back off at the earliest opportunity. He is a liberal socialist, not a leftist, according to leftists. Bernie is a compromise candidate. Think of him the same way as the original New Deal was a compromise to de-escalate the dust-bowl 1930's when leftist sentiment was at an all time high and there was risk of a revolution hitting the streets. The jobs programs and safety nets were not given out by the ruling class because they wanted to, but it was to innoculate against something that would be even worse for them. The same goes for Bernie; the capital owners, billionaries, can either offer a compromise by not sabotaging his grassroots movement, or they can risk tensions rising out of control. Personally I can see weaknesses in Bernie, you just haven't talked to us to find out what they are. I think Bernie's weakest areas are in seeing threats to himself directed from capital. He considers his opposition, other senators, to be his friends -- even as they repeatedly throw him under the bus. He doesn't see his own movement's near-total erasure from the left-in-name-only democratic media. Bernie and the four senators in the squad all unquestioningly promote and participate in the impeachment theatre, not realizing that the media is partially using it as a hit on them directly -- directing the anger of the people to be expressed as foreign xenophobia instead of against the billionaire class (who the media and DNCC and intelligence orgs are all beholden to). Yes, I'll take a diet coke and two bonus checks from Mr. Putin please
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 22:53
|
|
|
Madurai posted:I'm no SA-15 expert, but it was doctrine to fire two Standards at any target to ensure a kill. If the whole thing was automated anyway, the second launch probably was, too, for the same reason. The shots were 30 seconds apart, and the first one did hit before the second was fired. The battery commanders claim that 'it would have been out of range in 8 seconds' or w/e is full of poo poo. edit : i am not saying that is not normal, just that the story they have put out has been garbage from the start.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 22:58
|
|
|
By the way, I used to be just as gung-ho about Russia being a problem as the rest of you non-CSPAM folks not even that long ago. I posted in the "Russia is the only story that matters" thread and agreed with them, and thought everyone else was a troll. Eventually I had some questions about why we were betting everything on a republican cop. You can see the process of one person, me, coming around on it through my posts in the russia skepticism thread. https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3885352&userid=81407 Then give the whole thread a proper read (not just my posts) if you're still not sure why someone who calls themselves left would go against the grain about Russian influence. You might not even be aware of how frustrating the whole Mueller movement was to you in hindsight, then all at once it can just click for you what was really going on. Happy Thread fucked around with this message at 23:31 on Jan 15, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 23:01
|
|
|
Dumb Lowtax posted:By the way, I used to be just as gung-ho about Russia being a problem as the rest of you non-CSPAM folks not even that long ago. You can see the process of one person, me, coming around on it through my posts in the russia skepticism thread. As someone who was a member of the intelligence community in 2016, get the hell out of here with this “Russia did nothing wrong” poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 23:04
|
|
|
Dumb Lowtax posted:Most Bernie supporters that I know do not believe his policy is perfect. We wish Bernie would be even farther left, which may be a foreign concept to you and register as no challenge being stated at all. That's not our problem. I'm more than familiar with what Bernie supporters like yourself feel are weak spots with Sanders. That wasn't intended as a dig, I'm just trying to point out that I genuinely understand that there are many of his supporters who feel he is not pushing leftwards enough but are still supporting him because they see him as the best option going forward. It's a valid concern for you and I'm not trying to invalidate that. What I am referring to are weak areas that people who are not necessarily convinced that they should vote for Sanders to begin with take issue with. Sanders history on race relations being one of them. His record on guns being another. These aren't invalid points, but I feel as if the moment these get brought up in good faith, they are hand waived away, and it's loving embarrassing. Sanders has his weak spots that are susceptible to be pointed out for the majority of the electorate to notice like any other pol and pretending that he doesn't isn't gonna help in the long run. Dumb Lowtax posted:By the way, I used to be just as gung-ho about Russia being a problem as the rest of you non-CSPAM folks not even that long ago. You can see the process of one person, me, coming around on it through my posts in the russia skepticism thread. I don't think anyone here at least will disagree that the hyped idea that Russia is entirely behind our current political situation is overblown, short sighted and stupid as gently caress sometimes. But I do think it's foolish to pretend Russian interference is/was not an issue whatsoever though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 23:07
|
|
|
All I’m saying is that if someone personally says their first pick is Bernie/Warren/Yang/Biden/Klobuchar and their second choice is Trump, just get the gently caress outta here. OTOH, pretty willing to vote for whoever the gently caress if it turns out we need those particular abysmal jerk voters to win in 2020.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 23:10
|
|
|
Internet Wizard posted:As someone who was a member of the intelligence community in 2016, get the hell out of here with this “Russia did nothing wrong” poo poo Of course they tried to exert their influence. And hell, they even had some successes, the largest of which is probably taking over the NRA. The core point however is that if you can assign any "blame" to Russia for Hillary losing it has to be some minuscule fraction of a percent at fault. The responsibility for that election cannot be placed with Russia.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 23:11
|
|
|
MY BRAIN HURTS https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/1217570022949826561?s=19 He's also going on Anderson Cooper's show and got judicial permission to do it. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 23:12
|
|
|
I’ve see you pushing that line in multiple places Dumb Lowtax. All the major players are constantly agitating and believing otherwise is a sign that you’ve drunk the kool aid from one or the other. Edit- “they took over one of the largest lobbying groups in America but really it had no effect at all” Is a interesting take. Abongination fucked around with this message at 23:17 on Jan 15, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 23:14
|
|
|
Russia is definitely gonna Russia with Putin at the helm but what went down was just his Intel community being ahead of the curve on social media disinformation. Absolutely point out the lovely poo poo they did, but it needs to go hand-in-hand with the domestic critique of "and now what are we going to do about it?" that doesn't stop with "Russia bad, Russia enemy, hate not-America". If we un-gently caress our burgeoning kleptocratic hellscape of mass suffering for the enrichment of the elite their efforts would find much less fertile ground to sprout in.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 23:14
|
|
|
Yeah, if we're assigning percentage of blame Russia has to be a fraction of what's assigned to Comey's dumb rear end, and also of course Hillary herself and her campaign's choices to run up numbers (the exact same instinct that allowed Obama to beat her in the primary in 2007) instead of making sure her blue wall was actually both blue and a wall.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 23:16
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Of course they tried to exert their influence. And hell, they even had some successes, the largest of which is probably taking over the NRA. The core point however is that if you can assign any "blame" to Russia for Hillary losing it has to be some minuscule fraction of a percent at fault. The responsibility for that election cannot be placed with Russia. Honestly I feel that the problem with the 2016 election for the dems was that it was so close, any individual factor could have been the turning point - which has allowed people to pick and choose what they think was the real reason why Hillary lost. Russia, Comey, 'Bernie Bros', the campaign's strategy in the Midwest (or lack thereof), Clinton's personal likeability, emailghazi, trade policy, racism... flip any one of these individual factors and more likely than not, Clinton wins. Had she lost by more, we may have seen a deeper level of introspection. But instead, we get constant re-litigation over issues that still exist and are getting worse, because everyone thinks it's someone else's fault.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 23:22
|
|
|
Waiting for Putin to smash the button that flips the "Russia" sign over to the "USSR" sign.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 23:23
|
|
|
A Bad Poster posted:Waiting for Putin to smash the button that flips the "Russia" sign over to the "USSR" sign. Unless they're restarting with Russia+Ukraine, there is no union though. Kazakhstan sure as fick ain't going back , I don't think anyone else is interested either.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 23:27
|
|
|
Handsome Ralph posted:I don't think anyone here at least will disagree that the hyped idea that Russia is entirely behind our current political situation is overblown, short sighted and stupid as gently caress sometimes. But I do think it's foolish to pretend Russian interference is/was not an issue whatsoever though. Everyone wants to read this from my post but I didn't say that. I didn't say anything about what Russia did. I said that with the help of the DNCC and intelligence community, the media focused on it with more than 50% of their resources and air time, like it was the story of the century, at the expense of doing domestic or economic journalism. It's like a dead art now. Predictions about what will happen are not news. e: autocorrect Happy Thread fucked around with this message at 23:32 on Jan 15, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 23:29
|
|
|
Virginia has declared a state of emergency https://www.npr.org/2020/01/15/796666321/virginia-governor-declares-state-of-emergency-ahead-of-pro-gun-rally quote:Fearing potential violence, Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam is declaring a state of emergency and is banning firearms and other weapons on the Capitol grounds in Richmond ahead of a gun rights demonstration planned for next week.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 23:33
|
|
|
facialimpediment posted:MY BRAIN HURTS That's crazy poo poo. But who the gently caress is this guy calling it a "flak jacket?" They haven't been flak jackets since 'Nam.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 23:33
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:Honestly I feel that the problem with the 2016 election for the dems was that it was so close, any individual factor could have been the turning point - which has allowed people to pick and choose what they think was the real reason why Hillary lost. Russia, Comey, 'Bernie Bros', the campaign's strategy in the Midwest (or lack thereof), Clinton's personal likeability, emailghazi, trade policy, racism... flip any one of these individual factors and more likely than not, Clinton wins. Had she lost by more, we may have seen a deeper level of introspection. But instead, we get constant re-litigation over issues that still exist and are getting worse, because everyone thinks it's someone else's fault. If you want to give one proximate cause that is counterintelligence related then go with Comey's announcement in the last 2 weeks. Theres a lot of evidence in elections that only the last 2 weeks of tv ads and news stories really "work" as far as people making the decision whether to vote and who to vote for. However, you can also point out that Hillary did not campaign in any of those states that went Trump that were critical (Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania) in the last 2 months, let alone last 2 weeks. Bernie actually was doing multiple events per day for Hillary in those states in the lead up to the election and thats one of the reasons that "berniebros" are furious with the party insiders that blame Bernie for her loss.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 23:37
|
|
|
Dumb Lowtax posted:Everyone wants to read this from my post but I didn't say that. I didn't say anything about what Russia did. I said that with the help of the DNCC and intelligence community, the media focused on it with more than 50% of their resources and air time, like it was the story of the century, at the expense of doing domestic or economic journalism. It's like a dead art now. Predictions about what will happen are not news. I think we're talking past one another. I'm in total agreement that Russia and it's role in 2016 we're overhyped by the media and talking heads while they ignored other glaring issues that helped lead to Trump getting to where he is. I just think there is a tendency from the Chapo types and others on the left to counter swing to far and proclaim any belief that Russia had it's role in the election as foolish or wrong. Which is also stupid for its own reasons. hobbesmaster posted:
Yup. And this is a perfect example of where Clinton and her wing of the DNC refused to look inward at their own weak spots and admit that they massively hosed up on those fronts.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2020 23:58
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:All I’m saying is that if someone personally says their first pick is Bernie/Warren/Yang/Biden/Klobuchar and their second choice is Trump, just get the gently caress outta here. Definitely, I'd vote for a literal ham sandwich over Trump if Bernie isn't the nominee.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2020 00:04
|
|
|
Tythas posted:Virginia has declared a state of emergency Wasn't Ralph Northam the guy in the Klan outfit next to the guy in blackface?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2020 00:12
|
|
|
Dumb Lowtax posted:Wasn't Ralph Northam the guy in the Klan outfit next to the guy in blackface? He may have been the guy in blackface next to the Klan outfit. He wasn't sure.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2020 00:46
|
|
|
As much as Russia did meddle in the 2016 elections, does the US really have a leg to stand on here? There are probably more third world elections the US meddled in than we didn't over the last half century or so. Iraq and Afghanistan are still only nominally democratic US client states in a lot of ways. We clearly chose sides in Iran, Egypt, Bahrain, for the autocratic side in the latter couple of cases. And let's not even get into the dozens of direct coups we have sponsored or supported. The US doesn't seem to have a lot of respect for democracy internationally for a country complaining about foreign meddling in its elections. The Trump campaign criminally dealt with that Russia interference and unfortunately it doesn't look like they will be held to account, but many of the Democrats who are pointing fingers at Russia were part of the national security establishment for a long time in some capacity and should take a long hard look at themselves first.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2020 00:47
|
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:As much as Russia did meddle in the 2016 elections, does the US really have a leg to stand on here? There are probably more third world elections the US meddled in than we didn't over the last half century or so. Iraq and Afghanistan are still only nominally democratic US client states in a lot of ways. We clearly chose sides in Iran, Egypt, Bahrain, for the autocratic side in the latter couple of cases. And let's not even get into the dozens of direct coups we have sponsored or supported. And we're lynching Negroes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2020 00:51
|
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:As much as Russia did meddle in the 2016 elections, does the US really have a leg to stand on here? There are probably more third world elections the US meddled in than we didn't over the last half century or so. Iraq and Afghanistan are still only nominally democratic US client states in a lot of ways. We clearly chose sides in Iran, Egypt, Bahrain, for the autocratic side in the latter couple of cases. And let's not even get into the dozens of direct coups we have sponsored or supported. Was it "democracy" that the CIA or DoD or someone officially defined as "aligned with US interests"?
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2020 00:51
|
|
|
A home invader still still is wise to warn his cohabitants about a different home invader being afoot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2020 00:52
|
|
|
AreWeDrunkYet posted:As much as Russia did meddle in the 2016 elections, does the US really have a leg to stand on here? There are probably more third world elections the US meddled in than we didn't over the last half century or so. Iraq and Afghanistan are still only nominally democratic US client states in a lot of ways. We clearly chose sides in Iran, Egypt, Bahrain, for the autocratic side in the latter couple of cases. And let's not even get into the dozens of direct coups we have sponsored or supported. Yes, as bad as what the US has done is, you ain't got poo poo on Russia
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2020 01:14
|
|
|
The term you're looking for is American Exceptionalism. Perfect example is Iran- they have done absolutely nothing we haven't, but they are bad. "Do as I say, not as I do".
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2020 01:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 04:07 |
|
|
Also, please, we're Sanders Siblings
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2020 01:26
|
|
