|
Nieuw Amsterdam posted:There is always a nonzero chance Trump wins but looking objectively at the setup, would you rather be Trump or Biden? I’m not calling Trump the favorite, I’m saying there’s probably at least, at this point, a 1:3 chance he wins. That may shrink as we get closer. But we ignore that possibility right now at our peril. Any thinking that follows the lines of “well we can spend money in a different place because Biden is going to win the general anyway” or “rates go brrrrr who cares about a recession it’s in the bag” is fatally flawed. Or, at an individual level, “no need to donate time or money, Trump doesn’t stand a chance.”
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 16:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 11:27 |
|
|
FLIPADELPHIA posted:Unless these polls also correctly sample likely voters, then they are nowhere near determinative in predicting election outcomes. Half the country votes. This all seems like a load of bullshit to me. The popular vote is distorted by the US and their weird electoral college system, but it's still a useful tool to see where the wind is blowing. I guarantee you, no presidential candidate who is absolutely hated or unwanted by the public is going to win. Otherwise the US would now be governed by president-for-life Jeb Bush. The popular vote going a little bit the wrong way is certainly funny (if you're not from the US) and depressing (if you're from the US), but it would only be "meaningless" if the electoral college gets actually for real appointed by paintball matches. Until then, the voting public is still in the race. Also I'd like a study that supports your claim that every single voter who dislikes Trump also hates voting. Oh, you don't have one? Well, I guess strike that first paragraph entirely, it's not founded in reality.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 16:31
|
|
|
Libluini posted:This all seems like a load of bullshit to me. The popular vote is distorted by the US and their weird electoral college system, but it's still a useful tool to see where the wind is blowing. I guarantee you, no presidential candidate who is absolutely hated or unwanted by the public is going to win. Otherwise the US would now be governed by president-for-life Jeb Bush. The popular vote going a little bit the wrong way is certainly funny (if you're not from the US) and depressing (if you're from the US), but it would only be "meaningless" if the electoral college gets actually for real appointed by paintball matches. Until then, the voting public is still in the race. In 2016, Hillary Clinton and Trump were both hated by the general public and Trump won. Trump is around -25 net favorable right now and Biden is around -18. Statistically, it is very likely that a majority of voters will have a negative opinion about either Biden or Trump in 2024.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 16:34
|
|
|
Returning to Trump legal discussion, next week is going to be a newsworthy one in DC. Monday: Chutkan likely to set trial date for Trump's Jan 6 case (Smith wants January 2024, Trump wants April 2026) Tuesday: Pre-sentencing hearing for seditious conspiracy Proud Boys (Pezzola, Rehl, Nordean, Tarrio, Biggs) Wednesday: Sentencing for Nordean and Tarrio Thursday: Sentencing for Biggs (former Jones employee, the one who may be able to tie the unindicted coconspirators (Chesebro)- and thus Trump - directly to the Capitol breach) and Rehl Friday: Sentencing for Pezzola
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 16:37
|
|
|
FLIPADELPHIA posted:Unless these polls also correctly sample likely voters, then they are nowhere near determinative in predicting election outcomes. Half the country votes. Don't know about all the other states, but here in AZ since 2020 there was a massive influx of people buying houses from CA which tends to lean blue so I'd imagine that it might skew more towards the Dems in the 2024 election rather than go the other way. https://usafacts.org/articles/725000-people-left-california-in-2020-which-states-did-they-move-to/
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 16:39
|
|
|
Libluini posted:This all seems like a load of bullshit to me. The popular vote is distorted by the US and their weird electoral college system, but it's still a useful tool to see where the wind is blowing. I guarantee you, no presidential candidate who is absolutely hated or unwanted by the public is going to win. Otherwise the US would now be governed by president-for-life Jeb Bush. The popular vote going a little bit the wrong way is certainly funny (if you're not from the US) and depressing (if you're from the US), but it would only be "meaningless" if the electoral college gets actually for real appointed by paintball matches. Until then, the voting public is still in the race. Biden is an extremely unpopular politician. His approval ratings are very close to what Trump's were during his term. Currently Biden is at 41% approval. You guys are acting like There's a huge difference between how hated Trump and Biden are, but I'm not seeing any data to back that up. Trump's current favorable is 39.7%
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 16:42
|
|
|
small butter posted:To add to this, Republicans have been losing elections since Trump got elected. Yes, they "won" the House in 2022 (to quote another SA poster) by a margin that you can count on one hand after a fireworks accident during a time of unprecedented inflation, doom and gloom, and apparently roving gangs ready to kill white suburban women and babies (remember fall 2022?). And Democrats are winning special elections or at the very least swinging them +10, while Democrats are in power, which is an obvious precursor to winning the general. If Republican enthusiasm is outmatched by Democratic enthusiasm on off years, what event will trigger enthusiasm for Republicans prior to the general? No no you don’t understand, the GOP nominee running from prison on treason charges will goose Republican turnout beyond belief* especially after he starts running his “gently caress yeah I killed Roe” campaign. *This is what MAGAs actually believe. It’s also really really hard to unseat an incumbent, it doesn’t happen all that often unless they REALLY SUCK and same-party support collapses. Ford - caretaker who never won a national election Carter - chaotic term, New Deal coalition died H W Bush - very bad economy, Dems finally got their poo poo together after the 1980’s with a new coalition Trump - chaotic term, is a criminal, barely won in the first place
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 16:48
|
|
|
FLIPADELPHIA posted:Biden is an extremely unpopular politician. His approval ratings are very close to what Trump's were during his term. Currently Biden is at 41% approval. You guys are acting like There's a huge difference between how hated Trump and Biden are, but I'm not seeing any data to back that up. Trump's current favorable is 39.7% There's a difference between unlikeability and hatred. As in, many people I know don't particularly like Biden. But we loving HATE Trump. We're not repulsed by Biden. But we're repulsed by Trump. Polls don't really capture this.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 16:49
|
|
|
Fork of Unknown Origins posted:I’m not calling Trump the favorite, I’m saying there’s probably at least, at this point, a 1:3 chance he wins. That may shrink as we get closer. But we ignore that possibility right now at our peril. Any thinking that follows the lines of “well we can spend money in a different place because Biden is going to win the general anyway” or “rates go brrrrr who cares about a recession it’s in the bag” is fatally flawed. Or, at an individual level, “no need to donate time or money, Trump doesn’t stand a chance.” 100% agree and my intent is not to say “Biden’s got this in the bag.”
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 16:49
|
|
|
Wang posted:Don't know about all the other states, but here in AZ since 2020 there was a massive influx of people buying houses from CA which tends to lean blue so I'd imagine that it might skew more towards the Dems in the 2024 election rather than go the other way. It leans blue thanks to the cities, tons of California residents are CHUDs and you don't know which ones moved 
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 16:51
|
|
|
Libluini posted:This all seems like a load of bullshit to me. The popular vote is distorted by the US and their weird electoral college system, but it's still a useful tool to see where the wind is blowing. I guarantee you, no presidential candidate who is absolutely hated or unwanted by the public is going to win. Otherwise the US would now be governed by president-for-life Jeb Bush. The popular vote going a little bit the wrong way is certainly funny (if you're not from the US) and depressing (if you're from the US), but it would only be "meaningless" if the electoral college gets actually for real appointed by paintball matches. Until then, the voting public is still in the race. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0261379422001299 small butter posted:There's a difference between unlikeability and hatred. As in, many people I know don't particularly like Biden. But we loving HATE Trump. We're not repulsed by Biden. But we're repulsed by Trump. Polls don't really capture this. I don't think it's likely but please don't assume it can't happen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 16:52
|
|
|
Paracaidas posted:Returning to Trump legal discussion, next week is going to be a newsworthy one in DC. Quoting because it's a good lineup on all things legal and Trump in the same breath.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 16:53
|
|
|
FLIPADELPHIA posted:The popular vote is a meaningless metric. It has no legal or political value and if anything, the public has basically accepted that the GOP can't win the popular vote as being a feature instead of a bug. No one cares. MI Governor race margins: 2010 R+19 2014 R +4 2018 D +9 2022 D +11 The state leg was +16 R in 2016 and is now +2 D. Like, that is a hard state to pull in your direction, especially when your electoral position is clearly worse than it was when you lost by 3% (because you are a convicted felon). Whitmer has completely rehabilitated the Dems in Michigan and IMO it is just a blue state again. Biden lost Florida by 3.5 points; him taking that is probably vastly more likely than Trump taking Michigan.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 16:57
|
|
|
Fork of Unknown Origins posted:I’m not calling Trump the favorite, I’m saying there’s probably at least, at this point, a 1:3 chance he wins. That may shrink as we get closer. But we ignore that possibility right now at our peril. Any thinking that follows the lines of “well we can spend money in a different place because Biden is going to win the general anyway” or “rates go brrrrr who cares about a recession it’s in the bag” is fatally flawed. Or, at an individual level, “no need to donate time or money, Trump doesn’t stand a chance.” It's this -- you wouldn't get into a plane with a 1:3 chance of it crashing, or a 1:10 or 1:100 for that matter.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 16:58
|
|
|
Tenkaris posted:It leans blue thanks to the cities, tons of California residents are CHUDs and you don't know which ones moved I know I remember seeing that transplants to Texas tend to vote more conservative than native Texas. A lot of them are "fleeing the nanny-state CA"
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 16:59
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:YOU aren't repulsed by Biden. Republicans think he's the Marxist antichrist. Sure, some do. But Trump is way more revolting to way more people.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 17:11
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:YOU aren't repulsed by Biden. Republicans think he's the Marxist antichrist. The people who hate Biden most would hate anyone with a (D) after their name just as much and some more. They don't hate him as much as they hated Obama and Hillary when they ran. Hell, they don't hate him as much as they hate Obama and Hillary right now. That said, while I'm pretty bullish on a Biden victory right now there's plenty of chances for it to fall apart. And all being equal I'd rather have people aware of that than being so certain of a Democratic victory that they spend 2020 trying to stake out who owns the coming supermajority or something like a bunch of people I knew in 2016.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 17:26
|
|
|
FCKGW posted:I know I remember seeing that transplants to Texas tend to vote more conservative than native Texas. A lot of them are "fleeing the nanny-state CA" Plus it works the other way too, there are dem voters born and raised in Texas that eventually got fed up, tapped out and moved to a blue state.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 17:29
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:The popular vote isn't useful at all because both Hillary and Biden won it by millions of votes, but Trump actually needed like 40,000 between three states to win. After everyone observed 4 years of that disaster, all it could take is the weather to be slightly worse in dem heavy areas. This premise doesn't support it's conclusion at all, it just means it's not the sole determining factor. The electoral college vote--and therefore the presidency--is a direct derivative function of the popular vote, with the other input of that function being the geographic distribution. This is like saying gaining yards on offense isn't useful at all because you only need one to cross the goal line and the winner is determined by points.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 17:36
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:This premise doesn't support it's conclusion at all, it just means it's not the sole determining factor. The national popular vote isn't a determining factor at all in the election. The state popular votes are the determining factor.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 18:17
|
|
|
Wang posted:Don't know about all the other states, but here in AZ since 2020 there was a massive influx of people buying houses from CA which tends to lean blue so I'd imagine that it might skew more towards the Dems in the 2024 election rather than go the other way. People who leave California for Texas and Arizona trend extremely conservative. Also, California had more Trump voters than Texas.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 18:17
|
|
|
The popular vote doesn’t matter “legally” but it’s absolutely an extremely important statistical indicator, because state voting results are not randomly distributed. What moved the national results tends to move every state. For example if Biden is up by 5 then he’s behind by 15 in KS instead of 20. Some states, like Ohio/PA or MN/WI have even stronger correlations. Trump was already pushing the extreme limits of exploiting the EC in 2020. You can’t really lose by 4+ points and win.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 18:25
|
|
|
Pakistani Brad Pitt posted:It's this -- you wouldn't get into a plane with a 1:3 chance of it crashing, or a 1:10 or 1:100 for that matter. Yeah this. I doubt if anyone but the most pessimistic consider Trump winning the most likely outcome, but if “there is a fifteen percent chance of your house burning and killing you and your family” you will not be feeling great about those odds.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 18:27
|
|
|
Don’t you have an election thread to poo poo up? I want to know about Trump law.Paracaidas posted:Returning to Trump legal discussion, next week is going to be a newsworthy one in DC. For Monday, what are the implications if they get different trial dates? I realize they are both unlikely to get what they ask for but I don’t know how in sync they need to be.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 18:41
|
|
|
Prism posted:Don’t you have an election thread to poo poo up? I want to know about Trump law. The Chutkin case is DC which is Trump only on the indictment. There will be one date and it’s up to Chutkin and she’s not a Chudge so while you could see her pick a reasonably soon date she is unlikely to go for 2026. There will be only one trial date there. I think (correct me tho) you’re asking about what if there are different trial dates for Chesebro vs the other 18 coconspirators in the Georgia RICO case? My understanding based off yesterdays coverage is that Georgia has a speedy trial act that Chesebro has invoked and if prosecution doesn’t move quickly to respect that the whole case goes away. Unless Chesebro changes his mind, his trial will go forward soon. DA Willis insists she will try everyone together, still, in 60 or so days. I hear a lot of skepticism on that but a lot of this is unprecedented. It could result in Chesebro being separated out, which means he could be convicted before the rest of the Rico trial begins. Lot up in the air there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 18:52
|
|
|
Fart Amplifier posted:The national popular vote isn't a determining factor at all in the election. The state popular votes are the determining factor. A vote is a vote, you're just aggregating at different levels of detail. The election is determined by votes weighted by geographic distribution. The national vote is just votes without the geographic distribution information: it's still determinative, it's just not the only determining factor. It's not like geographic distribution is some unbounded or randomized input either, there's a relatively narrow band where the outcome can differ from the popular vote, it's just that our elections have been so close that we've been living in that band the last several decades.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 19:10
|
|
|
Yiggy posted:Plus it works the other way too, there are dem voters born and raised in Texas that eventually got fed up, tapped out and moved to a blue state. Yeah, but there are people from the surrounding shittier states for whom Texas still looks like greener pastures. I have a lot of friends that moved from Louisiana to Texas, primarily to Austin. Texas is still viewed as an improvement over a lot of peoples current situation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 19:19
|
|
|
Pakistani Brad Pitt posted:It's this -- you wouldn't get into a plane with a 1:3 chance of it crashing, or a 1:10 or 1:100 for that matter. COVID-19 did pretty well at showing people have no loving clue how statistics work; my own father touted the "99% survival rate" as a reason to not care about it, for example. But I also lived in Vegas at the time, and if you ever need evidence that people have no clue how statistics or odds work, you can't find a better place.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 19:27
|
|
|
Funny that someone brought up DragonCon because this looks like a first attempt at Two-Face cosplay.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 19:42
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 20:15
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 20:16
|
|
|
Yiggy posted:The Chutkin case is DC which is Trump only on the indictment. There will be one date and it’s up to Chutkin and she’s not a Chudge so while you could see her pick a reasonably soon date she is unlikely to go for 2026. There will be only one trial date there. I mean if Chesebro is convicted in a RICO case that is extremely bad news for the rest of the defendants, right?
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 20:28
|
|
|
Fork of Unknown Origins posted:I mean if Chesebro is convicted in a RICO case that is extremely bad news for the rest of the defendants, right? Yeah, it's this. If he gets what he wants - a fast trial - and it ends up happening before anyone else's, are lawyers allowed to use information that came up at that trial (including admissions of guilt as part of a plea bargain, or whatever - I'm not very up on American law and know very little about RICO) as evidence in the other ones?
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 20:38
|
|
|
Prism posted:For Monday, what are the implications if they get different trial dates? I realize they are both unlikely to get what they ask for but I don’t know how in sync they need to be. Monday is expected to be Chutkin setting a trial date. She is not limited to either side's proposal and can pick roughly any day she'd like (though it'd be rare to be sooner than the earliest request date or further than the latest request date). Given her rulings and statements on other Jan 6 charges, she's very unlikely to give Trump his requested delay and may not choose Smith's date but will likely agree with the Government that the right to a speedy trial is not solely a right of the defense. As to Georgia, beyond not being a lawyer generally I know very little about how they operate down there, especially on RICO. So this is me synthesizing others takes on things I'm not deeply familiar with and should be taken even less seriously than any other of my lawspeculating posts: Chesebro is requesting an accelerated timeline, which is his right. Trump's insisting that he will not be a part of that despite Willis' stated desire to handle everyone at once, so he'll move to sever hinself every time someone moves quickly. Even though his actual desire is "never, and failing that, not until I'm sworn in and can thus push it 4 years", I suspect he has a solid argument that his circumstances, aims, and the case against him differ enough from Chesebro and anyone else who wants to speed this up that he'll be able to split off. The order of operations here does matter a bit, especially with the overlap between Smith and Willis. What's not clear to me (because I have no idea myself and have heard conflicting takes from people I respect) is who is advantaged by splitting the RICO cases and, for those in both Jan 6 indictments, the benefits and drawbacks for each of them to Smith or Willis getting first crack. Also,(PDF) Meadows filed his response to Willis trying to prevent removal to federal court today I'll grab highlights and lowlights when I have time if nobody has gotten to them first. I do think I side with Meadows on the principles given what he's charged with, but had a hearty  at his argument that not only is literally anything to do with the executive branch and its powers a part of his duties, but so is anything that has to do with the legislative branch - "even for matters committed exclusively to Congress" - because (I'm not joking) The State of the Union address.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 20:40
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:A vote is a vote, you're just aggregating at different levels of detail. The election is determined by votes weighted by geographic distribution. The national vote is just votes without the geographic distribution information: it's still determinative, it's just not the only determining factor. It's not like geographic distribution is some unbounded or randomized input either, there's a relatively narrow band where the outcome can differ from the popular vote, it's just that our elections have been so close that we've been living in that band the last several decades. Votes in the presidential election are literally and legally not equal. Votes in different states are not aggregated together at any point in the electoral progress. The national popular vote is not used for anything. Voters in different states are voting directly for their electors and indirectly for the president. The national popular vote is a completely useless statistic that is only ever aggregated that way because people find it interesting to calculate. It is a determinant of nothing and is only an interesting emergent sidenote calculated by uselessly aggregating the vote counts for the separate elections held in each state.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 20:44
|
|
|
nachos posted:Did he always say election “interference” or is this some new pivot He always says that. He's not describing what he's been charged with; he's claiming that the idea that he might be persecuted for his crimes is judicial interference in the 2024 election.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 20:53
|
|
|
Paracaidas posted:I do think I side with Meadows on the principles given what he's charged with, absofuckinglutely not lmao. he cannot hide behind his federal position while simultaneously claiming he was engaging in First Amendment protected political activity when said political activity is explicitly made illegal by the Hatch Act. just because there were no consequences because trump ran a lawless administration does not mean that the law ceases to exist moreover, it's a mockery of the entire idea of why removal is necessary in certain cases when states attempt to prosecute federal officials actually doing their jobs. his actions that broke the law -- such as offering to have the Trump campaign pay the bills for more recounts or sitting in on meetings between fake electors and Trump campaign attorneys or pressuring a Georgia official to change the results after they'd already had a recount and lost it -- were explicitly on behalf of the Trump campaign, not him doing his duties as a federal official eke out fucked around with this message at 21:06 on Aug 25, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 20:55
|
|
|
Meadows is trying to have it both ways: claiming it should be removed to federal court because he was acting under the color of his job duties as CoS, but also that it was first amendment protected speech because it was campaign work, which undercuts the first claim.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 21:26
|
|
|
You really can’t fault a person(‘s lawyer) for trying to have it in any and all plausible ways in a court filing. Arguments in the alternative all the way down.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 21:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 11:27 |
|
|
gregday posted:Meadows is trying to have it both ways: claiming it should be removed to federal court because he was acting under the color of his job duties as CoS, but also that it was first amendment protected speech because it was campaign work, which undercuts the first claim. and, to be clear, it cannot be part of his duties because Congress has specifically made engaging in political activity while on duty illegal
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2023 21:34
|
|