The 2016 US Election (Part III)

[Flagg]

So lets review, today we got stories about Trump having mob ties, mafia ties, running six different scams one involving his charity events for veterans and a few other issues not worth covering for how pedestrian they are.

And on the flip side we have Clinton campaign strategy memo "leaking" (AKA they handed it directly to politico so they would report this exclusive on their front page I hate our media) oh and as Shep covered we have another bit of fallout from Team Clinton and her disdain for security. I was already proven wrong on the fact she was not prosecuted so this interests me little, she already won on the issue. She got away with it and this latest little thing just demonstrates that either the FBI was garbage at investigation or had already decided that charges would not be forthcoming. I'm still waiting on the official explanation on why people like Combetta, Sydney and the rest could see and read Secretary Clinton's email and not be required to be submitted for security clearances but again rules are for other people.

Same verse same as the first, less than fifty days until the election and every time Secretary Clinton gets into the news Trump benefits. If she could vanish for 40 days, like hop on the slow boat tour of the Pacific and come back in the week before the election she might beat Trump by sixty points. But she can't because if she vanishes everyone will assume she's dead because she tried working when she should have been resting.

Reality has a liberal bias blah blah blah "Trump Says Something Outrageousely Offensive, Media Fawns".

DOES CLINTON HAVE PARKINSON'S? MORE AT 11! (At 11: No, she just overworked, but our breathless advertising won't make people who didn't tune in at 11 assume she does! INTEGRITY? HA!).

[Simon_Jester]

So Reddit's immediate reaction to finding out a username was to search the internet for any other uses of that same username. Given that, can't you imagine a less nefarious reason to want to strip out personal email addresses of any number of people from a PST that had the potential to go public? The leap to "he was asking Reddit for help obstructing justice, because there's no history of mass doxxing and harassment on the internet," seems entirely unwarranted.

That... is a distinct point.

It would remain a deeply stupid move, though, to redact the emails before handing them over to Congress or the FBI. And notably, unless I'm badly wrong, Wikileaks got the emails from the State Department, not from the packet of emails handed to Congress and the FBI.

However, given what has just happened to Combetta, I can't blame him for really, really wanting his personal email address to NOT be part of any mass releases of emails to the public. Since as a result of all this he's being publicly outed for participation in porn sites, that suddenly becomes a bit more understandable.

[Also, he will probably be wrongly accused of anything done on the Internet by anyone else in the world who uses the screenname "stonetear," which is composed of two common one syllable words and is probably used by multiple people out of the hundreds of millions of English speakers online worldwide. I mean hell, I've been mistaken for other Simon Jesters and vice versa, and I suspect "stonetear" is more common than "Simon Jester."]

So lets review, today we got stories about Trump having mob ties, mafia ties, running six different scams one involving his charity events for veterans and a few other issues not worth covering for how pedestrian they are.

And on the flip side we have Clinton campaign strategy memo "leaking" (AKA they handed it directly to politico so they would report this exclusive on their front page I hate our media) oh and as Shep covered we have another bit of fallout from Team Clinton and her disdain for security. I was already proven wrong on the fact she was not prosecuted so this interests me little, she already won on the issue. She got away with it and this latest little thing just demonstrates that either the FBI was garbage at investigation or had already decided that charges would not be forthcoming. I'm still waiting on the official explanation on why people like Combetta, Sydney and the rest could see and read Secretary Clinton's email and not be required to be submitted for security clearances but again rules are for other people.

Same verse same as the first, less than fifty days until the election and every time Secretary Clinton gets into the news Trump benefits. If she could vanish for 40 days, like hop on the slow boat tour of the Pacific and come back in the week before the election she might beat Trump by sixty points. But she can't because if she vanishes everyone will assume she's dead because she tried working when she should have been resting.

This ties into my point: Trump can have news regarding four scandals released in the same day and people [edit: that is to say, people who support Trump at the moment] don't seem to take notice.

Whereas when Clinton has one scandal, time bombs associated with it can continue to be viewed as important by her opponents [edit: and the more fairweather of her supporters] months or years later.

There is very little correlation between the amount of information being released that says bad things about the candidate's character, and its impact upon the candidate, or the amount of mileage it gets in the media.

[Gaidin]

As much as we haven't wanted the mere posting of a picture before. It just illustrates it so god damned perfectly...

[Flagg]

As much as we haven't wanted the mere posting of a picture before. It just illustrates it so god damned perfectly...

I'm no mod, but it's perfect and you are forgiven, my son.

[SolarpunkFan]

Edit: ignore this post. The one below is better.

[SolarpunkFan]

NPR Battleground Map: A Path To The Presidency Opens Up For Trump

A month ago, there were "Road Closed" signs up on all of Donald Trump's potential paths to the White House.

But now, less than a week before the crucial first debate of this presidential race — and as a terrorism bombing investigation continues in New York and New Jersey — a viable route has emerged for the Republican nominee, according to the latest NPR Battleground Map.

About a dozen battleground states have gotten closer, with some key ones showing Trump leading for the first time. Hillary Clinton retains the advantage, but it's a far more precarious lead for the Democrat than at any time in this presidential race.

Trump's movement comes as many pollsters have switched to "likely voter" models, which try to predict the electorate based on factors like enthusiasm and past voting records. That alone may be responsible for most of the tightening, but it also follows a less-disastrous month of campaigning for Trump than the stretch immediately following the party conventions, which saw his fight with the Khan family, whose son, a Muslim American, was an Army captain killed in Iraq. Trump also began running his first major round of campaign ads in key states in recent weeks.

Oh, and the latest 538 forecast has Clinton at 58.2% and Trump at 41.8% possibilities of winning. And that's the polls-only forecast, the other forecasts are looking even worse.

Okay, people can tell me right now that this is going to be a Democratic slam dunk. I'm not going to buy that anymore (even if I only bought it in transient periods earlier). Anyone saying that it's going to be a slam dunk for Hillary is sounding exactly like the unskewed polls people from the 2012 election to me right now.

[The Romulan Republic]

At the same time, I would point out that the states that are leaning Trump do not add up to enough electoral college votes for him to win, and there's no other blue state that's on the cusp of flipping (other than Nevada, which is right on the line). The math still does not actually favour him.

Could he win? Yes. Although I'm more concerned about it being close enough that he can scrape over the line with fraud/voter suppression than I am about a fair Trump win.

Is it time to concede that Clinton's campaign is doomed? Absolutely not.

That said, it is appalling that it is this close, and will serve to further normalize some very dangerous politics.

[Gaidin]

Okay, people can tell me right now that this is going to be a Democratic slam dunk. I'm not going to buy that anymore (even if I only bought it in transient periods earlier). Anyone saying that it's going to be a slam dunk for Hillary is sounding exactly like the unskewed polls people from the 2012 election to me right now.

It was never going to be. Hard core republicans that don't like Trump but still hilariously dislike the Dems and/or Clinton were still going to do what? Sure, there's plenty of Republicans making this look like Goldwater Redux when you look at the newspapers, but the voters are still the voters. The last couple weeks were a high from the Convention and the parties have started solidifying up with their voters and it's a race to see who's got the best ground game. That is where the math is going to count now that her convention high is well and legitimately over.

[SolarpunkFan]

It was never going to be. Hard core republicans that don't like Trump but still hilariously dislike the Dems and/or Clinton were still going to do what? Sure, there's plenty of Republicans making this look like Goldwater Redux when you look at the newspapers, but the voters are still the voters. The last couple weeks were a high from the Convention and the parties have started solidifying up with their voters and it's a race to see who's got the best ground game. That is where the math is going to count now that her convention high is well and legitimately over.

I don't think the ground game is going to matter quite frankly.

The media is trying to make fiascoes out Clinton non-events while handing Trump free pass after free pass. They've been doing this for a year now. When people get contacted by the Hillary campaign or see one of her ads, they're still going to judge her based on the picture the media has painted. Once a person has decided on something they're not going to have their minds changed easily. A large portion, perhaps a majority, of the population thinks fucking Trump, of all people, is more trustworthy than Hillary. And at this point, that idea probably has too much momentum behind it to have enough of it turned around in two months.

I know I sound pessimistic (or insert a worse word there), but I don't have faith in my countrypeople when they voted for Bush Jr. TWICE.

[Iroscato]

I know I sound pessimistic (or insert a worse word there), but I don't have faith in my countrypeople when they voted for Bush Jr. TWICE.

Well...once. Still bad enough though, and this is what I keep saying to people when they disregard Trump out of hand because he's "too crazy".

[The Vortex Empire]

Trump up to 44.5% chance of victory. For perspective, on this same day in 2012, Romney had a 23.9% chance.

[MKSheppard]

I'm still waiting on the official explanation on why people like Combetta, Sydney and the rest could see and read Secretary Clinton's email and not be required to be submitted for security clearances but again rules are for other people.

[The Romulan Republic]

Trump up to 44.5% chance of victory. For perspective, on this same day in 2012, Romney had a 23.9% chance.

Some perspective from the other side:

He's still less likely to win than Clinton, and Romney ultimately got thrashed.

[Q99]

I do find it interesting that it seems George HW Bush is voting Hillary! Not surprising in one sense, I had wonder if the Bushes might, but important none the less.

[The Romulan Republic]

Might be the first time I've ever felt affection for old HW.

[Ziggy Stardust]

Trump's movement comes as many pollsters have switched to "likely voter" models, which try to predict the electorate based on factors like enthusiasm and past voting records.

Is there not a chance that likely voter models may be overstating the swing for Trump a bit? I don't know much about the sophistication of these models or what they do or not adjust for, but there is a chance that the unique nature of this election may undermine those models a bit. Historical voting patterns tend to show that, in general, more conservative-leaning voters have higher turnout than liberal-leaning voters (IIRC this is independent of age as well, though perhaps I'm misremembering that point). However, in this particular election, due to the more or less unprecedented type of attention Trump's campaign is getting, there is a potential for a relative boost in turnout for the left voting block and a corresponding decline in turnout among moderate right-wingers. If that ends up being the case, then "likely voter" models may be underestimating Hillary's chances.

That said, there is no guarantee that this election will break from historical voting patterns. I'm merely positing that if it were to ever happen, this would be the most likely year for it in a while.

[The Romulan Republic]

On the flip-side, the Democrats may have lower than usual turnout because of deep dislike from progressives and young voters towards Clinton. Fear and hate of Trump might off-set that. Or it might not.

Edit: I recall a joke from Trevor Noah on The Daily Show, to the effect that Clinton and Trump are both lucky, because they're both running against the only person they could possibly beat. Oversimplified, sure, but it has more truth to it than I care for.

[Q99]

It's a funny thing, because Hillary almost beat Obama and I'm pretty sure she'd have beaten McCain just fine in that fairly conventional election.

Might be the first time I've ever felt affection for old HW.

Even though I like him less than any Democratic President in my lifetime, I've always also rating him above all the Republican ones. He was more reliable and sensible- pulling back on the 'no new taxes' when it didn't make sense, for example.

[Mr Bean]

It's a funny thing, because Hillary almost beat Obama and I'm pretty sure she'd have beaten McCain just fine in that fairly conventional election.

Given it was the who gets to replace Bush election I'd say that's likely but I don't think the Half term governor happens if it's Senator Clinton since both being Senators, both having great careers prior to running the VP picks will be totally different. Why does the VP pick matter? Because it sets the tone, and the half racism tone is not what we would have had, it would have instead been the Great Crusade against the Clinton's.

[Flagg]

I'm still waiting on the official explanation on why people like Combetta, Sydney and the rest could see and read Secretary Clinton's email and not be required to be submitted for security clearances but again rules are for other people.

I'm still waiting for torturers and the "lawyers" who wiped their ass with all the laws and treaties banning torture to and giving the torturers legal grounds constructed of smoke, mirrors, and human feces to be be prosecuted. You know, stuff way worse than emails.

[U.P. Cinnabar]

I'm still waiting on the official explanation on why people like Combetta, Sydney and the rest could see and read Secretary Clinton's email and not be required to be submitted for security clearances but again rules are for other people.

I'm still waiting for torturers and the "lawyers" who wiped their ass with all the laws and treaties banning torture to and giving the torturers legal grounds constructed of smoke, mirrors, and human feces to be be prosecuted. You know, stuff way worse than emails.

And, as soon as a way is found to blame Hillary for that too, your wait will be over.

[Adam Reynolds]

Given it was the who gets to replace Bush election I'd say that's likely but I don't think the Half term governor happens if it's Senator Clinton since both being Senators, both having great careers prior to running the VP picks will be totally different. Why does the VP pick matter? Because it sets the tone, and the half racism tone is not what we would have had, it would have instead been the Great Crusade against the Clinton's.

A large part of why Palin was chosen was a result of the fact that McCain had a disadvantage with women but also needed to appease the conservative base. That would be even more true against Clinton.

[Mr Bean]

Given it was the who gets to replace Bush election I'd say that's likely but I don't think the Half term governor happens if it's Senator Clinton since both being Senators, both having great careers prior to running the VP picks will be totally different. Why does the VP pick matter? Because it sets the tone, and the half racism tone is not what we would have had, it would have instead been the Great Crusade against the Clinton's.

A large part of why Palin was chosen was a result of the fact that McCain had a disadvantage with women but also needed to appease the conservative base. That would be even more true against Clinton.

I disagree because the Palin pick was a pick that was 50% panic. Don't you remember the rush that resulted in an unvetted Palin napping the VP nod? Had the race been closer or lopsided the other way that panic situation never happens. If you recall McCain even before he lost the election was telling his friend that Palin was a huge mistaken given how many hidden baggage issues she had come with. If you don't have that rush, that panic you don't get Palin.

[Flagg]

Given it was the who gets to replace Bush election I'd say that's likely but I don't think the Half term governor happens if it's Senator Clinton since both being Senators, both having great careers prior to running the VP picks will be totally different. Why does the VP pick matter? Because it sets the tone, and the half racism tone is not what we would have had, it would have instead been the Great Crusade against the Clinton's.

A large part of why Palin was chosen was a result of the fact that McCain had a disadvantage with women but also needed to appease the conservative base. That would be even more true against Clinton.

I disagree because the Palin pick was a pick that was 50% panic. Don't you remember the rush that resulted in an unvetted Palin napping the VP nod? Had the race been closer or lopsided the other way that panic situation never happens. If you recall McCain even before he lost the election was telling his friend that Palin was a huge mistaken given how many hidden baggage issues she had come with. If you don't have that rush, that panic you don't get Palin.

That HBO movie with Julianne Moore 'Game Changer' is worth viewing if you are a Republican or not because if even half of it's true (and I've heard that it's more like 99% true with the 1% being amalgams for running time and making a few different people one character, and it's more like 15% of the movie is what actually happened and there's 85% more of shit she and her family did that they just couldn't add due to running time) it shows just how desperate they were. The funny thing is, they were so against a McCain/Lieberman ticket, and that was my greatest fear in 2008 because I think it had a damned good chance of succeeding.

[The Romulan Republic]

I just realized something looking at fivethirtyeight's numbers.

If they're right, then the states currently leaning Trump give him 265 electoral college votes (presuming they all ultimate go to him), leaving him just five short of a win.

The closest to flipping of the remaining Democratic-leaning states is Colorado, with nine electoral college votes.

My state could very easily decide the outcome of what I truly believe is probably the most important election in generations.

Edit: I am happy to report that fivethirtyeight still gives the Democrats well over 60% odds in Colorado, thankfully.