Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Elections 2018 USA  (Read 7051 times)

sedziobs

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 197
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #100 on: November 08, 2018, 07:58:24 PM »
Yes it does.  It includes their assessment of how likely their deterministic prediction was biased in either direction.

Klondike Kat

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 161
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 15
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #101 on: November 09, 2018, 12:43:39 AM »
Yes it does.  It includes their assessment of how likely their deterministic prediction was biased in either direction.

So are you saying that they purposely prediction on the far edge of uncertainty towards the Democrats?  Just like they did in the presidential election?  I guess next time, we just adjust their numbers 3% to the right, and they should be right on.

sedziobs

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 197
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #102 on: November 09, 2018, 12:55:33 AM »
I said nothing like that.  Do you understand the difference between a probabilistic forecast and a deterministic prediction?  538's forecast showed an 83% chance that their "prediction" would be wrong.  The far left edge of the 80% confidence interval was a 2 seat gain for Democrats.  The far right was a 4 seat gain for Republicans.  That is an acknowledgement of uncertainty and polling bias.

Klondike Kat

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 161
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 15
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #103 on: November 09, 2018, 02:50:22 AM »
I said nothing like that.  Do you understand the difference between a probabilistic forecast and a deterministic prediction?  538's forecast showed an 83% chance that their "prediction" would be wrong.  The far left edge of the 80% confidence interval was a 2 seat gain for Democrats.  The far right was a 4 seat gain for Republicans.  That is an acknowledgement of uncertainty and polling bias.

You still have not addressed the consistent 4% bias in their polls towards the Democrats.  That is not within the margin of error.

sedziobs

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 197
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #104 on: November 09, 2018, 02:58:36 AM »
538 doesn't conduct polls.  What they do is make forecasts based off of them and supplementary information.  The forecast accounts for potential bias in the polls.  The result, even with the 4% poll bias, was within their stated margin of error.
« Last Edit: November 09, 2018, 03:08:46 AM by sedziobs »

Klondike Kat

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 161
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 15
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #105 on: November 09, 2018, 01:40:47 PM »
538 doesn't conduct polls.  What they do is make forecasts based off of them and supplementary information.  The forecast accounts for potential bias in the polls.  The result, even with the 4% poll bias, was within their stated margin of error.

Alright predictions, let's not quibble.  But the 4% was not within their standard of error.  An individual poll, yes.  But as you state, their forecasts are not done on individual polls.  They are supposed better at forecasting.  Yet, their analysis performed poorer than straight polling.  All their adjustments towards the Democrats proved false, just like the 2016 presidential race.

sedziobs

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 197
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #106 on: November 09, 2018, 05:40:31 PM »
So what you're saying is that only Nate Silver is allowed to say such things. And you, of course. Maybe you're related to Nate or do you own shares in 538?
This is absurd.  I have never said that only Silver or myself acknowledge uncertainty and bias.  I'm explaining how probabilistic forecasts (of all types) incorporate uncertainty.  It's a very basic concept that some have trouble grasping.

Will you backtrack on your rant about the national House vote if it climbs above 6%?  It's up to 4.5% as of now.  How are you determining that it is outside RCP's margin of error?  I don't see it on their site.

Klondike Kat, The 4% average polling error is itself deterministic.  538 gives their margins of error for each of those.  The only one that appears to be outside it is Indiana.  Out of 13 states you listed, one state being outside the margin of error is not unexpected.  The fact that most of the bias was in one direction is built into the aggregate model.  Silver (and others) account for correlation, where a miss in one state will affect others in the same way.  That's part of the reason why the aggregate model had anywhere from 49 to 55 Republican seats within the confidence interval.

538's analysis did not perform worse than straight polling.  The polls only model had 54:46 as an 8.3% chance.  Their classic model had it as an 8.6% chance.  That's not much better than polling, but it's not worse.  If you mean straight polls without any kind of model, that also underperformed.  Using that would give a 0% chance of 54:46.  The same is true of the 2016 election.  Looking only at polls (as most media outlets did) gave Clinton essentially a 100% chance of winning.  538 gave her a 71% chance.  There wasn't a single raw poll that had Trump ahead in Wisconsin from the beginning of September through the election.  But 538 gave Trump a 15% chance of winning Wisconsin, which combined with correlation, gave much better odds of a national Trump victory than polls alone.
Quote
Our probabilities are based on the historical accuracy of election polls since 1972. When we say a candidate has a 30 percent chance of winning despite being down in the polls, we’re not just covering our butts. Those estimates reflect the historical uncertainty in polling.
...
while the election is contested at the state level, the error is correlated from state to state. If a candidate beats his polls to win Ohio, there’s a good chance he’ll also do so in Pennsylvania.

You continue to say "4% was not within their standard of error".  What is your rationale for that?

Klondike Kat

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 161
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 15
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #107 on: November 09, 2018, 07:54:15 PM »

Klondike Kat, The 4% average polling error is itself deterministic.  538 gives their margins of error for each of those.  The only one that appears to be outside it is Indiana.  Out of 13 states you listed, one state being outside the margin of error is not unexpected.  The fact that most of the bias was in one direction is built into the aggregate model.  Silver (and others) account for correlation, where a miss in one state will affect others in the same way.  That's part of the reason why the aggregate model had anywhere from 49 to 55 Republican seats within the confidence interval.

538's analysis did not perform worse than straight polling.  The polls only model had 54:46 as an 8.3% chance.  Their classic model had it as an 8.6% chance.  That's not much better than polling, but it's not worse.  If you mean straight polls without any kind of model, that also underperformed.  Using that would give a 0% chance of 54:46.  The same is true of the 2016 election.  Looking only at polls (as most media outlets did) gave Clinton essentially a 100% chance of winning.  538 gave her a 71% chance.  There wasn't a single raw poll that had Trump ahead in Wisconsin from the beginning of September through the election.  But 538 gave Trump a 15% chance of winning Wisconsin, which combined with correlation, gave much better odds of a national Trump victory than polls alone.
Quote
Our probabilities are based on the historical accuracy of election polls since 1972. When we say a candidate has a 30 percent chance of winning despite being down in the polls, we’re not just covering our butts. Those estimates reflect the historical uncertainty in polling.
...
while the election is contested at the state level, the error is correlated from state to state. If a candidate beats his polls to win Ohio, there’s a good chance he’ll also do so in Pennsylvania.

You continue to say "4% was not within their standard of error".  What is your rationale for that?

By comparison, realclearpolitics uses only polling data in their analyses.  In the same states as mentioned previously, their calculated polling composite average bias was less than 1% in favor of the Democrats.  RCP states a greater uncertainty in their averages.  Hence, they listed seven states as tossups (NV, MO, IN, AZ, FL, MT, and WV).  They have access to the same polling data as Nate Silvers at 538.  Therefore, one can only conclude that the fundamentals that 538 includes in their analyses are skewed blue. 

In 2016, the RCP election map heading into election day was Clinton 203, Trump 164, and 171 tossups.  Compare that to 538 which posted Clinton 270, Trump 215, and 53 tossups (all tilted towards Clinton).  This was largely a result of their 2.5% bias towards Clinton in the battleground states.  538 had Clinton's lead in WI, MI and PA outside their margin of error in their fundamentals, giving those state to her in their final prediction.  By the way, the Trafalgar group posted polling day on Monday before the election showing Trump ahead in PA, MI, and FL.  No polls were conducted in WI during the final week.

I am not the only one to have discovered this bias.  A little searching revealed this:

https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/10/12/nate-silver-538s-measurable-3-5-democratic-bias-and-the-2018-house-race/

sedziobs

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 197
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #108 on: November 09, 2018, 08:46:23 PM »
I never said that 538 didn't have bias, and I never made any comparison between 538 and RCP.  The point is that 538's forecasts accounted for the possibility of bias.  The results were within the margin of error.

Quote
RCP states a greater uncertainty in their averages.
Can you provide a link to that?  I can't find any margins of error for their polling averages.  I imagine they have different criteria for what they label toss-ups compared to 538, which uses 60% chance or less.  Does RCP list their criteria or methodology anywhere?

RCP had a 7.2% bias toward Clinton in Wisconsin, 538 had a 6.0% bias in their fundamentals forecast (within their confidence interval).  I don't know how you're coming up with the idea that the result was outside their margin of error.

By the way, Sinema has opened up a 0.5% lead in Arizona and Florida is headed for a recount.  If those both go D (not sure how likely that is), then the result will be 52:48.  That would match 538's central prediction, and give Democrats a 5-3 edge in RCP toss-ups.  It would mean 538 split their toss-ups, and the only deterministic miss was Indiana.  Of course there's no guarantee that will happen.

Klondike Kat

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 161
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 15
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #109 on: November 09, 2018, 10:02:54 PM »
So we can agree that 538 has a blue bias?

sedziobs

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 197
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #110 on: November 09, 2018, 10:35:12 PM »
Yes, 538 had a blue bias in the last two elections.  Can we also agree that the results were within their stated confidence interval?

sedziobs

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 197
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #111 on: November 10, 2018, 03:35:13 AM »
Sinema is now up to a full 1.0% lead in Arizona. 

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Royalty
  • *****
  • Posts: 6092
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 244
  • Likes Given: 174
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #112 on: November 10, 2018, 10:14:53 AM »
That is a well-written text, with excellent annotations by Dore. Thanks for typing all of that out, Lurk.
Compare, compare, compare

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Royalty
  • *****
  • Posts: 6092
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 244
  • Likes Given: 174
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #113 on: November 10, 2018, 01:13:43 PM »
Hansen has castigated Obama to the bone for selling out completely on his promises of 2008 campaign. Others still believe Obama can walk on water. The disconnect is unbearable for me to cope with some days. To me Obama is a 100% first rate fraud.

Maybe you might find that article here http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/index.shtml
---


Martin Gisser will say this is all Republican propaganda, and stupid James Hansen and his granddaughter actually fall for that shit. If only they were better at maths, they would see that reality is like a clockwork.

Amazingly depressing that such a video only gets around 1500 views after a year and a half.  :-\

But never mind. What did Trump do today?
Compare, compare, compare

Klondike Kat

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 161
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 15
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #114 on: November 10, 2018, 03:23:29 PM »
That is a well-written text, with excellent annotations by Dore. Thanks for typing all of that out, Lurk.

Yes, very nice.  I think it is extremely difficult (but not impossible) for a third party to emerge from the grass roots.  The situation would need to deteriorate more from the current situation to facilitate such.  What I envision to be more likely is the Democratic party splitting in two; creating moderate and progressive parties.  Currently, the Democratic Party is trying to be both, and as a result, there is division within.  Many progressives, who disliked Clinton and the Party leaders, would embrace this new development, as would the moderates, who have been running against them.  I suspect that the moderate wing would retain the Democratic name, as the party appears to be headed that direction anyway.  Many moderate, independent voters would align with this "new" Democratic Party, while the greens and others on the left are likely to join the new progressive party.  There might be some growing pains for a years while everything sorts itself out, and Republicans may benefit briefly, but it would represent more of the people and make the elections more interesting.

Klondike Kat

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 161
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 15
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #115 on: November 10, 2018, 11:50:10 PM »
Yes, 538 had a blue bias in the last two elections.  Can we also agree that the results were within their stated confidence interval?

The results were within the confidence level.  The problem I have with them is predicted an outcome when the difference between the candidates is less than their confidence level.  If the difference between the two candidates is within the uncertainty range, than it should be classified as a tossup.

Pmt111500

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1584
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 25
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #116 on: November 11, 2018, 02:23:23 AM »
It looks like the (incompentent, thank Gods) mail bomber and a Drumpf supporter, who targeted Don'TRumps' political opponents with packages containing explosives, sent the failed bombs from a postal office distribution center in Florida. When this was discovered the distribution center was shut down and by happenstance it had a bunch (i don't know how many) of filled absentee ballots within. These were not counted in the first count right after the election was over. Thus, a criminal did prevent citicens' votes being counted and this should be added to his charges if there is no recount.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2018, 02:47:45 AM by Pmt111500 »
Amateur observations of Sea Ice since 2003.

Pmt111500

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1584
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 25
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #117 on: November 12, 2018, 09:46:43 AM »
It looks like Georgia's election officials don't know their own addresses. They have preprinted a wrong address to the mail-in ballots so these might get lost in post. I do not know how widespread this problem is. Anyway they are incompetent, if not outright frauds. If they've done this knowingly they should face a jail sentence of some +5 years, I guess.

https://mobile.twitter.com/hill_ruthie/status/1061009244915417093
« Last Edit: November 12, 2018, 10:13:39 AM by Pmt111500 »
Amateur observations of Sea Ice since 2003.

Buddy

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3325
  • Go DUCKS!!
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #118 on: November 13, 2018, 08:55:28 PM »
I EXPECT that Trump will win Florida after the recount is done, and is likely to win Mississippi as well when they vote.  But to tell you just how important those two state Senate seats are to Trump .... if the Dem’s somehow won those two seats ...   it would mean that there would only have to be 16 Republican Senators that vote for removing Trump from office, as opposed to 20 Republicans needed if the Republicans win both seats.

This is Trump’s “fallback wall” ...   and he wants/needs it as high as he can get it.  Because once the information about how corrupt he is, he will continue to lose support by the US public and Congress.
FOX (RT) News....."The Trump Channel.....where truth and journalism are dead."

Buddy

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3325
  • Go DUCKS!!
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 43
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #119 on: November 15, 2018, 01:51:03 AM »
In Donald Trump’s “very close to complete victory” last Tuesday .... the new House members went to Washington DC today for “Freshman Orientation” and a photo shoot.  Note that there are still close to 10 seats that are still too close to call, but the photos of the new Freshman House members is GOBSMACKING ....

Republicans:  30 men + 1 woman (NO .... that is NOT a misprint ... ONE)

Democrats:    22 men + 34 women

So 61% of the new House Democrat’s are women .... and 3% of the new House Republicans are women.

And how man of the Republican men are WHITE?  Only ALL OF THEM.  The Dem’s had about 15 of the 56 new members from an ethnic minority (visually ... so it could be more ... that is about 27%).

I think the GOP needs to change their name from the Grand Ole’ Party (GOP), to the GWM .... (Grand White Men). 😱

And you wonder why Donnie was campaigning to “angry white males”?
« Last Edit: November 15, 2018, 02:01:07 AM by Buddy »
FOX (RT) News....."The Trump Channel.....where truth and journalism are dead."

Pmt111500

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1584
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 25
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #120 on: November 15, 2018, 10:34:26 AM »

Republicans:  30 men + 1 woman (NO .... that is NOT a misprint ... .... and 3% of the new House Republicans are women.

Really funny, this time republicans elected less women representatives than Iran, this might become a meme :
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SG.GEN.PARL.ZS
« Last Edit: November 15, 2018, 12:10:44 PM by Pmt111500 »
Amateur observations of Sea Ice since 2003.

sedziobs

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 197
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #121 on: November 15, 2018, 04:02:35 PM »
In California 39th, Cisneros has steadily gained and is now within 122 votes.  In Maine, the 2nd district is going to a runoff, and both third party candidates have endorsed the Democrat.  If those both go to the Dems, and they take California 45th and Utah 4th where they're leading, we're looking at 234-201.

sedziobs

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 197
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 19
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #122 on: November 15, 2018, 08:46:48 PM »
In Maine, the 2nd district is going to a runoff, and both third party candidates have endorsed the Democrat.
So this wasn't exactly a runoff.  It was a ranked choice recount, and Democrat Jared Golden won today.

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2160
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 84
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #123 on: November 16, 2018, 03:38:26 PM »
… I suggest the US House of Representatives will, come January 3, have (all approximations) either 210 or 235 Democrats (with either 225 or 200 Republicans), or a shift of either 17 (±5) or 42 (±5) seats.  …
From Electoral-Vote.com:
Quote
… Depending on which outlet you go with, there are anywhere from four to eight seats still up in the air. It is our view that the lower end of that is correct, and that only GA-07, TX-23, UT-04, and CA-39 remain in doubt. Democrats have the upper hand in two of those, and Republicans in the other two, which means that the House likely to end up with 234 Democrats and 201 Republicans, a net gain of 38 seats for the blue team. That's obviously very good, and given that two of the Republican members who are headed for victories (Chris Collins and Duncan Hunter in California) are under indictment, they might eventually make it 40.
So, it appears my criterion for a Democratic wave is about to be met.
« Last Edit: November 16, 2018, 04:01:58 PM by Tor Bejnar »
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2160
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 84
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #124 on: November 21, 2018, 02:15:09 PM »
From electoral-vote.com:
Quote
… GA-07 is the only House race left unresolved. Assuming [Democrat] Bourdeaux does not prevail [419 votes down before recount of non-in-person ballots (in-person voting was on no-paper-trail machines)], then it will be 234 Democrats in the House to 201 Republicans, meaning that the blue team picked up 39 seats.
Hmmm, gain of 38 or 39 seats?  (see previous message's quote of E-V.com - Politico says it's a 39 seat gain for the D-team.)  My Nov. 2 prediction (with a D-wave) was not too bad!  Wish I could guess future ASI E, A and V numbers as well.   :P
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

Lurk

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 160
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #125 on: December 03, 2018, 06:25:02 AM »
Beware the Polls and the Media spin in the close races during 2020 :)

Final Results   --   --   49.2   49.6    DeSantis +0.4 (GOP) 4% out
RCP Average   --   --   49.4   45.8   Gillum +3.6

Final Results   --   --   --   47.4   50.4   Reynolds +3.0 (GOP) 2.3% out
RCP Average      --   --   45.0   44.3   Hubbell +0.7

Final Results                 --   --   --   43.3   47.8   6.5   Kelly +4.5 (Dem) 5.5% out
Emerson   10/26 - 10/28   747 LV   3.7   44   43   8   Kobach +1
Emerson*   9/26 - 9/28   938 RV   3.5   37   36   9   Kobach +1
PPP (D)   9/12 - 9/13   618 LV   --   39   38   9   Kobach +1
PPP (D)*   8/24 - 8/26   877 LV   --   39   38   9   Kobach +1
Remington Research (R)   7/19 - 7/20   1189 LV   2.9   35   36   12   Kelly +1

Final Results   --   --   --   45.3   49.4   Sisolak +4.1 (Dem) 4.7% out
RCP Average      --   --   46.3   45.7   Laxalt +0.6

Final Results                 --   --   --   46.4   50.7   DeWine +4.3 (GOP) +9% out
Gravis   10/29 - 10/30   789 LV   3.5   48   43   Cordray +5
Emerson   10/26 - 10/28   566 LV   4.3   49   46   Cordray +3
Suffolk*   10/4 - 10/8   500 LV   4.4   46   40   Cordray +6
NBC News/Marist   9/16 - 9/20   564 LV   5.0   47   47   Tie

Senators

Final Results   --   --   --   48.0   49.7   Sinema +1.7 (Dem) 2.7% out
RCP Average      --   --   47.5   46.5   McSally +1.0

Final Results   --   --   49.9   50.1   Scott +0.2 (GOP) 2.6% out
RCP Average   --   --   48.8   46.4   Nelson +2.4

Final Results   --   --   --   45.1   51.0   3.9   Braun +5.9 (GOP) 6.6% out
RCP Average      --   --   44.0   43.3   4.5   Donnelly +0.7

Final Results   --   --   --   51.5   45.5   Hawley +6.0 (GOP)  5.4% out
RCP Average      --   --   46.8   46.2   Hawley +0.6

Final Results   --   --   --   50.4   45.4   Rosen +5.0 (Dem) 5% out
RCP Average      --   --   46.7   46.7   Tie

Final Results   --   --   --   54.7   43.9   Blackburn +10.8 (GOP) +5.6% out
RCP Average      --   --   49.2   44.0   Blackburn +5.2
American journalist Walter Lippmann observed, “Where all think alike, no one thinks very much!”
To Solve Climate Change ~ Change the System, because it changes nothing when nothing changes!

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2160
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 84
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #126 on: December 03, 2018, 08:19:40 PM »
… I suggest the US House of Representatives will, come January 3, have (all approximations) either 210 or 235 Democrats (with either 225 or 200 Republicans), or a shift of either 17 (±5) or 42 (±5) seats.  …
With apparently all U.S. House of Representative races determined, Wikipedia reports

                Dem     Rep
Seats won  235     200
Change       +41    -41

Pity I wrote "all approximations"!
On January 3, however, one or more of these seats may be open due to death, resignation or refusal to seat (most likely [but not very likely, at all]: GA-7)

GA-7 issues
Quote
Gwinnett County, which makes up the largest portion of the 7th District, has been the target of questions — and litigation — from Democrats and voting rights advocates for several weeks. The county was continually under fire for its voting procedures, from its rejection of absentee ballots, which critics said occurred at a far higher rate than in other Georgia counties, to hours-long lines in some precincts on Election Day.
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

oren

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 2975
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 320
  • Likes Given: 596
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #127 on: December 03, 2018, 09:21:20 PM »
Good call Tor!

TerryM

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4113
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #128 on: December 03, 2018, 11:51:29 PM »

Lurk

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 160
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #129 on: December 04, 2018, 04:22:55 PM »
November 21, 2018
Noam Chomsky: Moral Depravity Defines US Politics

C.J. Polychroniou: Noam, with people still arguing about winners and losers from the 2018 midterm elections (and there is clearly a lot to say about what those elections mean), what do you consider to be the most striking features of the latest manifestation of American democracy in action?

Noam Chomsky: The most striking features are brutally clear.

Humanity faces two imminent existential threats: environmental catastrophe and nuclear war. These were virtually ignored in the campaign rhetoric and general coverage. There was plenty of criticism of the Trump administration, but scarcely a word about by far the most ominous positions the administration has taken: increasing the already dire threat of nuclear war, and racing to destroy the physical environment that organized human society needs in order to survive.

These are the most critical and urgent questions that have arisen in all of human history. The fact that they scarcely arose in the campaign is truly stunning — and carries some important, if unpleasant, lessons about our moral and intellectual culture.

To be sure, not everyone was ignoring these matters. They were front and center for those who are constantly vigilant in their bitter class war to preserve their immense power and privilege. Several states had important ballot initiatives addressing the impending environmental catastrophe. The fossil fuel industry spent huge, sometimes record-breaking, sums to defeat the initiatives — including a carbon tax in the mostly Democratic state of Washington — and mostly succeeded.

We should recognize that these are extraordinary crimes against humanity. They proceed with little notice.

The Democrats helped defeat these critically important initiatives by ignoring them. They scarcely mentioned them “in digital or TV ads, in their campaign literature or on social media,” a New York Times survey found. Nor, of course, were they mentioned by the Republicans, whose leadership is dedicated to driving humanity off the cliff as soon as possible — in full knowledge of what they are doing, as easily demonstrated. [...]

There is plenty of competition for moral depravity in the current remarkable moment of human history. Perhaps the prize goes to a bureaucracy, maybe in honor of Kafka: Trump’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Right in the midst of the campaign, it produced a detailed study calling for an end to regulations on emissions, with a rational argument: extrapolating current trends, it turns out that by the end of the century the game will be over. Automotive emissions don’t contribute very much to the catastrophe, so there isn’t any point trying to limit them.

In brief, let’s rob while the planet burns, putting poor Nero in the shadows.

This surely qualifies as a contender for the most evil document in history. Again, not an issue in the campaign.

more
https://truthout.org/articles/noam-chomsky-moral-depravity-defines-us-politics/



How could this be so? Long term research all over the world has long had the answers to that question. eg from the Netherlands ... a quick easy summary of key factors

Communication Studies Theories
Theory clusters - Mass Media
https://www.utwente.nl/en/bms/communication-theories/sorted-by-cluster/Mass-Media/


Lurk369:Best of Bookmarks
« Last Edit: December 11, 2018, 02:25:15 AM by Lurk »
American journalist Walter Lippmann observed, “Where all think alike, no one thinks very much!”
To Solve Climate Change ~ Change the System, because it changes nothing when nothing changes!

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2160
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 84
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #130 on: December 04, 2018, 05:59:15 PM »
Yesterday I wrote, "On January 3, however, one or more of these seats may be open due to … refusal to seat (most likely [but not very likely, at all]: GA-7)"

Well, NC-9 may be in more (a lot more) trouble than GA-7.
NC-09 Just Keeps Getting Shadier
Quote
As authorities investigate the election in NC-09, which ostensibly resulted in Republican Mark Harris being elected to Congress by a narrow margin, they keep finding more and more troublesome signs. The latest of those come from a set of 161 absentee ballots that got a careful look-see.

In North Carolina, a witness must sign an absentee ballot to confirm that the person who filled it out is who they claim to be. Normally, that witness is a family member or close friend, and it's rather unusual for a person to be witness on more than one or two or maybe three ballots. Well, it's unusual everywhere except for NC-09, it would seem. The 161 absentee ballots in question were "witnessed" by just a handful of people, one who signed off on 40 ballots, another who signed off on 30, and three more who signed off on at least 10. All of these people appear to be connected, and all of them (or nearly all of them) appear to know Leslie McCrae Dowless. Dowless is a Republican operative who just so happened to work on Harris' campaign, and who denies any wrongdoing. Of course, he also denied any wrongdoing when he was convicted of insurance fraud in the early 1990s after taking out a $163,000 policy on a dead man. So, you may not want to take his word for it, especially since one witness has already signed an affidavit that Dowless was set to receive a $40,000 bonus if Harris won.

The bipartisan elections board that is responsible for overseeing the election voted once again, this time by a 7-2 margin, not to certify the election (for now). Some Republican officials in the state are up in arms, but given that two of those seven votes were from Republicans, and a third was from an independent, they don't have much of a leg to stand on. If the board decides the election was not on the up-and-up, they can call for a new one to be held. At this point, that would seem to be the likeliest outcome.

2018 mid-term elections:  the gift that keeps on giving   ::)
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2160
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 84
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #131 on: December 05, 2018, 03:03:35 PM »
House Democrats May Not Seat Mark Harris in January
electoral-vote.com - Dec. 5

Quote
Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD), who will be the Democratic majority leader in the House come January (and thus second in command, outranked by only the Speaker), said yesterday that if the election in NC-09 is still under a cloud in January—as it is now—the House will not seat Mark Harris (R), who has a slim lead over Dan McCready (D). There are many red flags out there concerning the election, including one that the Republicans violated state law in collecting absentee ballots, but that is not the only problem. There are numerous additional allegations of irregularities and if they are not cleared up, or Harris is given credentials by the state Board of Elections along partisan lines, the House Democrats are prepared to reject Harris and declare the seat vacant. That would force a special election to fill it.
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

TerryM

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4113
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #132 on: December 05, 2018, 09:27:02 PM »
House Democrats May Not Seat Mark Harris in January
electoral-vote.com - Dec. 5

Quote
Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD), who will be the Democratic majority leader in the House come January (and thus second in command, outranked by only the Speaker), said yesterday that if the election in NC-09 is still under a cloud in January—as it is now—the House will not seat Mark Harris (R), who has a slim lead over Dan McCready (D). There are many red flags out there concerning the election, including one that the Republicans violated state law in collecting absentee ballots, but that is not the only problem. There are numerous additional allegations of irregularities and if they are not cleared up, or Harris is given credentials by the state Board of Elections along partisan lines, the House Democrats are prepared to reject Harris and declare the seat vacant. That would force a special election to fill it.
Tor
Is there a precedent for such an action?
Thanks
Terry

sidd

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3862
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #133 on: December 05, 2018, 09:49:44 PM »
America's Finest News Source: Republican legislature in Wisconsin limits powers of newly elected Democratic Governor

"the Republican-controlled Wisconsin legislature was working to weaken incoming Democratic governor Tony Evers by restricting his access to food, water, and shelter"

"a felony for anyone within Wisconsin’s borders to provide Evers with a warm bed or medical aid"

"passed another bill enabling them to cripple the incoming governor with a tire iron."

https://politics.theonion.com/wisconsin-legislature-weakens-incoming-democratic-gover-1830884970

sidd

SteveMDFP

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1090
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 78
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #134 on: December 05, 2018, 10:24:06 PM »
House Democrats May Not Seat Mark Harris in January
electoral-vote.com - Dec. 5

Quote
Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD), who will be the Democratic majority leader in the House come January (and thus second in command, outranked by only the Speaker), said yesterday that if the election in NC-09 is still under a cloud in January—as it is now—the House will not seat Mark Harris (R), who has a slim lead over Dan McCready (D). There are many red flags out there concerning the election, including one that the Republicans violated state law in collecting absentee ballots, but that is not the only problem. There are numerous additional allegations of irregularities and if they are not cleared up, or Harris is given credentials by the state Board of Elections along partisan lines, the House Democrats are prepared to reject Harris and declare the seat vacant. That would force a special election to fill it.
Tor
Is there a precedent for such an action?
Thanks
Terry

Yes, several examples exist:
Unseated members of the United States Congress
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unseated_members_of_the_United_States_Congress

Getting into the weeds on this, it still seems perfectly feasible.  Expelling a member requires 2/3 majority, but refusing to seat an election winner takes just a majority.
Supremes in 1969 ruled that an eligible, duly-elected person could not be refused a seat.

You might think the State would get to decide what constitutes "duly-elected," but the Federal Contested Elections Act permits the loser of an election to appeal to the House itself.  Hearings have to be held, but the ultimate vote would be a foregone conclusion.

Hoyer is on a firm ground here.

TerryM

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 4113
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 51
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #135 on: December 05, 2018, 10:43:46 PM »
I'll stay out of this for the moment except to say that it's unwise to press a case in which the outcome is liable to bite you when the pendulum has swung.


The Republicans have been playing similar games for a few electoral cycles at the state level. We'll see if anyone really wants to play this rough at the federal level.


Terry

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2160
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 84
  • Likes Given: 24
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #136 on: December 06, 2018, 05:02:59 AM »
It is largely not a partisan battle going on in relation to NC-9.  Two of the 4 Republicans on the NC election board do not currently support certifying the election for the NC-9 House seat.  (A recent board vote on the matter was 5 to 2.)  The Democratic chairman of the board resigned to remove the "it's partisan" argument some Republicans started to make.   (A new vote, presumably, would be 4 to 2 against certifying that election.)  If the state (because of the board) does not do the paperwork required by the House, it is unlikely the House will seat anybody to represent that district.  If it becomes clear that what now looks like probable fraud really (truly) isn't, the election board will vote again and the House will most likely seat the certified winner.  If the seat remains vacant, NC will hold a special election.

Do read the Wikipedia article on un-seated individuals.  The reason the House (and Senate) gets to decide who to seat (and not the state which held the election) is "Article I, Section 5 of the United States Constitution ... states that, 'Each House shall be the judge of the elections, returns and qualifications of its own members'".
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

Lurk

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 160
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #137 on: December 06, 2018, 05:20:26 AM »
There is much that is dysfunctional about US Elections, the US Constitution, and the Judiciary.
American journalist Walter Lippmann observed, “Where all think alike, no one thinks very much!”
To Solve Climate Change ~ Change the System, because it changes nothing when nothing changes!

Lurk

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 160
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 9
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #138 on: December 10, 2018, 04:13:24 AM »
The Real Results of the 2018 Mid-Term Elections in America

While this will have implications to some other threads I am putting it here to specifically take a non-partisan unbiased look at it and emphasize the systemic dysfunctions at the core of all the USA's problems and what LURKS behind all the damage America and Americans are doing to the rest of the world - militarily and climate wise.

This Systemic corruption gets very personal operating at an individual influence / manipulation level like this, in America's schools all the way up to the rarefied atmosphere of "the cream of America's political leadership" in US Congress .... supposedly The People's House - really?

The source of these images is unimportant. The facts they contain are what is important. This is what the MSM news services and the power brokers in the two main Political Parties will never tell the American people. If you do not immediately understand 'what the problem is' about this information, feel free to ask. I will try to explain it.

Now, try to imagine why it is the Paris Agreement is being abandoned by America, and why no rational ethical long term Laws and Regulations have ever been passed in the US Congress for +25 years that would have addressed the primary causes of AGW to mitigate today's impacts of Climate Change over the United States of America and upon the rest of the world .... the USA being the Net Contributor of +20% of all GHG drivers in the world to date.
Quote

In regard to taking action on AGW/CC, how important do you believe Politics is to achieve real lasting changes going forward?

If I knew how to create a Poll for the ASIF asking this question AFTER they were shown the images below - I would make it a Popup gateway that every viewer had to answer before they could access the Forum (as a one off). 

American journalist Walter Lippmann observed, “Where all think alike, no one thinks very much!”
To Solve Climate Change ~ Change the System, because it changes nothing when nothing changes!