Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Elections 2018 USA  (Read 3579 times)

sidd

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3765
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 68
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #100 on: November 05, 2018, 11:26:25 PM »
Chris Hedges at truthdig on voting for scum:

"Scum versus scum. That sums up this election season. Is it any wonder that 100 million Americans don’t bother to vote?"

"The securities and finance industry has backed Democratic congressional candidates 63 percent to 37 percent over Republicans, according to data collected by the Center for Responsive Politics. Democratic candidates and political action committees have received $56.8 million, compared with Republicans’ $33.4 million, the center reported. The broader sector of finance, insurance and real estate, it found, has given $174 million to Democratic candidates, against $157 million to Republicans. And Michael Bloomberg, weighing his own presidential run, has pledged $100 million to elect a Democratic Congress."

"[Democrats] core battle cry is: We are not Trump! This is ultimately a losing formula. "

"You cannot use the word “liberty” when your government, as ours does, watches you 24 hours a day and stores all of your personal information in government computers in perpetuity. You cannot use the word “liberty” when you are the most photographed and monitored population in human history. You cannot use the word “liberty” when it is impossible to vote against the interests of Goldman Sachs or General Dynamics. You cannot use the word “liberty” when the state empowers militarized police to use indiscriminate lethal force against unarmed citizens in the streets of American cities. You cannot use the word “liberty” when 2.3 million citizens, mostly poor people of color, are held in the largest prison system on earth. This is the relationship between a master and a slave. The choice is between whom we want to clamp on our chains—a jailer who mouths politically correct bromides or a racist, Christian fascist. Either way we are shackled."

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/scum-vs-scum/

sidd

sidd

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3765
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 68
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #101 on: November 05, 2018, 11:33:59 PM »
Laursen at counterpunch presents a case for abstention:

"non-voters have been sending an increasingly loud and consistent message for at least 50 years now: we’ve lost our faith in electoral democracy. "

"a deep disillusionment that’s been growing for decades with an electoral democracy that becomes less democratic all the time, a sclerotic and highly institutionalized two-party system"

"Voting affirms the present system. It signifies our assent ... It maneuvers potentially revolutionary social movements into unthreatening political channels (the best decision Black Lives Matter ever made was to not endorse candidates). It nudges us to blame specific policies and politicians, rather than take a desperately needed hard look at electoral democracy itself."

" The right to say No to the whole damn thing is the most powerful political weapon we have as members of this or any society, because it denies the State legitimacy. "

" the worst thing about voting: it distracts us from the need to explore, collectively, without mediation by governments or politicians, how we can manage our future. "

https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/11/05/why-im-not-voting/

sidd

DrTskoul

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 897
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 26
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #102 on: November 06, 2018, 02:00:52 AM »
Laursen at counterpunch presents a case for abstention:

"non-voters have been sending an increasingly loud and consistent message for at least 50 years now: we’ve lost our faith in electoral democracy. "

"a deep disillusionment that’s been growing for decades with an electoral democracy that becomes less democratic all the time, a sclerotic and highly institutionalized two-party system"

"Voting affirms the present system. It signifies our assent ... It maneuvers potentially revolutionary social movements into unthreatening political channels (the best decision Black Lives Matter ever made was to not endorse candidates). It nudges us to blame specific policies and politicians, rather than take a desperately needed hard look at electoral democracy itself."

" The right to say No to the whole damn thing is the most powerful political weapon we have as members of this or any society, because it denies the State legitimacy. "

" the worst thing about voting: it distracts us from the need to explore, collectively, without mediation by governments or politicians, how we can manage our future. "

https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/11/05/why-im-not-voting/

sidd

The power of no is what makes a Brexit possible...no voting is abdication of one's civic responsibility....
“You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you're finished, you'll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird... So let's look at the bird and see what it's doing -- that's what counts.”
― Richard P. Feynman

Lurk

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1513
  • Neven's Side Kick (apparently)
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #103 on: November 06, 2018, 04:25:45 AM »
Here ya go, some little known news.

Texas voter turnout in 2018 races toward presidential election year levels


At the end of early voting on Friday, turnout in the state's largest counties already surpassed the entire turnout of the 2014 midterm elections.

That’s because her county, the fourth largest in Texas, saw what she said was record-breaking turnout during early voting this year. By the time the polls closed Friday, 37.7 percent of registered voters in Bexar County had voted, well past the 19.8 percent turnout at the same point in 2014, the last midterms, and close to the presidential-year turnout recorded at the same point in 2012 and 2016.

And Bexar County’s election officials are not alone in having a lot to high-five each other about. Turnout during early voting in the state’s 30 largest counties easily surpassed the entire turnout — during the early voting period and on Election Day — of the 2014 midterms and total turnout during early voting in 2012.

In Harris County, the state’s largest county, 36.6 percent of registered voters had voted by the end of Friday, compared to 17.5 percent at the same point in 2014.

In Dallas County, the number was 39.7 percent, compared to 17.8 percent at the same point in 2014.

Early voting turnout in Dallas County and Travis County surpassed total early voter turnout in both the 2014 midterms and the 2012 presidential election, and just fell short of the total early voting turnout in 2016, by the end of Friday.

“We’ve got a lot of unhappy and activist voters out there who have been wanting to vote for a long time,” said Dana DeBeauvoir, the Travis County clerk. She attributed the bump in the number of voters to President Donald Trump.
https://www.texastribune.org/2018/11/02/early-voting-turnout/
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard

oren

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 2859
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 278
  • Likes Given: 548
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #104 on: November 06, 2018, 04:56:16 AM »
If all the disenfranchised and disillusioned people rose up as one to actually vote, things could be very different.

sidd

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3765
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 68
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #105 on: November 06, 2018, 05:19:00 AM »
Re:If all the disenfranchised and disillusioned people rose up as one to actually vote

as Chris Hedges asked, and I quoted a few posts ago,

https://forum.arctic-sea-ice.net/index.php/topic,2385.msg179644.html#msg179644

Which scum shall they vote for ?

sidd

mostly_lurking

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 372
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 22
  • Likes Given: 23
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #106 on: November 06, 2018, 11:49:45 AM »
The last sentence of this monumental "speech" is the reason I think the GOP's will do well.
The same people will want to feel this again.




sidd

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3765
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 68
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #107 on: November 06, 2018, 10:17:12 PM »
Sjursen at antiwar on one issue studiously ignored in this election:

"But none, I repeat, none, say a thing about American foreign policy, the nation’s ongoing wars, or the exploding, record defense budget. You see, in 2018, despite being engrossed in the longest war in US history, the citizenry – both on Main Street and Wall Street – display nothing but apathy on the subject of America’s clearly faltering foreign policy."

"Both mainstream wings of the Republicans and Democrats like it that way. They practice the politics of distraction and go on tacitly supporting one indecisive intervention after another, all the while basking in the embarrassment of riches bestowed upon them by the corporate military industrial complex. Everyone wins, except, that is, the soldiers doing multiple tours of combat duty, and – dare I say – the people of the Greater Middle East, who live in an utterly destabilized nightmare of a region."

" there may be some distinction between Republican and Democratic policies; but on the profound issues of war and peace, there is precious little daylight between the two parties. That, right there, is a formula for perpetual war."

"This November 6th is profound because it demonstrates, once and for all, the utter vacuousness of American politics."

"no one – not the generals or the civilian policymakers – seems capable of articulating an exit strategy. Maybe there just isn’t any."

"none of that will be on the ballot today ... They’ll be casting ballots based on the illusion of differentiation between two highly corporate political entities that are squarely in the pocket of the weapons’ industry and their Wall Street financiers. And, tonight, when the media outlets dazzle their viewers with holograms, charts, and other neat toys depicting the day’s winners and losers – not one station will even utter that naughty word: Afghanistan."

https://original.antiwar.com/Danny_Sjursen/2018/11/05/2012334409/

sidd

Lurk

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1513
  • Neven's Side Kick (apparently)
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #108 on: November 07, 2018, 07:54:56 AM »
Danielle Ryan is an Irish freelance writer based in Dublin. Her work has appeared in Salon, The Nation, Rethinking Russia, teleSUR, RBTH, The Calvert Journal and others. Follow her on Twitter @DanielleRyanJ 

It’s not Russia that’s damaging American democracy – it’s money

Instead of being loud and proud about these views, however, they practice what the study authors called “stealth politics” — in other words, they rarely speak publicly on politics, but spend massive amounts of money lobbying politicians on the quiet.

This is not to imply that conservative billionaire donors are bad and liberal billionaires donors are good, which is what mainstream liberal media would seemingly like us to believe when they promote the likes of George Soros as a paragon of goodness while lamenting the influence of the Koch brothers. It is, however, a simple fact that America’s wealthiest billionaires are overwhelmingly conservative — and very rarely are they interested in creating a society that is fairer and better serves the average working American.

“Why the hell are you mad at immigrants seeking a better life and not the tiny percentage of greedy f*cks hoarding the world's resources while we fight amongst ourselves for crumbs?”


More nuanced perspectives here
https://www.rt.com/op-ed/443088-money-damaging-us-democracy-midterms/

In another weirder than weird incident:

 In a bizarre twist, the man who spray painted anti-Semitic graffiti on a Brooklyn synagogue turned out to be “queer,” black, former anti-hate-crime intern, James Polite: a 26-year-old with loving Jewish foster parents.

Less than a week after a gunman murdered 11 worshippers at a Pittsburgh synagogue, anti-Semitic graffiti was found scrawled inside Union Temple in Brooklyn’s predominantly Jewish Prospect Heights neighborhood. The graffiti read “Die Jew Rats” and “Hitler.”

    NYPD arrests James Polite — the man they say is in this surveillance picture - in connection with anti Semitic graffiti found inside Union Temple in Prospect Heights. He’s believed to have also set fires outside schuls & yeshivas in Williamsburg @CBSNewYorkpic.twitter.com/WMm4UznAvf
    — Jessica Layton (@JLaytonTV) November 3, 2018

A Democratic political event scheduled at the synagogue on Thursday night was canceled, and police investigated the incident as a hate crime. After being caught on the synagogue’s CCTV cameras, James Polite was arrested on Friday.

Far from being an archetypal tattooed skinhead, Polite is a black former Democratic intern who had his college education bankrolled by the New York Times’ ‘Neediest Cases Fund.’
https://www.rt.com/usa/443086-synagogue-graffiti-democrat-suspect/

Go figure! The world is 'mad', no doubt about it.

Meanwhile back in the real world where real people live and grow up in:
A courageous 15-year-old boy was practically ripped apart by a ferocious bear but still managed to rescue his little cousin as the two faced the animal alone in the middle of a forest in Russia’s eastern Kamchatka Region.

https://www.rt.com/russia/443222-bear-attacks-teenagers-kamchatka/
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard

Tor Bejnar

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 2104
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 82
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #109 on: November 07, 2018, 06:13:02 PM »
On Nov. 2 I wrote, "a shift [to the Ds in the House] of either 17 (±5) or 42 (±5) seats".  With a shift of only 32-35 [whatever it turns out to be - edit: 34 changed to 35], this election is decidedly less 'wavy' then I expected, and represents slightly more change than is average for the mid-term election during a President's first term.
« Last Edit: November 07, 2018, 07:54:09 PM by Tor Bejnar »
Arctic ice is healthy for children and other living things.

Klondike Kat

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 140
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 17
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #110 on: November 07, 2018, 07:03:48 PM »
On Nov. 2 I wrote, "a shift [to the Ds in the House] of either 17 (±5) or 42 (±5) seats".  With a shift of only 32-34 [whatever it turns out to be], this election is decidedly less 'wavy' then I expected, and represents slightly more change than is average for the mid-term election during a President's first term.

Yes.  The Dems gain in the House is somewhat tempered by the losses in the Senate.  Pending any recounts and runoffs, it appears that the GOP will pick up three seats. 

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3337
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 310
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #111 on: November 07, 2018, 07:47:36 PM »
VICTORY !! said the democrats

VICTORY !! said Trump.

Not a lot has changed in opinions amongst the population of the USA in general. Say I
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

Klondike Kat

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 140
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 17
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #112 on: November 07, 2018, 08:28:58 PM »
VICTORY !! said the democrats

VICTORY !! said Trump.

Not a lot has changed in opinions amongst the population of the USA in general. Say I

Exactly!

sidd

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3765
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 68
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #113 on: November 07, 2018, 08:43:58 PM »
Politico has a state by state breakup at

https://www.politico.com/election-results/2018/

The maps are useful. The rural-urban divide persists, democrats show gains in suburbs, republicans retain rural edge.

sidd

sidd

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3765
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 68
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #114 on: November 07, 2018, 10:39:49 PM »
Only in the USA: Republican brothel owner wins election posthumously

“I’m fine with him being dead and winning,” O’Rourke said. “I know a lot of people who were going to vote Democrat if he were alive, but will now vote Republican because he’s dead.”

Wait, what ?

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-nevada-dead-candidate-20181106-story.html

Didn't Bush the Lesser appoint an attorney general who had lost to a dead guy ?

It comes back to me, it was John Ashcroft, the first of a trio of craven,disastrous lesser Bush AGs (the latter two were gonzales and mukasey) who went along with illegal wars, illegal detentions, assassinations, covert military actions, torture, and mass surveillance of their own citizenry and the world. Altho, in fairness, Ashcroft did protest a bit at the NSA programs. And now that i think about it some more, the deputies of the first two were Mueller and Comey.

sidd
« Last Edit: November 07, 2018, 11:40:54 PM by sidd »

Lurk

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1513
  • Neven's Side Kick (apparently)
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #115 on: November 08, 2018, 04:08:16 AM »
I made several posts about the Generic Congressional Polling recently.

I think I clearly pointed out some of the traps involved. Like where almost everyone in the Media, and Posters here as well, SPIN the Polling Numbers to push their own Beliefs and Biases while either discarding out of hand OR intentionally choosing to remain ignorant of the facts and the default FALSE ASSUMPTIONS that are presented - overlooking the valid evidence based details and the historical facts contained in those very Polls and prior results.

RCP Average   10/13 - 11/3   --   Dems 49.7%    Repub 42.4%     Democrats +7.3%
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/2018_generic_congressional_vote-6185.html

Actual Results to date via NYTs
Dems 51,515,283 votes (51.2%)
Repubs 47,348,982 votes (47.1%)
Dems Vote +4.1 %
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/11/06/us/elections/results-house-elections.html

That is 3.2% below the RCP average .... outside the Margin of Error of all Polls

CNN   had the Democrats +13% - they were out by 9% or 4 Times the margin of error.

NPR/PBS/Marist had the Democrats +9% - out by 5% or double the margin of error.

Economist/YouGov   with Democrats +5% - only out by 1% - good job.

The last Rasmussen Reports   had Repubs at +1% - out by 5%
But the prior Pol had Democrats at +3% - only 1% off

But the following Numbers are more key here.

RCP most recent Average had Democrats Polling 49.7% - there vote was actually 51.2% or 1.5% higher. The Republicans polling was way down at 42.4% - but the GOP Vote was actually 47.1% or 4.7% higher than the Polls said it was! This is THREE times higher than the error of the Democrat Vote.

This happens all the time in recent elections. I repeat, ALL the time, by the great majority of Pollsters. They keep making the same mistake/error every election. And I said this was clearly was a problem before the election. But everyone keeps on ignoring it. So why do the media and everyone else keep placing so much emphasis of the Polls are saying this and that?

When 99% of the time they are not accurate and therefore are not true?

If the same errors are being made on Trump Approval rating it means he is closer to an Approval level of 47% with a net spread of only -6% overall - and not the double digits that keep being reported.

This was repeatedly noted after the major surprise of the 2016 election. Two years later barely a sole can remember it. This is what both saddens me and scares me most about the future.

----

Perspective is critical for proper understanding. You cannot take the latest peer-reviewed climate science paper and declare it true for all time. The historical record of the rest of science and unknowns in the current paper must be considered equally.

And the very same people who place their faith in such science look to flaky political polling (and to hideously inaccurate biased reporting by either really DUMB or intentionally MANIPULATIVE LYING Media sources and Pseudo-Experts )and continue to believe it's true at face value.

They (including yourself most probably) never check the details. And if someone does check the details and point out serious repeated errors then that information gets discarded and ignored and dismissed out of hand.

What most people claim is true is predominantly based solely upon a lack of true knowledge, their own ignorance and their entrenched cognitive biases .. aka personal beliefs. Show them the facts and the evidence even a thousand times and it will make no difference to 99% of people - including those who come to the ASIF.

Now that is far greater never-ending problem than any entrenched Polling errors and a biased MSM reporting on them.

---

An interesting historical backgrounder to think about is the Democrat party are no where near the position they were in at the 2008 Election.

In the 2010 Mid-term election, President Obama's party the Democrats lost 63 House seats. By contrast as of the most current account it looks like around 28 Republican House seats or something have been lost this Mid-term election.

Also in President Obama's first midterm election, the Democrats lost 6 Senate seats. Including in the deep blue state of Massachusetts. This mid-term the Republicans have gained 3 Senate seats held by Democrat incumbents. A differential of 9.

Looks to me both sides made some gains this election. Now back to the ongoing 'madness' I suppose. Why the US can see clear to getting rid of these midterms completely is the oddest thing of all.

Well maybe not, because some very weird out there stuff happens in US politics. Seems eminently rational to only have 4 year elections with half the senate up for election (both in federal and the state races).
« Last Edit: November 08, 2018, 07:21:49 AM by Lurk »
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard

sedziobs

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 180
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #116 on: November 08, 2018, 04:45:07 PM »
Polls are one piece of information.  Forecasters don't use them exclusively or uncritically.  Despite your baseless assertion that polls are not accurate 99% of the time, 538 forecast an average gain of 36-39 seats depending on the model.  They also predicted a Republican gain in the Senate.  The predictions weren't perfect, but they were useful. 

So why do you SPIN the Polling Numbers to push your own Beliefs and Biases while either discarding out of hand OR intentionally choosing to remain ignorant of the facts and the default FALSE ASSUMPTIONS that are presented - overlooking the valid evidence based details and the historical facts contained in those very Polls and prior results?  Are you really DUMB or just an intentionally MANIPULATIVE LYING pseudo-expert?

sedziobs

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 180
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #117 on: November 08, 2018, 05:29:02 PM »
It remains to be seen what the final popular vote margin will be.  NYT forecast it to be 6.9% as of yesterday afternoon.  California might have millions of mail ballots left to be counted.

Quote
In this year’s primary election, more than two-thirds of California voters mailed in their ballots. But on election night, workers were able to tabulate only about 58 percent of what would be total ballots cast—another 3 million-plus arrived over the next three days to be tallied. That left many counties scrambling to handle the avalanche of mail-in ballots days after election night.
capradio.org/articles/2018/11/06/


Klondike Kat

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 140
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 17
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #118 on: November 08, 2018, 06:21:14 PM »
Polls are one piece of information.  Forecasters don't use them exclusively or uncritically.  Despite your baseless assertion that polls are not accurate 99% of the time, 538 forecast an average gain of 36-39 seats depending on the model.  They also predicted a Republican gain in the Senate.  The predictions weren't perfect, but they were useful. 

So why do you SPIN the Polling Numbers to push your own Beliefs and Biases while either discarding out of hand OR intentionally choosing to remain ignorant of the facts and the default FALSE ASSUMPTIONS that are presented - overlooking the valid evidence based details and the historical facts contained in those very Polls and prior results?  Are you really DUMB or just an intentionally MANIPULATIVE LYING pseudo-expert?

With regards to 538, they were slightly biased to the Democrats.  The gain in the House is likely to fall short of 36, but not by much, so this was fairly close.  Considering the lack of polling in many Congressional races, this was quite good.

Their Senate predictions were off by much more.  In their final predictions they had the Democrats winning Arizona (+1.7), Florida (+3.2), and Indiana (+3.7), with only Missouri (+1.1) and Nevada (+1.1) as pure tossups. They predicted 50:48, with two tossups, which was not a gain, but no change (assuming the two tossups split equally).  If the results in FL and AZ stand (no guarantee), the GOP will gain 3 seats.

Their likely Democrat wins were Montana (+4.8), West Virginia (+7.5), New Jersey (+11.5), Ohio (10.6), and Michigan (11.3).  Their likely Republican states were  North Dakota (-4.6), Texas (-4.9), and Tennessee (-5.3).  The actual results were AZ (-1.0), FL (-0.2), IN (-7.3), MO (-6.0), NV (+5.0), MT (+3.1), WV (+3.2), NJ (+9.6), OH (+6.4), MI (+6.3), ND (-10.8), TX (-2.6), and TN (-10.8).  Of these 13 states, only twice did the Democrats perform better than predicted (TX and NV), and their predictions favored the Democrats in these states by an average of 3.8%!  This is outside their margin of error, so they definitely appears to be a bias.

sedziobs

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 180
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #119 on: November 08, 2018, 07:10:11 PM »
538 "predicted" 51:49 as the most likely deterministic outcome with a 17.7% chance.  But the probabilistic forecast also had 54:46 as an 8.6% chance.  Their 80% confidence interval included everything from 49:51 to 55:40.  So while they missed on many individual states, they weren't too far off when accounting for uncertainty.

Klondike Kat

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 140
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 17
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #120 on: November 08, 2018, 07:54:02 PM »
538 "predicted" 51:49 as the most likely deterministic outcome with a 17.7% chance.  But the probabilistic forecast also had 54:46 as an 8.6% chance.  Their 80% confidence interval included everything from 49:51 to 55:40.  So while they missed on many individual states, they weren't too far off when accounting for uncertainty.

That still does not account for their almost 4% bias towards the Democrats in their voting predictions.

sedziobs

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 180
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #121 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: 140
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 17
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #122 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: 180
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #123 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.

Lurk

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1513
  • Neven's Side Kick (apparently)
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #124 on: November 09, 2018, 02:46:21 AM »
Polls are one piece of information.  Forecasters don't use them exclusively or uncritically.  Despite your baseless assertion that polls are not accurate 99% of the time, 538 forecast an average gain of 36-39 seats depending on the model.  They also predicted a Republican gain in the Senate.  The predictions weren't perfect, but they were useful. 

So why do you SPIN the Polling Numbers to push your own Beliefs and Biases while either discarding out of hand OR intentionally choosing to remain ignorant of the facts and the default FALSE ASSUMPTIONS that are presented - overlooking the valid evidence based details and the historical facts contained in those very Polls and prior results?  Are you really DUMB or just an intentionally MANIPULATIVE LYING pseudo-expert?

Interesting abuse. I see you have never read the best-selling book "How to win friends and influence people"  by Dale Carnegie, published in 1936.

<snip, N.>

Lurk: Bugger! :)
« Last Edit: November 09, 2018, 11:39:53 AM by Lurk »
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard

Klondike Kat

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 140
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 17
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #125 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: 180
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #126 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 »

Lurk

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1513
  • Neven's Side Kick (apparently)
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #127 on: November 09, 2018, 02:58:50 AM »
I said nothing like that.

Always good to see someone get a does of their own medicine. Personal Karma sure has speeded up these days. It's almost instantaneous much of the time now.

Quote
Do you understand the difference between a probabilistic forecast and a deterministic prediction?


Great question. Do you understand the difference between what people write here and what you interpret as the meaning of what they wrote nor recognize the specific subject matter they were addressing? Because I do not think you do understand this at all.

Quote
That is an acknowledgement of uncertainty and polling bias.

Oh really? How nice. 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? :)

Please explain your extremely overt bias here. If you want to that is. I don't really care in the least but maybe others might.
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard

Klondike Kat

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 140
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 17
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #128 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: 180
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #129 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: 140
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 17
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #130 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: 180
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #131 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: 140
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 17
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #132 on: November 09, 2018, 10:02:54 PM »
So we can agree that 538 has a blue bias?

sedziobs

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 180
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #133 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?

Lurk

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1513
  • Neven's Side Kick (apparently)
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #134 on: November 10, 2018, 02:04:34 AM »
Yes. But I have no confidence in their confidence level. Who sets the rules and the standards ... only 538?

What's far more important an issue is how does CNN manufacture a Polling result of +13% to the Dems for Generic Congressional Polling - not only once but repeatedly over years and years .. and why would any half decent aggregator of Polls, or Media entity dare publish a CNN Poll in the News?

Why would Nate Silver waste his time and everyone else's who reads his analysis include a single result from CNN Polls? It's like cutting off his own ear. Now that's one Poll of many others equally useless and frankly dishonest and manipulative of the people.

YouGov and Rasmussen are an example of what a decent professional Pollster is and how they can produce consistently reliable results worth discussing, and worth Nate Silver and RCP analyzing and aggregating with others.

I don't really care what Nate did nor how close his forecasts scenarios were. 99% of people never go there anyway. otoh It was telling that RCP again had the Dems +7.5% ahead. But we all have our limitations.   
« Last Edit: November 11, 2018, 02:47:12 PM by Lurk »
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard

sedziobs

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 180
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 13
  • Likes Given: 2
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #135 on: November 10, 2018, 03:35:13 AM »
Sinema is now up to a full 1.0% lead in Arizona. 

Lurk

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1513
  • Neven's Side Kick (apparently)
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #136 on: November 10, 2018, 09:28:14 AM »
Jimmy "Delusional Wild-eyed Idealist" Dore says to his 410,000 Subscribers and others:

You know there's a movement for a People's Party right, which is the Bernie movement, the political director Nick Branagh who started this organization, and they're trying to get a third party because the majority of people don't belong to either of the two parties and the majority overwhelming majority of Americans want a third party, and the democratic party in their view and in my view too, it's it's not reformable (sic). So I could be wrong about that I don't think so.

So they put out their analysis and I thought it was really interesting and I'm gonna share some of it with you and then we'll talk to the author okay.

So the four leading progressive organizations that emerged from Bernie Sanders 2016 presidential campaign endorsed Democratic candidates across 46 states. Nearly all the candidates for Congress governor lieutenant governor and Senate lost.

That's 'Our Revolution', 'Justice Democrats', 'Brand New Congress' and the 'Democratic Socialists of America' endorsed a combined 107 candidates for Congress this year, so that's not local that's not state, that's on the federal level for Congress and they saw a hundred and seven candidates combined of all those organizations.

44 of them won their primaries and only 12 won their general elections, twelve. Five of those twelve were already in Congress, so that leaves seven. Five of those seven were longtime party politicians in line for higher office rather than insurgent candidates, so that leaves two, only two of them were actually opposed by the party and unseated establishment Democrats in the primaries - Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who we had on the show before anyone  else had her on their shows - and Ayana Pressley.

There are 435 members of Congress. So it gets worse. Almost every candidate those groups
endorsed for governor lieutenant governor and Senate lost in the primary or general election.

The only ones who won as a result the Blue Wave, is a Corporate Wave, that has swept in the same kind of Democrat politicians that drove working people into Donald Trump's arms after eight years of Obama when Democrats busied themselves serving the wealthy.

Again the result will be an even sharper lurch to the Authoritarian Right. So they're making the case here that it doesn't  appear that this revolution is happening, and if you look at the numbers it's not.

Working people seek solutions that are proportionate to the size of the problems we face, something that looks and feels new down to our bones. Incrementalism and an attempted rebranding of the Democratic Party are the well-worn paths of the cycle into Oligarchy.

Feinstein and Pelosi kept saying they were  gonna protect the Affordable Care Act, that is not proportionate to the size of the health care problem that were facing, because if they do that they're still ignoring the 30 million people that have no health care, they're still ignoring all those people who can't afford their deductible to go see a doctor the first time.

That's what the Democratic Party is, the wall that keeps us progressives from connecting with
people, in inspiring the millions who want authentic credible change. Had we committed ourselves to building it after the 2016 election we would have either forced a Democratic Party to change in the face of an existential threat, or we would be replacing it and the Republican Party right now instead.

Most of us decided to work inside the Democratic Party so the cycle continues, voraciously consuming our climate, our economy, our society, and our lives.


« Last Edit: November 10, 2018, 11:09:26 AM by Lurk »
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Royalty
  • *****
  • Posts: 5935
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 217
  • Likes Given: 155
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #137 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

Lurk

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1513
  • Neven's Side Kick (apparently)
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #138 on: November 10, 2018, 11:02:07 AM »
He's certainly no John McCain so that's a really good start for Dr James Hansen. Could he end up becoming the the equivalent of Albert Einstein in the 21st century? I wonder. Weird how the best people often get the proper attention they deserve long after they are dead.

Being 'harangued' by highly self-opinionated 'Merricans for years online, they are simply unavoidable on any subject, it came to pass sometime in the middle of the 2000s that I probably first spoke out of the need for a legitimate 3rd Party in the USA to be running alongside the Greens and Libertarian to bring some reason and sense and justice back into the political process and electoral system there. Of course I was deemed an idiot and stupid, as 'Merricans are want to say about anything ever so slightly alien to  their mystical beliefs of how great their country already is.

They forced me after several years, maybe a decade all up, to adjust my demeanor and approach on forums - ie to default assume the worst because history of direct experience had proven beyond all doubt that is how it pans out usually. The exceptions will rise to the top very fast and I will know who they are quickly. The 'cream' would totally understand my approach and agree with it.

I must say I was very pleased when I first noted James Hansen saying basically the very same thing about a 3rd Party first starting publicly around 2012. After he had finally had a total gutful of Barack Obama's duplicity, deceptions, hypocrisy, the egregious inaction and his profound inability to get anything positive happening in regard addressing emissions and decent UNFCCC agreements, etc etc etc.

So here's a few notes from James Hansen to chew over and try to swallow whole as a "blue pill" if you dare.

The Peaceful Revolutionary Party
27 January 2017
James Hansen
“Sophie’s Planet” will aim at a wider audience than reached by “Storms of My Grandchildren”. 
The climate science should be more transparent, with more emphasis on political implications.
Paramount among the latter is the need for a third party, distinct from present inept minor parties. I noted the third party need in my Ridenhour remarks and in a Communication. 
David Brooks had a superb article on the need for a third party in the New York Times on November 8, 2016.
http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2017/20170127_PeacefulParty.pdf
---

American Presidential Choices: An Opinion Based On Climate Science
14 April 2016
James Hansen
I am a political Independent, fed up with both of our major parties.  I have begun writing a piece in which I argue the case for a third party, not in 2016, but soon thereafter, if, as seems likely, the threat of a downward spiral in the economic prospects for young people becomes more apparent.  Thus I intended to say nothing about the current election cycle.   [...]

BTW, one other thing: it seems to me that scientists who have taken the trouble to understand the energy story should make their opinions clear to the public.  I have the impression that there is a reluctance to speak out by those scientists who conclude that nuclear power needs to play a role in solving the climate problem.  Everyone knows that if you yearn for applause and want to hobnob with Hollywood liberals you should agree that all we need is the sun and the wind for energy.  Meanwhile, they drive to the airport in electric cars powered by gas and coal and fly off to Timbuktu.
http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2016/20160414_Electioneering.pdf
---

The American Party
29 May 2013
James Hansen
My remarks when receiving the Ridenhour Courage Award were written in Union Station on my
way to the event.
But my concluding comment -- that we are near a point when the American people should contemplate a centrist third party -- was not an idle spur - of - the - moment reflection.

I was in government 40 years, long enough to understand how aging organizations can evolve
into self-licking ice cream cones a, organizations whose main purpose becomes self-perpetuation
rather than accomplishment of their supposed objectives. 
The public can see this tendency in our politicians, our Congress, and our major political parties.
Our government has failed to address climate, energy, and economic challenges.
These challenges, addressed together, actually can be a great opportunity. 
Our democracy and economic system still have great potential for innovation and rapid adoption of improved technologies, if the government provides the right conditions and gets out of the way.

The American Party
The public recognizes and is fed up with the failure of both political parties to work for the
common good.  So is it time to abandon them for a third party?  Perhaps not quite. [...]

And yet moderation is just what most Americans seem to want.
In such case, the fastest way to progress may be a 3rd party, a centrist party.  It is very possible
that the United States is ready for a centrist American Party.  In 1992 Ross Perot garnered almost
20% of the votes for President.  At times he had led in the polls, but he damaged his credibility in
several ways, including his assertion that he had once seen Martians on his front yard.

Compared with 1992, a much larger fraction of the people is fed up with the failures of both
major parties.  If, following the mid-term elections of 2014, there is not a strong indication of bi-partisan progress, it may be time to consider the possibility of launching a major centrist 3rd party effort, not only for the Presidency but for Congress as well.
http://www.columbia.edu/%7Ejeh1/mailings/2013/20130529_AmericanParty.pdf
---

Washington Can Lead: Unwashed Version
26 October 2016
James Hansen
The editors of The Seattle Times did a good job with my 20 October op-ed , placing it under the
following title and sub-head:
Washington can lead on climate change by passing I-732
To provide an example for other states and the rest of the world – but most of                 
all for young people, future generations and nature – vote yes on I-732 
http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2016/20161026_UnwashedVersion.pdf
https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/washington-can-lead-on-climate-change-by-passing-i-732/
---

IN one of his articles I not find atm Hansen totally trashed OBAMA over his ineptness in particular his decision to fight the Court case in Washington and how he went about it. Not once did Obama nor his Secretaries respond to any communications from Hansen. You;d think a man with even half a brain would call on someone retired like James Hansen for advice about the climate problem at least once in his 8 year term. Oh no. Instead Obama repeatedly ordered his admin to fight the court case Hansen was supporting to the nth degree, as well as to make sure that Keystone Pipeline went through, native indian tribes or not.

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
---



And btw re that recent IPCC 1.5 report ...

We have 12 years to limit climate change catastrophe, warns UN
Urgent changes needed to cut risk of extreme heat, drought, floods and poverty, says IPCC
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/oct/08/global-warming-must-not-exceed-15c-warns-landmark-un-report

Go on, so tell me how dumb and stupid I am. Go on --- then try and prove it. :)
« Last Edit: November 10, 2018, 11:10:17 AM by Lurk »
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard

Lurk

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1513
  • Neven's Side Kick (apparently)
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #139 on: November 10, 2018, 12:07:38 PM »
That is a well-written text, with excellent annotations by Dore. Thanks for typing all of that out, Lurk.

No worries, ty.

Nick Brana of MPP @9:25
"I'm a social scientist Jimmy.  I studied sociology and what you do in the scientific method is that you evaluate the results of a particular action, experiment, test, after having done it. That's how science works and so what we need to do now Jimmy, is we need to sit back, and we need to soberly analyze the results of our strategy."

Sounds a sensible approach.
« Last Edit: November 10, 2018, 01:53:00 PM by Lurk »
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard

Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Royalty
  • *****
  • Posts: 5935
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
  • Liked: 217
  • Likes Given: 155
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #140 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: 140
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 17
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #141 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: 140
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5
  • Likes Given: 17
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #142 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: 1535
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 23
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #143 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.

Lurk

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1513
  • Neven's Side Kick (apparently)
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #144 on: November 11, 2018, 06:09:37 AM »
Voter registration in the United States
largely reflects its 19th-century origins

and has not kept pace with advancing
technology and a mobile society. States’
systems must be brought into the 21st
century to be more accurate, cost-effective,
and efficient.

Research commissioned by the Pew Center
on the States highlights the extent of the
challenge:

 Approximately 24 million—one of
every eight—voter registrations in the
United States are no longer valid or
are significantly inaccurate.

 More than 1.8 million deceased
individuals are listed as voters.

 Approximately 2.75 million people
have registrations in more than one
state.


Meanwhile, researchers estimate at least
51 million eligible U.S. citizens are
unregistered, or more than 24 percent of
the eligible population.
https://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/legacy/uploadedfiles/pcs_assets/2012/pewupgradingvoterregistrationpdf.pdf

How many then consciously choose to Vote twice? Submitting a Postal Vote for NY while they go to the Polling station in Florida down the road from their expensive vacation Condo on the Miami Spit.

NCSL has been unable to find a prosecution of any person under that statute for voting in multiple states at the same time.
Double voting is often listed as a felony in states, and can come with hefty fines or jail time. Although statistics show it to be rare, it is also difficult to identify and difficult to prosecute when it does occur.
States, not the federal government, are charged with overseeing elections. There is not a national voter registration list—only state registration lists.
http://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/double-voting.aspx

Some 6.9 million Americans are registered to vote in two or more states, according to a report obtained by Watchdog.org
https://www.watchdog.org/national/million-multiple-voters-in-states-report-finds/article_75b5d4ca-38f2-55fc-83c9-458c383da699.html
« Last Edit: November 11, 2018, 02:44:04 PM by Lurk »
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard

Lurk

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1513
  • Neven's Side Kick (apparently)
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #145 on: November 12, 2018, 04:39:49 AM »
RE Broward recount from 538. Confirmation again of post by (i forgot?) who showed the image of the Ballot paper. But details the numbers impact.

Something Looks Weird In Broward County. Here’s What We Know About A Possible Florida Recount. By Nathaniel Rakich

Unusually, the votes tabulated in Broward County so far exhibit a high rate of something called “undervoting,” or not voting in all the races on the ballot. Countywide, 26,060 fewer votes were cast in the U.S. Senate race than in the governor race.1 Put another way, turnout in the Senate race was 3.7 percent lower than in the gubernatorial race.


One possible reason for the discrepancy is poor ballot design. Broward County ballots listed the U.S. Senate race first, right after the ballot instructions. But that pushed the U.S. Senate race to the far bottom left of the ballot, where voters may have skimmed over it, while the governor’s race appears at the top of the ballot’s center column, immediately to the right of the instructions.


BUT
An alternative explanation is that an error with the vote-tabulating machines in Broward County caused them to sometimes not read people’s votes for U.S. Senate. If that’s true, we would probably only find out if there is a manual recount.


But recounts rarely change the outcomes of elections. A FairVote analysis found that the average recount from 2000 to 2015 shifted the election margin by an average of just 0.02 percentage points. The largest margin swing was 1,247 votes — coincidentally also coming in Florida, in the 2000 presidential race. If Nelson is going to stage a comeback in the Sunshine State, he’ll almost certainly have to close the gap between him and Scott even more in the next couple of days.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/something-looks-weird-in-broward-county-heres-what-we-know-about-a-possible-florida-recount/

Lurk: So if I am looking at this objectively, it very much seems to me that the Ballot design have cost Dem. Nelson his Senate seat. Why? Because Broward is a huge section of the sth florida population and very much lean Democrat. The data shows that about 26,000 could have missed the senate selection.   The gap atm is barely a few thousand votes.
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard

Pmt111500

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1535
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 23
  • Likes Given: 4
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #146 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: 3323
  • Go DUCKS!!
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 42
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #147 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."

Lurk

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1513
  • Neven's Side Kick (apparently)
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 70
  • Likes Given: 20
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #148 on: November 14, 2018, 02:19:59 PM »
Well with a half dozen seats still to declare looks like the final House result may be closer to ~ Democrats 232 (+33) Republicans 203 (-33). That's a surprise as I didn't expect it to end up like that. Certainly seems like a blue wave now, albeit tempered just a little. Thank goodness it's over.

It's interesting too how Ocasio-Cortez is already "out there" backing in the agw/cc green deal protesters in Pelosi's office. That's a surprise.
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard

Buddy

  • ASIF Governor
  • Posts: 3323
  • Go DUCKS!!
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 42
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Elections 2018 USA
« Reply #149 on: Today at 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: Today at 02:01:07 AM by Buddy »
FOX (RT) News....."The Trump Channel.....where truth and journalism are dead."