The 2016 US American Election Thread

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

https://twitter.com/LisaBloom/status/793880513018785792

November surprise?

She will be smeared by his news outlets and mostly dismissed. It's too terrible for people to believe it's real and instead they'll vilify the woman. I hope I'm wrong but that's how this will probably go.

[Senator Clay Davis]

That's pretty much exactly how it'll go. And Trump surrogates will say extremely revolting things about the accuser to remind us there are worse people than Trump.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by ResAlien

She will be smeared by his news outlets and mostly dismissed. It's too terrible for people to believe it's real and instead they'll vilify the woman. I hope I'm wrong but that's how this will probably go.

I don't know - a HuffPo article today said the media hasn't been covering the story, because the accuser was anonymous. That changes this afternoon.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b0c43e6c1d9834

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by troutman

I don't know - a HuffPo article today said the media hasn't been covering the story, because the accuser was anonymous. That changes this afternoon.

Daily Beast got legally smashed when they tried to cover it earlier this year (late last year?) and no major outlets have touched it much since. Hopefully this changes that.

[GirlySports]

It would depend how famous the accuser is.

If its Oprah this election is over.

[PsYcNeT]

The accuser would be a female model in her mid-30s. I'm going to guess she isn't famous, but who knows.

[troutman]

Mark Burnett Clamps Down on ‘The Apprentice’ Staff Over Donald Trump Leaks

Staffers on the reality show say its creator is pressuring them to keep quiet about Donald Trump’s piggish behavior on set.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...source=twitter

[Titan]

Lisa Bloom sure is trying to milk this as much as possible for her own gain.

[troutman]

Jane Doe's complaint:

https://www.scribd.com/document/3260...form=hootsuite

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by troutman

Jane Doe's complaint:

https://www.scribd.com/document/3260...form=hootsuite

Jesus ####ing Christ.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Titan

Lisa Bloom sure is trying to milk this as much as possible for her own gain.

I think she has offered to defend Trump accusers pro bono, or crowd fund their defences.

https://twitter.com/LisaBloom

[Drak]

That case is beyond disturbing.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by Titan

Lisa Bloom sure is trying to milk this as much as possible for her own gain.

Considering their history, I would be willing to bet Bloom is doing this to stick it Trump as hard as she can.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Steve Bannon, Donald Trump’s campaign CEO and former Breitbart chief, gave a rare interview Wednesday in which he hailed a “sea change” reshaping American politics and framed Trump’s rise within a nationalist tide across Europe and the United Kingdom.

“This whole movement has a certain global aspect to it,” Bannon said on Breitbart News Daily, a Sirius radio program he hosted before leaving Breitbart to join the Trump campaign.

“People want more control of their country,” Bannon told Breitbart editor-in-chief Alex Marlow. “They’re very proud of their countries. They want borders. They want sovereignty. It’s not just a thing that’s happening in any one geographic space.”

“There’s real engagement,” he added. “Regardless of what happens next week, obviously I think that we’re going to win and I’ve thought that from day one, but there’s a sea change in American politics. This movement — as I keep saying— it’s just at the top of the first inning.”

Bannon argued that establishment leaders in both parties had missed grassroots anger that began with Tea Party victories in 2010. “I still think that most of the people in the establishment don’t realize how deep this movement is and how powerful it is,” he said.

The UK voting to leave the European Union this summer, Bannon argued, resonated with Trump voters and demonstrated that similar political currents existed in both countries: “Whether you’re in Wisconsin or Maine or Mississippi, people know the details of it, and they know what drove that vote.”

https://www.buzzfeed.com/nathanielme...Wq9#.ma8GD9jBY

Interview, if you dare listen to it, is here

https://soundcloud.com/siriusxm-news...art-news-daily

[peter12]

Originally Posted by GGG

I like 538 but the credit they get for the last two elections is a little overblown.

There might be 5 or 6 swing states out there so over two elections you might have 12 difficult choices. So assuming a 50/50 odds random chance gives you a 3/1000 chance of winning. Now even the 6 closest states probably have a 60% favourite which increases the chances of randomly going 11/12 or better is about 1/50.

So if in 2008 there were 50 websites predicting election results you'd expect in 2016 to have a few Nate Silvers existing. The other thing is that you'd expect eventually an election to occur where 538 would go 0/6 on swing states otherwise the probiotics assigned to the favourites wouldn't be high enough. In the end if you did the analysis I don't think you could say you have statisticly significant evidence that Nate is better than you would expect from random chance.

To me the value in any of these aggregates is doing all the leg work to interpret all of the polling out there in a constant methodology to provide a baseline of information around the spin. Also there work on inferring the effect of each state based on the behaviours of surrounding states, demographics and national trends.

So even though the echo chamber has decided otherwise, I never said that I intrinsically distrusted his mathematical methodology, as I plainly do not understand them. Neither do you, nor anyone else in here as everyone is basically relying on his results, and anecdotes, authoritative opinions etc...

That was my point. Very few of you guys can read even though apparently you are all experts at reading polls.

[PsYcNeT]

Hey any one of the US lawyers here willing to pull the Trump rape case up on Pacer and see if there was evidence of a 12(b)(6) challenge?

EDIT: US only I'm dumb.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by peter12

It is political rhetoric with the veneer of mathematical certainty.

As someone with a very basic understanding of statistics, I tend to ignore everything about Nate Silver, and his little band of meritocratic spinsters.

Of course if you took away fivethirtyeight, most posters in this thread would have very little to read.

This statement here seems to be clear criticism of 538 and its methodology. If you didn't call them meritocratic spinsters maybe you could spin this statement into your above one.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by peter12

So even though the echo chamber has decided otherwise, I never said that I intrinsically distrusted his mathematical methodology, as I plainly do not understand them. Neither do you, nor anyone else in here as everyone is basically relying on his results, and anecdotes, authoritative opinions etc...

That was my point. Very few of you guys can read even though apparently you are all experts at reading polls.

I understand his methodology though not how he processes and weights every item and I understand why he makes the decisions he does on his model. He's disclosed this at length and repeatedly. With some work you could reverse engineer the whole thing. There is nothing mysterious or magical about what he is doing.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by peter12

So even though the echo chamber has decided otherwise, I never said that I intrinsically distrusted his mathematical methodology, as I plainly do not understand them. Neither do you, nor anyone else in here as everyone is basically relying on his results, and anecdotes, authoritative opinions etc...

That was my point. Very few of you guys can read even though apparently you are all experts at reading polls.

Wow. I've never come across anyone so dismissive of the intelligence of others while maintaining such confidence in their own underwhelming intellect. How many times will you completely and utterly blow apart your own credibility with so many factually erroneous statements. There are more than enough people on this forum that have the proper education and experience to understand 538's methods and their approach to weighing the value and validity of polls. You claim them to be only a data aggregator but the way they choose to weigh and model their data has made them extremely accurate in calling races. The details of that model are proprietary, but there is enough information out there to get a pretty good idea how he does he analysis and arrives at his conclusions. Just because you don't understand it does not mean others cannot.

[Roast Beef]

Originally Posted by troutman

Jane Doe's complaint:

https://www.scribd.com/document/3260...form=hootsuite

I really could have gone without reading that. Disgusting.