2016 USA Presidential election thread I: The warm-up

[ronin sparthos]

My problem with talking to people about politics isn't about getting owned on the points or being eviscerated by someone who has deeper insight but more the petty way people behave when they get cornered or pressed to give more than a shallow response.

Perhaps it's because I've spent enough time on the Internet to see these things manifest with frequency in explosive ways that IRL equivalents are less satisfying. When family backs into using God as cover for a shitty argument, people start going for personal attacks, lies start getting churned up that only make the verbal bodyslam more potent or people flat want to go to blows/hold grudges about some stupid shit, it gets pretty grating fast.

Now should you engage people on politics? Absolutely. But when people refuse to admit any fault or even cooly respond to being skewered by a good point with a level head I just tend to chime in and out. Too many people take a discussion as a personal affront to their character.

[Quicklet]

Agreed. Trying to have a conversation with someone who is dogmatic and already has their mind made up is wholly unsatisfying. Too many people have been conditioned to think "You don't agree with me on X topic, so that makes you a bad person."

[notorious bum]

Because these polls attempt to use modeling to create a sample representative of Democratic primary voters, similar to how polls for the general election use modeling to create a samplings of the expected voting electorate in a state, rather than just being a free for all.

Bernie's weakness vs. Clinton in every demographic besides educated youth is extremely well documented. So it's no surprise that refining the polls to balance that demographic relative to its actual electoral weight, rather than allowing all of them to over-represent as they flooded the internet after the debate, creates a massive disparity in results.

Bernie actually polls the worst with old people and the poor, ironically. Did you know that between 2004 and 2008 the youth share of the vote only increased by one percentage point, yet it made sizable difference?

Anyways, when you knowingly poll over 30% of people who didn't watch the debate, at all, you get those magical numbers you posted. Then, you must take into account the people who watched the post-debate through pundits' lips and chopped-up clips. Reason why I referred to the Gore v. Perot debate is that everyone who watched that debate thought Perot won, then the media slammed skewed polls and commentary down the throats of America saying otherwise.

It's a good thing that the internet isn't quite relevant yet, it might even--dare I say--change an election! Here's a Google poll that isn't shit and excludes the "no" vote on watching the debate: https://www.google.com/insights/cons...4gg&question=2

[Kyreth]

Basically what NB said above- they couldn't get a clean "CLINTON WINS" out of the actual debate watchers, so they went with the next best thing- getting polls out there based on the general population. If there was much more media spin on the whole thing, we'd be watching Webb achieve an extra-Mars orbit from being launched from the political arena simply by accident.

The election cycle fails to make any sense this year. We've got a clown car full of Republican candidates shooting themselves in the foot being led by an egomaniac and a Democratic battle between a media darling (down to the massive donations) and a socialist that seems to cause an allergic reaction in the establishment for not having any dirt to shovel on nor a desire to shovel dirt on his competition.

I feel no need for a tinfoil hat, but something is definitely fucked up in the political landscape.

[Falisa]

I went to a funeral about a month ago and my family was talking about "how global warming is just horse shit to get people to vote for democrats" among other idiotic political comments. I'm just sitting next to them staring at my phone trying my hardest to keep a straight face. They were trying to get my opinion about it but I was trying my best to dodge that argument. Thankfully this is mostly all family I see maybe once every four years, although my mom was agreeing with it...

[notorious bum]

I went to a funeral about a month ago and my family was talking about "how global warming is just horse shit to get people to vote for democrats" among other idiotic political comments. I'm just sitting next to them staring at my phone trying my hardest to keep a straight face. They were trying to get my opinion about it but I was trying my best to dodge that argument. Thankfully this is mostly all family I see maybe once every four years, although my mom was agreeing with it...

Just correct them and let them know that it's called "Climate Change" now, not global warming. See if they bite and ask "what's the difference?" lol

[archibaldcrane]

There's a decent argument to be made that Republicans accidentally help prevent more CO2 emissions than Democrats who are trying do.

[Guyverarmor]

I did that once NB.... my dad doesn't believe in Global Warming, but does in Climate Change...

[archibaldcrane]

Uh, "reports say" that Biden is going to announce he is running.

I may have to get that hat ready to eat it.

What an idiot, he's going to get slaughtered.

https://twitter.com/edhenry/status/656148356159422464

[Gredival]

Bernie actually polls the worst with old people and the poor, ironically. Did you know that between 2004 and 2008 the youth share of the vote only increased by one percentage point, yet it made sizable difference?

His weakness with senior and low income voters is important yes, but he also lags behind in the black vote, the Latino vote... as I said, he loses every demographic except the youth.

So when you apply modelling to polling, which every respectable polling firm does, that affects percentages.

The difference between polling accuracy these days is all about the accuracy of the modelling used. Ramussen is inaccurate because they massively overweight conservative voters. Gallup screwed up last cycle by overweighting the right-of-center to Mitt.

Anyways, when you knowingly poll over 30% of people who didn't watch the debate, at all, you get those magical numbers you posted. Then, you must take into account the people who watched the post-debate through pundits' lips and chopped-up clips. Reason why I referred to the Gore v. Perot debate is that everyone who watched that debate thought Perot won, then the media slammed skewed polls and commentary down the throats of America saying otherwise.

Adorable! You think what actually happened matters? Oh sweetie, this is politics.

[Ragnus]

That's one thing I don't understand. How the fuck is Bernie behind on the Black Vote?

[Melena]

Has he met with anyone from Black Lives Matters? I know they kind of sabotaged one of Bernie's speeches in Seattle, and Hillary actually met with them.

[Sho]

My problem with talking to people about politics isn't about getting owned on the points or being eviscerated by someone who has deeper insight but more the petty way people behave when they get cornered or pressed to give more than a shallow response.

Perhaps it's because I've spent enough time on the Internet to see these things manifest with frequency in explosive ways that IRL equivalents are less satisfying. When family backs into using God as cover for a shitty argument, people start going for personal attacks, lies start getting churned up that only make the verbal bodyslam more potent or people flat want to go to blows/hold grudges about some stupid shit, it gets pretty grating fast.

Now should you engage people on politics? Absolutely. But when people refuse to admit any fault or even cooly respond to being skewered by a good point with a level head I just tend to chime in and out. Too many people take a discussion as a personal affront to their character.

To be fair, I never get into personal attacks in politics, even if it's called upon my person, here or IRL. That's exceptionally petty and shows you and everyone around you that you cannot handle yourself in a debate where ideologies clash. I will admit however that people will use any justification to state and stand behind their points, even if they are blatantly so far off the mark it makes you wonder if they really believe in what they are saying.

People may or may not believe me post-debate, but I always open with a line stating that I don't mean any offense to who or what they believe in.

Agreed. Trying to have a conversation with someone who is dogmatic and already has their mind made up is wholly unsatisfying. Too many people have been conditioned to think "You don't agree with me on X topic, so that makes you a bad person."

I don't see it this way actually. I find it more satisfying to figure out just why they are so into what they believe. It's easy to pick out the dogmatic types who are all in, but rarely looked into why they believe with such unchanging fervor. I've found that in this case, they connect to a something very visceral that occurred in their life at various points. This in turn serves to bolster their feelings on a topic. In any rate, I don't feel the loss because I went in knowing that their mind was made up regardless of what they say. I do however, explain to them what will most likely happen given the current polling trends and trajectory.

I've heard any number of personal attacks, but more often than not, I've been treated fairly and with a bit of respect on differing views.

[Qeomash]

Uh, "reports say" that Biden is going to announce he is running.

I may have to get that hat ready to eat it.

What an idiot, he's going to get slaughtered.

https://twitter.com/edhenry/status/656148356159422464

http://cdn.meme.am/instances/64183673.jpg

[Sho]

That's one thing I don't understand. How the fuck is Bernie behind on the Black Vote?

He's behind simply due to a lack of exposure really. Clinton by contrast has had years upon years of exposure through African-American voter block since 1991, essentially (First Lady, Secretary of State, NY Senator). The fact that Cornell West endorsed him didn't help too much, unfortunately...

[notorious bum]

Bernie has a 60% name ID with black vote, but an overwhelmingly favorable view for those who are familiar with him. BLM plays a very insignificant role in this race, despite the vocal minority on Twitter. Last I checked, Bernie is nearly caught up to Hilary on the Latino vote, she continues to plummet and it will only get worse.

Here's a good article on why http://www.latinorebels.com/2015/10/...ain-insulting/

[thetruepandagod]

thx Obama

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-34571609

[notorious bum]

You could say their plan was.....half baked.

[kuronosan]

I would have accepted "dope".

No. You're dead to me now.

[Sho]

Lel.