2016 Election -- Part II
Poll
 | 57 votes (47.89%) | ||
| | 33 votes (27.73%) | ||
| | 12 votes (10.08%) | ||
| | 10 votes (8.4%) | ||
| | 4 votes (3.36%) | ||
| | 3 votes (2.52%) |
119 members have voted
Maybe it's because there aren't any. Can you point to a good Trump story in any non-mainstream media publication?Quote: RonCThe mainstream media seems to have a pretty strict way of handling news regarding this election. Here is the basic pattern:
Good Trump story...when there is one, you won't see it.
I don't mean some innumerate tripe about how he has a 263% lead over Hillary in some poll conducted by Voter Suppression Militia Incorporated. I mean a story where, if you read it about some other politician, you'd think "good job" rather than "what a schmuck."
Because every story I read about Trump makes me think "what a schmuck."
One of the latest: he hired a pollster, the pollster did a lot of work, then Trump is disputing the bill rather than paying him. It's the latest in a long and well-chronicled history of Trump stiffing his vendors. It's not just dishonest, it's dishonorable.
Show me a "good job" story about Trump.
Quote: MathExtremistShow me a "good job" story about Trump.
I'm not a Trump fan, and I haven't tried to fact check this, but if true he's probably not a complete ogre:
5 acts of kindness by Trump
Okay, then 538 shows Clinton's chances plummeting, too. A couple of weeks ago they had her at an 85% chance of winning, which has now dropped to 71%. They also show that Trump has turned another state red. A couple of weeks ago, Clinton was ahead by seven states, now it's only three. Trump need turn only three states from blue to red to win it. And in one of those states he's behind by only 0.2% points.Quote: ams288I trust FiveThirtyEight's model more.
By the way, this illustrates a difference between the lefties on this board and the extreme right-wingers: Lefties like me are capable of looking at the polls objectively, even when they move for Trump. ERW's on the other hand think that, because they *want* Trump to win, that means he'll win in a landslide, and all polls are wrong except any poll that happens to show Trump ahead.
He's probably not a complete ogre overall, but neither would I have a higher opinion of Bernie Madoff's business bona fides if I found out he volunteered at an animal shelter. Someone can be perfectly reasonable outside of work but a complete ogre at the job. People aren't voting for Trump because he donated a few bucks (to him) to a few nice people. People are voting for Trump because they believe he exhibits good leadership qualities, including being an honest, trustworthy businessperson who will honorably lead our country.Quote: MrVI'm not a Trump fan, and I haven't tried to fact check this, but if true he's probably not a complete ogre:
5 acts of kindness by Trump
Where are the stories that show that's even remotely true?
Quote: MichaelBluejayOkay, then 538 shows Clinton's chances plummeting, too. A couple of weeks ago they had her at an 85% chance of winning, which has now dropped to 71%. They also show that Trump has turned another state red. A couple of weeks ago, Clinton was ahead by seven states, now it's only three. Trump need turn only three states from blue to red to win it. And in one of those states he's behind by only 0.2% points.
"Plummeting" is an exaggeration. Give it a couple days and I'd bet her percentage starts ticking back up.
Based on early voting, Nevada is safe for Clinton.
She's safe in VA, PA, CO, and NH.
The absolute worst map I can get for her gives her 276 electoral votes.
For what it's worth, with a week left to go, if Hillary wins only the states where she's polling +3.5% or better over Trump then she still gets to 272 EC votes and wins the Oval Office. That doesn't include Nevada, Florida, North Carolina, Ohio, etc., but the Dems have early-voting leads in some of those states too.Quote: MichaelBluejayOkay, then 538 shows Clinton's chances plummeting, too. A couple of weeks ago they had her at an 85% chance of winning, which has now dropped to 71%. They also show that Trump has turned another state red. A couple of weeks ago, Clinton was ahead by seven states, now it's only three. Trump need turn only three states from blue to red to win it. And in one of those states he's behind by only 0.2% points.
By the way, this illustrates a difference between the lefties on this board and the extreme right-wingers: Lefties like me are capable of looking at the polls objectively, even when they move for Trump. ERW's on the other hand think that, because they *want* Trump to win, that means he'll win in a landslide, and all polls are wrong except any poll that happens to show Trump ahead.
Like casino game math, you've got to understand the electoral college math in order to properly understand what the polls mean. Nationwide polling isn't what matters. I know you know that but a lot of folks don't. It's like being a Cubs fan and thinking "we were down 3-1 in the series but in game 5 we scored three runs in the 4th inning so we've got this in the bag." Um, no.
Quote: MathExtremistQuote: MrVPeople are voting for Trump because
He is not Hillary Clinton.
He will select Supreme Court Justices who are not left of California.
He is not for increasing refugee resettlement in the USA.
He will end Sanctuary Cities.
He will repeal Obamacare.
He is not for a huge minimum wage increase.
Etc....
Many people will vote for Trump because of those reasons, not because they believe he has good leadership qualities. Not because they believe he is an honest businessman. Basically because he is not a Liberal Democrat. Next comes my usual refrain.... Why couldn't the Republicans have nominated someone who has those same general ideas but isn't Donald Trump?
I got 272, what's on yours?Quote: ams288The absolute worst map I can get for her gives her 276 electoral votes.
Okay, but if you admit he's dishonest and has been in the past, then why do you believe him that he'll do the things he says he will in the future? Do you actually have faith that a President Trump would carry out the policies he's been running on? Repealing Obamacare, electing conservative judges, deporting millions of immigrants?Quote: SOOPOOMany people will vote for Trump because of those reasons, not because they believe he has good leadership qualities. Not because they believe he is an honest businessman. Basically because he is not a Liberal Democrat. Next comes my usual refrain.... Why couldn't the Republicans have nominated someone who has those same general ideas but isn't Donald Trump?
What has Trump done to earn that trust, in view of his past?
Quote: President G. W. BushThere's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again.
Quote: MathExtremistI got 272, what's on yours?
Quote: MathExtremistOkay, but if you admit he's dishonest and has been in the past, then why do you believe him that he'll do the things he says he will in the future? Do you actually have faith that a President Trump would carry out the policies he's been running on? Repealing Obamacare, electing conservative judges, deporting millions of immigrants?
We aren't worried about whether or not Trump will carry out every one of his policies. However, we are quite worried that Hillary will try and implement hers!
Open borders, scary scary stuff!
Maybe it's Maine? I have 3-1 in favor of Hillary, do you have that flipped?
Quote: MathExtremistHere's mine -- it looks the same as yours but without Nevada, except I get 272 rather than 270:
Maybe it's Maine? I have 3-1 in favor of Hillary, do you have that flipped?
Yep - I had that flipped. Now it's 278.
Got it. Point is, the map with 272 is what I think is a reasonable backstop for the lower bound. Those are just the states where she's polling at +3.5% or better, which is a pretty big margin to overcome in a week especially when voting is already underway. Nevada early returns -- and NC early returns too, I think -- indicate she'll do better in those states and could end up in the 290-310 EC range. But it would take a significant polling miss across *all* of the states for her to do worse than 272.Quote: ams288Quote: MathExtremistHere's mine -- it looks the same as yours but without Nevada, except I get 272 rather than 270:
Maybe it's Maine? I have 3-1 in favor of Hillary, do you have that flipped?
Yep - I had that flipped. Now it's 278.
Quote: KeyserWe aren't worried about whether or not Trump will carry out every one of his policies. However, we are quite worried that Hillary will try and implement hers!
Open borders, scary scary stuff!
Quote: Hillary Clinton's websiteAs president, Hillary will:
Introduce comprehensive immigration reform. Hillary will introduce comprehensive immigration reform with a pathway to full and equal citizenship within her first 100 days in office. It will treat every person with dignity, fix the family visa backlog, uphold the rule of law, protect our borders and national security, and bring millions of hardworking people into the formal economy.
Where do you get "open borders" from that?
She's for open borders. Wiki exposed the transcripts of her speeches.
Yes, she's for open borders for the transmission of energy and trade goods. Not free, unvetted immigration. Context matters. Politifact rated the claim that "she's for open borders" as mostly false.Quote: KeyserThere's what she says in public, then there's what she says in private.
She's for open borders. Wiki exposed the transcripts of her speeches.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/oct/19/donald-trump/donald-trump-says-hillary-clinton-wants-have-open-/
Let me ask you a pointed question. Trump has said an awful lot of things in the past 15 months that fact-checkers have rated as mostly or entirely false. Do you believe him or the fact checkers?
If you believe Trump, why?
She was talking about the electrical power grid.Quote: KeyserThere's what she says in public, then there's what she says in private.
She's for open borders. Wiki exposed the transcripts of her speeches.
A....NO!
No one has seen the quote in the context of the rest of the speech, but I don't see any reason to doubt that the above referred to energy markets.Quote:My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere.
Quote: KeyserLMAO!
A....NO!
^^^^^ This is what happens when you expose a rightie to facts.
Quote: MathExtremist
Where do you get "open borders" from that?
If a person is here illegally, and is identified, and not deported, to me that is an open border. What is the point of having a 'border', if when it is breached you just ignore it?
Quote: SOOPOOIf a person is here illegally, and is identified, and not deported, to me that is an open border. What is the point of having a 'border', if when it is breached you just ignore it?
inb4 someone says you're a racist and this country was founded on immigration.
IIRC, this country was founded on soon-to-be American heroes slaughtering the Indians (no offense Face or ams288), taking the land for their own.
Quote: RSIIRC, this country was founded on soon-to-be American heroes slaughtering the Indians (no offense Face or ams288), taking the land for their own.
None taken. Not an issue I care about.
What is the point of having a "speed limit", if when it is breached you just ignore it? But you're not in favor of arresting the tens of millions of people who speed every year on U.S. highways. The law gives judges and prosecutors discretion to prosecute crimes if those crimes are codified. There is no discretion to prosecute something that is not illegal -- you can't do it.Quote: SOOPOOIf a person is here illegally, and is identified, and not deported, to me that is an open border. What is the point of having a 'border', if when it is breached you just ignore it?
In the case of immigration, the law gives prosecutors the right to detain and deport immigrants who came here illegally. But that's not an obligation and it shouldn't be. Discretion is how the system gets to decide which illegal immigrants should leave and which ones should get to stay if, on balance, their benefit to society outweighs the fact that they came here in violation of immigration laws.
Simple yes-or-no question: if you were in charge of ICE, would you deport Jose Antonio Vargas?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/magazine/my-life-as-an-undocumented-immigrant.html
Quote: MathExtremistWhat is the point of having a "speed limit", if when it is breached you just ignore it? But you're not in favor of arresting the tens of millions of people who speed every year on U.S. highways. The law gives judges and prosecutors discretion to prosecute crimes if those crimes are codified. There is no discretion to prosecute something that is not illegal -- you can't do it.
In the case of immigration, the law gives prosecutors the right to detain and deport immigrants who came here illegally. But that's not an obligation and it shouldn't be. Discretion is how the system gets to decide which illegal immigrants should leave and which ones should get to stay if, on balance, their benefit to society outweighs the fact that they came here in violation of immigration laws.
Simple yes-or-no question: if you were in charge of ICE, would you deport Jose Antonio Vargas?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/magazine/my-life-as-an-undocumented-immigrant.html
Honestly, if we closed the borders and stopped the illegal migration of folks from other countries, I would be more open to examining each case on an individual basis but considering ALL of the factors involved in the illegal arrival before putting everyone ahead of people waiting in line properly to gain entry. Perhaps we could set a quota of some sort for illegal to legal conversions each year...and no conversions for anyone not in the country when the borders are "closed" to illegal entry (physically or by law).
Until we have a real stoppage of entry (stating clearly that NO ILLEGAL ENTRY AFTER THIS DATE WILL EVER BE GRANTED LEGAL STATUS), all of the other stuff doesn't matter.
Democrats may want more illegals for votes; Rich Republicans, for cheap labor. Both of them are bad reasons to let people enter illegally.
We are a country of immigrants. We are also a country with laws regarding immigration. It is possible to have immigration without massive illegal immigration and amnesty every twenty or thirty years.
Quote: MrVI'm not a Trump fan, and I haven't tried to fact check this, but if true he's probably not a complete ogre:
5 acts of kindness by Trump
I will wager most of those acts were charged to the Trump Foundation, which isn't his money. He hasn't contributed a dime to his own foundation in years.
Quote: RonCUntil we have a real stoppage of entry (stating clearly that NO ILLEGAL ENTRY AFTER THIS DATE WILL EVER BE GRANTED LEGAL STATUS), all of the other stuff doesn't matter.
And as long as (a) the 14th Amendment guarantees that everybody born here is a citizen, (b) all citizens have the right to residence, and (c) it is considered a fundamental human right that no child can be forcibly separated from his parents except for the good of the child (United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 9, Section 1), this is much easier said than done.
Quote: ThatDonGuyAnd as long as (a) the 14th Amendment guarantees that everybody born here is a citizen, (b) all citizens have the right to residence, and (c) it is considered a fundamental human right that no child can be forcibly separated from his parents except for the good of the child (United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 9, Section 1), this is much easier said than done.
Then we separate the parent from the child, send 'em back to Mexico. Done. If the child wants to go back to Mexico or the parent wants to bring him back, go ahead.
And now this...
Looks like this...
and this...
and this...
Those who do not learn from history...
=)
We are, but only because the immigrants that came here first wrote the laws that said later immigrants couldn't do exactly what they did. Seems arbitrary and capricious.Quote: RonCWe are a country of immigrants. We are also a country with laws regarding immigration.
Quote: MathExtremistWe are, but only because the immigrants that came here first wrote the laws that said later immigrants couldn't do exactly what they did. Seems arbitrary and capricious.
Actually seems quite the smart course of action.
Europe's borders are even more porous, and in the past they shifted more than one of those floppy tube men outside an oil change station. And what did you get from that?Quote: FaceThose who do not learn from history... =)
Don't ask me what the moral of the story is. I just like the photo.
Quote: MathExtremistWhat is the point of having a "speed limit", if when it is breached you just ignore it? But you're not in favor of arresting the tens of millions of people who speed every year on U.S. highways. The law gives judges and prosecutors discretion to prosecute crimes if those crimes are codified. There is no discretion to prosecute something that is not illegal -- you can't do it.
In the case of immigration, the law gives prosecutors the right to detain and deport immigrants who came here illegally. But that's not an obligation and it shouldn't be. Discretion is how the system gets to decide which illegal immigrants should leave and which ones should get to stay if, on balance, their benefit to society outweighs the fact that they came here in violation of immigration laws.
Simple yes-or-no question: if you were in charge of ICE, would you deport Jose Antonio Vargas?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/magazine/my-life-as-an-undocumented-immigrant.html
Comparing breaking the speed limit to illegally crossing the border using either force or forged documents is silly. But I will say I have not fully considered the ramifications of deporting illegal aliens who were brought here when they were children and thus they weren't the ones actually committing the crime, their parents were. I think it has to be an all or none thing though.... Who decides which illegals are more of a benefit to society?
To me, the worst part about letting illegals stay is that all of the potential immigrants who played by the rules are slapped in the face.
I volunteer.Quote: SOOPOOWho decides which illegals are more of a benefit to society?
.
That should be fairly simple.
Might want to start outside Home Depot's and U-Haul in LV. Then head to LV BLVD and look for the porn slappers.
How many illegal immigrants are in jail in America?
Society does. Believing in an all or none philosophy is exactly why "don't throw the baby out with the bathwater" is an idiom. You know it's not ever as simple as that. People who try to tell you it *is* that simple are lying to you.Quote: SOOPOOI think it has to be an all or none thing though.... Who decides which illegals are more of a benefit to society?
Why should that matter if the rules are arbitrary to begin with? Take right now as a point in time and you tell me: of the people in the United States at this very moment, who would you allow to stay and who would you send away? Don't make the assumption that there is any inherent validity or correctness to our immigration laws -- if there were, everyone wouldn't agree that we need "immigration reform."Quote:To me, the worst part about letting illegals stay is that all of the potential immigrants who played by the rules are slapped in the face.
I say that a first person who is honest, works hard, pays their taxes and stays out of trouble is worth more to society than a second person who cheats others out of money or routinely breaks their business promises. So would you, I hope. Except if the first person was born in New Zealand and the second person was born in New York, our law says that we have to let the second one in but not the first.
Why is that a just law?
Quote: AxelWolfI volunteer.
That should be fairly simple.
Might want to start outside Home Depot's and U-Haul in LV. Then head to LV BLVD and look for the porn slappers.
Let's go!
Quote: AxelWolfHow many illegal immigrants are in jail in America?
Well I do think one of the crazy parts of immigration is red blooded American as apple pie born gang members are in prison taking up space have to be kept here, but hissy fits are thrown about people whose only crime so far may be crossing the border or looking for work mowing yards or sweeping floors
Quote: rxwineWell I do think one of the crazy parts of immigration is red blooded American as apple pie born gang members are in prison taking up space have to be kept here, but hissy fits are thrown about people whose only crime so far may be crossing the border or looking for work mowing yards or sweeping floors
Well, illegals seem to be over-represented in prison, and run some of the toughest gangs.
But my question is if illegal aliens are so hard-working, how come the left goes ape every time there is a commons-sense measure to deny them welfare and other assistance?
Them pilgrims didn't take Indian jobs and work hard at them. They took their land. So, think Foreign investors, like Arab , Russian, Chinese billionaires buying up valuable property. They're the ones going to destroy us. The serfs are getting blamed for their masters desires,
(just kidding, or not, who knows.)
Quote: KeyserCan any of the lefties actually articulate why they oppose a border wall?
Because pits are cheaper.
Quote: KeyserCan any of the lefties actually articulate why they oppose a border wall?
Something about racism and our country being founded on immigration or something dumb like that.
If I were president, border patrol / watch-tower guards would have flamethrowers and there'd be super-powered carne-asada-sniffin' dogs that could smell through the dirt and into the underground tunnels.
Quote: KeyserCan any of the lefties actually articulate why they oppose a border wall?
Because ladders exist.
Quote: KeyserCan any of the lefties actually articulate why they oppose a border wall?
Talk to US residents that live along the southern border
Its not a left right issue
To the locals its just plain stupid
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/295
Nationalism is not bad. It is what built this country and made it great. Unfortunately we have a corrupt establishment that wants to sell us out for personal gain, through the the accumulation of money and power. A vote for Hillary = continued destruction of our foundation. End game is AMERICANS living on par with the rest of the world. Eff that.
