Trump cheats at golf - the ONE and ONLY politics thread

In a way though, he backed them into a corner. He was overt about the stuff that talk radio and Fox News had been fueling for years. The party didn't want Trump to win; they got blindsided by him in some ways. 30 percent of the electorate has been fed a diet of xenophobia and fear-mongering for the entire Obama presidency, and so when a celebrity candidate came along and started saying them, the actual party was screwed. I think Trump minus the racism would actually be a really interesting candidate, because a lot of people rightfully feel powerless and left behind, and I actually agree that a lot of the educated class (both sides!) can be really snotty and condescending to people who didn't get the opportunities they got. I laugh when I see Wall Street Journal and Washington Post journalists writing about "Trump is connecting with people who go bowling on the weekends" as if any of those reporters have been inside a goddamn bowling alley in 15 years, or have any idea how cliche it is to write that. (Monster truck rallies! People who listen to country music!) I don't know if Trump Wants To Blow Up The System, But Is Not A Bigot would be enough to win, but it would be interesting argument.

 

The corporatist controlled MSM which has been powersucking Dumpf's cock for the entire campaign. Yah, uh huh.

 

It blipped across the screen and got swamped in the firestorm over Dumpf's repugnant Khan comments.

 

LOL. I missed this the other day.

Obama and Biden can't even agree whether or not Putin is a dictator:

 

Of course you'd be shitting your pants if somebody didn't acknowledge that Putin is in fact a dictator.

 

This is what I originally said:

What more specific knowledge on information security do I need in order to make that statement?

 

I think there's a lot of wiggle room in what Nate does.

For example, in this article, he talks about some of the choices he makes, but in one case-- relating to swing states-- declines to say why.

It's interesting to me, that the choices he makes... For example the factors related to third party candidates... Almost always favor Trump.

Election Update: Why Our Model Is Bullish On Trump, For Now

Like any liberal, I love Nate Silver.

I also think he doesn't want to be in any way responsible for this country electing Trump.

It's possible he was shaken by his earlier whiff on Trump, personally and professionally.

-----

I will give you the inherent problems with polling. Those have always existed.

My question is, are they in 2016, the least reliable that they have ever been ?

For firms who conduct the bulk of their polling using voice calling, what does that mean ?

Anecdotally, I think about how I almost never pick up a ringing phone anymore. Who does ?

 

You should have added "Hillary Clinton not withstanding" in there somewhere ...

 

Important to remember, while Obama is personally popular, a large majorities of the country believed we're on the "wrong track".

That's going to go a long way towards deciding the election. Trump is the candidate proposing real change. (And it's why you heard so many references during the DNC to Hillary being a "change maker").

But, turnout and the map still favor Hillary. I don't see Trump winning Pennsylvania -- or more obviously Michigan or Wisconsin -- which means he needs to pull of an inside straight, that likely includes Virginia, as well as Ohio and Florida (and North Carolina).

 

It was the continuation of a conversation about Clinton, with the implication that her network and the DNC network being hacked showed a failure of information security.

Any network security robust enough to not be hacked by state-sponsored actors is impractical for every-day use.

 

What's your experience on this topic?