2018 mid-term forecast

[imported_tajmahal]

What source do you consider to be more credible?

I find their credibility to be somewhat lacking. But they're obviously telling you what you want hear....whatever makes you happy I guess.

Nate Silver is a partisan Democrat pollster who's always going to find positives for them and negatives for Republicans. That's exactly why they put their faith in him and hate it when his accuracy is questioned.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Still seeing lots of lawn signs? And it’s not polls it is the people, less than 50% in deep red Alabama support him.

How many people risk putting up Trump yard signs or Trump bumper stickers when thug Democrats and criminal extremists use violence, intimidation or vandalism against any show of Trump support?

 

[fskimospy]

Nate Silver is a partisan Democrat pollster who's always going to find positives for them and negatives for Republicans. That's exactly why they put their faith in him and hate it when his accuracy is questioned.

You have no idea how funny I find it to see the ever-expanding list of things you believe are biased against Republicans. The degree to which you've closed yourself off from any information that might threaten your bubble is amazing.

There was a time where conservatives would have been embarrassed by this sort of denial of reality. Now you guys become enraged any time reality attempts to intrude.

 

[SlowSpyder]

How many people risk putting up Trump yard signs or Trump bumper stickers when thug Democrats and criminal extremists use violence, intimidation or vandalism against any show of Trump support?

I've had friends on Facebook post things saying if you voted for or support Trump they'll no longer be friends with you on FB or in real life. People I've known for years. Many Trump supporters keep quiet about it. On just this very board I've been called many insulting names and labeled a racist for supporting Trump and disagreeing with leftist totalitarian policies.

 

[dullard]

re-re-re-vision! yeah, We all knew Trump was going to win and the Democrats would fail miserably in the House and Senate races! Yeah, that's the ticket! We all knew it ! Even Nate Silver and 538.

1) You misspelled his name, I corrected it for you. By that misspelling you are already announcing that you don't actually know anything about the subject.
2) 538's actual prediction just before the election is here:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/feature...the-polls-clinton-leads-but-its-a-close-race/

it shouldn’t be hard to see how Clinton could lose. She’s up by about 3 percentage points nationally, and 3-point polling errors happen fairly often, including in the last two federal elections. Obama beat his polls by about 3 points in 2012, whereas Republicans beat their polls by 3 to 4 points in the 2014 midterms. If such an error were to favor Clinton, she could win in a borderline landslide. If the error favored Trump, however, she’d be in a dicey position, because the error is highly correlated across states.

But the public polls — specifically including the highest-quality public polls — show a tight race in which turnout and late-deciding voters will determine the difference between a clear Clinton win, a narrow Clinton win and Trump finding his way to 270 electoral votes.

What happened, Clinton won the popular vote by 2.1%, but Trump won the electoral votes. 538 wasn't off by very much at all.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

How many people risk putting up Trump yard signs or Trump bumper stickers when thug Democrats and criminal extremists use violence, intimidation or vandalism against any show of Trump support?

Those are literally the only yard signs I saw in my neck of the cornfields. I did not put a Bernie or Hillary sign out of fear of damage done to my car/house/etc. I counted no less than 10 on my dog walks during the election season. 2.5 mile walk, not 1 hillary sign. > 10 drumpf signs. I'm sure you'll have a list of links ready to show me that those very mean hillary supporters threatened drumpf supporters. Save your time, drumpf is a shithead who repeatedly encouraged violence.
He talks tough, he postures just right for you to think he's a badass, and even whips out an imaginary gun from time to time to show just how rootin' tootin tough he is. But we all know the truth deep down. He's a coward, a blowhard, all talk, zero action. You know it, deep down, the guys a shitheel. Maybe someday you'll wake up enough to acknowledge that, or maybe not.
You can always go throw explosives at children crossing the border illegally though. You do have that going for you tajjy.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

I've had friends on Facebook post things saying if you voted for or support Trump they'll no longer be friends with you on FB or in real life. People I've known for years. Many Trump supporters keep quiet about it. On just this very board I've been called many insulting names and labeled a racist for supporting Trump and disagreeing with leftist totalitarian policies.

maybe finding out a friend supports a racist, xenophobic, misogynistic shitbag is a dealbreaker. It kinda is for most rational people.
Here, this song is dedicated to you and tajjy and the other drumpf fluffers.

 

[zinfamous]

I understand that polling can be wrong...which is a hell of a lot more than you apparently understand.

The polling wasn't wrong, though. Why are you so bad with numbers?

By the way, you realize what you are doing here is going back to 2013 (whatever year that was), and laugh and point at the end of the Denver/Baltimore AFCC game where Denver was probably the most favored winner of any game in the NFL ever, and lost, saying hahaha! everyone was wrong! You don't know anything! why bother?!

The polling for the 2016 election was far, far far more accurate than whatever predictions were made for something like a football game, but pretty much everyone was certain that the highly favored outcome would, indeed, be the outcome. It is just sometimes that the 30% underdog (1:3 is not all that bad) or like the 95% underdog (Baltimore) actually come out on top.

Trump was given a less than 1% chance of winning the popular vote, which is usually pretty indicative of something like a 10% or less chance of winning the EC. But he was given an insanely probable 30-33% chance of winning the EC, which tells you that the bizzareness of the polling and the way things turned out was accurately predicted in Nate Silver's model. Since you weren't following Nate Silver, at all, you would probably be stunned to learn that he never would come out and say that Hillary would certainly win. He was actually the most uncertain, and Trump-possible of the legitimate polsters. The liberal media fricking hated him for giving Trump that kind of chance, but you know, he went with the numbers and what his model told him. Everyone knew that his prediction was unsettling, but that's because they understood what he was saying. You didn't.

But, you don't get it. Numbers aren't important to you. statistics...well, are not your wheelhouse, I guess. ...which makes me wonder why you bother pretending to know what you're talking about here.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Those are literally the only yard signs I saw in my neck of the cornfields. I did not put a Bernie or Hillary sign out of fear of damage done to my car/house/etc. I counted no less than 10 on my dog walks during the election season. 2.5 mile walk, not 1 hillary sign. > 10 drumpf signs. I'm sure you'll have a list of links ready to show me that those very mean hillary supporters threatened drumpf supporters. Save your time, drumpf is a shithead who repeatedly encouraged violence.
He talks tough, he postures just right for you to think he's a badass, and even whips out an imaginary gun from time to time to show just how rootin' tootin tough he is. But we all know the truth deep down. He's a coward, a blowhard, all talk, zero action. You know it, deep down, the guys a shitheel. Maybe someday you'll wake up enough to acknowledge that, or maybe not.
You can always go throw explosives at children crossing the border illegally though. You do have that going for you tajjy.

Try looking at page 3 of this thread. Yes, this thread. Page 3. What? You want a link? to page 3 of .this.very.thread?

 

[fskimospy]

I've had friends on Facebook post things saying if you voted for or support Trump they'll no longer be friends with you on FB or in real life. People I've known for years. Many Trump supporters keep quiet about it. On just this very board I've been called many insulting names and labeled a racist for supporting Trump and disagreeing with leftist totalitarian policies.

You were labeled a racist because you made an argument that white people were not only the most oppressed of all races but that they were superior to black and Hispanic people.

That's the dictionary definition of racism. You are most certainly a racist.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Try looking at page 3 of this thread. Yes, this thread. Page 3. What? You want a link? to page 3 of .this.very.thread?

It's almost as if the bot can't read a whole post or if it can, it can digest the whole post. Hmmm.

 

[SlowSpyder]

You were labeled a racist because you made an argument that white people were not only the most oppressed of all races but that they were superior to black and Hispanic people.

That's the dictionary definition of racism. You are most certainly a racist.

I made NO such claim. I said that affirmative action is the only institutionalized racism today. That the left uses socially acceptable racism to try and combat other racism and that you shouldn't be so surprised that it isn't working. I quite plainly said that I do not believe any race is superior than another, that some minorities have been duped into believing that leaning on the government to survive is the way forward, thanks to the left. You on the other hand are the real racist, you support giving someone a job because of their race and/or skin color over another person, because of that person's race and/or skin color.

 

[fskimospy]

I made NO such claim. I said that affirmative action is the only institutionalized racism today. That the left uses socially acceptable racism to try and combat other racism and that you shouldn't be so surprised that it isn't working. I quite plainly said that I do not believe any race is superior than another, that some minorities have been duped into believing that leaning on the government to survive is the way forward, thanks to the left. You on the other hand are the real racist, you support giving someone a job because of their race and/or skin color over another person, because of that person's race and/or skin color.

You said that white people were the most disadvantaged ethnic group but they ended up with better outcomes than blacks or Hispanics. That means they started worse off and ended up better off. The only logical conclusion from that is that whites are better.

I know you don't like hearing that you're a racist, but you are. The truth hurts.

 

[Jhhnn]

ROI's were good under Obama and awesome under Trump so far. And I'm talking about normal market behavior, not the apocalypse.

The GOP obviously intends to flood the market with hot money seeking returns. That's what the Bush tax cuts accomplished, too. They also intend to relax financial regulation enabling the creation of more debt & marketing of higher risk vehicles in a systemic sort of way, something we experienced not so long ago.

What could go wrong, huh?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

The polling wasn't wrong, though. Why are you so bad with numbers?

By the way, you realize what you are doing here is going back to 2013 (whatever year that was), and laugh and point at the end of the Denver/Baltimore AFCC game where Denver was probably the most favored winner of any game in the NFL ever, and lost, saying hahaha! everyone was wrong! You don't know anything! why bother?!

The polling for the 2016 election was far, far far more accurate than whatever predictions were made for something like a football game, but pretty much everyone was certain that the highly favored outcome would, indeed, be the outcome. It is just sometimes that the 30% underdog (1:3 is not all that bad) or like the 95% underdog (Baltimore) actually come out on top.

Trump was given a less than 1% chance of winning the popular vote, which is usually pretty indicative of something like a 10% or less chance of winning the EC. But he was given an insanely probable 30-33% chance of winning the EC, which tells you that the bizzareness of the polling and the way things turned out was accurately predicted in Nate Silver's model. Since you weren't following Nate Silver, at all, you would probably be stunned to learn that he never would come out and say that Hillary would certainly win. He was actually the most uncertain, and Trump-possible of the legitimate polsters. The liberal media fricking hated him for giving Trump that kind of chance, but you know, he went with the numbers and what his model told him. Everyone knew that his prediction was unsettling, but that's because they understood what he was saying. You didn't.

But, you don't get it. Numbers aren't important to you. statistics...well, are not your wheelhouse, I guess. ...which makes me wonder why you bother pretending to know what you're talking about here.

Nate Silver predicted 5 possible scenarios...4 had Hillary winning. And even Nate admits in the Trump win scenario that it was "one of the worst polling misses of all time".

https://fivethirtyeight.com/feature...-these-5-articles-the-day-after-the-election/

5. Trump shocks the world
In a stunning rebuke of elites, Donald Trump edged out Hillary Clinton for the presidency last night, jolting world markets and sending shock waves across a beleaguered political establishment. Trump captured 294 electoral votes, flipping Florida, Iowa, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin to the GOP column. With millions of votes left to tabulate in California and New York, Clinton was on track to win a worthless popular vote plurality.

After one of the worst polling misses of all time, election “forecasters” and experts were left scratching their heads. Trump credited his “Silent Majority” for swarming polling places and himself for leading a blue-collar revolution. Indeed, turnout among whites without a college degree surged from 55 percent in 2012 to 64 percent in 2016, and Trump carried them by 35 percentage points. Validating the “shy Trump voter” theory, Trump defied expectations by nearly tying Clinton among whites with a college degree.

Democrats faulted third-party “spoilers” and a lack of enthusiasm among their base for Clinton’s loss. Latinos voted for Clinton by 47 percentage points, but their turnout barely increased over 2012. Meanwhile, African-American turnout fell to 56 percent from 63 percent four years ago. Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson, Green Party nominee Jill Stein and Independent Evan McMullin combined for 11 percent, severely eating into Clinton’s margin among millennials.

Down ballot, Republicans easily held the Senate, sweeping all seven races rated as “toss-ups” by the Cook Political Report for a 53-to-47 seat majority — just one seat down from their current tally after losing seats in Illinois and Wisconsin and gaining Nevada. Democrats gained a paltry five House seats, leaving Speaker Paul Ryan with a solid 242-to-193 majority and stirring talk among disappointed Democrats that it’s time for fresh leadership to replace Nancy Pelosi.

Several high-ranking Democrats, haunted by the prospect of reliving their 2000 nightmare and noting that Trump was on track to receive fewer than 45 percent of all votes cast, called for the abolition of the Electoral College. Meanwhile, in his victory speech, Trump immediately praised the integrity of the vote, congratulating state and local officials on their “tremendous” work to ensure a fraud-free election.

 

[jmagg]

I know you don't like hearing that you're a racist, but you are. The truth hurts.

]I know you don't like hearing that you're a racist, realist but you are. The truth hurts. /bootstraps

 

[fskimospy]

Nate Silver predicted 5 possible scenarios...4 had Hillary winning. And even Nate admits in the Trump win scenario that it was "one of the worst polling misses of all time".

https://fivethirtyeight.com/feature...-these-5-articles-the-day-after-the-election/

5. Trump shocks the world
In a stunning rebuke of elites, Donald Trump edged out Hillary Clinton for the presidency last night, jolting world markets and sending shock waves across a beleaguered political establishment. Trump captured 294 electoral votes, flipping Florida, Iowa, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin to the GOP column. With millions of votes left to tabulate in California and New York, Clinton was on track to win a worthless popular vote plurality.

After one of the worst polling misses of all time, election “forecasters” and experts were left scratching their heads. Trump credited his “Silent Majority” for swarming polling places and himself for leading a blue-collar revolution. Indeed, turnout among whites without a college degree surged from 55 percent in 2012 to 64 percent in 2016, and Trump carried them by 35 percentage points. Validating the “shy Trump voter” theory, Trump defied expectations by nearly tying Clinton among whites with a college degree.

Democrats faulted third-party “spoilers” and a lack of enthusiasm among their base for Clinton’s loss. Latinos voted for Clinton by 47 percentage points, but their turnout barely increased over 2012. Meanwhile, African-American turnout fell to 56 percent from 63 percent four years ago. Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson, Green Party nominee Jill Stein and Independent Evan McMullin combined for 11 percent, severely eating into Clinton’s margin among millennials.

Down ballot, Republicans easily held the Senate, sweeping all seven races rated as “toss-ups” by the Cook Political Report for a 53-to-47 seat majority — just one seat down from their current tally after losing seats in Illinois and Wisconsin and gaining Nevada. Democrats gained a paltry five House seats, leaving Speaker Paul Ryan with a solid 242-to-193 majority and stirring talk among disappointed Democrats that it’s time for fresh leadership to replace Nancy Pelosi.

Several high-ranking Democrats, haunted by the prospect of reliving their 2000 nightmare and noting that Trump was on track to receive fewer than 45 percent of all votes cast, called for the abolition of the Electoral College. Meanwhile, in his victory speech, Trump immediately praised the integrity of the vote, congratulating state and local officials on their “tremendous” work to ensure a fraud-free election.

He does not admit that. That was written (and not by Silver) on October 25th, before the Comey letter. Clinton was winning in the polling averages by about eight points before the letter and her lead shrank dramatically after that. This article was written on November 4th after the race had tightened significantly:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-is-just-a-normal-polling-error-behind-clinton/

Still, Clinton’s lead is small enough that it wouldn’t take more than a normal amount of polling error to wipe the lead out and leave Trump the winner of the national popular vote. If Clinton wins by 3 percentage points, she’s very likely to win the White House. But that’s still a medium-sized “if.”

So no, if anything Silver said it was a totally normal polling miss. Gotta pay attention to when things were written, brotha.

 

[SlowSpyder]

You said that white people were the most disadvantaged ethnic group but they ended up with better outcomes than blacks or Hispanics. That means they started worse off and ended up better off. The only logical conclusion from that is that whites are better.

I know you don't like hearing that you're a racist, but you are. The truth hurts.

This is 100% exactly what I mean, you cannot reason with today's left in many ways. You support racist policies, holding back one race to serve another. You say the only conclusion is not the only conclusion, that is a race based conclusion that only YOU come up with. YOU are the racist here, you're just too dull to recognize it, your indoctrination and programming don't allow it. I quite plainly said that some groups of people have been fooled by the left into believing relying on the government is the way forward. That in actuality holds those people back. It has nothing to do with superiority of a race and everything to do with the left's misguided attempts of indoctrinating and buying life time voters.

Have you no decency, sir?

 

[fskimospy]

This is 100% exactly what I mean, you cannot reason with today's left in many ways. You support racist policies, holding back one race to serve another. You say the only conclusion is not the only conclusion, that is a race based conclusion that only YOU come up with. YOU are the racist here, you're just too dull to recognize it, your indoctrination and programming don't allow it. I quite plainly said that some groups of people have been fooled by the left into believing relying on the government is the way forward. That in actuality holds those people back. It has nothing to do with superiority of a race and everything to do with the left's misguided attempts of indoctrinating and buying life time voters.

One group is worse off in the system but ends up better off. What conclusion should we draw other than they are superior? I'd love to hear it.

It's particularly funny that you start off with 'this is why you can't reason with the left' and then launch into an emotional rant where you ignore the logical consequences of what you've said.

 

[Jhhnn]

There's no doubt that the polls were off slightly in 2016. So what? 2018 is a whole new ball game & the GOP won't have Hillary to kick around any more. It won't be about Ben-fucking-ghazi or buttery males, either. It'll be a referendum about what Trump & the Repubs have done for the Country & the voters.

Anybody who thinks their efforts so far land in the plus column is pretty much delusional. This tax bill is the most widely despised piece of legislation in a very long time, rightfully so. Their efforts wrt healthcare & all the rest don't fare much better.

 

[SlowSpyder]

One group is worse off in the system but ends up better off. What conclusion should we draw other than they are superior? I'd love to hear it.

It's particularly funny that you start off with 'this is why you can't reason with the left' and then launch into an emotional rant where you ignore the logical consequences of what you've said.

How is that the only conclusion? You're so focused on race it is the only conclusion for you. I've explained, several times now, how that isn't the only conclusion. But racists only see race, YOU only see race...

 

[Maxima1]

One group is worse off in the system but ends up better off. What conclusion should we draw other than they are superior? I'd love to hear it.

It's particularly funny that you start off with 'this is why you can't reason with the left' and then launch into an emotional rant where you ignore the logical consequences of what you've said.

What if it's not all environment?

The black-white IQ gap starts early in life and despite race relations and environmental factors improving dramatically, the gap has remained relatively stable.

 

[fskimospy]

What if it's not all environment?

The black-white IQ gap starts early in life and despite race relations and environmental factors improving dramatically, the gap has remained relatively stable.

Not relevant to his argument.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Not relevant to his argument.

One group is worse off in the system but ends up better off. What conclusion should we draw other than they are superior? I'd love to hear it.

It's particularly funny that you start off with 'this is why you can't reason with the left' and then launch into an emotional rant where you ignore the logical consequences of what you've said.

Some people have been fooled by the left into a perpetual situation of treading water, living off the government, treated like they cannot make it on their own so the left tries to buy their votes with social programs. The left is the real racists, handicapping some races for the sake of others. The left is saying some people are inferior and need government help. The left has become the new conservatives. Holding on to outdated racist policies, the counter culture cannot be mainstream, too.

 

[umbrella39]

The left doesn't have to buy poor people off. Poor people seldom vote in the first place and in the rare instance that they do of course they would vote for the party of exclusion and hatred who at every turn rubs their face in the fact they are poor!

No... the poor oppressed white, male, conservative, Christians.... They are the TRUE victims. We must make them a protected class before they all melt.

It's amazing they can even type out their whimpers with the limp wrists God has blessed them with...