५ नोव्हेंबर, २०१८
At the Day-Before-the-Deluge Café...
... talk about the midterms if you like. I'm tired of all the gabbing and need a break before the challenge of staying alert for the actual experience tomorrow. Feel free to talk about anything though.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
२४५ टिप्पण्या:
245 पैकी 1 – 200 नवीन› नवीनतम»Already voted.
I will happily be willing to concede that if the Senate and House race goes against me, that I am woefully wrong about how popular Trump is and how many Republicans are out there.
I wonder if Inga, Freder, R/V, and Cooke are willing to concede that if THEY lose big, that maybe their ideology is to blame?
Yeah. Won't hold my breath.
I'm in Fargo. I wish I had saved all the campaign material that has been dumped on my front step and my mailbox for Heidi Heitkamp. I bet it would be about 10 pounds worth.
Looks like it will be all for naught though.
The Caravan: Some ICE official [or former ICE official] on Varney this morning said that the migrants will come through the check points and processed as those seeking asylum [which happens every day, alas!] meaning they will be released until some distant hearing is arranged. He used the issue of their escape from 'poverty' as an excuse.
How about we round up all our homeless and drop them at his house [and the houses of Leftist officials in sanctuary cities], tell them it's OK for them to enter and stay because--poverty.
Remember everyone, Republicans vote Tuesday, and Democrats vote Wednesday.
"Remember everyone, Republicans vote Tuesday, and Democrats vote Wednesday."
Truer than you think. Democrats continue voting until the correct result obtains.
I am so tired of being berated to vote. Eesh.
"I vote, and I virtue signal"
I put 100$ on several races last night after looking at predictit.
Getting 4 to 1 betting Manchin loses tomorrow among others.
Nate Silver just changed his House prediction to a 50/50 toss-up.
What's that tell you?
"I will happily be willing to concede that if the Senate and House race goes against me, that I am woefully wrong about how popular Trump is and how many Republicans are out there.
"I wonder if Inga, Freder, R/V, and Cooke are willing to concede that if THEY lose big, that maybe their ideology is to blame?"
How do you know what my ideology is? Do you think I am a partisan for the Democrats? I think they're largely as useless and corrupt as the Republicans. This is one reason the Democrats are losing...they don't learn. Obama was voted into office for the same reason Trump was: many Americans were sick and tired of "business as usual" and he seemed (superficially) different. His voters believed he would do something. He did...he continued "business as usual." This, of course, disillusioned many who had hoped he and the Democrats would address their concerns. Then the Dems put up a terrible candidate to follow Obama, and those who had become disillusioned turned away. That there is talk of Hillary running again in 2020 shows the Dems still haven't learned...because they're as useless and corrupt as the Republicans.
Now, that's national politics. Local politics can be different, so I can't speak to who will win in local races tomorrow, or why the voters will vote as they will.
Après nous le déluge
A surprisingly interesting Wikipedia article.
Regina Spector taking the phrase and running with it
My sis-in-law told me that Election Fever has infected her weekly Bible study group. Two people in her group are anti-Trumpers, and have essentially lost their minds over the abortion issue. They started shrieking about rape, incest, back-alley abortions, rusty coat hangers, etc.
SIL will probably be seeking out another group, preferable one that's interested in, you know, actually studying the Bible. I advised her to give it two more weeks, and then see if the Screaming Harridans have calmed down once they realize that the world isn't coming to an end.
Like most deplorables, I'll be glad when it's all over and we can return to the days of less propaganda. I've never received so many poll calls at the house, and it's getting OLD.
I watched last night's game this morning so I could blast through the political ads. Two martinis had nothing to do with it. Pats were lucky to win and I think that the Packers exposed a couple things about Brady.
I still haven’t heard a compelling reason from any candidate as to why I should vote for them, so I’ll probably be sitting this one out tomorrow.
Cookie at 9:33 AM: +100
Predictions:
1. Senate: GOP gains 3 seats. High confidence level. Blue wave thwarted. Many more federal judges confirmed. More aggressive AG confirmed.
2. House: The RCP average says Dems gain 26 seats, which gives them a slight majority. 219 - 216. Sadly, although I wish this were not the case, I think it's close to being right. Admittedly, there are two many uncertainties to figure out every single close House race. So, I will predict 221-214, Dem majority, but with a very low confidence level. I do hope I'm wrong.
Book this.
Don't forget folks.
The 2020 campaign begins on Wednesday.....
"Nate Silver just changed his House prediction to a 50/50 toss-up.
What's that tell you?"
It tells me that Silver has no idea which way the House will go, and that he realizes his "methodology" doesn't work in the Age Of Trump.
So he's throwing up his hands in order to salvage his reputation.
Smart move, but laughable.
Damn ation. I agree at least in part with cookie. Obama was at least in part an attempt by Reagan democrats at finding a fix. It's not just red starters that see a problem.
I think that Nelson's display of that decrepit rictus that is supposed to be a winning smile, as if he has no idea of the content of the dark and aggressive negative ad that precedes it, might be a mistake.
Incidentally, I hit the mute button and closed captioning turned on. On another ad, for a tech company, the mute didn't work until the instant the ad wasn't over.
I, too, am sick of the predictions and speculation. But more than anything I would love to see those arrogant, partisan pricks at CNN and MSNBC eat their words. Again.
The comments section keeps getting uglier and I don't see how anyone benefits. This blog evidences the best and worst of social media. How about an enforced code of conduct -- no more personal insults of other commentators?
”The 2020 campaign begins on Wednesday.....”
When does early voting start?
Whoever wins my emotional state will be about the same Wednesday as it was on Tuesday. I have my political preferences, but their gratification or frustration have very little to do with the success or failure of my life.
BAG
I pretty much agree. My prediction is looser than yours. House within 6,either way. Senate 54.
After Kavanagh I hope I am wrong and the dems lose big. But I don't see it.
There is another election and it requires you to vote daily for the next three days.
Vote for US Navy Vet Janae Sergio
maximcovergirl.com/2018/janae-sergio
Robert Cook said: "How do you know what my ideology is?"
For a simpleton like me, would you mind putting in a few bullet points, just what you would like to see a president do?
"Nate Silver just changed his House prediction to a 50/50 toss-up.
"Trust, but verify." I haven't seen this anywhere. Sounds like disinformation.
Mockturtle says -- "How about we round up all of our homeless"
I guess the liberty in "life liberty and the pursuit of happiness" doesn't apply to the most poor among us.
I think the 1912 Presidential election was one of the fulcrum points of history. The history of the world would have been far different if Wilson had lost. All these other vitally important elections not do much.
I made the mistake of reading through the Kerry Bercham/Karen Yarasavage text messages released by the Judiciary Committee yesterday. That Bercham was a busy little bee, buzzing around her friend, trying to get her to back up, or at least not knock, Deborah Ramirez's fantasy about Brett Kavanaugh.
Bercham is devious and two-faced with her friend Yarasavage, and ultimately sold both Yarasavage and Ramirez down the river by turning over texts to the Judiciary Committee. Did Yarasavage and Ramirez really want the world to know that Yarasavage thought Ramirez had daddy issues, and that is why Ramirez had fallen off the scope? Is Kerry Bercham someone you would want for a friend?
Bercham is the head of the corporate a securities practice at Akin Gump. Would you want her to be your lawyer?
Sad.
@steve uhr - You could begin the new comity by not mischaracterizing what mockturtle said.
Robert Cook said...How do you know what my ideology is? Do you think I am a partisan for the Democrats? I think they're largely as useless and corrupt as the Republicans.
As I often say, I have no more use for Republicans than Democrats, but I do have more respect for them.
I like the 2-party system and it worries me that the Democrats don't seem to be interested in being that second party. You identify their problem exactly--they cannot learn. That, of course, is because they have defined themselves as the smart ones. So anyone who thinks differently is, necessarily, not as smart. And smart people don't learn from dumb people, right? No, it has to be the other way around (but those stupid deplorables can't pull their heads out of the sand!).
This narcissistic delusion has led to an ossification of left-wing thinking and behavior.
The Tea Party saved the Republican Party after its soul was neglected by Bush and Rove. The Democratic Party desperately needs its own Tea Party, but they're not open to it. They're not ready. And that's a shame.
"Bay Area Guy said...
"Nate Silver just changed his House prediction to a 50/50 toss-up.
"Trust, but verify." I haven't seen this anywhere. Sounds like disinformation."
"So in the House we have Democrats with about a 4 in 5 chance of winning," Silver told ABC's "This Week."
However, he noted that "polls aren't always right."
"The range of outcomes in the House is really wide," he explained. "Our range, which covers 80 percent of outcomes goes from, on the low end, about 15 Democratic pickups, all the way to low to mid 50s, 52 or 53."
"Most of those are under 23, which is how many seats they would need to win to take the House," he said."
"But no one should be surprised if they only win 19 seats and no one should be surprised if they win 51 seats," Silver added. "Those are both extremely possible, based on how accurate polls are in the real world."
TL;DR Nate Silver: "I have no f*cking idea. Back to you."
Ah the python election sketch.
538 still has Democrats with a 7 out of 8 chance of winning the House.
Silver is a partisan hack.
Steve is incapable of understanding Mockturtle. See Jonathan Haidt.
I'm really tired of all the phone calls and TV ads. I will be happy when all that is over. I'm also tired of calls from pollsters - I always hang up on them. I have my hopes, but I'm not making any predictions because I'm often wrong.
Rasmussen reports Republicans lead generic Congressional ballot 46% to 45%. Last week it was 47%-44% in favor of the Dems.
Republicans win House and Senate.
Still time to vote early and avoid Democrat thugs with clubs at voting places.
Polling suggests....
Uh, you misspelled "battle-space preparation" wrong by I FIFY...
I mean why are D's like 50 points ahead!!! Mystifying....
"The Tea Party saved the Republican Party after its soul was neglected by Bush and Rove. The Democratic Party desperately needs its own Tea Party, but they're not open to it. They're not ready. And that's a shame.
I agree with the first part, but not the last part. The Democrat Tea Party, more likely than not, will be not from the Robert Cook-thoughtful -less partisan wing (which would be good), but rather from the Bernie Sanders, Democratic-Socialist wing (which will be bad, as nearly all socialist revolutions are).
But, Yes, the Democrat party needs to be shaken up badly. They are a sorry bunch - torn between elite white liberalism and identity-raced based activism.
I am reading the book The Great Good Thing by Andrew Klavan. He's a secular Jew who found Christ late in life. Klavan is a very interesting guy, definitely a right-winger. But he's also achieved a startling success in the popular culture. Among his great novels are Man and Wife and Empire of Lies. I also have Werewolf Cop by my bed. I haven't started it yet.
(Klavan has a popular podcast, Klavan on the Culture. Here is his The History of Western Culture in 2 1/2 Minutes).
Anyway, so far, good book!
I was a writer. I had no secrets. I hadn't had a thought in years that hadn't ended up in print somewhere. If I became a Christian I would be bound to declare it in some article or something. And what then? Would I lose work because of it? At the time, I was making good money in Hollywood, turning out ghost story scripts and murder mysteries. Would producers stop considering me for such assignments? Would they assume I was too pious to produce rollicking good tales about masked madmen with butcher knives chasing half-naked women across the screen?
And would I become too pious, in fact? What a nightmare that would be! As a writer, I prided myself on seeing and describing the world as it was, not as I wanted it or thought it was supposed to be. I had made my living writing hard-boiled fiction about tough, cynical men and femme fatales swept up in ugly underworlds of crime, sex, and murder. Would I suddenly be reduced to penning saccharine fluff about some little girl who lost her pet bunny but Jesus brought it back again? "Oh God," I prayed fervently more than once, "whatever happens, don't let me become a Christian novelist!"
"How about an enforced code of conduct -- no more personal insults of other commentators?"
OK, Steve. Let me say that I don't know anything about you, but I am sure you a wonderful person who is kind to dogs and small children. I am confident that you want the best for everyone and always think the best of people. When they disappoint you, you offer friendly correction when is sometimes spurned, but never badly intended. You want everyone to have all the good things in life, and indeed, believe that all are entitled to a certain standard of living here in America, and indeed, in the world, involving an ample, nourishing diet, a small but snug living space, and frequent educational and recreational opportunities at no cost to them.
May I wish you a happy day? If I may, then I will.
Ann Althouse said,...
"talk about the midterms if you like. I'm tired of all the gabbing"
I'm amazed that - every day - the country with most cults, the most dangerous cults, and the most exploitive cults can always find something else to talk about. But, especially, how important it is to keep waving the flag as that exploitation - usually of women and children - is happening. The mainstream news media never asks the exploited what they think about any of it, either - just as Republicans never ask old blacks about reparations - unless they're conservatives.
There's a LOT that Americans want to keep hidden, or just don't want to know.
Last week a CO detector beeping warnings where there was no CO present. I put it by the back fence 200 feet away, since it could not be shut off and the battery cannot be removed, where it beeped without cease. For today, garbage day, it got wrapped in a discarded full-size sheet wrapped to a huge thickness, making the beeps only slightly audible, and placed in two boxes and placed in the garbage.
I figured a loudly beeping thing would not otherwise get cheerfully loaded onto the truck, even though they accept any kind of electronics as regular trash.
You are getting 3 to 1 on Democrats having less than 217 seats next year.
There's a sizable percentage on the UK that identify as jedi grantee there are a smaller cohort.
Curious George said...
Nate Silver just changed his House prediction to a 50/50 toss-up.
What's that tell you?
That you made something up?
We're in the period of time of polling I call "The Tightening," in which every pollster, to try and not get caught with their pants down or thumb on the scale, suddenly sees the elections tightening. It happens nearly every cycle.
Why can naturopaths mislead the public about their credentials? Because no one bothers to stop them
FACT: By the time the Oprah-loving politicians and public got around to criticizing Trump for lying, they'd been enmeshed in NewAge lies for so long, they didn't have an ethical leg to stand on.
How could he?
He represents the people, and - when it comes to their integrity - he's doing an amazing job of representing them.
Last week a CO detector beeping warnings where there was no CO present. I put it by the back fence 200 feet away, since it could not be shut off and the battery cannot be removed, where it beeped without cease. For today, garbage day, it got wrapped in a discarded full-size sheet wrapped to a huge thickness, making the beeps only slightly audible, and placed in two boxes and placed in the garbage.
Seems like a loose metaphor for the Democrats taking power in this country. They will never get out of your life until you throw them onto the trash heap of history.
"Like most deplorables, I'll be glad when it's all over and we can return to the days of less propaganda. I've never received so many poll calls at the house, and it's getting OLD."
-- You'll be sorely disappointed. After tomorrow, you'll start seeing the "How to talk to your conservative family about the results of the election on Thanksgiving," followed by: "How not to let your Trumpist Uncle ruin Christmas." Then, you'll get "New Years Resolutions to Support the New Majority/Continue Resisting" mattering on the results. By February, we'll be in "Which Democrats will run in 2020" mode and "Will someone primary Trump" will be the on-again, off-again political love child of Spring and Summer 2019.
rhhardin said...I put it by the back fence 200 feet away, since it could not be shut off and the battery cannot be removed, where it beeped without cease
Don't you own a hammer?
Never a wood chipper around when you need one, he rh?
Murder, Suicides and Missing Persons at Iowa's Maharishi Campus
Imagine that: Our political process kicks off in the very same place the charlatan Maharishi Mahesh Yogi set-up his outfit - and all manner of mayhem takes place there no one talks about.
How - in a modern nation like America - does this happen?
SDaly said...
"Unlike what we thought of slavery, Reconstruction, sharecropping, lynching, etc., most white people just think it is a dumb, unworkable concept that would lead to increased resentment and tension - since we're all cool now - so we keep it out of the public sphere because we have that power as we've always had."
FIFY.
I wonder if it would be possible for Chris Christie to make a fat joke about Stacy Abrams. Probably not. I don't think anyone could. You can't even make fun of fat Republican women.......I walked by part of the NYC marathon yesterday. The runners were about two thirds through the race at that point. Some of the marathoners were mildly obese, but were still chugging away. A lot of overweight people are surprisingly fit.
There is a Democrat from Ohio, Tim Ryan, who is pretty squared away. If he were to topple Pelosi as speaker, I think the Dems (and the country) would greatly benefit.
But, alas, I doubt it will happen. The NY-SF rich white liberal axis would be too upset.
"People talk about reparations all the time, most just think it is a dumb, unworkable concept"
Show me the stats on blacks thinking it's a " dumb, unworkable concept" and then explain to me how racism has and does work in this country.
You're the expert.
If it were up to me early voting would be abolished unless there was a legitimate reason for an absentee ballot such as traveling or illness and the exit polling be banned and that no election results are published until the all of the west coast polls close. Being a sport, I would allow Alaska and Hawaii and anywhere else federal elections are held to cast ballots one day earlier due to the time zone differences but their results are not published until the mainland results are published. The world won't end if the results aren't know until the next morning.
@Crack "just as Republicans never ask old blacks about reparations". Well, what do you think about them?
Also, what do Native Americans think about them? To me it seems impossible even to begin.
I'm shocked how much TV advertising our statehouse candidates bought this cycle. The R's have a veto-proof majority right now and have been de-fanging the (D) Governor's powers. They've put amendments on the ballot to do more.
brylun said...
Rasmussen reports Republicans lead generic Congressional ballot 46% to 45%. Last week it was 47%-44% in favor of the Dems.
The current house majority for Republicans was based on Democrats winning the national popular vote by 3%.
The Republicans are going to win the national popular vote this time.
Here’s the story: There will be no great shift, as is the usual case.
There certainly will be no GWB “thumpin”.
In that regard, Trump has already won the midterms.
It’s only a matter of how bigly he wins.
MikeR said...
@Crack "just as Republicans never ask old blacks about reparations".
"Well, what do you think about them?"
They're beyond past due.
"Also, what do Native Americans think about them?"
Berkil is the only Native American I've ever run across even remotely against them for blacks.
"To me it seems impossible even to begin."
That seems to be whites' stumbling block: their own imaginations. Which they think is a good enough reason to hurt or deprive blacks - always have.
All reparational, in my eyes.
I decided Saturday this election is going to be 2016 redux. I cannot comprehend that AZ Senate polls are accurate. I just can't believe that so many people would vote for Sinema after she has spent her entire career crapping on the state. It's not going to be close. Polls are wrong.
Regarding polls and Nate Silver, this is interesting:
"According to the Pew Research Center, 36 percent of people would answer telephone surveys in 1997; today, just 9 percent will."
In addition, pollsters can't call cell phones.
So that means Nate Silver bases his predictions on 10% of the people in the country who will answer a LAND LINE.
No wonder 2016 turned out so badly for him.
The Crack Emcee said...
"People talk about reparations all the time, most just think it is a dumb, unworkable concept"
Show me the stats on blacks thinking it's a " dumb, unworkable concept" and then explain to me how racism has and does work in this country.
You're the expert.
Socialist redistribution has failed every time it is tried but it will work this time because it is based on the color of our skin.
Sounds legit.
South Africans are way ahead of you.
Our friend @Achilles has been saying for months that the polling is off and that the GOP keeps the House and expands the Senate majority.
And I hope he is right! If he is right, he will be immediately declared the King of the Commentariat political prognosticators.
Achilles-please favor us with your final prediction (if you are so inclined).
And, more importantly, what are you seeing that I and others are missing?
Steveurh bleats: I guess the liberty in "life liberty and the pursuit of happiness" doesn't apply to the most poor among us.
What I suggested was to let them enter and remain in the palatial mansions of the Leftist sanctuary state elites. Get a clue and read, steve!
He also pleads: The comments section keeps getting uglier and I don't see how anyone benefits. This blog evidences the best and worst of social media. How about an enforced code of conduct -- no more personal insults of other commentators?
Bugger off, steve! :-D
You can't discus reparations until you define what you mean. What is being proposed for who to give to whom?
Achilles said...
"Socialist redistribution has failed every time it is tried"
The CIA put Nelson Mandela in prison forever to "fight communism".
You guys are insane ideologues.
"According to the Pew Research Center, 36 percent of people would answer telephone surveys in 1997; today, just 9 percent will."
As time goes on a larger and larger percentage of reliable voters don't even have landlines anymore. I myself haven't had a land line since 2007.
In addition, pollsters can't call cell phones.
I don't believe that's true.
tim maguire said...
"You can't discus reparations until you define what you mean. What is being proposed for who to give to whom?"
There has a been a proposal in Congress for almost 40 years to find the answers to those questions, but the conservatives won't let it be acted on.
Just looked up my ballot for Madison. There isn’t even a Republican running for my federal Congressional district. Mark Pocan, the first politician out of the gate to offer Andrew McCabe a job, is the sittiing Democrat.
Ditto several other local races.
Then there’s this amendment:
Should the state legislature protect residential property taxpayers by preventing commercial and manufacturing property owners from using tax loopholes to shift the tax burden to homeowners?
I wonder what the story behind that is?
”In addition, pollsters can't call cell phones.
I don't believe that's true.”
The article I read said automatic dialers can’t call cell phones.
rhhardin reports: Last week a CO detector beeping warnings where there was no CO present. I put it by the back fence 200 feet away, since it could not be shut off and the battery cannot be removed, where it beeped without cease. For today, garbage day, it got wrapped in a discarded full-size sheet wrapped to a huge thickness, making the beeps only slightly audible, and placed in two boxes and placed in the garbage.
I figured a loudly beeping thing would not otherwise get cheerfully loaded onto the truck, even though they accept any kind of electronics as regular trash.
Reminds me of a Christmas issue of The New Yorker, probably in the early 80's, with some kind of musical device that deployed when the magazine was open. There was no shutting it off. I could hear it in the garbage can for days and days.
@Pianoman,
That's some interesting stuff re polling on landlines. Thanks a bunch.
Why do you think that development in polling (no cell phone polls, 10% landline) skews Left so much?
Is there a large chunk of "quiet" Trump supporters out there that the traditional polling simply don't reach anymore?
Before the Deluge
Some of them were dreamers
And some of them were fools
Who were making plans and thinking of the future
With the energy of the innocent
They were gathering the tools
They would need to make their journey back to nature
While the sand slipped through the opening
And their hands reached for the golden ring
With their hearts they turned to each other's hearts for refuge
In the troubled years that came before the deluge
Some of them knew pleasure
And some of them knew pain
And for some of them it was only the moment that mattered
And on the brave and crazy wings of youth
They went flying around in the rain
And their feathers, once so fine, grew torn and tattered
And in the end they traded their tired wings
For the resignation that living brings
And exchanged love's bright and fragile glow
For the glitter and the rouge
And in a moment they were swept before the deluge
Let the music keep our spirits high
Let the buildings keep our children dry
Let creation reveal its secrets by and by, by and by
When the light that's lost within us reaches the sky
Some of them were angry
At the way the earth was abused
By the men who learned how to forge her beauty into power
And they struggled to protect her from them
Only to be confused
By the magnitude of her fury in the final hour
And when the sand was gone and the time arrived
In the naked dawn only a few survived
And in attempts to understand a thing so simple and so huge
Believed that they were meant to live after the deluge
Let the music keep our spirits high
Let the buildings keep our children dry
Let creation reveal its secrets by and by, by and by
When the light that's lost within us reaches the sky
In addition, pollsters can't call cell phones.
This is incorrect.
Nate Silver addresses the problems with land-line polls all the way back in 2010
Nonapod: From the same article: "Pollsters have been hurt in particular by the near-ubiquity of cellphones — which by law may not be called using automatic dialers — and Americans’ growing unwillingness to answer poll questions. "
Blogger FIDO said...
Already voted.
I will happily be willing to concede that if the Senate and House race goes against me, that I am woefully wrong about how popular Trump is and how many Republicans are out there.
I wonder if Inga, Freder, R/V, and Cooke are willing to concede that if THEY lose big, that maybe their ideology is to blame?
Yeah. Won't hold my breath.
11/5/18, 9:22 AM
---
Well, those aren't equivalent concessions... amusing.
"If he is right, he will be immediately declared the King of the Commentariat political prognosticators."
-- I suppose that's fine, since Mick is the King in Exile after his Trump prognostication.
The passing of Wah Wah Watson has me thinking about all the great musicians that lived their lives, and particularly their professional careers, in the shadows of fame. I'm thinking about the people like Wah Wah and the other members of The Funk Brothers. There is a really good documentary of these guys, "Standing in the Shadows of MoTown" that is well worth watching.
Who are some of the others? I think I'll google me some answers.
Btw, what's going on tomorrow? I've been off Facebook for a couple of days now and seem to have lost touch with the apocalyptic goings on.
Shocking, I know, but professional pollsters actually know all about low response rates and take great pains to benchmark accordingly.
Bay Area Guy asked: "Why do you think that development in polling (no cell phone polls, 10% landline) skews Left so much?"
Because those on the Left are more likely to share their opinions with total strangers. Also, there's no penalty for having Leftist opinions these days, whereas publicly sharing right-wing opinions might get you blackballed.
Achilles-please favor us with your final prediction (if you are so inclined).
Rampant voter fraud is occurring in Nevada and Vermont.
They will buck the trend.
The turnout will be even and high across the board. If turnout is even that means net gains in the house for Republicans.
Democrats are going to lose some normally expected votes.
Michigan has a particularly strong republican candidate running against a particularly uninspiring Democrat.
New Jersey has a good Republican running against a complete shit weasel.
I have money down at 3 to 1 that Democrats get less than 217 seats.
I have money at 12 to 1 Republicans get 60+ and 15 to 1 57, 58, 59.
I have money at 4 and 5 to 1 that Menendez, Manchin, stabenow lose in individual positions.
I got 12 to 1 on Baldwin losing.
Is there a large chunk of "quiet" Trump supporters out there that the traditional polling simply don't reach anymore?
My suspicion isn't so much that they can't be reached, it's whether or not they're willing to answer a poll. My pure guess is that many Trump supporting voters are less likley to answer polls calls at all than anti-Trump people for a number of reasons (And even those that do answer them may not answer them candidly). Again, pure guess.
Here’s the article I read that may be what Pianoman is referring to:
https://pjmedia.com/election/nate-silver-admits-he-doesnt-know-whats-going-to-happen-with-mid-terms/
It says (among other things): “Pollsters have been hurt in particular by the near-ubiquity of cellphones — which by law may not be called using automatic dialers — and Americans’ growing unwillingness to answer poll questions.”
This year I've done two things I've never done before:
1. Early voting;
2. Straight Republican ticket.
I've heard the "polls are wrong!" Several times. 2012 polls were not wrong. 2016 polls were wrong. We'll just have to wait and see.
There seems to be a trend where early polls are way off and then the polls "tighten." I think that is a crock of shit. I don't think people's opinions swing that widely. The tightening is to save the pollsters credibility.
Polls in Europe are almost always dead on. I don't know why they are so accurate and US polls so poor.
"Henry said...
Curious George said...
Nate Silver just changed his House prediction to a 50/50 toss-up.
What's that tell you?
That you made something up?"
Nope. Please try again.
I think Republicans pick up a number of Senate seats. I set the over/under at 56.5 a few weeks ago but have backed off that to 55.5 and I feel comfortable there. The early voting numbers are quite promising for Republicans and even a few conservatives.
Talking about polls at this late date is mystifying. The polls are a tool of the MSM to shape public perception and nothing more.
Henry -- I guess Rick Moran is making shit up: https://pjmedia.com/election/nate-silver-admits-he-doesnt-know-whats-going-to-happen-with-mid-terms/
@Curious George -- The 538 House prediction is roughly 75% in favor of the Democrats taking control, which is what it has been for months. Where does your 50-50 number come from?
Achilles: “I got 12 to 1 on Baldwin losing.”
Well, I’ll do my part, but I wouldn’t count your winnings just yet.
--Thanks @Achilles!
--@Matthew Sablan,
"I suppose that's fine, since Mick is the King in Exile after his Trump prognostication."
Whatever happened to Mick? He sure rode that Trump train all the way home!
--@Pianoman re skewed polling numbers
"Because those on the Left are more likely to share their opinions with total strangers. Also, there's no penalty for having Leftist opinions these days, whereas publicly sharing right-wing opinions might get you blackballed.
That might be it. Occam's Razor. Trump supporters fear work-related reprisals, better to be quiet, and let the voting do the talking. Sounds plausible, thanks.
Henry said...
Shocking, I know, but professional pollsters actually know all about low response rates and take great pains to benchmark accordingly.
What is shocking is people put faith in sample sizes of 500 people when there are actual vote returns with millions of results available.
I answered two phone polls, a couple days apart, a month or so ago. But I must of ended up on a “suckers list” because then I was deluged with polls. I stopped answering them.
November 6, 2018: The day the Democrats hope to displace 9/11 as America’s greatest recent tragedy.
"Henry said...
@Curious George -- The 538 House prediction is roughly 75% in favor of the Democrats taking control, which is what it has been for months. Where does your 50-50 number come from?"
I posted it, from Silver himself saying it could go either way and the polls could be wrong.
When was the last time the polls predicted a bigger Republican vote than what actually occurred?
I think Mick was a Moby. He disappeared immediately after his election predictions turned out surprisingly to be correct.
A gentle reminder of Pollster Charlie Cook from 2016:
-- Says Donald Trump has no margin of error and would need to win all 24 states carried by Mitt Romney in 2012 to win race
--Won’t put specific percentage on Clinton’s chances of winning, but says "it’s a really big number"
--Predicts Democrats will gain 4 seats to give them a 50-50 split of chamber, where ties would be broken by Democratic Vice President Tim Kaine with a Clinton win;
Remind me again who Tim Kaine is? (LOL).
Democrats are ahead in the polling because of the expectations of the pollsters who normalize the data. If they expect R-D-I voting at 43-36-21 then regardless of the sample they get, they massage the data to fit their expectations. It's bull shit. But the people who are paying for the polls want the data to fit their pre-conceived narratives and they're not going to let anybody get the wrong idea. Propaganda is the name of the game.
In the week before the 2016 election the pollsters had leads of 5, 6, 7, and 12 points for Hillary but people still insist that the polls were accurate. That sort of willful ignorance cannot be overcome. (And the number of illegal votes cast is unknowable, besides.)
I would lie to a pollster if ever one called. I can mimic Leftists as can most conservatives. Science proves that doesn't happen in the reverse. So I'd do everything I could to skew the results of a poll.
That said, MSNBC had a Leftist on this morning who was pretending to be a conservative. She said everything an NPC is expected to say and MSNBC was giddy thinking they had found the zebra: a conservative who would vote straight ticket Democrat.
It's all propaganda.
”The early voting numbers are quite promising for Republicans ...”
I see a lot of claims, both ways, about what early voting numbers portend and I don’t understand it. How does anyone know what early voting numbers are, other than the raw number of ballots cast?
Original Mike said...
I answered two phone polls, a couple days apart, a month or so ago. But I must of ended up on a “suckers list” because then I was deluged with polls. I stopped answering them.
If people think this is rare they would be wrong. This happened to me a few years ago.
The polling companies pay much for lists of willing poll participants.
These polls are no longer based on representative samples. They are vastly over sampling a particular subset of people who like annoying phone calls.
gahrie:
2010 is your answer. Look for generic ballot poll 2010 on RCP.
Moby-Mick?
@Pianoman -- I deleted the comment about you making shit up, as that is harsher than I prefer to be.
But:
a) Pollsters can call cell phones, as long as it is a live call. These calls are more expensive and the response rate is low, but they are legal.
b) Silver is talking about probabilistic analysis, which is what he does. A 7 in 8 chance that the Democrats take the House leaves a 1 in 8 chance they don't. The numbers he talks about and their likelihood are literally take from his models.
I always find the discussions here about polling and election predictions to be bizarre, covering the gamut from ignorance to paranoia.
If I place a bet on the Kentucky Derby and the favorite loses, am I supposed to think that the paramutual betting model is broken?
Sometimes favorites lose.
Henry: It's anecdotal, but I've never received a pollster phone call on my cell. I've been getting pollster calls on my land line about 2-3 per day.
It certainly *seems* as if it's not legal for pollsters to call cell phones.
Moby-Mick?
That might be why he used the name Mick.
I posted it, from Silver himself saying it could go either way and the polls could be wrong.
So not a prediction. Just Silver commenting on how probability models work.
Original Mike said...
”The early voting numbers are quite promising for Republicans ...”
I see a lot of claims, both ways, about what early voting numbers portend and I don’t understand it. How does anyone know what early voting numbers are, other than the raw number of ballots cast?
We know party affiliations of early votes cast.
For the first time in history Republicans are leading in early voting in Florida going into Election Day for example.
Republican spread in Arizona is 5% higher than 2016.
@Pianoman -- I've been getting automated calls on my cell trying to get me to sign up for health insurance which seems like it would be technically illegal, unless there's a live person actually dialing the number.
The Supreme Court is righted.
And according to the WashPo "President Trump’s picks for lower federal courts have already been installed, leaving a conservative imprint on the nation’s judiciary."
Any blue wave will still crash on red rocks. Mission accomplished.
"How do you know what my ideology is?"
The no true Robert Cook fallacy.
MSNBC was giddy thinking they had found the zebra: a conservative who would vote straight ticket Democrat.
I must be a zebra. I'm one of the most liberal people in these comments and I just voted a straight R ticket. My bona fides:
Strong union man
Pro-choice
Wants universal health care
Limited clean government
First amendment advocate
Skeptical of military budgets and wars
Election night is generally an amusing time. Living here in the Northeast I'm generally both amused and disappointed. It's rare that my candidate or ballot question choices ever get voter approval. Yep, I'm out of step. If there's any satisfaction it comes from seeing the results from other parts of the country. Tomorrow will be no different.
Original Mike,
The people looking at requested and returned ballots understand the best predictor of the unknown votes inside is party affiliation. Those numbers (percentages of votes for the party by registered members of the party) are relatively consistent over many elections.
When comparing the returned ballots to past election totals at similar points before the election, we have an accurate measure of voter enthusiasm and participation. This is much more accurate than polling based on predictions.
Watching returned ballots is betting based on known results (within a margin of error). Projecting votes based on polls is informed guessing (within a margin of error). In what other activity would you prefer the latter to the former? And if you cannot think of any, why would you prefer it w/rt voting?
My official prediction: House R+12, Senate R+5.
”They are vastly over sampling a particular subset of people who like annoying phone calls.”
I think democrats, especially this election, want to tell everybody who will listen how they’re voting against Trump.
Speaking of which, did Inga stamp off in a huff again? Or is she laying low relishing the thought of coming here and rubbing our faces in it?
I bet we're talking past each other -- Moran was referring to robo-calls, and you're referring to live calls.
My guess is that most pollsters use robocalling. So for practical purposes, pollster can't call cell phones.
Everyone's right! LOL
Blogger Birkel said...”The people looking at requested and returned ballots understand the best predictor of the unknown votes inside is party affiliation.”
How do they know party affiliation? I voted early in November 2016 (I was in Australia Nov 8, which was a hoot!) and I didn’t have to declare affiliation to get a ballot.
Achilles,
Florida early votes favor Democrats. But they favor Democrats by much less than they did in 2016. Election Day voting generally favors Republicans by about 200,000 votes, which allowed Trump to overcome a 90k deficit and win by more than 100k votes after Election Day.
The Democrat advantage at present is just over 24k from early voting. A similar 200k Election Day advantage means Nelson and Gillum lose.
Original Mike:
If you are registered with a party in your state, the Secretary of State knows that information. It's in a database and they report the total number of ballot requests and ballots returned on an ongoing basis.
It's not magic.
”I've been getting automated calls on my cell trying to get me to sign up for health insurance which seems like it would be technically illegal, unless there's a live person actually dialing the number.”
It is illegal. A big, known problem that nobody is doing anything about.
Henry said...
I posted it, from Silver himself saying it could go either way and the polls could be wrong.
So not a prediction. Just Silver commenting on how probability models work.
He is selling snake oil to rubes.
I am studying predictive modeling right now. Some call it machine learning, some call it AI.
You build a model with data and apply it to a test set.
Nate Silver is using data that is poorly labeled and is over fitting. There are much better datasets out there he could apply to his model.
@Birkel - Personally, I’m not registered, but I see now. Creepy.
Birkel said...
Achilles,
Florida early votes favor Democrats. But they favor Democrats by much less than they did in 2016. Election Day voting generally favors Republicans by about 200,000 votes, which allowed Trump to overcome a 90k deficit and win by more than 100k votes after Election Day.
The Democrat advantage at present is just over 24k from early voting. A similar 200k Election Day advantage means Nelson and Gillum lose.
This also leaves out that the panhandle early voting is way way down because of the storm.
Those people will come out on election day.
There are much better datasets out there he could apply to his model.
Maybe you could write one out for him.
If we are to believe the pollsters, then this, in essence, is what we need to believe:
We must believe that the Trump voters they could not find 2 years ago they can find them now, and they can measure their likelihood to vote this time.
I am not convinced.
In 2004, the polls said that Clinton would beat Dole by 8. He beat him by 4. Personally, I think the pollsters knew the actual data but let their more optimistic models rule the day, they were right, their error was in the magnitude.
The Democrats might very well take the House. They might (Silver says 17% chance) take the Senate. But I suspect if they were sitting on good solid data that said the Democrats would take the house by 25 but *possibly* pickup 50 that all of the reporting today would be that the pollsters say dDems to pick up 45.
I am using lots of words to say even polling, and the excellent Nate Silver saying any outcome is just as likely and should not be a surprise means that the GOP is doing well.
Here are my predictions:
1. House stays Republican
2. 219 R to 217 D
3. GOP picks up 4 senate seats.
4. Manchin loses
Finally, if anyone is still reading, Achilles (or anyone else) where did you go to make your wagers?
Achilles,
From your lips to God's ears.
https://www.predictit.org/
Birches said...
I decided Saturday this election is going to be 2016 redux. I cannot comprehend that AZ Senate polls are accurate. I just can't believe that so many people would vote for Sinema after she has spent her entire career crapping on the state. It's not going to be close. Polls are wrong.
@Birches
You can't get a good poll here. Too many seasonal residents who are more than happy to tell you what's wrong with AZ, but aren't eligible to vote here.
FWIW; up until two weeks ago there were a large number of radio ads* put out by a PAC calling McSally a liar and urging people to vote for Sinema. Those have been replaced with ads from Sinema's campaign touting her bi-partisanship and reminding us that some organization voted her Most Likely To Buck Her Party. I take this as a sign that Sinema's numbers aren't good and that McSally stands a fair chance of wining.
*Can't say about TV, I don't own one.
Original Mike said...
”They are vastly over sampling a particular subset of people who like annoying phone calls.”
I think democrats, especially this election, want to tell everybody who will listen how they’re voting against Trump.
I would personally not ascribe bias to party affiliations of people who like to answer annoying phone calls and bleat to the world that hates them what they think.
There are just as many republicans in this bin as democrats and there are more old people, skewed republican, who have landlines.
A sea of deplorables, rock on!
That is a site for wagers.
I am studying predictive modeling right now. Some call it machine learning, some call it AI.
Predictive modeling may be useful in science and engineering but social 'science'? I think not.
”This also leaves out that the panhandle early voting is way way down because of the storm.
Those people will come out on election day.”
Will they have a place to vote?
Original Mike,
Yes they do have places to vote on the panhandle. In fact, the polling places are open today to make up for some of the earlier disruption. And the requests for mail-in ballots amongst panhandle residents is up considerably. Those people know how to mail things with the USPS.
The expectation for Florida is both Democrats win, if you listen to the press. If you're counting the ballots, so far it looks like the Republicans are over-performing.
Here's a VOX article about the 538 predictions with a typically hysterical headline:
One point Silver has made over and over again in recent weeks is that even if you take his House and Senate forecasts at face value, when you think about both of them together, there’s around a 40 percent chance that one of them will be wrong.
He elaborated on this on Twitter this week, making a point that’s important to understand — that a “very normal-sized polling error” in either direction could result in a dramatically different outcome.
...
An 80 percent chance of winning compared to a 20 percent chance seems like a huge advantage. Yet in commentary about their models, Silver and the rest of the FiveThirtyEight team (I recommend their podcast) repeatedly stress that an 80 percent chance of victory is not a done deal — not even close. Their argument is that an outcome that’s 20 percent likely will happen 20 percent of the time.
Yesterday I received a text on my cell phone calling me by my first name, my address, the address of my polling location and reminding me to vote on a state ballot question.
Yuk.
The Crack Emcee said...
tim maguire said...
"You can't discus reparations until you define what you mean. What is being proposed for who to give to whom?"
There has a been a proposal in Congress for almost 40 years to find the answers to those questions, but the conservatives won't let it be acted on.
So what? That conversation doesn't happen in congress, it happens in the public sphere. Places like right here in this comment section. You like to rant and rave and insult, but asked straight out, "what, exactly, do you mean?" and you punt. Figures.
The problem with polling:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heteroscedasticity
Birkel said...
https://www.predictit.org/
That is the site I used.
It has a very standard stock market setup.
Cook: “How do you know what my ideology is? Do you think I am a partisan for the Democrats? I think they're largely as useless and corrupt as the Republicans.”
We know because you disclose it here daily. No one says you are partisan. However, given your disclosed ideology, it is a fair assumption that you are no more likely to vote for a Republican than we are to vote for a Democrat. The key, of course, is that Democrats are marching inexorably in lockstep toward godless Marxism. The price you pay with them is rampant hypocrisy, graft and corruption.
Republicans are less predictable.
"Henry said...
I posted it, from Silver himself saying it could go either way and the polls could be wrong.
So not a prediction. Just Silver commenting on how probability models work."
Nope. Please try again.
When you create polls with turnout assumptions that the first time voters who came out in droves for Obama will do the same when you run a sour old white woman you're going to have some poor predictions.
steve uhr said...
How about an enforced code of conduct -- no more personal insults of other commentators?
Fuck off, asshole.
Henry said...
He elaborated on this on Twitter this week, making a point that’s important to understand — that a “very normal-sized polling error” in either direction could result in a dramatically different outcome.
Nate Silver sold his soul.
He got one election right in 2012. He got some popularity. Disney bought him.
Now he creates models that say what ABC wants him to say. He Fluffs them up with the same garbage AI "scientists" use to get grants from people who don't have a fucking clue what "AI" is.
He looks like a defeated man on TV. You can tell he doesn't really believe anything he is saying.
The mistake people make is in thinking that an announced poll result is actually a raw number reflecting what the responses to their questions were. That isn't the case. Instead, the polling outfit will adjust the actual responses based on expected turnout. So in this cycle, that means they are giving increased weight to the self-identified democrats and liberals -- most predictions have been for higher turnout among left-leaning voters.
I think those adjustments are done (mostly) in good faith, but it is good faith that lives in the bubble of conventional safe liberalism. In 2016 their models didn't hold because the couldn't see the undercurrent of deplorable disgust at Hillary. Are they missing an undercurrent of shy Trumpies this time? Won't know until Tuesday night.
@Crack - Let's talk some REPARATIONS! I recommend we begin with a massive national investment in genealogy and genetic testing. We will ascertain the exact amount of African or other heritage in all of our citizens. Then we will determine whose ancestors got here when. Also, we must determine whether we should have allowances for ancestors who fought for the Union in the Civil War or extra burdens for proven slave-holders or descendants of Confederates.
Let's work a few examples:
My grandson, black father, white Ukrainian mother. No ancestors who are anything other than victims, so he is a net receiver of reparations.
Your grandson, both parents are black, BUT 80% slave-holder genetics. He is a net receiver.
Me, all white, but half of the family arrived after the end of slavery, and on the other side, split between Union and Confederate, which off-set each other. No benefits or payments for me.
Whaddya think? Workable?
You're just minding your own business, trying to have a good time like everyone else, and then - BOOM! - the reminder you were never like everyone else.
Georgia high school marching band spells out racial slur, parents demand expulsion
mockturtle said...
I am studying predictive modeling right now. Some call it machine learning, some call it AI.
Predictive modeling may be useful in science and engineering but social 'science'? I think not.
Oh it works.
People in large numbers are very, very consistent.
@Crack, oops - my bad! YOUR grandson has to pay for MY grandson.
Original Mike said...
@Birkel - Personally, I’m not registered, but I see now. Creepy.
I don't think it's creepy. I voted absentee last week. My ballot went into an envelope that I signed verifying that it is my vote and I marked the ballot. I didn't take money for my vote, etc. This signed envelope went into an SASE that I stuck in the mail.
So the ballot has no identifying information and the outer envelope has no identifying information, but the inner envelope lets them know that Tim Maguire voted in this election. If I were registered with a party, it would let them know that too.
So they know how many Democrats and how many Republicans voted by absentee.
As I recall,La Deluge was the Revolution by French Deplorables who finally found their Trumpian leader in an Artillery Officer from Corsica who had studied the French like an anthropolgist studies a screwed up culture.
What I find creepy, Tim, is registering party affiliation with the government.
@ Crack - The new Office of Guilt and Reparations can provide tens of thousands of jobs.
Original Mike said...
What I find creepy, Tim, is registering party affiliation with the government.
I don't like parties having any official government status or favoritism for "major" party candidates. There's nothing about parties in the constitution.
I've been calling Republicans get MINIMUN 57 seats in the Senate and keep the House for 18 months on this blog. Even 62 seats in the Senate is possible. I stand by my predictions.
”I don't like parties having any official government status or favoritism for "major" party candidates. There's nothing about parties in the constitution.”
Exactly.
Although it is no longer acceptable to make fun of fat people, exclusive of Chris Chrystie, there are other sources of comedy. Maimed war veterans present a rich vein of comedy gold. Perhaps that Utah mayor who was recently killed in Afghanistan can be mocked in next week's SNL. The guy was a father of five. The jokes just write themselves.
Top O' the Morning to You, Amigos! -- Robert Francis O'Rourke
We have a certain member of the Commentariat who has asserted that the 2016 election results were not far off from the polling, but rather within an acceptable margin of error.
It is a plausible hypothesis.
How confident are folks that the current polls are skewed beyond an acceptable margin of error?
How the press plays things:
Trump in Chattanooga means Blackburn is in trouble.
Oprah in Georgia means Abrams is pulling out the big guns on the way to victory.
Totes fair.
I saw that bit by Nate Silver. I think the same thing probably happened that I hypothesized happened in 2016- he got a last minute look at internal Democratic polling, and has greatly hedged his predictions once more so that he can look good no matter what happens tomorrow night- so, officially, he sticks with the 85%+ chance the Democrats win the House, but can always point to the 50/50 remark if it doesn't happen that way.
I personally think the split decision predictions of the polls themselves are likely to be dramatically incorrect. My prediction is that there will be no split decision, and not even a close one in either house of Congress. Either the Democrats win 50-60 seats in the House and take the Senate by holding every single incumbent seat except for ND and by taking AZ, NV, and TN (Bredesen is still in it according to the polls), or the Republicans lose less than 12 seats in the House and add 4-5 seats in the Senate.
Why do I think this? The polls in the generic Rep vs Dem are all over the place- someone is very, very, very wrong in those generic polls. And if the generic polls that have the Dems up 8+% are right, then the Senate polling is probably very wrong in its lean towards the Reps.
Bay Area Guy:
A poll shows Gillum +7 in Florida. That one seems outside the margin of error.
Another shows Blackburn tied with Bredesen. I doubt that.
We will know more on Wednesday.
Yancey Ward,
I read that Republicans have won 80% of the toss-ups the last few election cycles.
That represents systemic error.
Bay Area Guy said...
How confident are folks that the current polls are skewed beyond an acceptable margin of error?
The RCP has the generic vote +7.3%.
I had them sliding toward the truth. Looks like I lost that bet.
Nobody in their right mind thinks the generic vote is going to favor democrats by 7.3%. Not even with the rampant fraud going on.
Bay Area Guy,
I have addressed this before- if the 2016 National Polls had any validity at all, the pollsters themselves would have detected the danger to Clinton by observing that her national lead was highly dependent on the results from just 3 states, and that she was polling very badly- well behind- in the rest of the country as a whole. In other words- Clinton's popular vote margin is accounted for by the margin in just one damned state- she won nationally by 2.9 million, but had a margin of 4.3 million in CA alone- add in NY and IL, the three biggest electoral states she won, and that margin for those three states is 6.9 million votes- Trump won the rest of the country by a significant margin.
How do we know the pollsters didn't detect this problem for Clinton? Because the internals of the national didn't show the problem (I looked at the internals for poll after poll in 2016, and they did indeed show that Clinton was likely to win the electoral college pretty handily). The national polling averages got the national vote total "correct" by accident. If you look at individual state polling, all of them pretty much showed Clinton was very unlikely to lose WI, MI, and PA, and was likely to win either NC or FL along with possibly AZ.
Tomorrow's election is even worse because we really are talking about 471 separate races in the case of Congress. I think a lot of the predictions are being made based on those generic polls that I mentioned are all over the place- someone is wrong- very wrong on those, I just don't know who is wrong.
Birkel said...
That represents systemic error.
That represents deliberate misleading.
It is not an error.
Yancey Ward said...
Tomorrow's election is even worse because we really are talking about 471 separate races in the case of Congress. I think a lot of the predictions are being made based on those generic polls that I mentioned are all over the place- someone is wrong- very wrong on those, I just don't know who is wrong.
One thing you will all see is that democrats are always united and always vote straight ticket.
Republican voters in the past not so much.
This is the first time people are going to see what happens when Republican voters are unified and vote straight line.
CNN has democrat generic at +13%.
Everyone else backslid.
I had 5$ at 9 to 1 that RCP would shift from +7.2% dem to +6.6% dem or lower by the end of the day today.
I think CNN's insanity cost me some money.
Georgia high school marching band spells out racial slur, parents demand expulsion
Some black kids spelled out "CNN" ? They shouldn't be expelled, they should be exemacuted.
Kay said...
I still haven’t heard a compelling reason from any candidate as to why I should vote for them, so I’ll probably be sitting this one out tomorrow.
In that case, vote, but don't vote for anyone. Vote against crazy.
The Democrats are demonstrating crazy. And promising even more frenzied crazy if they win. That's way more then enough motivation to vote against them, even if you're lukewarm or even cool towards the Republicans. The following was posted by Sarah Hoyt this morning:
************************************
"Slap the fake “resistance” back, put an end to their antifa tantrums, their Kavanaugh slimings, their “exactly like Hitler” slanders. Slap them so hard they’ll still be reeling by 2020. Vote. If there’s no one you wish to vote for, vote against your local democrat/socialist/progressive/whatever the heck they call themselves this Tuesday. Vote like your life depends on it. Stop Nancy Pelosi’s announced contract on America.
As Lindsey Graham said, these people should not be allowed anywhere near power. Not until and unless they gain some measure of sanity."
*************************
And if you need more convincing: https://pjmedia.com/election/5-reasons-to-vote-republican-in-the-mid-terms/
Not caring enough to vote isn't a good position. Democrats have been taking us to the point where you may not be interested in government, but government is interested in you. DId you talk bad about someone? Do you believe there are differences between men and women that are (gasp!) biological? Do you think men dressed as women shouldn't be allowed in restrooms with little girls? All these are badthink that Democrats would punish you for. I don't want government, nameless faceless bureaucrats, interested in me.
“Nate Silver just changed his House prediction to a 50/50 toss-up.”
“What's that tell you?”
“That you made something up?”
LOL
“7 in 8
Chance Democrats win control (87.3%)
1 in 8
Chance Republicans keep control (12.7%)”
Royal ass Inga can make a lot of money by betting that Democrats do better in 2018 than Republicans did in 2010.
Bet the farm!
“I had them sliding toward the truth. Looks like I lost that bet.”
And tomorrow all the blathering you’ve been doing all these months will be even more embarrassing for you.
rhhardin: Too late now, but typically the smoke/CO detectors with the built-in battery have a kill switch. It permanently disables the device so it is garbage after that, but it does turn it off.
Can you soak a detector in something like salt water to disable it?
"And tomorrow all the blathering you’ve been doing all these months will be even more embarrassing for you."
It'd be better if you made a bona fide prediction, rather than critique another's prediction.
Oh my god everyone, a couple marching band members stood in the wrong order and it didn't say broncos! Quick, everybody give the homeless man's Al Sharpton and Marvel Super hero protector of the jewish people some money.
This is horrible travesty must not stand! Didn't you hear the dumb bitch DEMANDING expulsion? Skip the investigation, doesn't matter what color any of those kids were, this absolutely requires that money be given to the Homeless Man's Al Sharpton. Don't you understand? Children stood in the wrong order!
Oh the humanity!
Homeless Man's Al Sharpton and most musically talented individual in human history, I would say your check is in the mail but they don't deliver to cardboard boxes in Utah.
Sorry, sport.
The dems sure arent afraid to show what they think about navy SEAL heroes, are they?
I am quite sure the military retirees and active duty personnel will be voting in even greater majority numbers for republicans over the "pro-MS13-ers have a spark of divinity" dems.
Oh, I think Inga has made a prediction- she is going with the Blue wave prediction, right? It will be interesting if the Republicans hold both houses and Inga actually shows up in the next month. I don't doubt for a second that I will see Birkel or Achilles here on Wednesday if the Democrats win the House and/or Senate, but Inga might well disappear for a time, or show up under another moniker.
Of course, the dems sealed their fate some time back when obama called the deserter and pro-taliban punk Bergdahl a "hero".
Bay Area Guy said...
"And tomorrow all the blathering you’ve been doing all these months will be even more embarrassing for you."
It'd be better if you made a bona fide prediction, rather than critique another's prediction.
That would take courage of conviction.
Remember that Inga, and 60 million other people voted for Jill Stein. Nobody actually voted for Hillary if you ask them.
get the spelling teacher fired
"Inga...Allie Oop said...
“Nate Silver just changed his House prediction to a 50/50 toss-up.”
“What's that tell you?”
“That you made something up?”
LOL
“7 in 8
Chance Democrats win control (87.3%)
1 in 8
Chance Republicans keep control (12.7%)”"
Our resident dullard #IngaKnew missed the best part from Nate:
"But no one should be surprised if they only win 19 seats and no one should be surprised if they win 51 seats," Silver added. "Those are both extremely possible, based on how accurate polls are in the real world."
Of course our dullard never learns from past mistakes. She just changes her name and tries again. The problem is she remains a fucking dolt.
It'd be better if you made a bona fide prediction, rather than critique another's prediction.
She already did. After the Kavanaugh hearings, she flatly stated the Ds would pick up both the House and Senate.
Not if. When.
To be fair, Yancey Ward, I do go days at a time without commenting. So I cannot promise Wednesday. But I ain't going anywhere over time.
I think the Senate prediction of R+1 or +2 is silly.
That basically assumes everything breaks toward Democrats and that is unlikely.
I'll go ahead and go on record as predicting the Dems pick up 17 seats in the house but fail to take the majority. The Republican's net between 3 and 4 seats. We will know pretty early on how the night is going to go, if West Virginia and New Jersey Senate races aren't called early and look like the counting will go late, then the blue wave will turn out to just be a toilet flushing.
Historically, the opposition party does well in mid year elections when the white house is held by the other side. I'm not sure if those historical trends mean anything in the age of Trump. I don't put any stock in the polls, and I think that the support for the Republican's is understated. The middle finger can be sent to dumb cunts like Inga in the privacy of the voting booth, for those of us not liberated enough to tell her fat lefty ass to her ugly digital face.
Time will tell how it turns out, but I think the actions of dumping money into Menendez's corrupt ass are a good indicator.
Birkel: When comparing the returned ballots to past election totals at similar points before the election, we have an accurate measure of voter enthusiasm and participation. This is much more accurate than polling based on predictions.
Just remember as in investing, it is the same in politics.
Past performance is not indicative of future results
DBQ,
And yet the past is the best predictor amongst poor predictors.
What I will be watching early tomorrow night- up to 10 p.m.:
The Senate election in TN and two big races, governor and senate in FL will likely be the first indications of how the races to the West go tomorrow night. If Blackburn beats Bredesen by 10% plus, I think a good night for Republicans in general- if Bredesen wins or it is too close to call, a very good night for Democrats will be in the cards elsewhere. In Florida, a win by the Republicans in the two big races by even a small margin will be a good sign for Republicans, but a comfortable win by the Democrats in those races (4%+) will be a good sign for Democrats. You can also watch certain House races all along the East Coast to get an early indication.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा