bmags

Crazy how influential drudge still is.

August Faegrestrom of Fangraphs tweeted out he had Sale and Quintana in his top 5. Phone autocorrected his last name.

Narvaez does seem to frame better for Rodon.

I'd like for rodon to have a great game and see if he can get his ERA under 4. I just feel like Rodon will have a scherzer like rise where it clicks.

QUOTE (Ezio Auditore @ Sep 30, 2016 -> 01:23 PM) I don't recall him doing this "probability" thing in 2008 or 2012. He did, I think election day 2012 they showed Obama with a lead of 1.2 points or something but a 90% odds of winning due to his showings in swing states. I think Silver is right to be skeptical because it's a lot easier to say Obama is more certain when he polls at 48-49%. When you are polling at 45% there is a lot more variance - especially when historically undecideds swing to the non-incumbent (which hillary WOULD BE). OTOH, in the primaries undecideds swung away from Trump.

Also I'd be very surprised if Hillary doesn't win NC. SS - this is a state without jill stein on ballot and where with a .1 polling difference, you should see ground game matter.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Sep 30, 2016 -> 01:05 PM) Nate's model is intentionally ridiculously reactive this year, showing huge swings for slight changes. They also use the Google Consumer Research poll which no one else is using and they weigh it the most heavily for some reason. I think I figured it out, on keepin it 1600 they mentioned that they take recent national polls or state polls and factor that into the trend and apply it to their overall model. It assumes the trend continues. So on Monday, you had a weekend of weak polls for Hillary - in that system it will assume that the trend would continue and pushes it to a net +2 or +3 for trump. But that makes it a lot more reactive to new polls, versus past years where it's model stayed fairly static even as pollercoasters happened. Very weird.

A+ Effort in late september!

"He could drink milk and by the time it hits his stomach it'd be expired" is so good

O I C

What is the deposition from? Is it from the author of that book that was sued over calculating his wealth?

QUOTE (Ezio Auditore @ Sep 30, 2016 -> 10:04 AM) I thought Cuban was just an egotistical rich douche but I can clearly now see I was wrong I mean he is, right more often than not. I disagree with him on net neutrality. But like many others, he probably does not view this country as a dystopia that cannot be saved and minorities must be punished for salvation. SO, he is a sane person, but doesn't mean I'd vote for him. Glad to have him aboard the sane wagon thou.

He definitely has a phone. I wonder how abusive he is to siri

QUOTE (Reddy @ Sep 29, 2016 -> 11:26 PM) Bro. I need you to chill the f*** out. I didn't say ALL did I? Guys seriously. I would be more than happy to try and chill on my part, cut back on the trolling, and be a productive member of this site like the good ole days, but if I I'm gonna try to do that, I need this guy to drop the vendetta, because I really don't understand it. EDIT: I realize this is stupid because I doubt it really matters to you guys one way or the other. Touche. Maybe I'll just put him on ignore... In reddy's defense, for a long time the mods that participated IN the buster were mostly conservative, that has ended with YASNY and kap no longer posting/posting in here. The last 4-5 years though, not so much.

Obviously these are snarky but I really do think this should be asked of Thiel after his morality play in the NY Times and with gawker: <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8">

Interesting hypothetical.

Ugh, I remember the day I tried to make a subforum. I was exhausted for a week.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 29, 2016 -> 04:03 PM) The first time I ran, it was on a whim because a seat opened up about a year before the election and the superintendent was an absolute scumbag. I didn't get to fill the temporary seat, and I ran in the full election too. I finished 3rd of 3, but made some good headway. I actually took the domain I bought to run for the election and made it into a local message board. Overtime I turned it into more of a political forumn and op-ed platform. I ran the second time four years later, and did a lot better. I have been asked to run again in the last two elections, but decided that was going to be my last run, until at least my kids were older. I have stayed largely in the public domain more than ever, both being on the local Planning Commission, an Economic Development group, and serving on a not-for-profit board as a President for five years. The social media aspect of my webpage has over 7500 members now, so I have a nice following there. I think if I decided to run again, I would have a really good chance at winning, but with everything else in life, I don't have the free time to serve an office well anymore. Maybe once the kids are older I will give a shot at an actual political office. Good stuff. How much time do you think school board/city council seat would be in your town?

Interesting artilce here: http://www.businessinsider.com/real-wage-g...research-2016-9 States that historically people see big wage growth from 25-40, then plateau, then drops as they approach 60. Well more people than ever are approaching 60, it is a driving factor in wage growth.

ss2k5, were you involved in PTA beforehand or just visible in public meetings?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 29, 2016 -> 03:44 PM) I lost. Took 2nd in a 4 person race, losing to the person that spent $6k by about 10 percentage points. I did beat the incumbant. Ah, sorry. I thought you had held a seat, but maybe that was the story.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Sep 29, 2016 -> 03:40 PM) I spent under $500, as did almost everyone else. The problem is it only takes one. And you won right? I covered school board in columbia, and at the time 2 won having raised 8k and 6k. But really what that signified was the two big civic groups had donated 5k to each of the candidates they chose and surprise! They won.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Sep 29, 2016 -> 03:18 PM) There are without a doubt people on here that don't post what interests them politically because they know you, bmags and another random poster or two will gangbang them before they can even respond to the first retort. I wasn't aware I "obsess" over national politics for listening to a few podcasts while I commute and keeping up with the news. You certainly know how to drum up a slew of caveats to castrate your formerly offensive post. You'd be great in politics. "Are you a Democrat that gets riled up over those War-Mongering Conservatives? Or are you a Republican upset with the way Obama and company are running the White House? Well this is the forum for you to rant, rave and try to enlighten. Warning: This forum is not for the faint of heart. Do not come in here if you're not willing to, at times, get into heated arguments."

QUOTE (raBBit @ Sep 29, 2016 -> 02:35 PM) HRC being a better candidate than Donald Trump adds nothing to her allure as a candidate. I never did what you claim with the bolded. My parents vote. My grandparents had voted in every election when they were alive. I don't feel the need to waste my time voting when the state I live in is a foregone conclusion. The rest of your post is all over the place and a task to respond to. I am not sure why you and many others think the government is out here trying to save children. Sure it happens, but like Napoleon said, "Absolute power corrupts absolutely." Something happened during the 1984/1988 elections where the funding elections and money in politics started to blow up. Both parties ended up sucking the tit of the powers traditional liberals used to hate. The banks, wall street, the military complex, etc. Past that, the liberals went so far left that their popular opinions aren't capitalistic or anywhere near in line with the idea of government this country was founded on. This has led to the expansion of government, more ugly foreign affair efforts and a smaller middle class yet the Democrats still scream for more government. With the history of human beings as my basis, it probably won't end in our favor. Starting with the DLC of the 90s the dems moved way to the center and are frankly still pretty center left compared to the 60s and 70s. The 60s were a much more liberal time period where things like the guaranteed wage were seriously discussed. Little did they know they were much more in line with the founding fathers view of the country than after 84, where they were just sucking the teets of the banks and military, something they certainly knew nothing about in the heart of the cold war. Funny story about the founding fathers. When they met in Philadelphia to draft the amend the Articles of Confederacy, they dictated the meeting be private. And crazier, many privately thought the new constitution would fail within 20 years but still voted for it because it was better than they currently had. Weird how that works out sometimes.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Sep 29, 2016 -> 02:39 PM) LOL. All I have gleaned from this situation is that its a complete s*** show. I'll vote yes because of the kids opinions and my own brood, but clearly this was handled f***ing terribly. You may see my name pop up on a local ballot soon... "Excuse me, there must be a mistake, I don't see RockRaines on the ballot?"