StrangeSox

There's a chance we don't know who controls the Senate until January. https://t.co/qBquzX0mex

I wouldn't this year. His model is over reactive to everything and seems designed to swing hard to relatively minor inputs and has tons of uncertainty baked in. Plus some of the poll adjustments they're doing don't seem to make any sense. Right now it's really just him hedging ridiculously because he screwed up so bad on the primaries. 538's model correlates everything too much. For example, if a new poll of Oklahoma came out tomorrow and Trump gained a couple of points there, nates model would drop Clinton's odds overall even though there's already a 0% chance she wins that state. But a movement for Trump in one poll nudges everything slightly in his favor. It allows for his model to pick up small shifts in a short period, but it also means it's very sensitive to every tiny little input.

Most of the polls this week have been fairly low quality, but NH is definitely not a must win for Clinton. There's a reason all of the aggregators except nate silver have the odds very strongly in her favor.

Eh, early voting numbers are looking very solid for Clinton in more than enough states for a strong 270+ EV firewall.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Nov 3, 2016 -> 03:25 PM) Why havent the democrats rigged the senate? Or the house? If they are so powerful that they could rig the presidential election, why stop there? I will await your answer that you will never provide while asking the same question in a few posts after mine Don't forget an overwhelming majority of state houses and governorships!

One of the weirder subplots of this whole election has been Trump's complete inability to understand what the word temperament means.

Sam Wang/Princeton Election Consortium's software had a glitch that wasn't discovered until this morning that ended up overstating Clinton's chances. It had showed 100%, but really it should only have been >99%.

After the current PM Theresa May had signaled a few months back that she was looking to do a "hard" Brexit as soon as next spring with her directing the whole thing, the UK high court has ruled that Parliament must approve a Brexit measure. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/n...ules?CMP=twt_gu

Are you kidding me? Well time to head to bed I guess.

About 400k Hispanics who didn't vote in 2012 have already voted in Florida this year.

Hanging a lot of pitches here

I'm rooting for the walk off balk, the most cubs way possible to lose a game 7

Chapman shook real bad

Hahaha eat s*** Chapman

QUOTE (Footlongcomiskeydog @ Nov 2, 2016 -> 10:03 PM) The Tribe won't even get another baserunner in this game. Hopefully this collapse gets into their heads and the Sox can kick their ass next year. Lol

What a bulls*** call

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Nov 2, 2016 -> 09:41 PM) Who cares what other people do. If the Cubs win, oh well. It was kind of funny that they hadnt won, but it would have been hard to imagine it never happening. My dad was a Cubs fan when he was a kid, he became a Sox fan because he used to get Sox tickets and I was one. I was watching the game with him for a while tonight and he left while the Cubs were up. I asked him why he wasnt at all excited about the Cubs winning because when he was a kid he was a big Cubs fan. He replied he was a Sox fan now. I was able to see a Sox win a World Series. The Cubs losing was just kind of a hilarious thing. Good post

Helpful map of when the polls close next Tuesday

Some interesting early voting data from a polling firm in Florida--finding a pretty substantial R-crossover voting for Clinton but otherwise acting like a typical Republican voter would (low Obama approval, voting for Rubio). Early voting has looked pretty solid in enough states for Clinton to get to 270 so far, but Florida's been one that hasn't been too promising. If these results are even somewhat accurate, that spells a pretty substantial win for Clinton there but also Rubio holding his seat.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Nov 2, 2016 -> 11:37 AM) That's very classy of you to try and paint it as if you're for women and I'm against them. I hate both parties, but it is sleazy tactics like this that make talking with liberals very tough. If you speak on anything pertaining to women, race, orientation, etc. you're automatically painted into a corner as a hate mongerer and the liberal gets themself off with some faux-morale high ground.. In reality, you just think it's easier to falsely character cast than to speak on the subject at hand. It's not the first time you've downplayed sexual assault and it won't be the last. Why would you even bring up MLK's "womanizing," anyway? It wasn't at all pertinent to the point bmags was making, which was that just because the FBI was investigating someone doesn't mean that person did anything wrong or deserved to be investigated. In the given context, it only served to deflect from Trump's alleged wrong-doings (which, really, no one was even discussing in that chain so your accusations of subject-changing look even more ridiculous), as did the way you chose to portray the events. No he wasn't just "embellishing his overzealous nature," he was bragging about sexual assault. Since then, a dozen different women have come out accusing him of the exact behavior he was bragging about. Additionally, several Miss Teen contestants came out and said that he would just bust into the dressing area where numerous underage girls were in various states of undress, and the same day the multiple stories of him talking about young girls and how he'd be dating them in a few years.

NC GOP remains garbage

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Nov 1, 2016 -> 08:24 PM) Comey trying real hard to get fired. There's a war within the fbi right now, we're just seeing it leak out.

Hahaha