Trump's posts aren't funny because he thinks we should have a national popular vote. They are funny because he thought it meant Obama would have lost.

I think by looking at this as urban vs rural, you are missing the key element that has risen dramatically since the 60's and 70's: suburbia and exurbia. That is where the battle is in the future, if you you are thinking in terms of geography.

 

I am using a very broad generalization to make the point. I could spend thousands of pages discussing specific trends etc, I just was using the most simple overboard generalization.

 

You guys agree with Donald Trump on the Electoral College.

 

Im fine with popular vote. I just think that if you want to complain about it, the time to do it is 4 years before the election, not the night of, when youre just saying it because you think your candidate would win that way.

 

Do I think today Trump wants the popular vote? Of course not, he just wanted it for that split second he thought it would give his candidate the win.

Romney, Akin, Mourdock, Walsh, and West... All lost. It was such an incredible night. I had about 40 people at my house to watch this amazing election

 

Congrats to President Obama, Sen-elect Elizabeth Warren, Tammy Baldwin and Tim Kaine to name a few

 

Thank you to President Clinton for working your ass off for the Obama campaign

The same coalition that got O in the White House will put Hillary there in 2016

 

Hillary 2016

I see your point, and that's the problem with the two party system. It's gotten to the point that it doesn't matter who the person is. It's what party they are aligned with.

 

Well, I disagree. I think both parties have legitimate platforms with real policies.

how's it feel to waste your vote?

 

FWIW, I really liked Gary Johnson's platform and I've always favored democrats.

Edited November 7, 201213 yr by chw42

I just find it pretty humorous when Twitter would have looked very similar for liberals if it had been around in November 2000. I remember reading some of the same sorts of things on message boards back in the day. Especially on issues you agree with him on anyway.

 

Absolutely, that's why I'm reveling.

The same coalition that got O in the White House will put Hillary there in 2016

 

Hillary 2016

 

The sad thing is I would be more agreeable to Hillary and Bill than Obama.

Alternative to Donald Trump? Being slowly consumed by pirahnas.

 

Alternative to the Electoral College? I don't want to hijack the thread again with that, but I made clear earlier, a popular national vote for the Presidency/VP (and only that office) is the only equitable and logical solution, in my view. You can go peruse the predictions thread for the detailed debate about that.

 

saw all that - new question - why is a national popular vote the right call NOW when it wasn't for last 200+ years?

 

FWIW, I really liked Gary Johnson's platform and I've always favored democrats.

 

Yeah? Big fan of the gold standard?

saw all that - new question - why is a national popular vote the right call NOW when it wasn't for last 200+ years?

It was the right call 200+ years ago, just as allowing women and minorities and people who didn't own land to vote was the right choice 200+ years ago.

I find it funny that millions love Silver's predictions based on biased data (polls). But many of those same people would rather gouge their eyes out than agree that sabermetrics in baseball are valid. Yes, it's not like it was 4-5 years ago, when the likes of Buster Olney and Jon Heyman would make sabermetrics seem nerdy and irrelevant (those two now use it...), but the point remains.

 

FanGraphs had an article on this today: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/n...rfect-modeling/

It was the right call 200+ years ago, just as allowing women and minorities and people who didn't own land to vote was the right choice 200+ years ago.

even though it disenfranchises anywhere that isn't an urban center?

Yeah? Big fan of the gold standard?

 

Let's just say I agree with him on most social issues.

i mean, as a democrat i'd LOVE a national popular vote.

I find it funny that millions love Silver's predictions based on biased data (polls). But many of those same people would rather gouge their eyes out than agree that sabermetrics in baseball are valid. Yes, it's not like it was 4-5 years ago, when the likes of Buster Olney and Jon Heyman would make sabermetrics seem nerdy and irrelevant (those two now use it...), but the point remains.

 

FanGraphs had an article on this today: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/n...rfect-modeling/

 

Unless baseball is a popular vote contest, I don't get the connection between the two.

I find it funny that millions love Silver's predictions based on biased data (polls). But many of those same people would rather gouge their eyes out than agree that sabermetrics in baseball are valid. Yes, it's not like it was 4-5 years ago, when the likes of Buster Olney and Jon Heyman would make sabermetrics seem nerdy and irrelevant (those two now use it...), but the point remains.

 

FanGraphs had an article on this today: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/n...rfect-modeling/

 

Silver's predictions were based on what turned out to be accurate data (polls) which he adjusts for various factors. Some argue that his model is overly complex, but it's done a hell of a job.

 

I've always been a fan of sabermetrics as well.

Unless baseball is a popular vote contest, I don't get the connection between the two.

of course you wouldn't

 

(statistics and math are used in making projections in both politics AND sports!)

Media Circus: Fox Struggles with Obama's Win

 

Dana Perino, the former George W. Bush press secretary, noted that women favored Obama heavily, pointing to abortion as an issue raised as a scare tactic by Democrats. Left unnoted in that exchange: declarations by two Republican Senate candidates that women should not be allowed to obtain abortions even in the case of rape. Many analysts elsewhere pointed to those statements Tuesday night as both men lost, but it also infused relevance into abortion as an issue for the race.

 

The coverage on Fox proved largely dour, depressive, even epically denialist.

 

Having lost the argument — not to mention his call that predicted for Romney an edge over Obama in the electoral college of about 30 electoral college votes — Rove made clear that the president's victory carried little weight.

 

"He has blown the last two years — he's played small ball," Rove said around 12:40 a.m. Wednesday. "This does not bode well for the future. ... He may have won the battle but lost the war."

 

Dick Morris, who had confidently predicted a Romney landslide, was nowhere to be seen.

Well, I disagree. I think both parties have legitimate platforms with real policies.

That may be, but to the average voter many of those policies either don't matter or they're not aware of them. We're all aware of the highly publicized issues (abortion, immigration, healthcare, etc.) and where the candidates stand. But there so many other issues that make up these parties. Oftentimes it comes down to those highly publicized issues and/or whether the candidate has a D or an R next to their name.

Sabermetrics came into a sport that was already ruled by statistics...it was a good, good thing but there was still only so much that can be done.

 

Silver popularized statistical analysis of polling numbers in an arena that liked numbers as much as a grade schooler likes math class. Silver in politics is like introducing batting average to baseball fans.

Unless baseball is a popular vote contest, I don't get the connection between the two.

 

There are almost more factors that go into an election than there are in a game of baseball, or hell even a 162 game season of baseball.

Media Circus: Fox Struggles with Obama's Win

 

Chris Matthews: Thank God for Hurricane Sandy!

 

http://www.thebiglead.com/index.php/2012/1...ened-last-week/

Sabermetrics came into a sport that was already ruled by statistics...it was a good, good thing but there was still only so much that can be done.

 

Silver popularized statistical analysis of polling numbers in an arena that liked numbers as much as a grade schooler likes math class. Silver in politics is like introducing batting average to baseball fans.

 

I'd say that poll numbers = batting average. Nate Silver's predictions = WAR.

 

WAR adjusts for position, playing time, the league average, replacement level, which is a lot more similar to Silver did than simple stats like batting average, which adjusts for nothing.

Edited November 7, 201213 yr by chw42

Chris Matthews: Thank God for Hurricane Sandy!

 

http://www.thebiglead.com/index.php/2012/1...ened-last-week/

 

not a wise comment, but per usual, taken out of context.

 

Chris Matthews: Thank God for Hurricane Sandy!

 

http://www.thebiglead.com/index.php/2012/1...ened-last-week/

chris matthews is awful, but that NPR story was more about the epistemic closure at Fox than anything else.

Edited November 7, 201213 yr by StrangeSox