US Election 2016

[Amentep]

 

 

Amentep you are one of those people who always seems to make a reasonable point in way that I find generally makes sense 

 

But you cant be seriously suggesting tighter gun controls and banning certain guns wont make a real  difference..its been proven, its not even a reasonable debate?Dont believe what the NRA tell you 

Yes, I am suggesting that. Because the problem is (as they always are) bigger than any single "magic bullet" solution can ever manage to solve.

 

Making things illegal only affects the people who care about the legality of what they're doing. In the case of mass shootings, the fact that homicide is already illegal wasn't a deterrent; it is highly unlikely that making it also illegal to have a gun would have any significant effect.

 

Solving the problem of mass shootings is only possible when society as a whole starts looking at the multiple factors that lead people to the point that mass death seems to be a logical choice, and working back from that trying to mitigate those factors.  "Magic bullets" need not apply.

 

 

 

I'm not convinced the only viable reason for wanting stricter gun control is that it would prevent mass shootings, though.

 

I'm pretty sure that the line of discussion leading to my post was specific about gun control as a way to solve mass shootings, though.

[Meshugger]

lol

 

[Valsuelm]

Donald Trump Wins More Than 2 Million More Votes Than Mitt Romney in 2012 in States Voting So Far

Edited April 25, 2016 by Valsuelm

[Meshugger]

Donald Trump Wins More Than 2 Million More Votes Than Mitt Romney in 2012 in States Voting So Far

 

Those votes are from meanies, racists, and other ****lords that the Republican party do not need to associate themselves with. They do nothing but helping people to feel exluded from the voting process. These 'traditional voters' are simply not your audience, America.

 

We have grown more inclusive and to embrace everyone: illegals, global bankers and people with allegiances to countries other than America. They are the new audience and creators for Republican policy, all while 'traditional voters' are sloughing off, both culturally and economically, like a carapace of a bug.

 

We are creating a new culture now for an America of tomorrow and we are refusing to let anyone feel prohibited from participating. 'Traditional Voters' are dead, they do not need to be the audience of the Republican party and they do not have to be yours, America. There is no 'side' to be on, there is no 'debate' to be had.

[Elerond]

Donald Trump Wins More Than 2 Million More Votes Than Mitt Romney in 2012 in States Voting So Far

 

Trump maybe even more popular than GWB in primaries when it comes to number of people voting him.

 

Also number of people voting in GOP primaries seems to be highest in 2000s.

 

About 12 million people have voted some other candidate than Trump, like for example Mitt Romney opposition got less than 10 million votes total. Also John McCain's opposition get less than 10 million votes and so did George W. Bush's opposition. GWB got about 12 million votes that was 62% of popular vote (McCain got bit less than 10 million votes (52.45% of total) and Romney bit over 10 million votes (52.21% of total)).

[Valsuelm]

And on the other side of the coin...

 

Democrat Turnout Collapses Down More Than 4.5 Million, Nearly 20 Percent In 2016 Versus 2008

Edited April 26, 2016 by Valsuelm

[Valsuelm]

Poll: Trump Reaches 50 Percent Support Nationally for the First Time

[Meshugger]

That was so quintessential american that it hurts.

[Valsuelm]

That was so quintessential american that it hurts.

Haha. Soul train was the shiz.

 

But wait, there's more!

 

Another way to look at it:

 

 

Oh come on now... don't get butthurt we've had better music than you for about 100 years now. You've got Tiktak!

 

 

 

I really just wanted an excuse to post this Tik Tak video, because I think it's an awesome song and those Finnish girls are lookers.

 

 

Edited April 26, 2016 by Valsuelm

[Meshugger]

 

That was so quintessential american that it hurts.

Haha. Soul train was the shiz.

 

But wait, there's more!

 

Another way to look at it:

 

 

Oh come on now... don't get butthurt we've had better music than you for about 100 years now. You've got Tiktak!

 

 

 

I really just wanted an excuse to post this Tik Tak video, because I think it's an awesome song and those Finnish girls are lookers.

 

 

 

The train-video was a compliment! (damn culture-barriers)

 

As for the Tik-Tak-video, i appologize for nothing  

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

Bernie supporters will absolutely support Clinton in the general.

[ShadySands]

Yeah, I saw something about that earlier

 

Found the link

 

http://www.snopes.com/2016/04/26/bernie-sanders-facebook-groups-controversy/

Edited April 27, 2016 by ShadySands

[Valsuelm]

Trump sweeps five more states, winning at least four of them with more than 50% of the vote.

Clinton wins four states. Sanders one.

http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results



Edit: Nice example of AP writers not understanding what 'sweep' means:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_2016_ELECTION_RDP?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-04-26-20-01-12

... or they do, and it's just some blatant pro Clinton propaganda.

Edited April 27, 2016 by Valsuelm

[Guard Dog]

Whatever you think of Bernie, he is the one candidate I can honestly say has stuck with his principles and has been clear about what those were. I believe that is at least part of his appeal.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Whatever you think of Bernie, he is the one candidate I can honestly say has stuck with his principles and has been clear about what those were. I believe that is at least part of his appeal.

He's actually toned some things down and pandered to democrats on others(like gun control). Disappointing, but I get why he does it given how democrats are.

 

And now Trump is saying Bernie should run as an independent. I doubt he will(much like Ron Paul didn't), but a four way race with Sanders and Trump as independent would be glorious.

[ktchong]

[Leferd]

Chance of winning based on the current UK betting markets:

 

Democratic nomination

Hillary Clinton 95.2% 

Bernie Sanders 3.3%

 

Republican nomination

Donald Trump 74.9%

Ted Cruz 16.7%

John Kasich 3.3%

 

Presidency

Hillary Clinton 73.3%

Donald Trump 17.7%

Ted Cruz 2.6%

Bernie Sanders 1.3%

John Kasich 0.6%

 

https://electionbettingodds.com/

 

PaddyPower bookmakers for the Presidency:

 

Hillary Clinton: 1/3
Donald Trump: 4/1
Ted Cruz: 16/1
John Kasich: 33/1
Bernie Sanders: 33/1
Paul Ryan: 33/1
Joe Biden: 80/1
Mitt Romney: 200/1

 

Both British betters and Irish oddsmakers are in strong agreement.

 

http://www.paddypower.com/bet/politics/other-politics/us-politics?ev_oc_grp_ids=791149

 

1 to 3 odds is a terrible return on investment if betting on Clinton...but then again so is betting 4 to 1 on a 17% chance with Trump. Still, I'd take the safe money on Clinton if I were in Great Britain or Ireland.

 

16 to 1 on Cruz and below is obviously dead money...as attractive as those odds are.

Edited April 27, 2016 by Leferd

[Valsuelm]

*Stuff*

I know you're fascinated with this stuff. However, I suggest tarot cards for a more probable accurate reading.

 

Trump was 10:1 just a couple weeks ago (and I was considering finding a place to make a safe bet). 3:1, I'm not sure I want to risk the consequences of illegal gambling on the web (no bookie I know would touch those odds). If there was a way to 'sell short' on Hillary at those odds, I very possibly would.

Edited April 27, 2016 by Valsuelm

[Guard Dog]

Leferd the election is a hell of a long way away. There is an endless array of s--t that can happen between now and then to change the whole dynamic. I know you are encouraged by what you are reading, but keep your wallet in your pocket!

[Leferd]

Nah. Nowhere did I say anything absolute except that these are the current odds and what I would hypothetically advise were someone in Europe putting money down. These odds are dynamic and fluctuate, but this is the best data we have considering the bookmakers take everything of value into account --polling data, punditry, gut feeling, Nate Silver, and the current betting markets.

Based on the best reliable data sets we have so far, Clinton and Trump are the overwhelming favorites. This is how the markets are playing out. There's an inherent efficiency to it. You know the old Vegas adage --in the long run, don't bet against the house.

I just happen to take more stock in election predictions from bookmakers, data analysts, and baseball sabrmetricians than hot media takes, random crpg forumites, partisans, the general news media, and especially tarot cards.

These guys (and gals) do a great job and have a very strong track record across multiple disciplines in making solid predictions against other sources. *obviously, the data becomes more reliable as we get closer...but anyone can say "lies, damned lies, and statistics." Cool, that's their prerogative.

PS...

Valsuelm, I don't know where you get your odds, but nowhere in any of my posts or in keeping tabs with the various books did I see Trump as a 10 to 1. Especially not from a couple weeks ago. You pulled that number out of your arse.

On these boards, I had written him as a 7-2 on Feb 15, 5-2 on Feb 26, and 9-4 on March 2.

Edited April 27, 2016 by Leferd

[Valsuelm]

Valsuelm, I don't know where you get your odds, but nowhere in any of my posts or in keeping tabs with the various books did I see Trump as a 10 to 1. Especially not from a couple weeks ago. You pulled that number out of your arse.

 

On these boards, I had written him as a 7-2 on Feb 15, 5-2 on Feb 26, and 9-4 on March 2.

If I was quoting you, I'd have done it. I got those odds from one of the links you had previously supplied or a site you had mentioned, I don't recall which one. You're the only person I've come across that puts stock in such things in regards to politics. I'd not have looked at betting odds on the U.S. Presidential Election (especially this far out) had you not brought them up.

Edited April 27, 2016 by Valsuelm

[Leferd]

 

Valsuelm, I don't know where you get your odds, but nowhere in any of my posts or in keeping tabs with the various books did I see Trump as a 10 to 1. Especially not from a couple weeks ago. You pulled that number out of your arse.

 

On these boards, I had written him as a 7-2 on Feb 15, 5-2 on Feb 26, and 9-4 on March 2.

If I was quoting you, I'd have done it. I got those odds from one of the links you had previously supplied, I don't recall which one exactly. You're the only person I've come across that puts stock in such things in regards to politics. I'd not have looked at betting odds on the U.S. Presidential Election (especially this far out) had you not brought them up.

 

 

The various books tend to be pretty consistent with one another --variances may account for 6-1 to 7-1, or 250-1 and 300-1...but never something as rangey as as 7-2 or 9-4 against a 10-1. I'm not being snarky, but you must have misread it.

 

To be honest, I can live with my being the only bookie and aggregate data  driven follower in WOT. It's given me a modest competitive advantage in fantasy baseball and whenever I go to Vegas.

[BruceVC]

Another series of wins for the Clinton campaign, very good news 

 

For all Sanders supporters I think Hilary summarized the Democratic view when she said   "To all the people who supported Senator Sanders, I believe there is much more than unites us than divides us.”

 

So once Sanders decides to step-down out of the race the majority of Democrats should support  Clinton to ensure a Clinton presidency  and a united Democrat force to defeat Trump    

Edited April 27, 2016 by BruceVC

[Leferd]

Another series of wins for the Clinton campaign, very good news

 

For all Sanders supporters I think Hilary summarized the Democratic view when she said "To all the people who supported Senator Sanders, I believe there is much more than unites us than divides us.”

 

So once Sanders decides to step-down out of the race the majority of Democrats should support Clinton to ensure a Clinton presidency and a united Democrat force to defeat Trump

Don't think that's gonna happen. There's no reason for Sanders to drop out of the race before California unless his campaign runs out of money. Hillary didn't drop out in '08 until the Primaries were over, even though she had virtually no chance of winning.

 

Sanders can still campaign on his core messages and keep Clinton "honest" by forcing her to acknowledge the base rather than veering center. She may have to more strongly consider Elizabeth Warren as her potential running mate, although the presumptive favorite --Julian Castro would be a strong choice.

 

The question is...will she double down on a strategy to consolidate her base for the general election and go on the strength of a united Democratic front, which you are hoping for, or go center and try to take voting moderate Republicans and #NeverTrump stalwarts.

Edited April 27, 2016 by Leferd

[BruceVC]

 

Another series of wins for the Clinton campaign, very good news 

 

For all Sanders supporters I think Hilary summarized the Democratic view when she said   "To all the people who supported Senator Sanders, I believe there is much more than unites us than divides us.”

 

So once Sanders decides to step-down out of the race the majority of Democrats should support  Clinton to ensure a Clinton presidency  and a united Democrat force to defeat Trump    

Don't think that's gonna happen. There's no reason for Sanders to drop out of the race before California unless his campaign runs out of money. Hillary didn't drop out in '08 until the Primaries were over, even though she had virtually no chance of winning.

 

Sanders can still campaign on his core messages and keep Clinton "honest" by forcing her to acknowledge the base rather than veering center. She may have to more strongly consider Elizabeth Warren as her potential running mate, although the presumptive favorite --Julian Castro would be a strong choice.

 

The question is...will she double down on a strategy to consolidate her base for the general election and go on the strength of a united Democratic front, or go center and try to take voting moderate Republicans and #NeverTrump stalwarts.

 

 

Good points raised, I may not support all Sanders policies but I think he genuinely means well when he talks about a "  more equatable and fair USA "

 

It would be nice though if  he did step down in the interests of Democratic unity but you right, people don't step down unless its really at a point where the numbers are against them

 

Here is a good link that discusses the reality of the Sanders campaign

 

http://www.refinery29.com/2016/04/108952/can-bernie-sanders-still-win-nomination-election-2016