|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On September 13 2016 04:32 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2016 04:22 Mohdoo wrote:
I think Clinton is gonna be hurt really bad by this unless she releases 100% of her health records or something. If it wasn't for her image of dishonesty, this wouldn't be nearly such a big deal. Now people need to be convinced she is not dishonest. So that creates an interesting situation. She has to release all her medical history. But, if anything makes her look shitty, they can't. Just trade her out for fucks sake. That isn’t an option. It is impossible to change out a candidate at this point in the election. There are several state laws that prohibit a change on the ballot after a specific date and those dates have passed. I don’t know why this keeps coming up when it is impossible to remove her from the ballot. There is a reason no reasonable person in the media is talking about it.
Of course its possible. There's no physical limitation here. Let's be honest, it's just paperwork. If Clinton died tomorrow, they'd figure something out. It's not like "Well fuck dude, that'd be a lot of trouble. The DNC hereby withdraws from the election".
What do you think would happen if she died tomorrow?
|
On September 13 2016 04:31 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2016 04:22 Mohdoo wrote:
I think Clinton is gonna be hurt really bad by this unless she releases 100% of her health records or something. If it wasn't for her image of dishonesty, this wouldn't be nearly such a big deal. Now people need to be convinced she is not dishonest. So that creates an interesting situation. She has to release all her medical history. But, if anything makes her look shitty, they can't. Just trade her out for fucks sake. I think it will actually hurt very little; in a more normal election it might hurt more; but here, the stakes are so high (how bad each side feels the other one is), that something of this scale won't change much. if trump is unfit for the presidency, then this is not something so severe as to affect hillary for it; and for those that think it would, they're already in the far trump camp (or at least the anti-hillary camp)
The reality of the currently election is that the only three states that matter right now are FL, OH and NC. Votes there matter. The rest of the country is pretty locked up unless there is a massive shift of over 5 points.
|
On September 13 2016 04:34 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2016 04:32 Plansix wrote:On September 13 2016 04:22 Mohdoo wrote:
I think Clinton is gonna be hurt really bad by this unless she releases 100% of her health records or something. If it wasn't for her image of dishonesty, this wouldn't be nearly such a big deal. Now people need to be convinced she is not dishonest. So that creates an interesting situation. She has to release all her medical history. But, if anything makes her look shitty, they can't. Just trade her out for fucks sake. That isn’t an option. It is impossible to change out a candidate at this point in the election. There are several state laws that prohibit a change on the ballot after a specific date and those dates have passed. I don’t know why this keeps coming up when it is impossible to remove her from the ballot. There is a reason no reasonable person in the media is talking about it. Of course its possible. There's no physical limitation here. Let's be honest, it's just paperwork. If Clinton died tomorrow, they'd figure something out. It's not like "Well fuck dude, that'd be a lot of trouble. The DNC hereby withdraws from the election". What do you think would happen if she died tomorrow?
Kaine would run on the ticket and pick VP. But that is it. That is literally the only way she gets out, if she dies. If she drops out tomorrow, she can’t give the nomination to anyone. Their name won’t appear on the ticket in several states and votes for her won’t count for whoever she “gives the nomination to”. It would be like running unopposed.
|
On September 13 2016 04:34 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2016 04:32 Plansix wrote:On September 13 2016 04:22 Mohdoo wrote:
I think Clinton is gonna be hurt really bad by this unless she releases 100% of her health records or something. If it wasn't for her image of dishonesty, this wouldn't be nearly such a big deal. Now people need to be convinced she is not dishonest. So that creates an interesting situation. She has to release all her medical history. But, if anything makes her look shitty, they can't. Just trade her out for fucks sake. That isn’t an option. It is impossible to change out a candidate at this point in the election. There are several state laws that prohibit a change on the ballot after a specific date and those dates have passed. I don’t know why this keeps coming up when it is impossible to remove her from the ballot. There is a reason no reasonable person in the media is talking about it. Of course its possible. There's no physical limitation here. Let's be honest, it's just paperwork. If Clinton died tomorrow, they'd figure something out. It's not like "Well fuck dude, that'd be a lot of trouble. The DNC hereby withdraws from the election". What do you think would happen if she died tomorrow?
I thought that's what VP picks were for?
|
On September 13 2016 04:38 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2016 04:34 Mohdoo wrote:On September 13 2016 04:32 Plansix wrote:On September 13 2016 04:22 Mohdoo wrote:
I think Clinton is gonna be hurt really bad by this unless she releases 100% of her health records or something. If it wasn't for her image of dishonesty, this wouldn't be nearly such a big deal. Now people need to be convinced she is not dishonest. So that creates an interesting situation. She has to release all her medical history. But, if anything makes her look shitty, they can't. Just trade her out for fucks sake. That isn’t an option. It is impossible to change out a candidate at this point in the election. There are several state laws that prohibit a change on the ballot after a specific date and those dates have passed. I don’t know why this keeps coming up when it is impossible to remove her from the ballot. There is a reason no reasonable person in the media is talking about it. Of course its possible. There's no physical limitation here. Let's be honest, it's just paperwork. If Clinton died tomorrow, they'd figure something out. It's not like "Well fuck dude, that'd be a lot of trouble. The DNC hereby withdraws from the election". What do you think would happen if she died tomorrow? Kaine would run on the ticket and pick VP. But that is it. That is literally the only way she gets out, if she dies. If she drops out tomorrow, she can’t give the nomination to anyone. Their name won’t appear on the ticket in several states and votes for her won’t count for whoever she “gives the nomination to”. It would be like running unopposed.
It's never really been tried, but when it's a matter of getting both parties represented on a ticket the courts have ignored the deadlines.
|
On September 13 2016 04:46 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2016 04:38 Plansix wrote:On September 13 2016 04:34 Mohdoo wrote:On September 13 2016 04:32 Plansix wrote:On September 13 2016 04:22 Mohdoo wrote:
I think Clinton is gonna be hurt really bad by this unless she releases 100% of her health records or something. If it wasn't for her image of dishonesty, this wouldn't be nearly such a big deal. Now people need to be convinced she is not dishonest. So that creates an interesting situation. She has to release all her medical history. But, if anything makes her look shitty, they can't. Just trade her out for fucks sake. That isn’t an option. It is impossible to change out a candidate at this point in the election. There are several state laws that prohibit a change on the ballot after a specific date and those dates have passed. I don’t know why this keeps coming up when it is impossible to remove her from the ballot. There is a reason no reasonable person in the media is talking about it. Of course its possible. There's no physical limitation here. Let's be honest, it's just paperwork. If Clinton died tomorrow, they'd figure something out. It's not like "Well fuck dude, that'd be a lot of trouble. The DNC hereby withdraws from the election". What do you think would happen if she died tomorrow? Kaine would run on the ticket and pick VP. But that is it. That is literally the only way she gets out, if she dies. If she drops out tomorrow, she can’t give the nomination to anyone. Their name won’t appear on the ticket in several states and votes for her won’t count for whoever she “gives the nomination to”. It would be like running unopposed. It's never really been tried, but when it's a matter of getting both parties represented on a ticket the courts have ignored the deadlines.
Yes, but it would take something amazing to cause that to take place. Not the “The DNC loses confidence in Clinton for reasons, new ticket to be announced shortly”. They might as well just throw the entire election out the window and slap their supporters in the face.
|
On September 13 2016 04:38 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2016 04:34 Mohdoo wrote:On September 13 2016 04:32 Plansix wrote:On September 13 2016 04:22 Mohdoo wrote:
I think Clinton is gonna be hurt really bad by this unless she releases 100% of her health records or something. If it wasn't for her image of dishonesty, this wouldn't be nearly such a big deal. Now people need to be convinced she is not dishonest. So that creates an interesting situation. She has to release all her medical history. But, if anything makes her look shitty, they can't. Just trade her out for fucks sake. That isn’t an option. It is impossible to change out a candidate at this point in the election. There are several state laws that prohibit a change on the ballot after a specific date and those dates have passed. I don’t know why this keeps coming up when it is impossible to remove her from the ballot. There is a reason no reasonable person in the media is talking about it. Of course its possible. There's no physical limitation here. Let's be honest, it's just paperwork. If Clinton died tomorrow, they'd figure something out. It's not like "Well fuck dude, that'd be a lot of trouble. The DNC hereby withdraws from the election". What do you think would happen if she died tomorrow? Kaine would run on the ticket and pick VP. But that is it. That is literally the only way she gets out, if she dies. If she drops out tomorrow, she can’t give the nomination to anyone. Their name won’t appear on the ticket in several states and votes for her won’t count for whoever she “gives the nomination to”. It would be like running unopposed.
I suppose my thinking is that it would take more than a heart stopping. If she went braindead, they'd also do the Kaine thing. If they can throw her under the bus hard enough, I think they could replace her. Her campaign has lost my confidence, though. They handled this whole thing extremely poorly. I still want her to be president, but I don't think she'll end up winning. I think Trump will manage to bring his unfavorables down more than she will at this point.
|
I would have to check the laws for MA, but I know that candidates that pass away stay on the ballot in many states. If they somehow win, a special election is held. I’m not sure it works the same for the Oval office, but the convention is normally the point where the party is locked it. Cannot change their minds. There is no “throwing Clinton under the bus so hard she will drop out,” option at this point.
|
On September 13 2016 01:49 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2016 01:43 Danglars wrote:On September 13 2016 00:56 xDaunt wrote:I'll just let this guy make the point for me:Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign just made a massive error. We'll know within the next few weeks if the error will prove to be catastrophic.
On Sunday, Clinton abruptly left a Manhattan ceremony marking the 15th anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. A video shows her shakily stumbling while trying to get into a van to leave. The candidate's physician later offered this explanation: Clinton has had an allergy-related cough for some time, and during an examination on Friday, the Democratic nominee was diagnosed with pneumonia, put on antibiotics, and told to take time out to rest. She became overheated and dehydrated during Sunday morning's event, which led her to collapse. She's now home in Chappaqua and on the road to recovery.
Compare this timeline to details from Hillary Clinton's public schedule and behavior over these same two days.
After Clinton was diagnosed with pneumonia and put on antibiotics, she did not, as her physician recommended, take time out to rest. Instead, she attended a fundraiser featuring Barbra Streisand. Then on Sunday morning, she attended the 9/11 commemoration, became "overheated," and woozily wobbled rather dramatically. Ninety minutes later she exited her daughter Chelsea's apartment building to tell the press she was "feeling great." The Secret Service permitted a young girl to come over to give the candidate a hug.
It was only a few hours later when her campaign finally announced that she has pneumonia and is recovering.
The most charitable reading of this timeline is that her campaign — presumably with the blessing and perhaps insistence of the candidate — fully intended to keep her illness a secret from the public. Let's be clear about what this means: Her campaign intended to lie. Even though doing so would require her to keep up a public schedule that might well make her condition worse and require ever-more elaborate forms of concealment. Because, of course, to curtail her schedule would raise questions that might reveal the truth.
So even after she collapsed, the campaign decided the ruse would continue. It arranged for the candidate to make her curbside declaration of wellness, even bringing on the girl to give her a "spontaneous" hug. (Clinton's protection detail would never have permitted a genuinely spontaneous embrace on the street, even by a child.)
It's easy to understand why the Clinton campaign would want to keep this kind of news a secret. The candidate doesn't trust the media. The right has been hitting her over supposed health issues for months (and even years), and the assault has picked up in intensity over the past week or so — since Clinton found herself in the midst of an extended coughing fit at a campaign event in Cleveland. Then there's the gender dynamic. Donald Trump presents himself as a hyper-masculine tough guy, while Clinton is the first female presidential nominee. The Clinton camp is probably twice as terrified of their candidate looking frail as a less path-breaking campaign would be.
So the campaign chose to lie. The potential reward was considerable: namely, an absence of politically damaging news stories about Clinton's medical condition. But the risk was enormous — and it's blown up in their faces. Because now the story isn't just that Clinton is ill. It's that, once again, she's untrustworthy — and this time about her own health.
That's why the announcement that she has pneumonia will only fuel more speculation about Clinton's physical condition, with potentially no end in sight. The world saw her collapse, and 90 minutes later, the candidate looked America in the eye and proclaimed that she was feeling great. Except now we know that she wasn't.
Not long after this charade, someone on the campaign staff made the call to come clean. But it may well have been too late.
The best the campaign can hope for now is that Clinton recovers quickly and soon looks healthy in her public appearances. Then maybe the topic will recede into the background of the campaign. The candidate got sick, but then she got better. End of story.
But if she doesn't recover quickly? If she appears weak and frail for more than a few days? Then, yes, she'll face perfectly reasonable questions about whether she's physically up to serving as president. But worse, she'll confront lingering doubts about what, precisely, is ailing her. "It's pneumonia," the campaign will proclaim over and over again. To which a skeptical America will justifiably reply, "Yes, we can tell that you'd like us to think so. But we have no reason to trust that's true."
Political trust is a fragile thing. Once it's gone, it's exceedingly difficult to get back — and without it, there's no basis on which to dismiss conspiracy theories that even normally level-headed observers will begin, for perfectly understandable reasons, to entertain.
Like so many of the scandals and pseudo-scandals that have dogged Hillary Clinton and her husband through the years, this one needs to be recognized as entirely self-inflicted. The campaign now has to live with the consequences of having chosen to lie to get out of a problem. You Hillary supporters need to shake yourselves out of your delusions. Her campaign clearly messed up, and I'm not sure why it's so hard for y'all to see it and concede that point (edit: Actually, I do know why, but I'm going to be nice). It's not that she lies, she just needs to hire on better liars. This issue comes on the heels of a related topic: it's not that she's corrupt, she's incompetent at hiding her corruption. I see Hunts abandoned asking xDaunt to elaborate about Clinton's clear corruption after the nth time of no answer. But if you say that she is incompetent at hiding her corruption, I do hope at least you have some examples.
You'll have to buy a book if you want all her corruption spelled out. The reduced form comes down to trying and failing to hide a private server to conduct business free from FOIA requests, with a pattern of lying when questions arose about classified emails and deleting emails even while they were subpoena'd. + Show Spoiler [hilarious as hell "oh shit"] +She also met with and assisted foreign national donors to her clinton family foundation while working as secretary of state.
The incompetence story is huge and shows no signs of stopping, though it's hard to get better than the current admissions out there. She instructed aides to remove the classified headers from documents before sending them to her, and later claimed she couldn't identify other emails as classified because there were no headers. Her foundation accidentally didn't disclose tens of millions of dollars of donations from foreign governments for three years, and had to refile. The deletions were justified because they were just yoga emails etc, even though the latest 15,000 contained at least one benghazi email. She claimed Comey corroborated her "truthful" statements made with respect to the investigation and what she told the American people.
I've been reading the responses in this thread and the acrobatics, and my only takeaway is that paying for government favors shouldn't surprise anybody, and it was only natural for Hillary to cover up her violations of the espionage act because nobody should care about classifications regardless. To say that another way since the thread's been heading there lately, everybody knows Clinton is corrupt and has used her office to commit crimes without consequence and enrich herself. (shitposter clarification: she has been dragged to interviews & hearings, so it wasn't entirely without consequence)
|
On September 13 2016 05:04 Plansix wrote:
I would have to check the laws for MA, but I know that candidates that pass away stay on the ballot in many states. If they somehow win, a special election is held. I’m not sure it works the same for the Oval office, but the convention is normally the point where the party is locked it. Cannot change their minds. There is no “throwing Clinton under the bus so hard she will drop out,” option at this point.
If Hillary was unable to continue, they could get her replacement on ballots. The issues would be states that already start early voting and Republican saturated states where they might actually keep her replacement off the ballot.
It's not anything Democrats would want to do, and it wouldn't happen if Hillary could prevent it, but it's not impossible at all.
|
On September 13 2016 04:11 ticklishmusic wrote:
I miss that guy, hopefully he comes back.
I miss Pre-Trump farvacola. If he responded on the article, it would be on the merits or lack of evidence/poor reporting. Not this - 1. Tell, don't show, don't listen
On September 13 2016 03:38 farvacola wrote:
Neither The Hill nor The Week think that Hillary has been very above board. The sky appears blue.
Excuse my whiplash when yesterday everything but her fine health was a conspiracy, and today she's sick, has been sick, whole staff is sick, and any critique is clearly revealing the partisan nature of the news source. Farvacola, StealthBlue's quality selections have always been bottom of the barrel to barely passing muster, yet they're taken apart and analyzed by most notwithstanding their editorializing, and it moves the thread through the sewage.
|
On September 13 2016 05:24 Danglars wrote:
Excuse my whiplash when yesterday everything but her fine health was a conspiracy, and today she's sick, has been sick, whole staff is sick, and any critique is clearly revealing the partisan nature of the news source. Farvacola, StealthBlue's quality selections have always been bottom of the barrel to barely passing muster, yet they're taken apart and analyzed by most notwithstanding their editorializing, and it moves the thread through the sewage.
It's not like alternative medicine as a methodology is redeemed if it accidentally produces something that works. If you make up 500 conspiracy theories, sooner or later one is going to have some merit, it's not a reason to start believing in them.
|
On September 13 2016 05:07 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2016 01:49 Dan HH wrote:On September 13 2016 01:43 Danglars wrote:On September 13 2016 00:56 xDaunt wrote:I'll just let this guy make the point for me:Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign just made a massive error. We'll know within the next few weeks if the error will prove to be catastrophic.
On Sunday, Clinton abruptly left a Manhattan ceremony marking the 15th anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. A video shows her shakily stumbling while trying to get into a van to leave. The candidate's physician later offered this explanation: Clinton has had an allergy-related cough for some time, and during an examination on Friday, the Democratic nominee was diagnosed with pneumonia, put on antibiotics, and told to take time out to rest. She became overheated and dehydrated during Sunday morning's event, which led her to collapse. She's now home in Chappaqua and on the road to recovery.
Compare this timeline to details from Hillary Clinton's public schedule and behavior over these same two days.
After Clinton was diagnosed with pneumonia and put on antibiotics, she did not, as her physician recommended, take time out to rest. Instead, she attended a fundraiser featuring Barbra Streisand. Then on Sunday morning, she attended the 9/11 commemoration, became "overheated," and woozily wobbled rather dramatically. Ninety minutes later she exited her daughter Chelsea's apartment building to tell the press she was "feeling great." The Secret Service permitted a young girl to come over to give the candidate a hug.
It was only a few hours later when her campaign finally announced that she has pneumonia and is recovering.
The most charitable reading of this timeline is that her campaign — presumably with the blessing and perhaps insistence of the candidate — fully intended to keep her illness a secret from the public. Let's be clear about what this means: Her campaign intended to lie. Even though doing so would require her to keep up a public schedule that might well make her condition worse and require ever-more elaborate forms of concealment. Because, of course, to curtail her schedule would raise questions that might reveal the truth.
So even after she collapsed, the campaign decided the ruse would continue. It arranged for the candidate to make her curbside declaration of wellness, even bringing on the girl to give her a "spontaneous" hug. (Clinton's protection detail would never have permitted a genuinely spontaneous embrace on the street, even by a child.)
It's easy to understand why the Clinton campaign would want to keep this kind of news a secret. The candidate doesn't trust the media. The right has been hitting her over supposed health issues for months (and even years), and the assault has picked up in intensity over the past week or so — since Clinton found herself in the midst of an extended coughing fit at a campaign event in Cleveland. Then there's the gender dynamic. Donald Trump presents himself as a hyper-masculine tough guy, while Clinton is the first female presidential nominee. The Clinton camp is probably twice as terrified of their candidate looking frail as a less path-breaking campaign would be.
So the campaign chose to lie. The potential reward was considerable: namely, an absence of politically damaging news stories about Clinton's medical condition. But the risk was enormous — and it's blown up in their faces. Because now the story isn't just that Clinton is ill. It's that, once again, she's untrustworthy — and this time about her own health.
That's why the announcement that she has pneumonia will only fuel more speculation about Clinton's physical condition, with potentially no end in sight. The world saw her collapse, and 90 minutes later, the candidate looked America in the eye and proclaimed that she was feeling great. Except now we know that she wasn't.
Not long after this charade, someone on the campaign staff made the call to come clean. But it may well have been too late.
The best the campaign can hope for now is that Clinton recovers quickly and soon looks healthy in her public appearances. Then maybe the topic will recede into the background of the campaign. The candidate got sick, but then she got better. End of story.
But if she doesn't recover quickly? If she appears weak and frail for more than a few days? Then, yes, she'll face perfectly reasonable questions about whether she's physically up to serving as president. But worse, she'll confront lingering doubts about what, precisely, is ailing her. "It's pneumonia," the campaign will proclaim over and over again. To which a skeptical America will justifiably reply, "Yes, we can tell that you'd like us to think so. But we have no reason to trust that's true."
Political trust is a fragile thing. Once it's gone, it's exceedingly difficult to get back — and without it, there's no basis on which to dismiss conspiracy theories that even normally level-headed observers will begin, for perfectly understandable reasons, to entertain.
Like so many of the scandals and pseudo-scandals that have dogged Hillary Clinton and her husband through the years, this one needs to be recognized as entirely self-inflicted. The campaign now has to live with the consequences of having chosen to lie to get out of a problem. You Hillary supporters need to shake yourselves out of your delusions. Her campaign clearly messed up, and I'm not sure why it's so hard for y'all to see it and concede that point (edit: Actually, I do know why, but I'm going to be nice). It's not that she lies, she just needs to hire on better liars. This issue comes on the heels of a related topic: it's not that she's corrupt, she's incompetent at hiding her corruption. I see Hunts abandoned asking xDaunt to elaborate about Clinton's clear corruption after the nth time of no answer. But if you say that she is incompetent at hiding her corruption, I do hope at least you have some examples. You'll have to buy a book if you want all her corruption spelled out. The reduced form comes down to trying and failing to hide a private server to conduct business free from FOIA requests, with a pattern of lying when questions arose about classified emails and deleting emails even while they were subpoena'd. + Show Spoiler [hilarious as hell "oh shit"] +She also met with and assisted foreign national donors to her clinton family foundation while working as secretary of state. The incompetence story is huge and shows no signs of stopping, though it's hard to get better than the current admissions out there. She instructed aides to remove the classified headers from documents before sending them to her, and later claimed she couldn't identify other emails as classified because there were no headers. Her foundation accidentally didn't disclose tens of millions of dollars of donations from foreign governments for three years, and had to refile. The deletions were justified because they were just joga emails etc, even though the latest 15,000 contained at least one benghazi email. She claimed Comey corroborated her "truthful" statements made with respect to the investigation and what she told the American people. I've been reading the responses in this thread and the acrobatics, and my only takeaway is that paying for government favors shouldn't surprise anybody, and it was only natural for Hillary to cover up her violations of the espionage act because nobody should care about classifications regardless. To say that another way since the thread's been heading there lately, everybody knows Clinton is corrupt and has used her office to commit crimes without consequence and enrich herself. (shitposter clarification: she has been dragged to interviews & hearings, so it wasn't entirely without consequence)
Paying for government favors? You really think she'd stoop to Trump levels of corruption?
As for being dragged to hearings, that's would be the partisan politics at work. More interesting is that none of the investigations those hearings were part of found any actual wrongdoing...
Do I like her personally? No. And I am certainly not a fan of the back chamber deal making that is the norm in Washington, which Hilary is obviously both a part of and adept at. But actual corruption goes a lot further than that.
|
It's interesting how evolution has led to many people being more sure of things than the actual likelihood. I wonder what mechanisms made that useful. I should look up that research more.
But I wonder what makes people so fond of strawmen; what evolutionary reason is there for that, if any? or is simply a byproduct of cognition and communication?
|
Is there any good election analysis websites?
538 has been absolute garbage. What kind of statistical model would make the "Now Cast" go from 33.2% for Trump on Sept 7th, down to 25.6% on the 9th... And now climb back up.
There is literally nothing that happened that could could represent a roughly 1.5 point loss for Trump over Hillary over that time (not looking at polls, but looking at real life)... 1.5 is a rough figure which comes from estimating vote % from winning chances.
|
On September 13 2016 05:07 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2016 01:49 Dan HH wrote:On September 13 2016 01:43 Danglars wrote:On September 13 2016 00:56 xDaunt wrote:I'll just let this guy make the point for me:Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign just made a massive error. We'll know within the next few weeks if the error will prove to be catastrophic.
On Sunday, Clinton abruptly left a Manhattan ceremony marking the 15th anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. A video shows her shakily stumbling while trying to get into a van to leave. The candidate's physician later offered this explanation: Clinton has had an allergy-related cough for some time, and during an examination on Friday, the Democratic nominee was diagnosed with pneumonia, put on antibiotics, and told to take time out to rest. She became overheated and dehydrated during Sunday morning's event, which led her to collapse. She's now home in Chappaqua and on the road to recovery.
Compare this timeline to details from Hillary Clinton's public schedule and behavior over these same two days.
After Clinton was diagnosed with pneumonia and put on antibiotics, she did not, as her physician recommended, take time out to rest. Instead, she attended a fundraiser featuring Barbra Streisand. Then on Sunday morning, she attended the 9/11 commemoration, became "overheated," and woozily wobbled rather dramatically. Ninety minutes later she exited her daughter Chelsea's apartment building to tell the press she was "feeling great." The Secret Service permitted a young girl to come over to give the candidate a hug.
It was only a few hours later when her campaign finally announced that she has pneumonia and is recovering.
The most charitable reading of this timeline is that her campaign — presumably with the blessing and perhaps insistence of the candidate — fully intended to keep her illness a secret from the public. Let's be clear about what this means: Her campaign intended to lie. Even though doing so would require her to keep up a public schedule that might well make her condition worse and require ever-more elaborate forms of concealment. Because, of course, to curtail her schedule would raise questions that might reveal the truth.
So even after she collapsed, the campaign decided the ruse would continue. It arranged for the candidate to make her curbside declaration of wellness, even bringing on the girl to give her a "spontaneous" hug. (Clinton's protection detail would never have permitted a genuinely spontaneous embrace on the street, even by a child.)
It's easy to understand why the Clinton campaign would want to keep this kind of news a secret. The candidate doesn't trust the media. The right has been hitting her over supposed health issues for months (and even years), and the assault has picked up in intensity over the past week or so — since Clinton found herself in the midst of an extended coughing fit at a campaign event in Cleveland. Then there's the gender dynamic. Donald Trump presents himself as a hyper-masculine tough guy, while Clinton is the first female presidential nominee. The Clinton camp is probably twice as terrified of their candidate looking frail as a less path-breaking campaign would be.
So the campaign chose to lie. The potential reward was considerable: namely, an absence of politically damaging news stories about Clinton's medical condition. But the risk was enormous — and it's blown up in their faces. Because now the story isn't just that Clinton is ill. It's that, once again, she's untrustworthy — and this time about her own health.
That's why the announcement that she has pneumonia will only fuel more speculation about Clinton's physical condition, with potentially no end in sight. The world saw her collapse, and 90 minutes later, the candidate looked America in the eye and proclaimed that she was feeling great. Except now we know that she wasn't.
Not long after this charade, someone on the campaign staff made the call to come clean. But it may well have been too late.
The best the campaign can hope for now is that Clinton recovers quickly and soon looks healthy in her public appearances. Then maybe the topic will recede into the background of the campaign. The candidate got sick, but then she got better. End of story.
But if she doesn't recover quickly? If she appears weak and frail for more than a few days? Then, yes, she'll face perfectly reasonable questions about whether she's physically up to serving as president. But worse, she'll confront lingering doubts about what, precisely, is ailing her. "It's pneumonia," the campaign will proclaim over and over again. To which a skeptical America will justifiably reply, "Yes, we can tell that you'd like us to think so. But we have no reason to trust that's true."
Political trust is a fragile thing. Once it's gone, it's exceedingly difficult to get back — and without it, there's no basis on which to dismiss conspiracy theories that even normally level-headed observers will begin, for perfectly understandable reasons, to entertain.
Like so many of the scandals and pseudo-scandals that have dogged Hillary Clinton and her husband through the years, this one needs to be recognized as entirely self-inflicted. The campaign now has to live with the consequences of having chosen to lie to get out of a problem. You Hillary supporters need to shake yourselves out of your delusions. Her campaign clearly messed up, and I'm not sure why it's so hard for y'all to see it and concede that point (edit: Actually, I do know why, but I'm going to be nice). It's not that she lies, she just needs to hire on better liars. This issue comes on the heels of a related topic: it's not that she's corrupt, she's incompetent at hiding her corruption. I see Hunts abandoned asking xDaunt to elaborate about Clinton's clear corruption after the nth time of no answer. But if you say that she is incompetent at hiding her corruption, I do hope at least you have some examples. You'll have to buy a book if you want all her corruption spelled out. The reduced form comes down to trying and failing to hide a private server to conduct business free from FOIA requests, with a pattern of lying when questions arose about classified emails and deleting emails even while they were subpoena'd. + Show Spoiler [hilarious as hell "oh shit"] +She also met with and assisted foreign national donors to her clinton family foundation while working as secretary of state. The incompetence story is huge and shows no signs of stopping, though it's hard to get better than the current admissions out there. She instructed aides to remove the classified headers from documents before sending them to her, and later claimed she couldn't identify other emails as classified because there were no headers. Her foundation accidentally didn't disclose tens of millions of dollars of donations from foreign governments for three years, and had to refile. The deletions were justified because they were just yoga emails etc, even though the latest 15,000 contained at least one benghazi email. She claimed Comey corroborated her "truthful" statements made with respect to the investigation and what she told the American people. I've been reading the responses in this thread and the acrobatics, and my only takeaway is that paying for government favors shouldn't surprise anybody, and it was only natural for Hillary to cover up her violations of the espionage act because nobody should care about classifications regardless. To say that another way since the thread's been heading there lately, everybody knows Clinton is corrupt and has used her office to commit crimes without consequence and enrich herself. (shitposter clarification: she has been dragged to interviews & hearings, so it wasn't entirely without consequence)
I was hoping for something along the lines of person puts money in then receives political favor that can be reasonably correlated with it. When you say that not only is she corrupt (something that I'm very willing to consider), but she is incompetent at hiding said corruption, I don't think that 'everyone know she is corrupt', 'she met with donors' and 'she deleted emails' is good enough. When you claim it's so obvious, you need at least something half as clear as the several instances of Trump paying for favors such as with Pam Bondi or Andrew Stein.
|
On September 13 2016 05:54 FiWiFaKi wrote:
Is there any good election analysis websites?
538 has been absolute garbage. What kind of statistical model would make the "Now Cast" go from 33.2% for Trump on Sept 7th, down to 25.6% on the 9th... And now climb back up.
There is literally nothing that happened that could could represent a roughly 1.5 point loss for Trump over Hillary over that time (not looking at polls, but looking at real life)... 1.5 is a rough figure which comes from the standard deviations they use for their distributions.
538 only uses polls and nothing else. The "polls plus" prediction is only based on trends from the last bunch of elections and how the states preformed and shifted. So the changed was caused by the polls changing.
|
North Dakota police have issued an arrest warrant for the Democracy Now! host Amy Goodman, who has been reporting on the Native American protests against an oil pipeline, accusing her of entering “private property” to conduct interviews.
The charges have raised concerns about possible free speech violations and press intimidation, since the Morton county sheriff’s office accused the award-winning broadcast journalist after Democracy Now! filmed security guards working for the Dakota access pipeline using dogs and pepper spray on protesters.
“This is an unacceptable violation of freedom of the press,” Goodman said in a statement after police accused her of criminal trespass, a misdemeanor offense.
On 3 September, Goodman reported at the site of the Native American-led protest of a controversial $3.8bn oil pipeline that the Standing Rock Sioux tribe says poses a threat to its water supply and could damage its cultural heritage.
Goodman’s dispatch on the use of dogs quickly spread online and was viewed more than 13m times on the news program’s Facebook page. Many outlets rebroadcast the footage, including CBS, NBC, NPR and CNN, according to Democracy Now!.
An 8 September criminal complaint was filed against Goodman and Cody Hall, a protest organizer. The charging document from the state’s attorney for Morton County calls on the defendants to be “arrested and dealt with according to law”.
Lindsay Wold, a special agent with the North Dakota bureau of criminal investigation, wrote in an affidavit that a “large group of protesters” were blocking a highway and that employees of the Dakota access pipeline were working in a nearby field, “utilizing heavy equipment to clear the land”.
Security workers had formed a line to try to block the activists, Wold wrote.
The agent alleged that the protesters broke through a fence, crossed on to the private land, halted the employees from working, and assaulted security guards.
Source
|
Optics in the debates might change if HRC fully accepts the sick role and sticks to policy. The usual mud slinging might just enable sympathizers for her due to being unhealthy and old, meaning Trump is going to have to maintain a presidential tone and not get involved in petty attacks.
|
On September 13 2016 05:58 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2016 05:54 FiWiFaKi wrote:
Is there any good election analysis websites?
538 has been absolute garbage. What kind of statistical model would make the "Now Cast" go from 33.2% for Trump on Sept 7th, down to 25.6% on the 9th... And now climb back up.
There is literally nothing that happened that could could represent a roughly 1.5 point loss for Trump over Hillary over that time (not looking at polls, but looking at real life)... 1.5 is a rough figure which comes from the standard deviations they use for their distributions. 538 only uses polls and nothing else. The "polls plus" prediction is only based on trends from the last bunch of elections and how the states preformed and shifted. So the changed was caused by the polls changing.
Well then it's model is really poor, and giving way too much weight to one or two polls, that change is way too erratic and nothing close to reality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3039395/pages/1353814-0-LHM-p19-normal.gif)
