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 November 04 2016 21:45 OuchyDathurts wrote: This is the dumbest tangent I've ever seen in this thread. No one cares.
It does come from the guy with the dumbest (readable) posts.
He's a very interesting specimen, a yuuuge part of the draw of the US megapol thread.
That and xDaunts election year meltdowns (misunderstand me right here, you seem like a cool dude even if your views don't align with mine xD ). I still remember how convinced he was of Romneys victory 2012.
On November 04 2016 20:39 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: This "Spirit Cooking" thing is certainly the strangest thing to come out of the wikileaks emails so far.The email received by Tony Podesta (Who then asked his brother John) is from Marina Abramovic who says
From: Marina Abramovic <marinaxabramovic@gmail.com<mailto:marinaxabramovic@gmail.com>> Date: June 28, 2015 at 2:35:08 AM GMT+2 To: Tony Podesta <podesta@podesta.com<mailto:podesta@podesta.com>> Subject: Dinner
Dear Tony,
I am so looking forward to the Spirit Cooking dinner at my place. Do you think you will be able to let me know if your brother is joining?
All my love, Marina
Youtube video showing the very same Marina Abramovic doing a "spirit cooking" session
Everything depends on which context you are doing what you are doing. If you are doing the occult magic in the context of art or in a gallery, then it is the art.If you are doing it in different context, in spiritual circles or private house or on TV shows, it is not art.The intention, the context for what is made, and where it is made defines what art is or not.
MARINA ABRAMOVIC - Reddit Q&A
You would think the same Puritans that clutch their pearls and feint when they hear the word 'pussy' would have a stronger reaction to satanic rituals but I guess Clinton aides sacrificing animals to Moloch and drinking/eating blood, semen and breast milk is not that big of a deal... compared to 'pussy'.
You're an idiot if you think anyone cares about the word pussy. Good try though!
Except now this is getting spinned into Bill Clinton's assosiation with a known pedophile.
Disclaimer: Do not criticize the source as is. I am not saying any of the below is true, but rather pointing out a site with a huge amount of traffic, regardless you like Cernovich or not.
"Add “Spirit Cooking” to the latest sex cult practices of the Clinton inner circle, which also includes child trafficking.
Additional emails from the release reveal Hillary’s efforts to protect Laura Silsby, who was caught trafficking 33 children from Haiti. Where were those children being smuggled to?
Perhaps those children were destined for Jeffrey Epstein’s “pedophile island,” a sex cult resort that Bill Clinton visited dozens of times. Notably, Clinton refused to allow his Secret Service detail to accompany him several times.
Former President Bill Clinton was a much more frequent flyer on a registered sex offender’s infamous jet than previously reported, with flight logs showing the former president taking at least 26 trips aboard the “Lolita Express” — even apparently ditching his Secret Service detail for at least five of the flights, according to records obtained by FoxNews.com."
Wait. I know this one! Is the known pedofile Donald J. Trump?
Former President Bill Clinton was a much more frequent flyer on a registered sex offender’s infamous jet than previously reported, with flight logs showing the former president taking at least 26 trips aboard the “Lolita Express” -- even apparently ditching his Secret Service detail for at least five of the flights, according to records obtained by FoxNews.com.
Clinton’s presence aboard Jeffrey Epstein’s Boeing 727 on 11 occasions has been reported, but flight logs show the number is more than double that, and trips between 2001 and 2003 included extended junkets around the world with Epstein and fellow passengers identified on manifests by their initials or first names, including “Tatiana.” The tricked-out jet earned its Nabakov-inspired nickname because it was reportedly outfitted with a bed where passengers had group sex with young girls.
“Bill Clinton … associated with a man like Jeffrey Epstein, who everyone in New York, certainly within his inner circles, knew was a pedophile,” said Conchita Sarnoff, of the Washington, D.C. based non-profit Alliance to Rescue Victims of Trafficking, and author of a book on the Epstein case called "TrafficKing." “Why would a former president associate with a man like that?”
To be fair:
Other politicians, celebrities and businessmen, including presidential candidate Donald Trump, have been accused of fraternizing with Epstein. Trump lawyer Alan Garten told FoxNews.com in a statement Trump and Epstein are not pals.
“There was no relationship between Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump,” he said. “They were not friends and they did not socialize together.”
Nevertheless, the "spiritin cooking" is simply disgusting and will for sure generate some impact on the electorate, christian or not.
On November 04 2016 22:39 TheTenthDoc wrote: The irony of people finding those links meaningful while dismissing Trump/Russia ties as conspiracy is palpable.
This applies to every Hillary 'conspiracy.' Shocking level of cognitive dissonance. They are all Sherlock Holmes when it comes to Hillary but are more akin to Homer Simpson when it comes to Trump issues.
Could any of you "debaters" direct me to links that showcase the programs of the two candidates? What they propose to do when elected? Links to communicating platforms on the issues "at stake". That is what should be argued about no?
Or is that a triggering bait request? (the fact that no one discusses substance anymore anywhere at any time and that "what the candidates/parties propose to do" is what the important thing is (vital), as opposed to anything else which is irrelevant). Remind me please, what is the % of voters ?
On November 04 2016 15:34 Nyxisto wrote: As LegalLord pointed out a few pages ago Nate and Princeton(for example) use two very different approaches. Nate goes with a very complex model which can be prone to overfitting (misinterpreting noise as meaningful data) while the Princeton guy goes with a statistical model that is based on fewer assumptions and less on historical data, which can be more biased(methodologically wrong) but is less prone to overreact when changes come in. There's no real way to tell which better, it's an age old discussion and pretty much a matter of taste, but I think Nate is putting too much focus on changes right now.
Overfitting is definitely a valid concern for Nate's model, and he has mentioned as such. His model is prone to very aggressive changes in results. It tends to converge to reality in the last few days but that is one of the concerns with his model that need acknowledging.
PEC just uses a questionable method. Trump's chances are definitely better than 3%. He really could win under not so unfeasible circumstances. Read their FAQ and you'll see "well our method has failed before, it failed to predict this and that election... but we fixed it and it's all good now guys!" I call BS.
On November 04 2016 22:45 zatic wrote: As an outside observer, the last two pages have been the dumbest in this thread so far.
On November 04 2016 22:39 TheTenthDoc wrote: The irony of people finding those links meaningful while dismissing Trump/Russia ties as conspiracy is palpable.
This applies to every Hillary 'conspiracy.' Shocking level of cognitive dissonance. They are all Sherlock Holmes when it comes to Hillary but are more akin to Homer Simpson when it comes to Trump issues.
I am simply saying the following images are disturbing and will 100% have impact.
This is beyond stupid. Either A: its was a joke in the office that made its way to an email B: someone is into weird things and that is fine. C: It was an email from someone that he didn’t want.
Did he reply? Because email is open facing, people can just send you things and you get them. Was this in his deleted folder where he did not reply to it?
Officials investigating possible Al Qaeda terror attack planned for day before election: report
Federal officials are investigating reports of possible Al Qaeda terror attacks on the U.S. the day before the election.
Three states — New York, Texas and Virginia — are considered possible targets for the planned Monday attacks, FBI sources told CBS News. No more specific cities or locations were mentioned.
Officials have not confirmed the reports, and sources told the news network that the credibility of the threats is still being assessed.
“The counterterrorism and homeland security communities remain vigilant and well-postured to defend against attacks here in the United States,” the sourced told CBS News.
On November 04 2016 15:34 Nyxisto wrote: As LegalLord pointed out a few pages ago Nate and Princeton(for example) use two very different approaches. Nate goes with a very complex model which can be prone to overfitting (misinterpreting noise as meaningful data) while the Princeton guy goes with a statistical model that is based on fewer assumptions and less on historical data, which can be more biased(methodologically wrong) but is less prone to overreact when changes come in. There's no real way to tell which better, it's an age old discussion and pretty much a matter of taste, but I think Nate is putting too much focus on changes right now.
If only there was a site that could aggregate the aggregators
Wouldn't work. You aggregate polls to increase your sample size and hopefully compensate for some errors in bias. The issues there are many and the pollster rating is really at the core of what makes 538 what it is. Aggregating statistical approaches makes no sense because you're just throwing together a bunch of statistical analyses, not all of which make sense. It's obvious to anyone who has looked at at least a few of these predictor models that a lot of them are scientifically mediocre and have a lot of hand-on-the-scale adjustments in outcome to push a result they want to be true.
For policy. Especially because it covers topics that aren't the core talking point for each candidate rather than letting them get by with just a few policy issues in a few key areas.
silver is much more of a forecaster than simple analyst of polling statistic. pec has a more academic conservative approach in not putting random stuff into the model. it is basically two different goals, prediction vs distilling polling information.
the forecast part of pec is simple and not the central focus of their thing. it is rather the state poll aggregate snapshots
Will this have been the most drama filled election in US history? It's just astounding howmuch shit keeps hitting the fan every moment.. Truly incredible
On November 04 2016 23:25 Uldridge wrote: Will this have been the most drama filled election in US history?
It was 8 months ago? Pretty much the moment that a serious contender for the Republican Nominee started his campaign by stereotyping Mexicans as rapists.
On November 04 2016 23:25 Uldridge wrote: Will this have been the most drama filled election in US history? It's just astounding howmuch shit keeps hitting the fan every moment.. Truly incredible
I doubt it; the elections leading up to and surrounding the Civil War likely put this one to shame in that department, though it's virtually impossible to go about qualifying such an observation.
EPT
). I still remember how convinced he was of Romneys victory 2012.![[image loading]](http://i1.wp.com/www.dangerandplay.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Podesta-Spirit-Cooking.png.jpg?w=632)
![[image loading]](http://i1.wp.com/www.dangerandplay.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/With-a-knife-cut-deeply-into-the-middle-finger-of-your-left-hand-eat-the-pain-1.jpg?resize=768%2C537)
