|
On November 04 2020 07:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 07:21 Wegandi wrote:On November 04 2020 07:10 Shinokuki wrote:On November 04 2020 06:54 Wegandi wrote:On November 04 2020 06:46 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 04 2020 06:42 Wegandi wrote:
Republican ED turnout is way up in PA, AZ, and FL. Dem turn-out in many counties lower than NPA / Other. I expect Trump to win all three, AZ by 2%, PA by 1% and FL by 3%. Compared to 2016 Republicans also had better EV margins. Hard to tell which way the NPA / Independent crowd will swing in these states, but the GOP has banked so many advantages all ready it is going to take a big Biden break with them for him to win. Some of you predicting Texas, FL, GA, etc. going to Biden I have to wonder besides the skewed polling what actual #'s you're going by? Look at the actual SOE / County #'s / State EV/ED #'s compared to 2016, not polling that have MOE of +/- 4.5% lol.
Anyway, I voted Jorgenson today and GOP down-ballot (Dems would have a shot at my vote if they weren't all progressives with socialist inclinations).
PS: I live in Florida. I'm not sure why you think that establishment Democrats, who are neoliberal / typical right-leaning moderate politicians from the perspective of most of the rest of the world, have socialist inclinations, but I definitely appreciate that you voted for JJ instead of DT. Do you have a specific site or two that you prefer to look at, when assessing EV/ED #s and all that jazz? For Florida: joeisdone.github.io (don't mind the partisan name, it is purely #'s from SOE/Counties) Dude, all the Dems on my ballot were for nationalized healthcare, the Green New Deal, 15$ min wage, increased regulatory state, huge on climate change taxation/business restrictions, etc. They're not Larry McDonald lmao. I get why you might be against healthcare, wage, and etc but climate change? Who gives a shit what you have or what others will have if we are going to suffer tremendously because of climate change in 2040-2050 My views on the climate change doomists are well known, plus even if what they say is true it's still not as bad as all the policy programs relating to "climate change". Poverty will do more harm to folks than even the worse-case scientific prognostications. I'd rather not slide into Argentina, Venezuela, Sub-Saharan Africa, etc. Please refer to them as "experts" or "scientists", not "doomers" or "alarmists". And if you want to avoid poverty so badly, why aren't you a proponent for increased minimum wage or addressing climate change? Seems inconsistent to me, to say poverty is bad while perpetuating social inequity and not caring about the existential threat of climate change.
Minimum wage increases poverty not decreases. For someone so-called believes in everything science you guys sure do have a knock for being illiterate with economic science. How about being pro-rent control as well? Back on topic - Biden is going to have pull significantly with the NPA's to have a shot. R's are running way ahead of their 2016 #'s.
|
I like everything you say and stand for biff, but please dont follow this new trend of putting asterisks around words to emphasise them.
|
To quote a former teacher of mine,
“ Not generally an anxious person but tonight I have enormous anxiety about tomorrow’s election. Hoping that America lives up to what I was taught it could be...but terrified that it will show itself for what it is....”
Pretty much sums it up
|
On November 04 2020 07:32 Elroi wrote:
I like everything you say and stand for biff, but please dont follow this new trend of putting asterisks around words to emphasise them.
It’s just another way to do emphasis on internet text, I have seen it at work as well lol
|
On November 04 2020 07:31 JimmiC wrote:
Also Venezuela in particular is freaking AWFUL for the environment. They are like the worst example of a country you could point too as "we better not care about the environment or we will be them". I'm not sure on Argentina so I can't comment but it both lazy and completely wrong to throw out random countries you think are shit and blame it on their climate policy, especially when they are actually doing the opposite.
It's not about "caring for the environment" (I'm a free-market environmentalist by the way), it's the advocates of socialist to socialist adjacent "solutions" to the problem.
|
On November 04 2020 07:27 Vivax wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 07:06 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 04 2020 07:02 Vivax wrote:
Haven't followed US pol for a while. Did Trump manage to cover up his insanity pre-election and does the average voter have a memory for things he said over the last few years when he thought himself immortal? Trump has said and done insane things every week for at least the past 4 years, and people decided long ago as to whether or not anything Trump said/did would be disqualifying. I don't think the past month or so drastically changed anyone's mind. I tried to think of the best thing he has done during his term and that'd probably be him spamming on twitter. Just for the entertainment value. I'm not sure that I'd place escalating tariffs and fostering international frictions among those things.
Yeah, I'm honestly not sure what actions Trump has taken that I would personally consider to be particularly admirable during his presidency. I read somewhere that he signed off on a bunch of legislation that was passed overwhelmingly in Congress, but any monkey could rubber stamp something that had full bipartisan support. Maybe him getting distracted by golfing and tweeting and television really was the best (albeit indirect) part of his term, as that meant he did less governing.
|
Northern Ireland26771 Posts
On November 04 2020 07:32 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 07:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 04 2020 07:21 Wegandi wrote:On November 04 2020 07:10 Shinokuki wrote:On November 04 2020 06:54 Wegandi wrote:On November 04 2020 06:46 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 04 2020 06:42 Wegandi wrote:
Republican ED turnout is way up in PA, AZ, and FL. Dem turn-out in many counties lower than NPA / Other. I expect Trump to win all three, AZ by 2%, PA by 1% and FL by 3%. Compared to 2016 Republicans also had better EV margins. Hard to tell which way the NPA / Independent crowd will swing in these states, but the GOP has banked so many advantages all ready it is going to take a big Biden break with them for him to win. Some of you predicting Texas, FL, GA, etc. going to Biden I have to wonder besides the skewed polling what actual #'s you're going by? Look at the actual SOE / County #'s / State EV/ED #'s compared to 2016, not polling that have MOE of +/- 4.5% lol.
Anyway, I voted Jorgenson today and GOP down-ballot (Dems would have a shot at my vote if they weren't all progressives with socialist inclinations).
PS: I live in Florida. I'm not sure why you think that establishment Democrats, who are neoliberal / typical right-leaning moderate politicians from the perspective of most of the rest of the world, have socialist inclinations, but I definitely appreciate that you voted for JJ instead of DT. Do you have a specific site or two that you prefer to look at, when assessing EV/ED #s and all that jazz? For Florida: joeisdone.github.io (don't mind the partisan name, it is purely #'s from SOE/Counties) Dude, all the Dems on my ballot were for nationalized healthcare, the Green New Deal, 15$ min wage, increased regulatory state, huge on climate change taxation/business restrictions, etc. They're not Larry McDonald lmao. I get why you might be against healthcare, wage, and etc but climate change? Who gives a shit what you have or what others will have if we are going to suffer tremendously because of climate change in 2040-2050 My views on the climate change doomists are well known, plus even if what they say is true it's still not as bad as all the policy programs relating to "climate change". Poverty will do more harm to folks than even the worse-case scientific prognostications. I'd rather not slide into Argentina, Venezuela, Sub-Saharan Africa, etc. Please refer to them as "experts" or "scientists", not "doomers" or "alarmists". And if you want to avoid poverty so badly, why aren't you a proponent for increased minimum wage or addressing climate change? Seems inconsistent to me, to say poverty is bad while perpetuating social inequity and not caring about the existential threat of climate change. Minimum wage increases poverty not decreases. For someone so-called believes in everything science you guys sure do have a knock for being illiterate with economic science. How about being pro-rent control as well? Back on topic - Biden is going to have pull significantly with the NPA's to have a shot. R's are running way ahead of their 2016 #'s.
Economic science is a spook.
Less idiotic points aside, what sort of time do you fine folks expect we’ll get a vaguely concrete picture of things? I reckon I’m good for 4-5 hours tops of browsing and occasionally posting nothing of particular value.
|
On November 04 2020 07:36 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 07:32 Wegandi wrote:On November 04 2020 07:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 04 2020 07:21 Wegandi wrote:On November 04 2020 07:10 Shinokuki wrote:On November 04 2020 06:54 Wegandi wrote:On November 04 2020 06:46 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 04 2020 06:42 Wegandi wrote:
Republican ED turnout is way up in PA, AZ, and FL. Dem turn-out in many counties lower than NPA / Other. I expect Trump to win all three, AZ by 2%, PA by 1% and FL by 3%. Compared to 2016 Republicans also had better EV margins. Hard to tell which way the NPA / Independent crowd will swing in these states, but the GOP has banked so many advantages all ready it is going to take a big Biden break with them for him to win. Some of you predicting Texas, FL, GA, etc. going to Biden I have to wonder besides the skewed polling what actual #'s you're going by? Look at the actual SOE / County #'s / State EV/ED #'s compared to 2016, not polling that have MOE of +/- 4.5% lol.
Anyway, I voted Jorgenson today and GOP down-ballot (Dems would have a shot at my vote if they weren't all progressives with socialist inclinations).
PS: I live in Florida. I'm not sure why you think that establishment Democrats, who are neoliberal / typical right-leaning moderate politicians from the perspective of most of the rest of the world, have socialist inclinations, but I definitely appreciate that you voted for JJ instead of DT. Do you have a specific site or two that you prefer to look at, when assessing EV/ED #s and all that jazz? For Florida: joeisdone.github.io (don't mind the partisan name, it is purely #'s from SOE/Counties) Dude, all the Dems on my ballot were for nationalized healthcare, the Green New Deal, 15$ min wage, increased regulatory state, huge on climate change taxation/business restrictions, etc. They're not Larry McDonald lmao. I get why you might be against healthcare, wage, and etc but climate change? Who gives a shit what you have or what others will have if we are going to suffer tremendously because of climate change in 2040-2050 My views on the climate change doomists are well known, plus even if what they say is true it's still not as bad as all the policy programs relating to "climate change". Poverty will do more harm to folks than even the worse-case scientific prognostications. I'd rather not slide into Argentina, Venezuela, Sub-Saharan Africa, etc. Please refer to them as "experts" or "scientists", not "doomers" or "alarmists". And if you want to avoid poverty so badly, why aren't you a proponent for increased minimum wage or addressing climate change? Seems inconsistent to me, to say poverty is bad while perpetuating social inequity and not caring about the existential threat of climate change. Minimum wage increases poverty not decreases. For someone so-called believes in everything science you guys sure do have a knock for being illiterate with economic science. How about being pro-rent control as well? Back on topic - Biden is going to have pull significantly with the NPA's to have a shot. R's are running way ahead of their 2016 #'s. Economic science is a spook. Less idiotic points aside, what sort of time do you fine folks expect we’ll get a vaguely concrete picture of things? I reckon I’m good for 4-5 hours tops of browsing and occasionally posting nothing of particular value.
Maybe 3-4 hours from now, since so many swing states are in the Eastern/Central time zones.
|
|
|
On November 04 2020 07:36 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 07:32 Wegandi wrote:On November 04 2020 07:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 04 2020 07:21 Wegandi wrote:On November 04 2020 07:10 Shinokuki wrote:On November 04 2020 06:54 Wegandi wrote:On November 04 2020 06:46 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 04 2020 06:42 Wegandi wrote:
Republican ED turnout is way up in PA, AZ, and FL. Dem turn-out in many counties lower than NPA / Other. I expect Trump to win all three, AZ by 2%, PA by 1% and FL by 3%. Compared to 2016 Republicans also had better EV margins. Hard to tell which way the NPA / Independent crowd will swing in these states, but the GOP has banked so many advantages all ready it is going to take a big Biden break with them for him to win. Some of you predicting Texas, FL, GA, etc. going to Biden I have to wonder besides the skewed polling what actual #'s you're going by? Look at the actual SOE / County #'s / State EV/ED #'s compared to 2016, not polling that have MOE of +/- 4.5% lol.
Anyway, I voted Jorgenson today and GOP down-ballot (Dems would have a shot at my vote if they weren't all progressives with socialist inclinations).
PS: I live in Florida. I'm not sure why you think that establishment Democrats, who are neoliberal / typical right-leaning moderate politicians from the perspective of most of the rest of the world, have socialist inclinations, but I definitely appreciate that you voted for JJ instead of DT. Do you have a specific site or two that you prefer to look at, when assessing EV/ED #s and all that jazz? For Florida: joeisdone.github.io (don't mind the partisan name, it is purely #'s from SOE/Counties) Dude, all the Dems on my ballot were for nationalized healthcare, the Green New Deal, 15$ min wage, increased regulatory state, huge on climate change taxation/business restrictions, etc. They're not Larry McDonald lmao. I get why you might be against healthcare, wage, and etc but climate change? Who gives a shit what you have or what others will have if we are going to suffer tremendously because of climate change in 2040-2050 My views on the climate change doomists are well known, plus even if what they say is true it's still not as bad as all the policy programs relating to "climate change". Poverty will do more harm to folks than even the worse-case scientific prognostications. I'd rather not slide into Argentina, Venezuela, Sub-Saharan Africa, etc. Please refer to them as "experts" or "scientists", not "doomers" or "alarmists". And if you want to avoid poverty so badly, why aren't you a proponent for increased minimum wage or addressing climate change? Seems inconsistent to me, to say poverty is bad while perpetuating social inequity and not caring about the existential threat of climate change. Minimum wage increases poverty not decreases. For someone so-called believes in everything science you guys sure do have a knock for being illiterate with economic science. How about being pro-rent control as well? Back on topic - Biden is going to have pull significantly with the NPA's to have a shot. R's are running way ahead of their 2016 #'s. Economic science is a spook. Less idiotic points aside, what sort of time do you fine folks expect we’ll get a vaguely concrete picture of things? I reckon I’m good for 4-5 hours tops of browsing and occasionally posting nothing of particular value.
You're an economic denier. Everyone shout at the barbarian! (This is the level of discourse on anything but the climate doom line concerning AGW)
|
On November 04 2020 07:24 Luolis wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 07:21 Wegandi wrote:On November 04 2020 07:10 Shinokuki wrote:On November 04 2020 06:54 Wegandi wrote:On November 04 2020 06:46 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 04 2020 06:42 Wegandi wrote:
Republican ED turnout is way up in PA, AZ, and FL. Dem turn-out in many counties lower than NPA / Other. I expect Trump to win all three, AZ by 2%, PA by 1% and FL by 3%. Compared to 2016 Republicans also had better EV margins. Hard to tell which way the NPA / Independent crowd will swing in these states, but the GOP has banked so many advantages all ready it is going to take a big Biden break with them for him to win. Some of you predicting Texas, FL, GA, etc. going to Biden I have to wonder besides the skewed polling what actual #'s you're going by? Look at the actual SOE / County #'s / State EV/ED #'s compared to 2016, not polling that have MOE of +/- 4.5% lol.
Anyway, I voted Jorgenson today and GOP down-ballot (Dems would have a shot at my vote if they weren't all progressives with socialist inclinations).
PS: I live in Florida. I'm not sure why you think that establishment Democrats, who are neoliberal / typical right-leaning moderate politicians from the perspective of most of the rest of the world, have socialist inclinations, but I definitely appreciate that you voted for JJ instead of DT. Do you have a specific site or two that you prefer to look at, when assessing EV/ED #s and all that jazz? For Florida: joeisdone.github.io (don't mind the partisan name, it is purely #'s from SOE/Counties) Dude, all the Dems on my ballot were for nationalized healthcare, the Green New Deal, 15$ min wage, increased regulatory state, huge on climate change taxation/business restrictions, etc. They're not Larry McDonald lmao. I get why you might be against healthcare, wage, and etc but climate change? Who gives a shit what you have or what others will have if we are going to suffer tremendously because of climate change in 2040-2050 My views on the climate change doomists are well known, plus even if what they say is true it's still not as bad as all the policy programs relating to "climate change". Poverty will do more harm to folks than even the worse-case scientific prognostications. I'd rather not slide into Argentina, Venezuela, Sub-Saharan Africa, etc. Imagine being a climate change denier in 2020...
Offtopic:
+ Show Spoiler +Things in nature tend to balance themselves out and move towards an average. I'd base a guess on it that there's a poorly understood mechanic by which earth won't be flooded with heat and water if the warming and melting continues. The thing is that I don't know if that could be something worse than those two  I'm definitely skeptical when politicians use it as an excuse to implement policies. CO2 certificates come to mind. To you it's sold as a measure against the warming, while the legislators caved in to a lobbying effort and mostly care about the economic implications. And for certain their own interests.
|
On November 04 2020 07:35 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 07:27 Vivax wrote:On November 04 2020 07:06 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 04 2020 07:02 Vivax wrote:
Haven't followed US pol for a while. Did Trump manage to cover up his insanity pre-election and does the average voter have a memory for things he said over the last few years when he thought himself immortal? Trump has said and done insane things every week for at least the past 4 years, and people decided long ago as to whether or not anything Trump said/did would be disqualifying. I don't think the past month or so drastically changed anyone's mind. I tried to think of the best thing he has done during his term and that'd probably be him spamming on twitter. Just for the entertainment value. I'm not sure that I'd place escalating tariffs and fostering international frictions among those things. Yeah, I'm honestly not sure what actions Trump has taken that I would personally consider to be particularly admirable during his presidency. I read somewhere that he signed off on a bunch of legislation that was passed overwhelmingly in Congress, but any monkey could rubber stamp something that had full bipartisan support. Maybe him getting distracted by golfing and tweeting and television really was the best (albeit indirect) part of his term, as that meant he did less governing.
1. No Foreign wars started unlike the 5 presidents before him ( So none of our troops dont have to die in Needless wars )
2. Tax cuts for everyone so you earn more of your income
3. Pulling our troops out of Afghanistan (Unlike what obama did where they promised to pull out Troops but did not )
4. First step Act : Giving people with Non violent crimes lesser sentences and pardoning those convicted previously BY JOE BIDEN'S 1994 CRIME BILL
User was banned for this post.
|
United States10397 Posts
On November 04 2020 07:30 plasmidghost wrote:
We might be getting a sense of the election from the Indiana suburbs when polls close in half an hour
For reference from 2016:
Lake County: 57.7-37.3% Clinton
Monroe County: 58.5-35.2% Clinton
St. Joseph County: 46.7-46.5% Clinton
Marion County: 58.0-35.5% Clinton
Then the smaller red rural counties were averaging about 73-75% in favor of Trump. These are the benchmarks to see how the rest of the country might fare. If Biden can break 60% in those blue counties and Trump can't hit consistent 70% in the rural counties, it will not be a good night for Republicans.
|
On November 04 2020 07:36 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 07:32 Wegandi wrote:On November 04 2020 07:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 04 2020 07:21 Wegandi wrote:On November 04 2020 07:10 Shinokuki wrote:On November 04 2020 06:54 Wegandi wrote:On November 04 2020 06:46 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 04 2020 06:42 Wegandi wrote:
Republican ED turnout is way up in PA, AZ, and FL. Dem turn-out in many counties lower than NPA / Other. I expect Trump to win all three, AZ by 2%, PA by 1% and FL by 3%. Compared to 2016 Republicans also had better EV margins. Hard to tell which way the NPA / Independent crowd will swing in these states, but the GOP has banked so many advantages all ready it is going to take a big Biden break with them for him to win. Some of you predicting Texas, FL, GA, etc. going to Biden I have to wonder besides the skewed polling what actual #'s you're going by? Look at the actual SOE / County #'s / State EV/ED #'s compared to 2016, not polling that have MOE of +/- 4.5% lol.
Anyway, I voted Jorgenson today and GOP down-ballot (Dems would have a shot at my vote if they weren't all progressives with socialist inclinations).
PS: I live in Florida. I'm not sure why you think that establishment Democrats, who are neoliberal / typical right-leaning moderate politicians from the perspective of most of the rest of the world, have socialist inclinations, but I definitely appreciate that you voted for JJ instead of DT. Do you have a specific site or two that you prefer to look at, when assessing EV/ED #s and all that jazz? For Florida: joeisdone.github.io (don't mind the partisan name, it is purely #'s from SOE/Counties) Dude, all the Dems on my ballot were for nationalized healthcare, the Green New Deal, 15$ min wage, increased regulatory state, huge on climate change taxation/business restrictions, etc. They're not Larry McDonald lmao. I get why you might be against healthcare, wage, and etc but climate change? Who gives a shit what you have or what others will have if we are going to suffer tremendously because of climate change in 2040-2050 My views on the climate change doomists are well known, plus even if what they say is true it's still not as bad as all the policy programs relating to "climate change". Poverty will do more harm to folks than even the worse-case scientific prognostications. I'd rather not slide into Argentina, Venezuela, Sub-Saharan Africa, etc. Please refer to them as "experts" or "scientists", not "doomers" or "alarmists". And if you want to avoid poverty so badly, why aren't you a proponent for increased minimum wage or addressing climate change? Seems inconsistent to me, to say poverty is bad while perpetuating social inequity and not caring about the existential threat of climate change. Minimum wage increases poverty not decreases. For someone so-called believes in everything science you guys sure do have a knock for being illiterate with economic science. How about being pro-rent control as well? Back on topic - Biden is going to have pull significantly with the NPA's to have a shot. R's are running way ahead of their 2016 #'s. Economic science is a spook. Less idiotic points aside, what sort of time do you fine folks expect we’ll get a vaguely concrete picture of things? I reckon I’m good for 4-5 hours tops of browsing and occasionally posting nothing of particular value.
Economic science is a spoook. LOL your comment is pretty idiotic.
|
On November 04 2020 07:32 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 07:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 04 2020 07:21 Wegandi wrote:On November 04 2020 07:10 Shinokuki wrote:On November 04 2020 06:54 Wegandi wrote:On November 04 2020 06:46 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 04 2020 06:42 Wegandi wrote:
Republican ED turnout is way up in PA, AZ, and FL. Dem turn-out in many counties lower than NPA / Other. I expect Trump to win all three, AZ by 2%, PA by 1% and FL by 3%. Compared to 2016 Republicans also had better EV margins. Hard to tell which way the NPA / Independent crowd will swing in these states, but the GOP has banked so many advantages all ready it is going to take a big Biden break with them for him to win. Some of you predicting Texas, FL, GA, etc. going to Biden I have to wonder besides the skewed polling what actual #'s you're going by? Look at the actual SOE / County #'s / State EV/ED #'s compared to 2016, not polling that have MOE of +/- 4.5% lol.
Anyway, I voted Jorgenson today and GOP down-ballot (Dems would have a shot at my vote if they weren't all progressives with socialist inclinations).
PS: I live in Florida. I'm not sure why you think that establishment Democrats, who are neoliberal / typical right-leaning moderate politicians from the perspective of most of the rest of the world, have socialist inclinations, but I definitely appreciate that you voted for JJ instead of DT. Do you have a specific site or two that you prefer to look at, when assessing EV/ED #s and all that jazz? For Florida: joeisdone.github.io (don't mind the partisan name, it is purely #'s from SOE/Counties) Dude, all the Dems on my ballot were for nationalized healthcare, the Green New Deal, 15$ min wage, increased regulatory state, huge on climate change taxation/business restrictions, etc. They're not Larry McDonald lmao. I get why you might be against healthcare, wage, and etc but climate change? Who gives a shit what you have or what others will have if we are going to suffer tremendously because of climate change in 2040-2050 My views on the climate change doomists are well known, plus even if what they say is true it's still not as bad as all the policy programs relating to "climate change". Poverty will do more harm to folks than even the worse-case scientific prognostications. I'd rather not slide into Argentina, Venezuela, Sub-Saharan Africa, etc. Please refer to them as "experts" or "scientists", not "doomers" or "alarmists". And if you want to avoid poverty so badly, why aren't you a proponent for increased minimum wage or addressing climate change? Seems inconsistent to me, to say poverty is bad while perpetuating social inequity and not caring about the existential threat of climate change. Minimum wage increases poverty not decreases. For someone so-called believes in everything science you guys sure do have a knock for being illiterate with economic science. How about being pro-rent control as well? Back on topic - Biden is going to have pull significantly with the NPA's to have a shot. R's are running way ahead of their 2016 #'s.
For someone who claims to be knowledgeable on economic science, you seem to not be aware of the nuance this topic has, and that a claim such as "Minimum wage increases poverty not decreases" with any qualification is outright incorrect.
|
On November 04 2020 07:38 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 07:36 WombaT wrote:On November 04 2020 07:32 Wegandi wrote:On November 04 2020 07:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 04 2020 07:21 Wegandi wrote:On November 04 2020 07:10 Shinokuki wrote:On November 04 2020 06:54 Wegandi wrote:On November 04 2020 06:46 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 04 2020 06:42 Wegandi wrote:
Republican ED turnout is way up in PA, AZ, and FL. Dem turn-out in many counties lower than NPA / Other. I expect Trump to win all three, AZ by 2%, PA by 1% and FL by 3%. Compared to 2016 Republicans also had better EV margins. Hard to tell which way the NPA / Independent crowd will swing in these states, but the GOP has banked so many advantages all ready it is going to take a big Biden break with them for him to win. Some of you predicting Texas, FL, GA, etc. going to Biden I have to wonder besides the skewed polling what actual #'s you're going by? Look at the actual SOE / County #'s / State EV/ED #'s compared to 2016, not polling that have MOE of +/- 4.5% lol.
Anyway, I voted Jorgenson today and GOP down-ballot (Dems would have a shot at my vote if they weren't all progressives with socialist inclinations).
PS: I live in Florida. I'm not sure why you think that establishment Democrats, who are neoliberal / typical right-leaning moderate politicians from the perspective of most of the rest of the world, have socialist inclinations, but I definitely appreciate that you voted for JJ instead of DT. Do you have a specific site or two that you prefer to look at, when assessing EV/ED #s and all that jazz? For Florida: joeisdone.github.io (don't mind the partisan name, it is purely #'s from SOE/Counties) Dude, all the Dems on my ballot were for nationalized healthcare, the Green New Deal, 15$ min wage, increased regulatory state, huge on climate change taxation/business restrictions, etc. They're not Larry McDonald lmao. I get why you might be against healthcare, wage, and etc but climate change? Who gives a shit what you have or what others will have if we are going to suffer tremendously because of climate change in 2040-2050 My views on the climate change doomists are well known, plus even if what they say is true it's still not as bad as all the policy programs relating to "climate change". Poverty will do more harm to folks than even the worse-case scientific prognostications. I'd rather not slide into Argentina, Venezuela, Sub-Saharan Africa, etc. Please refer to them as "experts" or "scientists", not "doomers" or "alarmists". And if you want to avoid poverty so badly, why aren't you a proponent for increased minimum wage or addressing climate change? Seems inconsistent to me, to say poverty is bad while perpetuating social inequity and not caring about the existential threat of climate change. Minimum wage increases poverty not decreases. For someone so-called believes in everything science you guys sure do have a knock for being illiterate with economic science. How about being pro-rent control as well? Back on topic - Biden is going to have pull significantly with the NPA's to have a shot. R's are running way ahead of their 2016 #'s. Economic science is a spook. Less idiotic points aside, what sort of time do you fine folks expect we’ll get a vaguely concrete picture of things? I reckon I’m good for 4-5 hours tops of browsing and occasionally posting nothing of particular value. Maybe 3-4 hours from now, since so many swing states are in the Eastern/Central time zones.
1. Started the Middle Eastern Peace Deal with many nations signing on board
2. Axed the TPP, which would make many people in the swing states unemployed
3. Pulled out of the UNFAIR Paris climate accords which enabled CHINA to continue polluting till 2030
4. NOMInATED FOR THE NOBEL PEACE PRIZE THRICE
|
|
|
He doesn't care, the left has no nuance. All socialism.
|
United States10397 Posts
Man you little shits still talking about political positions and what not. Who cares, we have an election to watch!
|
Northern Ireland26771 Posts
On November 04 2020 07:43 d1shboy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2020 07:36 WombaT wrote:On November 04 2020 07:32 Wegandi wrote:On November 04 2020 07:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 04 2020 07:21 Wegandi wrote:On November 04 2020 07:10 Shinokuki wrote:On November 04 2020 06:54 Wegandi wrote:On November 04 2020 06:46 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 04 2020 06:42 Wegandi wrote:
Republican ED turnout is way up in PA, AZ, and FL. Dem turn-out in many counties lower than NPA / Other. I expect Trump to win all three, AZ by 2%, PA by 1% and FL by 3%. Compared to 2016 Republicans also had better EV margins. Hard to tell which way the NPA / Independent crowd will swing in these states, but the GOP has banked so many advantages all ready it is going to take a big Biden break with them for him to win. Some of you predicting Texas, FL, GA, etc. going to Biden I have to wonder besides the skewed polling what actual #'s you're going by? Look at the actual SOE / County #'s / State EV/ED #'s compared to 2016, not polling that have MOE of +/- 4.5% lol.
Anyway, I voted Jorgenson today and GOP down-ballot (Dems would have a shot at my vote if they weren't all progressives with socialist inclinations).
PS: I live in Florida. I'm not sure why you think that establishment Democrats, who are neoliberal / typical right-leaning moderate politicians from the perspective of most of the rest of the world, have socialist inclinations, but I definitely appreciate that you voted for JJ instead of DT. Do you have a specific site or two that you prefer to look at, when assessing EV/ED #s and all that jazz? For Florida: joeisdone.github.io (don't mind the partisan name, it is purely #'s from SOE/Counties) Dude, all the Dems on my ballot were for nationalized healthcare, the Green New Deal, 15$ min wage, increased regulatory state, huge on climate change taxation/business restrictions, etc. They're not Larry McDonald lmao. I get why you might be against healthcare, wage, and etc but climate change? Who gives a shit what you have or what others will have if we are going to suffer tremendously because of climate change in 2040-2050 My views on the climate change doomists are well known, plus even if what they say is true it's still not as bad as all the policy programs relating to "climate change". Poverty will do more harm to folks than even the worse-case scientific prognostications. I'd rather not slide into Argentina, Venezuela, Sub-Saharan Africa, etc. Please refer to them as "experts" or "scientists", not "doomers" or "alarmists". And if you want to avoid poverty so badly, why aren't you a proponent for increased minimum wage or addressing climate change? Seems inconsistent to me, to say poverty is bad while perpetuating social inequity and not caring about the existential threat of climate change. Minimum wage increases poverty not decreases. For someone so-called believes in everything science you guys sure do have a knock for being illiterate with economic science. How about being pro-rent control as well? Back on topic - Biden is going to have pull significantly with the NPA's to have a shot. R's are running way ahead of their 2016 #'s. Economic science is a spook. Less idiotic points aside, what sort of time do you fine folks expect we’ll get a vaguely concrete picture of things? I reckon I’m good for 4-5 hours tops of browsing and occasionally posting nothing of particular value. Economic science is a spoook. LOL your comment is pretty idiotic.
Go read Stirner.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
