[POLL] United States Presidential Elections 2016

[ClydeYellow]

Your point is...what?

My point is that US pollsters seem like a bunch of amateurs who know nothing about proper methodology in social research (and arguably building a model to predict what preferences people will express in an election is social research).

I mean, surely people who in many cases are paid stupendously for their work would know better than to use a RNG to phone a small US-wide sample, ask them "who are you going to vote for President", apply some convoluted data weighting formula that's based on pure demographics and probably hasn't been updated since 2012 and call it a day, right? Oh, wait - that's pretty much Pew's survey methodology. Pew's. I wonder what smaller polling institutes and newspapers which only get into this polling business come election season are doing!

I find the fact that presenting a third party as the focus of the question to avoid the dreaded social desirability bias (which is undoubtedly a factor when you have an election in which the supporters of a candidate have been depicted as a "basket of deplorables" by a large portion of the media) is being seen as a novel approach and wasn't standard procedure already quite baffling.

If that's how little US pollsters care about non-statistical biases in their surveys, I guess I will be much more careful about using their datasets in the future.

So, now you are saying that "facts" don't matter (the actual low inflation rate)?

While I agree with the rest of your post, a low inflation rate means little - it may be the result of a parsimonious or plain clever fiscal policy which reduces the budget deficit (which is good), but it may also be the result of a recession causing a decrease in the aggregate demand (which is bad). In the second case, the inflation rate can even become negative - triggering a vicious cycle of deflation (which is disastrous and should be avoided at all costs, especially in our current debt-based economy).

The 10% drop of the inflation rate on the USD in the 1980-1983 period was largely a result of Volcker's monetary policies and, in a part which I believe an accurate economical analysis would reveal to be smaller, Reagan's budget cuts and market deregulation. Obama further reduced inflation, sure, and undoubtedly his 2009 stimulus played no small part in increasing the US revenue base by favoring economic growth, but I think it's far too early to judge if this was the only factor at play, and if it will be a positive or a negative thing on the long term.

In the end numbers are numbers; a little bit of interpretation is needed before labeling them as "good" or "bad".

(And all of this conundrum, btw, is why I am a staunch supporter of techno-communism, which would cut the gordian know by abolishing money and quickly progressing towards surpassing the scarcity of most resources )

 

[homeforsummer]

Everyone who voted for Trump is racist either officially or internally. None of them ever considered his policies on the economy, or the environment, or education, or foreign policy, or defense. It's all about making America white again.

Just as with Brexit, I don't believe this to be the case. It smacks too much of finger-pointing rather than getting to the source of an issue. I'm sure the majority of people who voted for Trump did so for perfectly legitimate reasons, just like those who voted for Brexit.

However.

A vote for Trump will have required an individual to overlook or ignore that he had deliberately curried favour with those who are xenophobic, misogynistic, homophobic, anti-choice, anti-science, etc (not least his creationist, gays-can-be-cured VP-elect Pence). It would also have required an individual to be comfortable with electing a politician who was very appealing to such people.

I understand that people were stuck between a rock and a hard place with this election (if I've taken away anything from it, it's that I'm glad the process is over), but that's a lot of stuff that someone will have had to think "Nope, all that is perfectly fine" to consider voting for Trump.

 

[TRGTspecialist]

He said his key question was something along the lines of, "How do you think your neighbour is going to vote". He figured that by taking it to a third party, he would remove the inherent bias against personal embarassment that might come from such polarizing choices. He said that when he asked that question, a clear trend emerged towards slightly higher support for Trump and he factored that into his call for a Trump win.

That is quite interesting, although I wonder how reliable an indicator it is in the long run (I note that while some of his polls were closer than others, some like Nevada and Colorado were worse - swings and roundabouts I guess). There are other methods to try and address the "shy ____" factor, some phone pollsters use automated voices rather than real people for example. (EDIT: as you'll already know because that's what the Breitbart link said.........thought I'd read that somewhere else, oops)

Oddly ironic that the much decried Breitbart News was one of the few news sources that gave any credence to the man that accurately predicted the election results

If their reasoning for crediting him was anything more substantial than "find the best Trump numbers to report" then maybe, but I doubt it. Not that that's a criticism exclusive to Breitbart - too many media outlets refused to acknoweledge the uncertainty in the polls (which was hardly unnoticable) because they just couldn't see beyond an easy Clinton victory.

 

[PeterJB]

Just as with Brexit, I don't believe this to be the case. It smacks too much of finger-pointing rather than getting to the source of an issue. I'm sure the majority of people who voted for Trump did so for perfectly legitimate reasons, just like those who voted for Brexit.

However.

A vote for Trump will have required an individual to overlook or ignore that he had deliberately curried favour with those who are xenophobic, misogynistic, homophobic, anti-choice, anti-science, etc (not least his creationist, gays-can-be-cured VP-elect Pence). It would also have required an individual to be comfortable with electing a politician who was very appealing to such people.

I understand that people were stuck between a rock and a hard place with this election (if I've taken away anything from it, it's that I'm glad the process is over), but that's a lot of stuff that someone will have had to think "Nope, all that is perfectly fine" to consider voting for Trump.

I'm sure someone out there is planning an assassination attempt. Them doing it will demonstrate that they haven't thought it through because that will give Pence the presidency.

 

[BobK]

I don't know if this has been posted before or not, but it's a fantastic article on why Trump (most likely) won:

https://www.quora.com/How-did-Donald-Trump-win-the-2016-US-Presidential-Election/answer/Gordon-Zeng#

Excellent article, and here's another one.

 

[Famine]

I'm sure someone out there is planning an assassination attempt. Them doing it will demonstrate that they haven't thought it through because that will give Pence the presidency.

Looks like it was Monisha Rajesh, formerly a freelance contributor to the Guardian and Telegraph. I say 'formerly', as it seems she's not contributing anything else after Tweeting "It's about time for a presidential assassination.":

​

Her Twitter account is now deleted and the person she Tweeted to - a fellow Telegraph contributor - has changed his Twitter ID to "Trolls_be_GONE" (whereupon someone else took the Twitter ID and Tweeted "Hello twitter. Jackass here") and set his account to Protected.

Though to be honest I'm not sure what killing Obama would achieve at this point.

 

[Keef]

Though to be honest I'm not sure what killing Obama would achieve at this point.

If the CIA is anything to go by, assassinations only cause more problems than you bargained for.

 

[Dotini]

We need to be very clear. Thanks to GW Bush and Obama, Trump will inherit vastly bloated authority for the use of power, both openly and secretly. This includes assassination of US citizens. Trump will bring back waterboarding and much, much more severe forms of interrogation.

Moaning and wailing Democrats and neoliberals of course have only themselves to blame. Reap what you sow.

https://theintercept.com/2016/11/11/trump-cia-torture/

Jose Rodriguez, the former director of the National Clandestine Service, at the National Press Club on Nov. 18, 2015, in Washington, D.C.




Photo: Paul Morigi/Getty Images

 

[huskeR32]

I've got a modest proposal on cross-border trade:

Huske gets to move up to the Socialist Republic of Alberta while ...

JohnnyP crosses the river to the the Republican stronghold of Michigan.

Everyone's happy!

As long as I get to live close to Banff, I'm in.

 

[Dotini]

As long as I get to live close to Banff, I'm in.

In my youth, I skied and indulged in frozen waterfall climbing nearby to Banff.

 

[TenEightyOne]

I'm sure someone out there is planning an assassination attempt. Them doing it will demonstrate that they haven't thought it through because that will give Pence the presidency.

I remember reading that the Secret Service et al deal with about 500 threats per year (with only a handful rated 'credible'). There are always plots to assassinate most senior figures, I reckon.

 

[mustafur]

That is quite interesting, although I wonder how reliable an indicator it is in the long run (I note that while some of his polls were closer than others, some like Nevada and Colorado were worse - swings and roundabouts I guess). There are other methods to try and address the "shy ____" factor, some phone pollsters use automated voices rather than real people for example. (EDIT: as you'll already know because that's what the Breitbart link said.........thought I'd read that somewhere else, oops)



If their reasoning for crediting him was anything more substantial than "find the best Trump numbers to report" then maybe, but I doubt it. Not that that's a criticism exclusive to Breitbart - too many media outlets refused to acknoweledge the uncertainty in the polls (which was hardly unnoticable) because they just couldn't see beyond an easy Clinton victory.

Alot where looking at National polls, and not swing state polls which actually matter in the electoral college, even though trump still outperformed those by a bit.

 

[WhoosierGirl]

I'm sick and tired of being told I'm racist and sexist by virtue of the fact that I'm white and male.

Donald's money carried him to the presidency, maybe Ivanka's tits could carry her?

I could tell you your sexist but, I don't need to......I'll just let you do it for me.

 

[Dotini]

I could tell you your sexist but, I don't need to......I'll just let you do it for me.

Is crude and lewd the same thing as sexist?

 

[PeterJB]

Is crude and lewd the same thing as sexist?

I could tell you your sexist but, I don't need to......I'll just let you do it for me.

You apparently can't see the sarcasm either.

 

[WhoosierGirl]

Is crude and lewd the same thing as sexist?

Judging her ability to be a candidate on her "tits".... Ummmm yeah I would call that sexist.

You apparently can't see the sarcasm either.

No I really can't see it.



I read it again....still can't see the sarcasm.

 

[Dotini]

see the sarcasm

Two or three members were talking about Ivanka, okay joking about her good looks helping her succeed to high office. Clearly the anatomical reference was offensive to some on grounds of crudity, and to others on somewhat different grounds. Probably we should refrain from unnecessary offense in this very nice international forum. The humor was lost.

 

[RC45]

Says you, they're a government organization and engineering/science agency first and foremost, in a global society where other regions hold smart minds that are more into actually working in such a field. The recruitment is tantamount to continuing to thrive.

Recruiting scientists at the micro level is not the same as macro regional outreach.

NAsA has no place acting in such a political manner outreaching to anybody outside of the original mandate.

As a publicy tax funded agency they especially have no place doing anyone political bidding. Period.

And from a geopolitical stand point, do not for a second think that globalism to the other players means 'continued peaceful cooperation' - because it does not.

To many other nations, 'globalism' and 'global cooperation' is just a means to the end of neutering the West (and specifically the USA) - it is naive to think that our open armed embrace will not eventually be met with a knife to our back.

Lack of progress? Yet again you have no idea what the hell you're raving about.

A few bright lights in an other wise dull sheet of regressive shadow that is the middle east is a lack of progress.
A few great scientific minds floating about in a sea of bigoted racist women hating societies is not progress.
And if you don't know that outside of Israel pretty every state in the middle and near east is a bigoted racist women hating society, then my friend YOU have no idea what you are talking about.

No it doesn't they haven't stagnated at all. You seem to not really understand the context of the video other than some right wing rhetoric that this is clearly a democrat president pandering to a group that isn't liked by said right wing rhetoric.

As stated above, if all they have to show is few scientific minds (that got their education in the west) yet women, gays, blacks and non-muslims have to live under an oppressive risk of jail or worse they have stagnated.

I defy any gay black man (scientist or not) to try go set up shop in any country in the middle east.

Now THAT would be a measure of progress.

I deny what exactly, I rejected the notion that you fully think you know what the hell you're talking about. I reject it on the grounds that some of us actually are in the field and you don't seem to be unless you'd like to say otherwise. It get's old seeing this same bit where people see something have no idea what the agency does or the people who work in it and just run with this supposed liberal agenda running rampant.

I know exactly what I am talking about - and for what the agency does, my tax dollars say I get to have a say in that.
So exactly what about 'your field' needs to be reliant on outreach to the middle east conducted by NASA?

If they're civilization peeked, this is news to me, considering those from that region are more enthused to come to the U.S. after obtaining a degree in their nation or ours and being leading scientist and engineers.

Bingo - every wondered why they want to leave and come here vs stay there? Chances are they find the regressive crushing oppression that is the middle east a little much.

Again, know any gay black scientists that would dare set up shop in any country in the middle east?

The only other group of people on par are those of Asian back ground. Hate to break it to you, but the U.S. is a joke when it comes to sparking interests in it's own population to want to do the hard work it takes to be a scientist or engineer, nor do many states have the curriculum that would prepare students. The only group that gets left behind is us, but since we actually do everything we can to get international students over here and work for us in these fields it prevents us from falling backwards.

And this above statement, which is more a testament to the FAILURE of federally driven education policy than anything else, implies how exactly that the middle east (or even asia) has not stagnated?

Again - people are coming HERE - that would indicate that WE are the better destination.

I know, that is why I immigrated to the USA.

 

[Parker]

I could tell you your sexist but, I don't need to......I'll just let you do it for me.

So making what was clearly a joke makes someone sexist? Do you honestly think that was a genuine comment from @PeterJB?

 

[Carbonox]

So making what was clearly a joke makes someone sexist? Do you honestly think that was a genuine comment from @PeterJB?

Don't be silly, obviously even sarcastic remarks about women are offensive microaggressions and assertions of male dominance!

Offtopic: The spellchecker on my laptop marked the word "microaggressions" with a red line. I'm so glad it's not being recognized by that program.

 

[RC45]

My point is that US pollsters seem like a bunch of amateurs who know nothing about proper methodology in social research (and arguably building a model to predict what preferences people will express in an election is social research).

I mean, surely people who in many cases are paid stupendously for their work would know better than to use a RNG to phone a small US-wide sample, ask them "who are you going to vote for President", apply some convoluted data weighting formula that's based on pure demographics and probably hasn't been updated since 2012 and call it a day, right? Oh, wait - that's pretty much Pew's survey methodology. Pew's. I wonder what smaller polling institutes and newspapers which only get into this polling business come election season are doing!)

I think many of the polls that the Main Stream Media used where purposefully incorrectly biased towards Clinton in an unashamed attempt to influence voters at large.

After all if the MSM arrogantly believes they can influence the masses, they will also assume that people are so inclined to want to 'support the winner' that if enough polls show who the winner should be, they can pick the winner in advance.

 

[TenEightyOne]

The spellchecker on my laptop marked the word "microaggressions" with a red line...

That's because you spelt it wrong, it's not one word but two with-a-hyphen

 

[WhoosierGirl]

So making what was clearly a joke makes someone sexist? Do you honestly think that was a genuine comment from @PeterJB?

Did he not make a post wanting to not be called a sexist and racist just because he was a white male? I'm giving him a pretty clear example of what might give someone that idea.

 

[Dotini]

spelt

Spelt was an important staple in parts of Europe from the Bronze Age to medieval times; it now survives as a relict crop in Central Europe and northern Spain and has found a new market as a health food. Spelt is sometimes considered a subspecies of the closely related species common wheat (Triticum aestivum), in which case its botanical name is considered to be Triticum aestivum subsp. spelta. It is a hexaploid wheat, which means it has six sets of chromosomes.

 

[Parker]

Did he not make a post wanting to not be called a sexist and racist just because he was a white male? I'm giving him a pretty clear example of what might give someone that idea.

Making an obvious joke does not make someone sexist, so your example doesn't make sense. If you had quoted a post of his that was actually sexist or racist then you would've had a point.

 

[Dotini]

Making an obvious joke does not make someone sexist

True. But a proper gentleman or a female would perhaps have referred to her cheekbones rather than her mammaries.

 

[Parker]

True. But a proper gentleman or a female would perhaps have referred to her cheekbones rather than her mammaries.

My wife comments on busty women using their assets to their advantage in order to climb the corporate ladder, again in jest, so I suppose she is a sexist as well. Or maybe only women are allowed to make jokes about their breasts.

 

[McLaren]

Did he not make a post wanting to not be called a sexist and racist just because he was a white male? I'm giving him a pretty clear example of what might give someone that idea.

If making a joke was what made someone a legitimate "-ist", the art of comedy would be dead & gone. Jokes are the last way you can make any kind of offensive comment and get away with it because everyone knows you're not serious.

 

[WhoosierGirl]

If making a joke was what made someone a legitimate "-ist", the art of comedy would be dead & gone. Jokes are the last way you can make any kind of offensive comment and get away with it because everyone knows you're not serious.

Again, he posted wanting to not be called a racist and sexist just because he is male and white. He could be purple and Intersex and I would say that his prior post about Ivanka would be considered sexist and a good indication of why he is being called a sexist. Is he really serious, no idea I don't know him.

 

[Northstar]

Again, he posted wanting to not be called a racist and sexist just because he is male and white. He could be purple and Intersex and I would say that his prior post about Ivanka would be considered sexist and a good indication of why he is being called a sexist. Is he really serious, no idea I don't know him.

Would you consider Bob Saget to be sexist?