2024 ELECTION THREAD
The next presidential race will be here soon! Please see current Bovada odds. Thoughts?
That isn't what a society is.
I went to one polling pace today....computers were taking forever (hmmmm) so I went to another. For the 3rd straight election I walked in as a complete undecided voter. Some super lesbian is behind me in line wearing a shirt that could not have been more pro-Trump. I say "I wonder who you're voting for" and she says "Kamala all the way" - but she pronounced it "Camilla."
When it's her turn they tell her she has to turn her shirt inside out; apparently can't wear stuff like that within 100 feet of the entrance.
Oh was she mad. I'm assuming she complied.
I skipped the presidential vote to start since I was still undecided. Tackled that baby at the end. Just too many good options.
Projections are INHERENTLY inaccurate by nature... looking at them for insight for future probability are the lulz.
There is no society, remember? i was just correcting your quote, which i made part of my core identity, one of the best value expression in modern history by anyone.
/and who is society? There is no such thing! There are individual men and women and there are families and no government can do anything except through people and people look to themselves first./
3/4 of women NEVER need an abortion according to PRO ABORTION sources.
That's 1/8 of the population
/
Fact Check Team: Cities that called to 'defund police' grappling with crime surge boost police funding amid staffing shortfalls
How do you go from 3/4 to 1/8?
I'm bad at maths so maybe I'm missing something here.
3/4 of women never need an abortion. 1/4 need that throughout life in the USA (using those , imho a tad "generous" , pro abortion estimates).
Half of the population is women.
So 1/4 of 1/2 need abortions : 7/8 of the population never need it for their entire life.
Now compare that dunno with the draft, which affects half of the population in ways that are infinitely worse than not being able to get an abortion you would have wanted
Attempts to sue people from moving out of state to have an abortion (or to smoke cannabis, or to get employment in right-to-work states and so on) are fully unconstitutional and SCOTUS will piss over the head of republican states that will try to implement anything of the sort.
Especially this SCOTUS.
So have no fear.
For minors there are different considerations, and that's true for all topics.
Yeah, people want to wait 7 years to let them out of jail by the SC
Lower level courts can intervene as well. But yes it can be bad. Life works like that. At least your system has a recourse agains unconstitutional state violence, which works most of the times.
You want me to sign a document declaring that states shouldn't try to prosecute people for what they do in other states? sign me in. I am not a citizen though as you know. But i agree.
So?
Btw jjj remember this thread by me?
https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/285/p...
You and others disagreed with me.
You understand this would apply to those insane republican legislators who go after people who try to abort in other states violating basic principles of the constitution? you understand that the normal recourse through lawful meaning requires people to pay a price anyway right?
So those legislators when found guilty of violating the constitution and oppressing their people should pay, personally.
3/4 of women never need an abortion. 1/4 need that throughout life in the USA (using those , imho a tad "generous" , pro abortion estimates).
Half of the population is women.
So 1/4 of 1/2 need abortions : 7/8 of the population never need it for their entire life.
Now compare that dunno with the draft, which affects half of the population in ways that are infinitely worse than not being able to get an abortion you would have wanted
What % of people will ever get drafted?
It's always disinformation.
The Pentagon has denied claims running rampant online around an updated Defense Department (DOD) document outlining how military intelligence can be shared with local and federal authorities, after numerous sources claimed the directive opened the door for the use of force against civilians ahead of the U.S. elections.
"The policies concerning the use of force by DOD addressed in [the directive] are not new, and do not authorize the DOD to use lethal force against U.S. citizens or people located inside the United States, contrary to rumors and rhetoric circulating on social media," Department of Defense spokesperson Sue Gough told Newsweek.
"While the paragraph that's been most frequently referenced on social media is new to this directive, it does not reflect any change to DOD's policy regarding the use of lethal force by DOD personnel."
...
The directive does not hand over new powers to the military. The directive is actually just a reminder for the Pentagon that if they are backing up law enforcement or police in a scenario where there could be a use of force, this must be greenlit by the Secretary of Defense, said Matthew Savill, the director of military sciences at the London-based Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) think tank.
"There are still a host of legal protections around domestic activity and this doesn't override anything; it's a statement of policy, not a change in the law," Savill told Newsweek.
Source:
I literally did that in this post and it showed Harris with a huge advantage. And 538's did too before the flood of biased polls hit.
lol Harris being up by a small number in many polls is not the same as having a huge advantage. NYTimes eliminated all the R biases pollsters and it had less than a 5% swing. If Harris is a big favorite the mainstream polls themselves are wrong.
Btw jjj remember this thread by me?
https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/285/p...
You and others disagreed with me.
You understand this would apply to those insane republican legislators who go after people who try to abort in other states violating basic principles of the constitution? you understand that the normal recourse through lawful meaning requires people to pay a price anyway right?
I am aware that you spread your shitty arguments across multiple threads, like Playbig. Referring another shitty idea does nothing to support this latest one. If only we contained them all in one thread for posterity.
lol Harris being up by a small number in many polls is not the same as having a huge advantage. NYTimes eliminated all the R biases pollsters and it had less than a 5% swing. If Harris is a big favorite the mainstream polls themselves are wrong.
Depends on your definiton of huge. A 99% certain 1 point advantage is huge.
The more polls that give her a lead, the more certain the lead is. That type of advantage is what had 538 giving Harris a 64% chance to win before these biased polls started flooding. I'd call that huge.
I think it's kinda hilarious watching our little charlie browns trying to kick that football over and over.
Depends on your definiton of huge. A 99% certain 1 point advantage is huge.
The more polls that give her a lead, the more certain the lead is. That type of advantage is what had 538 giving Harris a 64% chance to win before these biased polls started flooding. I'd call that huge.
a 99% certain 1 point advantage NATIONALLY is autoloss for the democratic candidate, do you realize that? you need to win by 2.5-3 to be at a coinflip.
She has a lead on the popular vote, a fairly certain one. Too small of a lead to make her the favourite for the math of the EC
It's not a lie to choose the most impressive employment to put on your resume. There was a summer that I both managed a Taco Bell AND worked part time as a telemarketer peddling Sports Illustrated and credit card protection.
Hot tip: Sports Illustrated subscribers will almost universally renew if a woman asks them to in a breathy, sexy voice.
I have never once listed that job on a resume. You seem to have this idea that a resume is supposed to be an exhaustive list of everything you've ever done.
i hate you for this post because now i have no choice but to read all future posts of yours in breathy, sexy voice
Gregg Popovich doesn't talk much to the press about Trump but when he does...
You really didn't work at mcdonalds crap is nothing compared to what other dem presidential candidates got attack wise. Obama wasn't born in america, the swift boat on Kerry's service come to mind. Some people love to throw obvious bullshit and just see what people parrot or trump as he's not hitler, he's a different dictator type but hard to find one the avg american would know who isn't that h guy.
Wonder if McCain wins if he didn't stop that lady and told her Obama was a decent man.
Still surprised Trump isn't a bigger favorite given plenty of polls saying Trump wins you can cherry pick out there and gamblers tend to be trumpers but maybe they lost all their money last time betting on him to win after the election was over. I think he wins by a state or two. Didn't put in the work I did four years ago though, got that one dead on when everybody was in an idiot in their own bubble.
538 needed to boot some polls out of their system awhile ago (the two obvious, quinnpiac for being absurdly too far dem and trafalgar which just made most of them up) but they won't.
That is impossible to get in election polling and every pollster will tell you that.
The more polls that give her a lead, the more certain the lead is.
That's not true. Random error goes to 0 as sample size or number of polls goes to infinity. But polls have systemic error as well which means as random error goes to 0 polls still converge, but they are converging to the wrong value. If polls are systemically understating Trump by 3 points, sample size will not save you.
That type of advantage is what had 538 giving Harris a 64% chance to win before these biased polls started flooding. I'd call that huge.
Well if you think less than 2:1 ok.... But she had 64% chance in mid Sept on 538. Your contention that her win probability in the model has gone solely because of biased polls is just wrong. She is currently losing the popular vote in NYTimes poll. The model is just doing it's job.
538 needed to boot some polls out of their system awhile ago (the two obvious, quinnpiac for being absurdly too far dem and trafalgar which just made most of them up) but they won't.
Back testing shows it's better to leave them in and adjust and I agree Trafalgar possibly isn't really even a poll.
