2024 ELECTION THREAD
The next presidential race will be here soon! Please see current Bovada odds. Thoughts?
I think polling is hard for mostly other reasons (hard to get a representative sample - people lie), but I don't think this is right. When you do a medical study of say 5000 people, that's a pretty good sample and if you have chosen your subjects and controls well, you can make a very good projection about what happens with a much larger population.
You might have misunderstood. I wasn’t talking about polls, I was talking about early voting numbers. Of course, polls have obvious value, and were the race not in the moe you can predict most elections with enough polling data
You might have misunderstood. I wasn’t talking about polls, I was talking about early voting numbers. Of course, polls have obvious value, and were the race not in the moe you can predict most elections with enough polling data
I was just responding to mchu's idea that sample size has to be larger than the population you're trying to do a prediction for.
You argued we need to account for context when evaluating Trump's statements. I agree. The context is Trump has recently threatened the use of the military against his rivals (ie, the "enemy within"), so when he speaks about guns pointed at his rivals we need to look past beyond semantics so that we can parse what he actually means and thinks.
I understand that part of the context and I agree it’s more threatening given that, but you and members of the media are choosing to ignore the other part of the context, that it’s a common refrain when criticizing war hawks. I don’t think that that’s irrelevant and it tempers the comment somewhat. Maybe that was some shrewd maneuver on his part for cover but I doubt it. He’s not that careful in his speech. The headline below is a ridiculous fabrication that doesn’t serve anything but partisanship and clicks.
Trump's exact quote:
She's a radical warhawk. Let's put her with a rifle standing there with nine barrels shooting at her, ok? Let's see how she feels about it, you know, when the guns are trained on her face. You know, they're all warhawks when they're sitting in Washington.
How the news media is reporting it:
Ok, so you're FOS and you don't have any inside info and are just making up stories as usual then. Got it.
Is SRM asking this? I posted about the fraudsters caught in the act in PA before Trump did, which isn't on any "news media" sites. I posted his statement as confirmation. Ask SRM if camela wins and there's, again, wide spread allegations of election fraud, is he or she still ok with that?
it's silly to try and parse trump quotes for meanings. because he says so much dumb stuff that is completely nonsense and unintelligible so he gets a pass on almost everything. and then as soon as the media decides to stop endlessly running cover for him by sane-washing his idiotic thoughts you get people saying "the media is the enemy"..
it's just a losing battle. just post the full quote and be like "look at this moron.."
i loved harris' teams strategy of saying "just listen to him". which is why i sometimes post his direct quotes in the trump thread. they are impossible for intelligent people to defend.
Is SRM asking this? I posted about the fraudsters caught in the act in PA before Trump did, which isn't on any "news media" sites. I posted his statement as confirmation. Ask SRM if camela wins and there's, again, wide spread allegations of election fraud, is he or she still ok with that?
I'm not your ****ing messenger. Ask him yourself.
it's silly to try and parse trump quotes. because he says so much dumb stuff that is completely nonsense and unintelligible so he gets a pass on almost everything. and then as soon as the media decides to stop endlessly running cover for him by sane-washing his idiotic thoughts you get people saying "the media is the enemy"..
it's just a losing battle.
This is almost as out of touch as believing Biden didn't call Trump supporters garbage.
there is no reason to talk about spending because the national debt is a made up number that doesn't matter. the us government is the largest holder of us debt. it's a silly talking point used occasionally by both sides because it the word "debt" sounds scary.
if the national debt ever becomes a real issue(which is extremely unlikely) we will have far bigger problems than the national debt becoming a real issue. like world wars between nuclear powers type worries.
Debt being high is already an issue even if you think reaching 100% of debt to gdp (held by the public, it's correct to disregard the debt the government "owes to itself"), and the USA are currently at 93-94, because you can't do more anyway without consequences.
Even if you think going from 0 to 100 of debt has no further, ulterior consequences (and i can kinda agree it doesn't have ENORMOUS consequences to stay at 100%), it's still a "freeroll" than once consumed you can't use anymore.
So after you use that, your kids (or you when older) can't use that anymore.
Which means spending less than you were accostumed to as a society, if you used that for current expenses and not to build assets that generate value across generations.
At some point (and the USA is close) you reach a situation where you are spending more than revenue with an ever-growing component of interests in a way that the debt to gdp trend is unsustainable and self-fulfilling unless you severely reduce expenses or severely increase revenue.
Or you inflate "the debt away" which is a tax anyway.
Btw if it was all just an invented problem, why aren't republicans or democrats simply removing all taxes and giving much more money to their constituents? you think they would give up on those chances to gain consensus because of what exactly?
I think polling is hard for mostly other reasons (hard to get a representative sample - people lie), but I don't think this is right. When you do a medical study of say 5000 people, that's a pretty good sample and if you have chosen your subjects and controls well, you can make a very good projection about what happens with a much larger population.
Of course he isn't correct. If you have a truly representative sample, margins of error drop quickly, even if you are aiming for very high confidence intervals. In most cases, you don't even need 5000 observations.
That both her appearance and her politics are identical to her father. A woman can look like her dad and not be an "ugly, middle aged hag" which was something you just inserted out of god knows where
It was funny because there is nothing beneath Dick Cheney, including trying to pass himself off as his own daughter
Of course he isn't correct. If you have a truly representative sample, margins of error drop quickly, even if you are aiming for very high confidence intervals. In most cases, you don't even need 5000 observations.
If the question (polling question, or efficiency of medication question) is a clear cut yes/no, the needed sample is often so small people tend not to accept how small it can be to give enough information.
If you have to quantify effects, age stratify your answer and so on the needed sample explodes very quickly.
In a way it's like you can already call someone a fish or at the very least a very unprepared "reg" in 50 hands of data preflop sometimes (say they overfold the btn hu), while you need orders of magnitude more hands before you can claim with any accuracy what his checkraise turn range is and how much and in which direction it deviates from GTO
A sample size of 300 is sufficient for most purposes. Margin of error of about 5.6% assuming completely random sampling.
Btw if it was all just an invented problem, why aren't republicans or democrats simply removing all taxes and giving much more money to their constituents? you think they would give up on those chances to gain consensus because of what exactly?
thats what republicans are already doing?.... republicans(particularly trump) add to the national debt more than democratic administrations they just complain about it more.
my point is as long as the US dollar is the reserve currency the amount of national debt we have simply doesn't matter to daily life and it's a fearmongering political talking point. and the US is highly unlikely to let the USD slip without war because that would just be ceding world power without a fight so we'd have bigger things to worry about at that point anyway.
thats what republicans are already doing?.... republicans(particularly trump) add to the national debt more than democratic administrations they just complain about it more.
my point is as long as the US dollar is the reserve currency the amount of national debt we have simply doesn't matter to daily life and it's a fearmongering political talking point. and the US is highly unlikely to let the USD slip without war because that would just be ceding world power without a fight so we'd have bigger
Out of touch. Debt matters a lot to daily life, especially at higher interest rates. It inevitably means higher taxes and less government spending on public services, because a higher proportion of tax goes to paying interest. Adding war to prop up the USD in a never ending feedback loop means even more debt.
I feel a bit bad for hoping this is going to turn into some sort of circus shitshow
But hey I don't live in lolUSA so let's go 
thats what republicans are already doing?.... republicans(particularly trump) add to the national debt more than democratic administrations they just complain about it more.
my point is as long as the US dollar is the reserve currency the amount of national debt we have simply doesn't matter to daily life and it's a fearmongering political talking point. and the US is highly unlikely to let the USD slip without war because that would just be ceding world power without a fight so we'd have bigger
It does matter to daily life, otherwise (for example) democrats would have been able to forfeit all student debt in reconciliation easily
