[ArtificialSoldier]

Quote

So why is there "I'm with Trump" crap all over your wall then?

That's the second time you've said something like that, and I honestly don't know what you're referring to.

Coughlin's law: there are lies, damn lies, and polls. If there's one thing the primaries taught us, it's that people running polls are no better at their jobs than most of Congress. There are a lot of interesting results to look at today (or tomorrow), including all of the marijuana propositions. I think I'll class up the joint and do a bottle of wine instead of beer.

[jon.kiparsky]

Funny, some of the deals listed in the Time one don't have anything to do with the election...

Quote

7-Eleven — Free cup of coffee when you download the store’s app
Bertucci’s – Free cannoli with purchase of an entree
Bob Evans – 30% off your total bill after 2 p.m.
BurgerFi – $5 conflicted burger (normally $8 or $9)

[depricated]

where's a BurgerFi? I want a conflicted burger

[jon.kiparsky]

ArtificialSoldier, on 08 November 2016 - 12:46 PM, said:

If there's one thing the primaries taught us, it's that people running polls are no better at their jobs than most of Congress.

While it's true that it's very easy to lie with polling - see, for example, by relying on exit polls in a state where there has been significant early voting - the last two elections have shown us that people who know what they're doing can get some pretty amazingly tight results. Obvious example is Nate Silver and 538, but plenty of people have learned from his example. See the Times' "Upshot" articles - they're really drilling into polling, how it works, what makes a poll reliable, and so forth.

Without even looking at Silver's math, based on this paragraph from this post, I'm willing to bet you a bottle of wine - buyer's choice - that Clinton's electoral vote count is north of 300.

Quote

Our forecast has Clinton favored in states and congressional districts totaling 323 electoral votes, including all the states President Obama won in 2012 except Ohio and Iowa, but adding North Carolina. However, because our forecasts are probabilistic, and because Clinton’s leads in North Carolina and Florida especially are tenuous, the average number of electoral votes we forecast for Clinton is 302, which would be equivalent to her winning either Florida or North Carolina but not both.

[ArtificialSoldier]

Quote

Without even looking at Silver's math, based on this paragraph from this post, I'm willing to bet you a bottle of wine - buyer's choice - that Clinton's electoral vote count is north of 300.

Hmmmm. So, if Trump wins, at least I get drunk on your dime. And there's also a chance that, if Clinton wins, I get drunk on your dime. OK, deal.

He cites "undecided voters" in his poll, but I get the feeling that there are large groups of people who either don't want to say who they plan to vote for, or will say one thing and vote another.

I realize that Silver is the wunderkind lately, but this isn't a normal situation.

[jon.kiparsky]

Awesome, it's a bet. This will be an even sweeter election night than I'd expected!

[depricated]

I want a wine bet! Now I feel left out...

[jon.kiparsky]

Maybe Art is willing to double his losses?

[xclite]

It is at least reassuring that for the most part this thread feels civil and kind of observational instead of emotional and rage-inducing.

[NeoTifa]

That's because we got it all out in the Twitter thread.

[jon.kiparsky]

Also, it's the middle of the week and nobody's got time to bang out a wall-o-text about every last thing that the other jerk said that was wrong. Save that shit for the weekend!

[NeoTifa]

jon.kiparsky, on 08 November 2016 - 03:56 PM, said:

Also, it's the middle of the week and nobody's got time to bang out a wall-o-text about every last thing that the other jerk said that was wrong. Save that shit for the weekend!

What the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you little bitch? I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Navy Seals, and I’ve been involved in numerous secret raids on Al-Quaeda, and I have over 300 confirmed kills. I am trained in gorilla warfare and I’m the top sniper in the entire US armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another target. I will wipe you the fuck out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with saying that shit to me over the Internet? Think again, fucker. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of spies across the USA and your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for the storm, maggot. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. You’re fucking dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can kill you in over seven hundred ways, and that’s just with my bare hands. Not only am I extensively trained in unarmed combat, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the United States Marine Corps and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the continent, you little shit. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little “clever” comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your fucking tongue. But you couldn’t, you didn’t, and now you’re paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will shit fury all over you and you will drown in it. You’re fucking dead, kiddo.

[jon.kiparsky]

Yeah? Well so's your old man.

[Salient]

NeoTifa, on 07 November 2016 - 02:49 PM, said:

You idiots do know there are 3rd parties, right?

Which brings me to my first question, sorry not a Yank, your system looks overly complex.

Okay say Jill Stein or Gary Johnson win a few states on a protest vote Aussie senate style, yes I know it's not likely to happen, and nether Hillary or Trump get the 270 they need, what happens? Do you go to another election, count back, Trump law suite, or some sort of preferential vote counting?

We're got a mixed Senate due to minor and micro parties picking up a large number of protest votes from folk sick and tired of our three main parties btw Oh and in comparison to 'Merka, we voted in the village idiot

[jon.kiparsky]

If no candidate gets 270 votes when the electoral college meets on December 19, then the election goes to the House of Representatives, under a modified voting procedure (each state casts one vote, rather than one vote per member)
This is highly unlikely to happen, but it's what the rules say. Interestingly, an EC tie for vice president goes to the Senate - so it'd be possible to have an inconsistent result. This, again, is pretty unlikely.