Election 2016! - 2016-11-10 (page 5 of 7)

« first day (1 day earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (31 days later) »

7:00 PM

@TRiG I get that you don't like the guy, but be nice

@ArtOfCode He's said so directly, though.

I was talking about the arrogant, actually

@ArtOfCode Didn't he say he was his own foreign policy advisor, because he was so smart he didn't need anyone else?

Yes, your point being? Whether he's said it or not, you still have to be nice, and that includes not calling names.

6 hours ago, by Skooba

27

Q: Does the Be Nice policy require SE users to "be nice" to people who are not SE users (e.g. public figures)?

I've seen users remark that it is not a violation of the Be Nice policy to insult people who are not SE users -- i.e. that users are only required to "be nice" to other SE users. Usually this is stated in order to excuse insults made toward public figures (like politicians). Is that true? Does th...

discussion etiquette be-nice-policy

7:17 PM

Especially in an election chatroom, it's really hard to keep things from going off the rails. Maybe it's dictatorship or censorship or whatever, but if Art warns you about how you talk about Trump, you probably deserve it.

So... yeah, the be nice policy should and will be applied a little more liberally here.

Here's the President of the European Council:

Donald Tusk on Trump: "The events of the last months and days should be treated as a warning sign for all who believe in liberal democracy."

Tweeted by JenniferMerode on November 9, 2016 at 2:28 PM

Help, help, I'm being repressed!

@Undo Heh. Am I that obvious? :)

also, don't make me pull out #1357

I try to use language carefully. Perhaps I'm too angry for that right now. Perhaps I'll step out for a bit.

7:19 PM

@TRiG quite frankly, we are unconcerned with the opinions of the European council.

@ArtOfCode Probably less obvious than I am, but it's pretty easy to figure out folks' leanings.

also you're generally sane so it goes both ways.

I love how the same liberals in the USA, who were screaming to the high heavens about how Trump might not accept the results of the election, refuse to accept the results of the election.

6

let the moderators moderate, it's more effective ;)

Apologies./

no worries

7:21 PM

won't happen again

I'm coming in here for some sanity. The worst in here is better than the best on other sites

I'm thinking of shutting down facebook.

my account on facebook.

I'd recommend shutting down only your part of it :P

@RichardU the hate on there is insane

8 hours ago, by ArtOfCode

I'm avoiding reddit like the plague currently. I'm usually there quite a lot.

@ArtOfCode Reddit is actually being fairly sufferable. Much better than I thought it would be.

@RichardU Nice clarification. The other option would be a very long term project, and probably not legal.

7:23 PM

@RichardU There is quite a bit of difference between protesting against a new president (I'm excluding any rioting here, no defense for that), and undermining the validity of the election itself.

@Undo huh, okay, I might take a tentative look later

@MadScientist not when it's done violently, as it has been.

@PaulWhite not legal, but quite satisfying, I'd imagine. It's turned into a sewer. Now, here's the ironic part. I am not a Republican, nor am I a Trump supporter. I just asked people to be respectful of each other

That seems to be a major crime right now.

@RichardU you're painting with an awfully broad brush here if you put all liberals together with the few rioting

I've heard about Reddit.

@RichardU don't start on it.

reddit overdoses are horrible

7:25 PM

@RichardU when you keep calling half country bad names sooner or later they will fight back

@MadScientist I'll thin out the brush when people stop calling riots "protests"

One of the best time sinks in existence, but not one to do if you ever want to see the light of day again

@Skooba who's calling names?

So why isn't this room associated with politics.se?

and who's fighting back.

7:26 PM

@Skooba This is an intriguing theory.

I would think that would be more apropos.

@AaronHall because PPCG created it

@AaronHall We all failed the entrance exam.

sorry, I don't get subtlety

And it would appear I can't re-parent it

7:27 PM

@PaulWhite which is very embarrassing, as I gave that exam to myself

@ArtOfCode pretty sure we got that taken away when we borked something

@AaronHall I started it so the politics wouldn't get in our main chatroom. Then other people on the network found it. It happpens.

@RichardU Sometimes self-evaluations are the toughest :)

@Undo I think it's just restricted to site mods

@Geobits I've been pointing other people here as a way of keeping too much political chatter out of sites' main rooms

So here's the theory: What if Trump won because the media, especially this cycle, was making fun of Trump and, especially, his supporters? There are few emotions more effective than anger at getting people to vote.

7:28 PM

Wow, fifty people unfriended me on facebook so far

@Undo. I think you nailed it

I found in my own case in the rather uncomfortable position of defending Trump because of outright lies.

I'm not a Republican or a Trump supporter, but when people spin wild stories.... gotta correct the record

@Undo No coverage is bad coverage.

Trump is the only thing the media's been talking about for a really long time

@Undo There's certainly an argument to say that aligning the most visible aspects of The Establishment against Trump only helped him in the end.

maybe people will stop blindly believing the MSM now and realize that a few states/cities do not speak for us all

@Skooba MSM?

mainstream media

7:34 PM

I was fully expecting Hillary to win. Some people are attributing it to Trump's data? I did not think his technology would be very good.

@Skooba Thanks. I couldn't see how Methylsulfonylmethane fitted there.

@Skooba hear hear!

She outraised him 2 to 1: bloomberg.com/politics/graphics/…

@AaronHall and outspent him 5 to 1 on ads

@AaronHall Perhaps when he writes his memoirs we'll find out if he was as surprised as everyone else.

7:35 PM

@AaronHall on the contrary. I'm sure he had the best, just tremendous, wonderful, technology

I think what did her in was all the celebrities coming out with that stupid video.

@PaulWhite I'm sure he wasn't he was saying for awhile he sees it at the rallies and everything that there were a lot of people behind him

@Skooba You might well be right. Amazing confidence if so.

One theory is that the one who wins is the one who makes the fewest mistakes.

@Skooba and the more he was attacked outrageously, the more I, and I assume others, were compelled to defend him.

7:37 PM

The big money spend and celebrities probably played right into the Trump narrative.

@AaronHall according to every precedent, on paper, Trump should have lost.

I don't think you be dumb and be a billionaire. he had to be doing something right. now that may have been his ability to read people and surround himself with better people, but that is still a skill

@Skooba. Look up the terms "Obfuscating stupidity" and "Obfuscating Insanity" I think Trump employed both, and did so masterfully

@RichardU well if not him, then at least themselves. Hillary called half the country "deplorable"

@Skooba yeah, not a smart thing to do

7:39 PM

really really big mistake ----------------------------------------^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

YEP!

Also not being a career politician was probably a plus for many.

@RichardU Up through Nov 8, FiveThirtyEight gave him a ~25% chance.

projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast

I think that was like the "Tank" moment was for Ducacas (sp?) or the supermarket scanner was for George Bush

@Undo I am an autistic savant with pattern recognition, this one blew me away.

And social bullying of anyone who voiced public support probably depressed the polling numbers of his supporters.

7:41 PM

@AaronHall YEP!

This is why I oppose censorship at every level. To drive an idea underground is to enflame passion for it.

so 538 was probably closest - I didn't see it though.

@Undo Which is actually not bad odds.

@AaronHall That page is frozen at right-before poll numbers started coming in

@PaulWhite Nope! If you had that probability of getting mashed when crossing the street, you wouldn't cross the street.

That's my guideline for interpreting probabilities.

I think another thing that threw the Clinton campaign into disarray was the fact that they thought they were going to face JEb Bush

Very sage.

7:43 PM

I thought Princeton had the smart odds.

@RichardU Should have been pretty clear fairly early on into the Rep primaries that Trump had a decent chance

@RichardU or at least Cruz

I watched it unfold. They didn't take him seriously and he walked away with it.

in the primaries, I mean.

Aye

By the time they figured it out, it was too late for anyone else

And the Republican party had such a hate on for Ted Cruz, that they focused all their energies on taking him out, and Trump effortlessly took it.

7:46 PM

Looking at 538's analysis, all of the "paths" for Trump seemed to require too much to go right for him to win. I forgot the "errors" would be correlated.

@AaronHall Hard to take into account statistically.

If Trump wins Michigan, he's probably gonna sweep the other states too.

'@Undo it's always better to be lucky than good

Polls said he had a 44.2% share of the popular vote in Michigan

(ish)

I'm pretty sure polls already account for conservatives being more cagey about revealing their voting preferences.

So this time they underestimated it.

They'll definitely need to be recalibrated after this

7:49 PM

Didn't hillary not attract nearly as many voters as obama did.

I'm probably impossible for pollsters to reach, myself.

Were the absolute errors that significant though? Or was it just a case that the margin-of-error stuff all happened in the right places to affect the outcome given the electoral college system?

@Yodle 2012 v. 2016? Definitely.

user image

And if it's a case of not modelling that variations will tend to be repeated in other similar demographics, there's no way to account for that until the first read results come in.

@PaulWhite ^ Shaded regions are 80% possibilities

Presumably taking all the MoEs into account

7:52 PM

Understood, but rather than the overall number, I'm talking about the local differences.

Within a state, at least.

@PaulWhite That one is Michigan.

Oh! Ha ha.

7 hours ago, by Kaz

user image

@Null I wonder how many of those stayed home because of the Sanders thing.

Probably many reasons.

@PaulWhite Or the email thing. Or the health thing.

Dems had a ton of issues

7:54 PM

There was the rape accuser who backed out of her press conference at the last minute.

I bet some voters were waiting to see what she'd do before deciding.

Huh. That looks like Trump didn't so much win as Hillary lost.

@Dennis Yes.

@Undo Indeed. As did the other side, it is interesting that the effect of the "issues" was much more pronounced for the Democrats.

> I could shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose any voters - Donald Trump

Someone said that this was the Dem's election to lose.

and they lost it

She had every "advantage." Money, corporate & billionaire donors, endorsements from party, celebs, newspapers, social media trying to enforce concensus, the "elect a woman" vote, her opponent had some unsavory supporters... she had it on lock. (At least she did in my mind.) And she lost it.

8:01 PM

@AaronHall and one huge liability, her personality

Extremely unlikely, but not impossible: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faithless_elector Would be funny if Hillary ended up winning because of that, but it would probably cause even more rioting by the other side.

That's not even a joke, her negatives wer far too high

@RichardU and arguably her name

@Yodle Then you really would get a violent revolution.

@Yodle show me one instance where Republicans have ever rioted

@PaulWhite and her husband. You can't call Trump anti-woman without getting the "what about Bill" questions flooding in

3

8:02 PM

The problem for the democrats is they rigged the primary to anoint their chosen successor, over the wishes of Democrat voters.

Unsurprisingly, if you nominate somebody who is deeply unpopular, fewer people will vote for them.

2

Shocker

rigging again...

@RichardU hard to factor "personality" into it. I don't like her personality, but how much do Americans care about "personality"? I don't care about personality at all.

@Shog9 To give the democrats credit. At least they managed to rig their primary. The Republicans tried to rig it for Bush and failed miserably.

Let's assume that the Dem's primary was fair and above board - Bernie still had a ton of support that... Probably should've been a bigger wake-up call than it was.

8:04 PM

@Kaz Was that the whole "super-delegate" thing?

@AaronHall Charisma is hard to pin down, but like art, you know it when you see it... and when you don't

@PaulWhite No, that's not how you rig a primary. You don't do it overtly, but subtly, and largely behind the scenes.

@Kaz I've been saying for months that Clinton is what you get when you try to rig an primary and succeed, and Trump is what happens when you try and fail

2

@RichardU I know, I've been using it myself. It's a great line.

@Kaz Oh. I always assumed when people said "rigging the primary" they meant the way the preferred candidate got all the super-delegate votes. If it was done subtly, behind the scenes etc. how do we know it happened? Genuine question.

8:06 PM

@PaulWhite Because of the Wikileaks emails.

Things like giving Clinton debate questions beforehand

@PaulWhite no, what happened was Donna Brasille, was getting town hall questions, emails that came out in Wikileaks talked about strategies on how to take out Sanders... even going so far as to ask if it was alright to use the fact that he was a jew

@Undo Ah yes that

@RichardU Thank you also.

@Undo dang, you beat me to it.

Take into account the emails, the apparently kid-glove treatment by the FBI, the cozy relationship between her husband and the US AG, and the "deplorables" remark, and those are some big hurdles to get over.

@PaulWhite (For obvious reasons) there's no way to be sure. But there are all sorts of ways to tip the scales, and exert influence, and help the people you want to help (wikileaks has some examples).

8:07 PM

For some reason I had completely forgotten the questions ahead of time thing.

Now I'm not going to even think about personality.

@AaronHall Plus the fact that you don't get more arch-establishment than the Clintons.

And half the country hates the establishment

With a passion

When both candidates are part of the establishment, this is irrelevant

But as soon as you get a genuine outsider, for the first time in decades, it becomes a very clear choice.

Any time the FBI "investigates" any normal person, they confiscate everything to preserve evidence, and run every party involved through the ringer.

2

@AaronHall Quite. If she were any other federal employee, she would've been fired and possibly prosecuted for what she did.

2

They throw the entire book at them, stretching every law they can try to apply to coerce a guilty plea.

8:11 PM

The stars are flying in this room.

2

Unless

You're a VIP, politically favored. The chosen one.

hey, what's the point of power and influence if you can't use it?

3

@DrMcMoylex Everyone gets 20 stars per room, per day. Can't go on forever :)

@PaulWhite why is there a limit for stars?

3

A: How many messages can I star? Is there any rate limiting?

Per the FAQ, you're limited to 20 stars per room, per day and there's no cumulative limit. As a history lesson, there used to not be any upper limit on the number of stars you could cast. However, after a select group of Tavernfolk proved that they couldn't control themselves, Michael Mrozek did...

Also because we hate fun of course.

8:21 PM

Aaaaand, the death threats are continuing....

wow, it's getting nasty out there

What?

@RichardU On Facebook?

some people I know have a bet going for how long it is until he gets assassinated. Quite sad really

I give that a very, very low probability.

No higher than most other candidates.

@muddyfish the first attempt was last Saturday

8:22 PM

Essentially zero in fact.

He's a human being. He says dumb things sometimes, but personally I don't think he's an evil person by any means. Maybe just misguided if he does go through with what he says he wants to do.

No reason to talk about him dying...

Who here would want to be judged by the worst thing he or she ever said?

A lot of things were said during the candidacy phase that shouldn't have been, but the "tone" (as they keep saying on TV) has changed significantly since the result came in.

@RichardU Exactly. Or even an action. I once punched a kid in preschool. I've never been a violent person, but if I was judged soley on that you'd think I was a murderer or something.

@Yodle there was a time in my life I didn't care if I lived or died. I said some pretty harsh things back then. Then, after my stroke, I couldn't control myself and anything that went into my head came out of my mouth. Divorce should be finalized in a few months.

8:26 PM

My condolences.

The fact Is people change over time. Look at Mark Wahlberg or Ice T. They are both very different people these days.

@AaronHall thank you.

@RichardU There was no gun and no assassination attempt there. Someone yelled gun and triggered a reaction by the Secret Service, but nothing more

@Yodle I know you mean that you were both in preschool, but now I'm imagining you as an adult randomly walking into a preschool and punching a kid. It's a funny mental picture

@RichardU Ah, sorry to hear :\

@MadScientist thank you for the correction.

8:27 PM

I've known a lot of people who go through divorces, and it's the saddest thing to me. I'm trying to improve my marriage. I'm taking however nice I think I need to be and I double it.

@DrMcMoylex haha yeah, that would be just a bit worse ;)

@RichardU tries to imagine a world where Mark Wahlberg and Ice T are the same person

@AaronHall Yeah, it is always really sad. Especially when you're really close friends with both of them.

luckily I haven't done that one yet. It helps my odds not being close friends with a lot of people.

my Office Communicator status says, "Please include any question with initial ping, or email it. Please include a minimal complete verifiable example if reporting a bug. To request a review, use the clipboard icon in qzreviews to copy the link and paste it in an email to me." And I still have people "hi" me, then ask if I'm busy... sigh

For anyone who hasn't seen it. Scott Adams has been talking about Trump for a long time (over a year). It's all detailed and fascinating. And up until yesterday I was still highly sceptical. Now, well, he called a Trump landslide 15 months ago and damn if he hasn't been proved right on nearly every prediction since then.

3

8:35 PM

And people were even making death threats to him.

@Kaz That's great reading!

He needs to get a thesaurus and stop using the term "persuasion" so much.

He's always been better at pictures than words, I heard.

@PaulWhite Dilbert is funny. His blog has been, eerily persuasive and prescient.

continues to read

8:45 PM

I'm thinking of questioning our ongoing "presidential election code freeze" as unproductive, and I want someone here to talk me down.

@AaronHall What are they concerned about?

user image

muh election

IDK, but they just extended it from the 10th to the 14th.

noɥʇʎPʎzɐɹC

@AaronHall code freeze?

@Shog9 feature need: hide individual posts (instead of user)

8:47 PM

Looks like a trump supporter was beaten nearly to death in Chicago

You know, because we need to monitor them for any signs of instability...

@AaronHall Wow.

wow?

@AaronHall The idea of a code freeze for that reason caused me to say "wow" in my head so I said it out loud. Or typed it. Or something.

well, the market has been swinging I guess.

So I just talked my own self down.

noɥʇʎPʎzɐɹC

8:53 PM

What code freeze!?

Where I work. No big deal, I get it now.

@AaronHall The stock market? And that affects your code? Just interested.

noɥʇʎPʎzɐɹC

@AaronHall what "code freeze"?

Well speaking of electioneering, I'm running for moderator on Stack Overflow - any questions? concerns? advice?

@noɥʇʎPʎzɐɹC no production changes where I work right now, dude.

noɥʇʎPʎzɐɹC

@AaronHall what does that mean?

And why is it presidential

@AaronHall Yo dawg you need corporate sponsors?

8:58 PM

I work in Finance, Risk, and the market is swinging because of the election, and we just always do that when we expect markets to swing.

@AaronHall may the best candidate win

@AaronHall @Undo might be able to offer you some general advice.

← 1 message moved from The Nineteenth Byte

« first day (1 day earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (31 days later) »

Transcript for

Nov '1610

Election 2016!

Discussion about the 2016 US election. Watch yo' profanity.

join this room
about this room

00:00

06:00

12:00

18:00

all times are UTC

site design / logo © 2024 Stack Exchange Inc; legal

mobile