• Please keep all posts on the Rittenhouse verdict here: Rittenhouse Verdict. Note the moderator warnings in the thread. The thread will be heavily moderated with a zero tolerance policy for any baiting, flaming, trolling or other rule breaks. Stick to the topic and not the other posters. Thank you.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Nate

MrWonka

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
10,880
Reaction score
5,813
Location
Charleston, SC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

Nate Silver and 538.com accurately predicted the results of every single state during the 2012 election. With their very first election forecast they give Trump a less than 20% chance of actually winning the race. This obviously puts him behind where Romney and McCain both were at the same point in their respective races. The last President to overcome a deficit close to this and win election was George H.W. Bush when he defeated Michael Dukakis. That was more of a Dukakis loss than a Bush win though. If you're counting on a Clinton meltdown I wouldn't. That seems like Trumps department.
 

justabubba

long standing member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 22, 2005
Messages
54,667
Reaction score
35,935
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

Nate Silver and 538.com accurately predicted the results of every single state during the 2012 election. With their very first election forecast they give Trump a less than 20% chance of actually winning the race. This obviously puts him behind where Romney and McCain both were at the same point in their respective races. The last President to overcome a deficit close to this and win election was George H.W. Bush when he defeated Michael Dukakis. That was more of a Dukakis loss than a Bush win though. If you're counting on a Clinton meltdown I wouldn't. That seems like Trumps department.

a hillary indictment should improve his chances
 

ajn678

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 19, 2016
Messages
8,002
Reaction score
3,420
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

Nate Silver and 538.com accurately predicted the results of every single state during the 2012 election. With their very first election forecast they give Trump a less than 20% chance of actually winning the race. This obviously puts him behind where Romney and McCain both were at the same point in their respective races. The last President to overcome a deficit close to this and win election was George H.W. Bush when he defeated Michael Dukakis. That was more of a Dukakis loss than a Bush win though. If you're counting on a Clinton meltdown I wouldn't. That seems like Trumps department.

Meh... he hasn't been perfect this election cycle. Pretty pointless to try and predict it already. Tons can change.
 

MrWonka

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
10,880
Reaction score
5,813
Location
Charleston, SC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
a hillary indictment should improve his chances

Which won't happen, but at this point I'm not really sure even that would change anything. Everyone knows what she's being accused of. Frankly they don't care. It's like Bill Clinton in the 90's his popularity remained throughout impeachment because people new it was all just a stupid witch hunt, and ultimately what they really cared about was the economy.
 

Hawkeye10

Buttermilk Man
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 29, 2015
Messages
45,404
Reaction score
11,744
Location
Olympia Wa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

Nate Silver and 538.com accurately predicted the results of every single state during the 2012 election. With their very first election forecast they give Trump a less than 20% chance of actually winning the race. This obviously puts him behind where Romney and McCain both were at the same point in their respective races. The last President to overcome a deficit close to this and win election was George H.W. Bush when he defeated Michael Dukakis. That was more of a Dukakis loss than a Bush win though. If you're counting on a Clinton meltdown I wouldn't. That seems like Trumps department.

This would be the one and same Nate Silver who has been colossally wrong about Trump for the entire last 16 months? The same one who has been wrong at most every turn this cycle?

*Rhetorical Question*
 
Last edited:

Glen Contrarian

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
17,688
Reaction score
8,046
Location
Bernie to the left of me, Hillary to the right, he
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
This would be the one and same Nate Silver who has been colossally wrong about Trump for the entire last 16 months? The same one who has been wrong at most every turn this cycle?

*Rhetorical Question*

Because - as Nate Silver himself admitted on Good Morning America this morning - he was wrong about Trump because he was ignoring the polls...that if he'd paid more attention to the polls of GOP primary voters and (in so many words) less to his own presumption that at some point even GOP voters have GOT to come to their senses...if he'd just kept to the polls as he always has otherwise, he'd have seen that Trump was going to win the nomination.

That said, barring national catastrophe, Hillary will win. And even if some right-wing wannabe Rambo assassinates her along the way, whoever's her VP pick will win...especially if it's Elizabeth Warren.
 

Hawkeye10

Buttermilk Man
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 29, 2015
Messages
45,404
Reaction score
11,744
Location
Olympia Wa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Because - as Nate Silver himself admitted on Good Morning America this morning - he was wrong about Trump because he was ignoring the polls...that if he'd paid more attention to the polls of GOP primary voters and (in so many words) less to his own presumption that at some point even GOP voters have GOT to come to their senses...if he'd just kept to the polls as he always has otherwise, he'd have seen that Trump was going to win the nomination.

That said, barring national catastrophe, Hillary will win. And even if some right-wing wannabe Rambo assassinates her along the way, whoever's her VP pick will win...especially if it's Elizabeth Warren.

Sliver is still putting a lot of stock in what Insider Elites think, and in endorsements (he still thinks they are a good thing, major), so I dont think he has learned his lessons yet. I am ignoring him unless he starts being right about stuff.
 

Kobie

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 17, 2013
Messages
48,281
Reaction score
25,273
Location
Western NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Sliver is still putting a lot of stock in what Insider Elites think, and in endorsements (he still thinks they are a good thing, major), so I dont think he has learned his lessons yet. I am ignoring him unless he starts being right about stuff.

In other words, you'll ignore the guy who was spot on in the 2014 midterms, 2012 election, 2010 midterms, etc. until he gets on board the Trump Train.
 

Hawkeye10

Buttermilk Man
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 29, 2015
Messages
45,404
Reaction score
11,744
Location
Olympia Wa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
In other words, you'll ignore the guy who was spot on in the 2014 midterms, 2012 election, 2010 midterms, etc. until he gets on board the Trump Train.

Until he starts being right. The Lakers used to be good too but were you picking them to win last year?

Are you expecting them to win next year, to be back to the Lakers of old?

This guy looks looks to be just as lost as Jim Buss is.

The game changed, the Lakers did not.

Get serious man.
 
Last edited:

Texmex

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 10, 2011
Messages
5,189
Reaction score
1,932
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Liberal
Until he starts being right. The Lakers used to be good too but were you picking them to win last year?

Are you expecting them to win next year, to be back to the Lakers of old?

This guy looks looks to be just as lost as Jim Buss is.

The game changed, the Lakers did not.

Get serious man.

Absolute, total denial. It looks like the first wall Trump put up was around your mind.
 

Mr Person

A Little Bitter
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Oct 14, 2015
Messages
50,569
Reaction score
34,884
Location
Massachusetts
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Which won't happen, but at this point I'm not really sure even that would change anything. Everyone knows what she's being accused of. Frankly they don't care. It's like Bill Clinton in the 90's his popularity remained throughout impeachment because people new it was all just a stupid witch hunt, and ultimately what they really cared about was the economy.

Exactly.

Add to it the fact that people also tend to dislike disparate treatment of like offenses. In Hillary's case, she may have been the first SoS to set up a private email server, but the real meat (and only potentially criminal element) of the whole thing was in potentially sending classified information. And, as it turns out, she did no better or worse on that front than the last several SoS's, R and D alike. Why should she fry when they all walked? Hell, when nobody made the slightest peep about it in the past?
 

Hawkeye10

Buttermilk Man
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 29, 2015
Messages
45,404
Reaction score
11,744
Location
Olympia Wa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Absolute, total denial. It looks like the first wall Trump put up was around your mind.

Boy are you confused, the subject is Nate Silvers current comprehension of political reality, not Hawkeye, or Trump.
 

kanabco

Banned
Joined
May 10, 2016
Messages
350
Reaction score
97
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
This would be the one and same Nate Silver who has been colossally wrong about Trump for the entire last 16 months? The same one who has been wrong at most every turn this cycle?

I have not been looking at polls much. Did Nate give a % on Trump winning anything? I can't find anything.
 

Winchester

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 25, 2014
Messages
6,665
Reaction score
6,277
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Which won't happen, but at this point I'm not really sure even that would change anything. Everyone knows what she's being accused of. Frankly they don't care. It's like Bill Clinton in the 90's his popularity remained throughout impeachment because people new it was all just a stupid witch hunt, and ultimately what they really cared about was the economy.

Republicans have cried wolf about the Clinton's so many times over the years people have started ignoring the cries even if they might be onto something with the emails.
 

Wiggen

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 18, 2011
Messages
15,436
Reaction score
6,038
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Sliver is still putting a lot of stock in what Insider Elites think, and in endorsements (he still thinks they are a good thing, major), so I dont think he has learned his lessons yet. I am ignoring him unless he starts being right about stuff.

He was right in 2012. No reason to think this year will be any different.
 

Hawkeye10

Buttermilk Man
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 29, 2015
Messages
45,404
Reaction score
11,744
Location
Olympia Wa
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
He was right in 2012. No reason to think this year will be any different.

Things change, and he has been consistently acting clueless for a year, so there is every reason to discount his opinions for now.

Maybe it is because I am Zen that I get this and you dont, we are taught early that the truth can change, that those who dont keep up dont know that they think they know. For now I am putting Silver in that category.
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,822
Reaction score
28,238
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

Nate Silver and 538.com accurately predicted the results of every single state during the 2012 election. With their very first election forecast they give Trump a less than 20% chance of actually winning the race. This obviously puts him behind where Romney and McCain both were at the same point in their respective races. The last President to overcome a deficit close to this and win election was George H.W. Bush when he defeated Michael Dukakis. That was more of a Dukakis loss than a Bush win though. If you're counting on a Clinton meltdown I wouldn't. That seems like Trumps department.

The FBI may take care of Hillary.
 

kanabco

Banned
Joined
May 10, 2016
Messages
350
Reaction score
97
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other

I didn't even know anyone was projecting this early. Traditionally strong polling does not commence until well after the convention. Perhaps Nate Silver is being paid so much he feels compelled to do this? Has Sam Wang done one? Franklin? Votematic? I don't think so. Silver makes more money than all of them combined so maybe that is the reason to push it now $$$. In any case Silver, followed closely by Franklin, have been dead nuts during the last two presidential cycles in a row. I see very little payback in going anti-silver "this" early. If there is descent among the top modelers in early October I will be surprised.
 
Last edited:

kanabco

Banned
Joined
May 10, 2016
Messages
350
Reaction score
97
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
The FBI may take care of Hillary.

As a possible counter, who runs the democratic party? I think you could say the current president does. At least he has the most powerful sway and since he does and he is pretty bright, and since he had/has the current Secretary of the Department of Justice sitting in on his cabinet meetings, and since he has their ears, would it not make sense that Obama was pretty sure somehow that Hillary will not be indicted? That is not the same as the FBI asking for an indictment against their bosses wishes but it is pretty clear to me that Obama would have sat down Hillary and told her not to run and pushed Biden in her stead.

therefore I am fairly sure there is nothing there to destroy her run.
 

justabubba

long standing member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 22, 2005
Messages
54,667
Reaction score
35,935
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
For what?
for failing to secure our nation's secrets
hardly an attribute we would want in the commander-in-chief

Being Bill's wife?
nothing indicates bill had anything to do with this matter
that said, there have been rumors about individuals buying government access via 'contributions' to the clinton foundation. if found to be true, then there would be a criminal nexus between the two individuals

That's reaching a bit far, doncha think ... ?
not at all
it is a matter currently under investigation by the FBI
thus, no far reach to question how it would impact hillary
but you are welcome to tell us why it should be found to be so
 

upsideguy

Pragmatic Idealist
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
18,319
Reaction score
11,273
Location
Rocky Mtn. High
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Things change, and he has been consistently acting clueless for a year, so there is every reason to discount his opinions for now.

Maybe it is because I am Zen that I get this and you dont, we are taught early that the truth can change, that those who dont keep up dont know that they think they know. For now I am putting Silver in that category.

Sorry, while angry, uneducated white men is a large constituency; its not a sufficient enough constituency to win the White House.
 

RetiredUSN

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2016
Messages
28,596
Reaction score
14,756
Location
Norfolk Virginia area.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/

Nate Silver and 538.com accurately predicted the results of every single state during the 2012 election. With their very first election forecast they give Trump a less than 20% chance of actually winning the race. This obviously puts him behind where Romney and McCain both were at the same point in their respective races. The last President to overcome a deficit close to this and win election was George H.W. Bush when he defeated Michael Dukakis. That was more of a Dukakis loss than a Bush win though. If you're counting on a Clinton meltdown I wouldn't. That seems like Trumps department.

He got the 2012 election right, but missed 5-6 times already with Trump in the primaries..
 
Top Bottom