Ramshock
CAF Pilib De Brún Translator
far too close to not fall victim to right wing cheatingHeffelump321
Great work though, seems pretty promising!
far too close to not fall victim to right wing cheatingHeffelump321
Great work though, seems pretty promising!
Watch your mouth.AOC is a fool though. Not great company to be in.
How is she a fool?AOC is a fool though. Not great company to be in.
Perhaps, I dunno. Probably genuine quotes from a Biden aide who got outside data from one of their partisan polling groups and just didn't think to fact check it before panicing.@owlo perhaps Bloomberg throwing a scare tactic at citizens to get out and vote?
Do you think Biden's camp plant these to ensure people turnout?This is a trash article. Assume all the 'datas' are true (probably some form of exit poll, SOS dont record like that)
Then consider this:
77% of TOTAL registered PA voters of ALL races have not yet cast a ballot.
In Arizona, over 55% of total registered voters have not cast a ballot.
In Florida 45% of registered voters have not voted.
And the Miami-Dade data is just a blatant lie.
https://countyballotfiles.floridados.gov/VoteByMailEarlyVotingReports/PublicStats
Turnout:
R 116K + 152K
D 208K + 146K
I 120K + 106K
Thoughts?Perhaps, I dunno. Probably genuine quotes from a Biden aide who got outside data from one of their partisan polling groups and just didn't think to fact check it before panicing.
I'm pretty sure everyone here would love to be in her company.AOC is a fool though. Not great company to be in.
Richard Fariña fan?Ok feck it, here's something on Florida. Note it's a pretty high turnout model.
For news sites who want to 'borrow' it, please reference redcafe and please don't bother messaging me.
I mean, it's possible.... but it'd mean a feckup of monumental proportions. There was a 538 podcast about this last night - I tend to agree that we'd need a fundamental rethink of the way we predict elections. Clinton losing was normalish. This would be beyond the pale.Thoughts?
https://www.politico.com/news/magaz...s-trump-biden-prediction-accurate-2016-433619
‘People Are Going To Be Shocked’: Return of the ‘Shy’ Trump Voter?
In 2016, pollsters Arie Kapteyn and Robert Cahaly saw Trump coming. In 2020, they see polls again underestimating his support.
Back offMy girl.
Agreed. And I don't know if I buy into the shy thing now, perhaps a very small percentage overall. The 2020 Trumplicans are a vocal, arrogant, bullyish bunch from what I see. Nothing like 2016. It's a cult, and not one that is hidden or secretive per say.I mean, it's possible.... but it'd mean a feckup of monumental proportions. There was a 538 podcast about this last night - I tend to agree that we'd need a fundamental rethink of the way we predict elections. Clinton losing was normalish. This would be beyond the pale.
Now if you frame that question as: "There are a lot of shy trump voters, could it be a tighter election than many predict?" .... then sure I can see that. But Trump would need to find NEW shy voters; the huge turnout increases need to be kept up with. He's [ostensibly] lost independents, white men, white women, gained latinos a bit? My question would be: What groups have we overlooked? And are they any more 'shy' than they were in 2016?
Chaotic genius.Richard Fariña fan?
Authoritarian populist streak a mile long. The fact that she constantly labels those criticising her as sexist or racist, without considering facts. Then attempts to ridicule them in almost the exact same way as Trump to whip up public angst. She needs to temper herself and look in the mirror.How is she a fool?
Qanon, definitely qanon.2016 was rough , hungover for a few days, working overtime to pay off rent, then came down with the worst cold imaginable compounded with hay fever a couple of weeks later. Great payoff for being emotionally invested in sth for 18 mths.
And while we are at it, what happened to @Red Dreams ?
What a load of keek. She calls people out on their bullshit and you dont like it.Chaotic genius.
Authoritarian populist streak a mile long. The fact that she constantly labels those criticising her as sexist or racist, without considering facts. Then attempts to ridicule them in almost the exact same way as Trump to whip up public angst. She needs to temper herself and look in the mirror.
The vote will be rigged so this is all mootI mean, it's possible.... but it'd mean a feckup of monumental proportions. There was a 538 podcast about this last night - I tend to agree that we'd need a fundamental rethink of the way we predict elections. Clinton losing was normalish. This would be beyond the pale.
Now if you frame that question as: "There are a lot of shy trump voters, could it be a tighter election than many predict?" .... then sure I can see that. But Trump would need to find NEW shy voters; the huge turnout increases need to be kept up with. He's [ostensibly] lost independents, white men, white women, gained latinos a bit? My question would be: What groups have we overlooked? And are they any more 'shy' than they were in 2016?
From what I've observed she only calls people out for being sexist or racist if they are in fact doing one of those two things to try and take her on. Trump's endorsed chants of 'send her back' towards AOC in the past when they're both from Queens.Chaotic genius.
Authoritarian populist streak a mile long. The fact that she constantly labels those criticising her as sexist or racist, without considering facts. Then attempts to ridicule them in almost the exact same way as Trump to whip up public angst. She needs to temper herself and look in the mirror.
Definitely interesting, but at least from listening to the 538 frequent podcasts they seem rather convinced that there are a number of differences this election cycle from the last time around. Plus, I thought I saw a table in here that purported to show that even if the polls are off by the same margins they were with Clinton, Biden would still likely win. However, I also saw a study recently that purported to show that voters were more likely to claim they were voting for Trump in online versus telephone polling, one of the explanations being a reluctance on the phone to admit you would be voting for TrumpThoughts?
https://www.politico.com/news/magaz...s-trump-biden-prediction-accurate-2016-433619
‘People Are Going To Be Shocked’: Return of the ‘Shy’ Trump Voter?
In 2016, pollsters Arie Kapteyn and Robert Cahaly saw Trump coming. In 2020, they see polls again underestimating his support.
My girl.
Exactly, Pexbo. Back off. Because she's mine.Back off
Obviously, but he somehow seems to be able to skip around those issues publically. People still vote for him because he's a "successful businessman who will run America like one of his companies". A landslide win for Biden can't be spun in the same way. He can't magically stay POTUS or get another similar position anywhere, and hopefully he'll get prosecuted for all his crimes. The dream is that the whole house of cards comes crashing down.Technically his multiple bankruptcies, losing his airline, losing his football league, losing the lawsuit about his scam university, etc were all pretty resounding loss too. In fact-he should be pretty used to losing. Its the fact that he hasn't lost more (yet) that is messed up.
Probably the worst comment you have posted. The rest are A+ and much appreciated.Chaotic genius.
Authoritarian populist streak a mile long. The fact that she constantly labels those criticising her as sexist or racist, without considering facts. Then attempts to ridicule them in almost the exact same way as Trump to whip up public angst. She needs to temper herself and look in the mirror.
Which ironically, is exactly what Trump voters say about Trump.What a load of keek. She calls people out on their bullshit and you dont like it.
Nancy Pelosi for example. https://edition.cnn.com/2019/07/11/politics/ocasio-cortez-pelosi-singling-out/index.htmlFrom what I've observed she only calls people out for being sexist or racist if they are in fact doing one of those two things to try and take her on. Trump's endorsed chants of 'send her back' towards AOC in the past when they're both from Queens.
Again, exactly what the Trump base thinks and says about him.....Probably the worst comment you have posted. The rest are A+ and much appreciated.
I really don't understand how you can come to that conclusion. To me she owns all those out of touch pricks with truth and reality. She's also not whipping up angst, it's already there but she has the balls to say it while the person you compare her too lies and lies. Fair play to that woman is all I can say. My kids are in safe hands with representatives like her.
she constantly labels those criticising her as sexist or racist
Asked if she thinks Pelosi has racial animus or is racist, Ocasio-Cortez said unequivocally, "No, no, absolutely not, absolutely not."
Not sure how to compute that statement when she also said : "Her singling out of Democratic women of color is disrespectful"
Maybe, but he is still a very divisive candidate and I think it is plausible that some polled will be reluctant to admit they support Trump. Not nearly as many as 2016, but the "shy" voter probably still existsSurely the shy Trump voter thing goes away this election? I mean he’s the president...they don’t need to hide anymore. Him winning validated whatever ridiculous notions they have.
Wait are you comparing AOCs intellect and political ability to Trumps?Which ironically, is exactly what Trump voters say about Trump.
Nancy Pelosi for example. https://edition.cnn.com/2019/07/11/politics/ocasio-cortez-pelosi-singling-out/index.html
Or the Twitter blocks, of anybody respectfully criticizing her who she disagrees with.
Who would have thought it'd be the 'progressives' trying to stifle free speech. (Not just directed at AOC now)
Both camps would also answer this question the same way.Wait are you comparing AOCs intellect and political ability to Trumps?
Trump's base is galaxies away from truth and reality. Watch any Jordan Kempler video and it will show you how idiotic these people can be. I don't see a fraction of that from anyone that is in support of "the squad". You can certainly disagree pal but to insinuate a false equivalency like that just doesn't sit right with me. We are not here to agree on everything but you do yourself an injustice to compare those two public figures or their base. Start with their grasp of the English language.Again, exactly what the Trump base thinks and says about him.....
I'm not trying to infer anything with that comment with regards to you, but I guess my ideals and hers just aren't alligned? In this atomosphere I find her dangerous. I'm very pro free speech etc, even if I vehemently disagree with it.
Bertie?Not sure how to compute that statement when she also said : "Her singling out of Democratic women of color is disrespectful"
Which surely means, if they weren't woman, or weren't colored, Pelosi wouldn't "Single them out"
Not sure what to make of it really. One thing I will say for her, is at least she apologises sometimes. It's definitely overly harsh to compare her to Trump, even if I personally see some similarities.
Ps. I'm an Ahern fanboy.
Bertie?
Cmon Jacinda obviously!Bertie?
It's the concept that anybody who disagrees with either of them will generally be castigated and sneered at as the village idiot because their way is the right way. Both sides are so esconced in their view that they completely intolerant to any other.Trump's base is galaxies away from truth and reality. Watch any Jordan Kempler video and it will show you how idiotic these people can be. I don't see a fraction of that from anyone that is in support of "the squad". You can certainly disagree pal but to insinuate a false equivalency like that just doesn't sit right with me. We are not here to agree on everything but you do yourself an injustice to compare those two public figures or their base. Start with their grasp of the English language.
See, now that's something you should abuse me for. I obviously can't spellArdern > Ahern
https://fivethirtyeight.com/live-blog/trump-biden-votes/The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals has just ruled that Minnesota cannot count ballots that arrive after 8 p.m. on Nov. 3. Earlier this month, a federal judge upheld a state court agreement — originally approved in August — that allowed the counting of absentee ballots received up to seven days after Election Day, but state Republicans quickly appealed the decision.
In its ruling, the 8th Circuit wrote that the state legislature, not the secretary of state, had the authority to set election law. It also instructed the state to segregate the late-arriving ballots; it remains to be seen whether they will be counted.
Agree with this. She is an unintelligent opportunist, but obviously an unpopular opinion here. She is Trudeau-lite in that sense.AOC is a fool though. Not great company to be in.